Mechanical properties of several nickel-titanium alloy wires in three-point bending tests
Mechanical properties of several nickel-titanium alloy wires in three-point bending tests
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0889-5406(99)70257-x
复制
发表时间：
1999-04-01
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Katsura, H
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nakano, H;Satoh, K;Katsura, H
本研究的目的是通过在统一的测试条件下进行三点弯曲测试，来阐明来自9个制造商的42个品牌的镍钛合金正畸丝的机械性能。制造商包括A-Company，Hoya Medical，Lancer，Ormco，Rocky Mountain，Sankin，Tomy（GAC），TP和3 M/Unitek。还测试了钴铬和钛钼合金丝，作为比较泰尔塞水平的参考。所有报告的数据都是在卸载过程中记录的，以模拟当金属丝从咬合不正的位置移动到牙弓中时金属丝施加在牙齿上的力。对于所测试的镍钛丝，获得了以下结果。(Ij在最大挠度为1.5mm的0.016英寸圆丝中，最灵敏（铜镍钛35）和最大（Aline）载荷值之间的差为136 g。对于测试的0.016 x 0.022英寸矩形导丝，最小（铜镍钛40）和最大（Aline）载荷值之间的差异为337 g。(2)检查1.5和0.5 mm偏转之间的载荷变化，以阐明所测试的丝的超弹性特性。对于0.016英寸线材，17个线材品牌产生小于100 g的载荷差，两个品牌产生至少100 g的载荷差（Aline和Titanal = 100 g）。对于0.016 x 0.022英寸的电线，15个品牌产生的负载差异小于100 g，8个品牌产生的差异超过100 g。最小和最大载荷差分别为3 g（铜镍钛35）和200 g（Aline）。(3)在卸载过程中，在1.5 mm和0.5 mm的挠度之间具有较小载荷差的大多数样品被发现在超弹性丝之间，而具有较大载荷差的样品主要被发现在加工硬化丝之间。与钴铬合金和TMA钢丝相比，镍钛合金钢丝施加的力明显更小。不过，不同品牌的发力量差别很大。因此，在使用镍钛合金线时，必须仔细选择品牌，并考虑到每种情况下错牙合畸形的严重程度和正畸治疗的阶段。本研究旨在为临床医生提供选择适当镍钛合金导丝的无偏倚指南。
The purpose of this study was to clarify the mechanical properties of 42 brands of nickel-titanium alloy orthodontic wires from 9 manufacturers by conducting three-point bending tests under uniform testing conditions. Manufacturers included A-Company, Hoya Medical, Lancer, Ormco, Rocky Mountain, Sankin, Tomy (GAC), TP, and 3M/Unitek. Cobalt-chrome, and titanium-molybdenum alloy wires were also tested as a reference for comparison of terce levels. All reported data were recorded during the unloading process to simulate the force that a wire exerts on a tooth as it is moved into the dental arch from a position of malocclusion. The following results were obtained for the nickel-titanium wires tested. (Ij Among the 0.016 inch round wires tested under a maximum deflection of 1.5 mm, the difference between the smartest (Copper nickel-titanium 35) and the largest (Aline) load values was 136 g. For the 0.016 x 0.022 inch rectangular wires tested, the difference between the smallest (Copper nickel-titanium 40) and the largest (Aline) load values was 337 g. (2) The change in load between 1.5 and 0.5 mm of deflection was examined to clarify the superelastic properties of the wires tested. For the 0.016 inch wires, 17 wire brands produced a load difference of less than 100 g, and two brands produced a difference of at least 100 g (Aline and Titanal = 100 g). For the 0.016 x 0.022 inch wires, 15 brands produced a load difference of less than 100 g, and eight brands produced a difference of over 100 g. The smallest and largest load differences were 3 g (Copper nickel-titanium 35) and 200 g (Aline). (3) The majority of the samples with a smaller load difference between deflections of 1.5 mm and 0.5 mm in the unloading process were found among super-elastic wires, while samples with a larger load difference were predominantly found among work-hardened wires. Compared with cobalt-chrome and TMA wires, nickel-titanium alloy wires exert significantly less force. However, the amount of force varies greatly from brand to brand. Consequently, when using nickel-titanium alloy wires, brands must be selected carefully by taking into consideration the severity of the malocclusion and the stage of orthodontic treatment in each case. It is the intent of this study to offer clinicians an unbiased guide for the selection of appropriate nickel-titanium alloy wires.