Comparative Study of Endodontic Files With Various Cross Sections With Varying Threads
Comparative Study of Endodontic Files With Various Cross Sections With Varying Threads
Comparative Study of Endodontic Files With Various Cross Sections With Varying Threads
net/publication/315619126
Comparative Study of Endodontic Files with Various Cross Sections with Varying
Threads
CITATION READS
1 545
3 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Finite Element Analysis and Comparison of Protaper and Hero Endodontic file Segments Subjected to Bending and Torsional Load View project
All content following this page was uploaded by R. N. Khapre on 31 May 2019.
Finite element analysis (FEA) of endodontic files using ANSYS is presented in this study. A comparative study
of four endodontic file models having different cross sections with varying number of threads is carried out
to understand their behavior under torsional and bending loads. Linear elastic as well as non linear material
behavior is considered during the analysis. Various results are obtained in form of equivalent von-Mises stress,
torsional stiffness, support reactions and presented in from of contours and charts. The obtained results were
validated by comparing them with the analytical solution and results available in literature. Discussion is pre-
sented on suitability of cross section under bending and torsional loads and effect of increase in number of
ARTICLE
threads on flexibility of endodontic file.
KEYWORDS: Endodontic Files, Root Canal Treatment, Finite Element Method, Nitinol.
using fatigue test and it was concluded that the higher cur- 1600
Actual Stress Strain Curve
vature generates higher stress in NiTi files which reduces
1200 Approximate Stress Strain Curve
lifetime of endodontic files.
Stress (MPa)
Khapre, et al.10 presented comparison of two NiTi files
800
namely ProFile and Twisted file models. Finite element
based ANSYS Workbench software was employed for the
400
analysis of segment of these files models for bending
and torsional loads. Study concluded that the Twisted file 0
model is more flexible than ProFile model. Rigidity curves 0 4 8 12 16 20
generated from transient finite element analysis was pre- Strain (%)
sented and discussed for both file models. Khapre, et al.11 Fig. 1. Stress–strain characteristics (actual and approximated) of NiTi.
presented a study on comparison of two NiTi endodontic
files namely Protaper and Twisted file. Finite element anal-
ysis was carried out using commercial software ANSYS horizontal. In this phase, very small stress produces large
11.0 on full length file models subjected to lateral load strain that makes NiTi super elastic. This phase is known
and displacement applied at the tip. It was reported that as transition phase. In the third part (c–d) stress strain
the twisted file model shows greater displacement as com- relationship is highly non linear. This phase is called as
pared to ProTaper file model for same magnitude of load. martensitic phase. It shows typical stress strain relation-
Load displacement curve was also presented that confirms ship for alloy till breaking point, where gradual increase in
the Twisted file model is more flexible than the ProTaper strain can be observed with increase in stress. Since NiTi
file model. is highly flexible and can handle larger strains, this helps
Khapre, et al.12 13 presented the comparison of ProFile in cleaning and shaping of the root canal of infected teeth.
ARTICLE
file model with Twisted file model. The comparison was While performing finite element analysis, the stress strain
based on finite element analysis of complete file models behavior of NiTi can be approximated by three lines a–b,
analyzed in ANSYS bending loads only. Load displace- b–c, c–d as shown in Figure 1. The Young’s modulus of
ment curve proved that the Twisted file model is more these three portions is 35,700 MPa, 860 MPa, and 11,600
flexible than ProFile file model. The magnitude of maxi- MPa respectively. The approximate Poisson’s ratio of 0.3
mum von-Mises stresses generated in Twisted file model was considered for NiTi during the analysis.
was found to be significantly higher than that of ProFile
file model. Khapre, et al.14 presented comparison of four 3. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE AND
cross sections used by Beak, et al.8 Study was carried RESULTS
out on segment of 1.8 mm length of file models having According to literature,15 When a cantilever beam of uni-
constant cross section subjected to bending as well as tor- form cross section is subjected to rotation at free end,
sion, using finite element analysis. Moment rigidity curve then reactive torsional moment of T = GJ /L is gener-
depicts that the s-rectangle cross section is most flexible ated at fixed end.15 Similarly when a cantilever beam of
when subjected to torsional loads.
uniform cross section is subjected to displacement at
The present study aims at comparison of four cross
free end, the reactive force of F = 3EI/L3 is generated
sections used by Baek, et al.8 and Khapre, et al.14 for
at fixed end.15 Considering these two equations, a sam-
design of endodontic file systems based on their finite
ple beam of 1.0 mm diameter with 12.0 mm length was
element analysis. It also discusses the effect of variation
analyzed by applying rotation of 20 and displacement of
in number of threads in endodontic files on their behav-
1 mm at free end while the other end was kept fixed. Only
ior under torsion and bending. Twelve finite file models
linear elastic behavior of NiTi was considered by taking
were created and analyzed using ANSYS and obtained
values of modulus of elasticity E = 35700 MPa and Pois-
results inform of equivalent von-Mises stress distribution,
son’s ratio = 03. Same cantilever beams are modeled
torsional stiffness and support reaction were presented and
in finite element based software ANSYS and analyzed for
compared.
both linear elastic (E = 35700 MPa and Poisson’s ratio
= 03 and non linear (Fig. 1) behavior of NiTi. The
2. NiTi CHARACTERISTICS results obtained are validated by comparing them with ana-
Figure 1 shows the stress–strain characteristics of NiTi. lytical results in Table I. Analytical results match well
As behavior of NiTi is highly non linear, the character- with the results obtained from ANSYS considering lin-
istics curve of NiTi can be divided into three parts a–b, ear elastic behavior of NiTi. The magnitude of torsional
b–c, c–d. In the first part (a–b), stress strain relationship moment and support reaction is nearly half when non lin-
is linear and alloy is in a more stable crystalline phase. ear behavior is incorporated. This difference is due to
This phase is called as austenitic phase. In the second part highly non linear behavior of NiTi. As analytical method
(b–c), stress strain relationship is also linear but almost uses only linear behavior of material therefore it is difficult
Table I. Validation of results obtained from ANSYS with analytical Table II. Details of geometry and mesh for twelve file models.
results.
Cross C/S area No. of Volume
ANSYS ANSYS section at tip (mm2 ) threads (mm3 ) Nodes Elements
Loading Analytical (linear) (non linear)
s-rectangle 0.3247 5 1.7102 1521 200
Rotation of 20 (N -mm) T = 3921 T = 39528 T = 1827 10 1.7392 2653 384
Displacement of 1 mm (N ) R = 3042 R = 3073 R = 1537 15 1.7465 3268 474
Rectangle 0.4330 5 2.2592 1521 200
10 2.3135 1941 256
15 2.4160 2301 304
to validate results obtained from ANSYS considering non
Square 0.5000 5 2.5124 1371 180
linear behavior of NiTi. 10 2.6065 1521 200
15 2.673 1671 220
Triangle 0.3248 5 1.4043 1051 135
4. FEA OF ENDODONTIC FILES 10 1.4944 1189 153
The file models were generated with 5, 10 and 15 threads 15 1.5235 1350 174
considering four different cross sections shown in Figure 2.
The length of file was considered as 12 mm and constant
taper of 5.83% was considered by taking tip and edge
stiffness as compared with non linear material behavior.
diameter 0.3 mm and 1.0 mm respectively. Table II shows
The magnitude of torsional stiffness is higher for square
the details of geometry and mesh of all file models. These
and rectangular cross section. Triangular cross section
file models was then tested for torsional loads and bending
shows lowest stiffness as compared with other file models.
load considering linear elastic as well as non linear mate-
This is due to the greater cross sectional area as compared
rial behavior. At first an angular rotation of 20 is applied
ARTICLE
to other file models. The s-rectangle file model shows
on each file model at the edge keeping the tip of the file
slightly higher stiffness than triangle file model as it has
as fixed. The distribution of equivalent von-Mises stress is
slightly larger cross sectional area. Figure 5 also shows
shown in Figure 3. The magnitude of von-Mises stress was
that the stiffness of file model increases with increase in
found to be maximum at the tip of each file model. The
number of threads for same cross section. This is due to
stress distribution is highly complex and shows meager
slight increase in volume of file with increase in the num-
difference in the magnitude of maximum von-Mises stress
ber of threads.
for various number of threads for same cross sections.
The variation in support reaction obtained in all file mod-
These file models were also tested for bending by apply-
els when subjected to bending loads is shown in Figure 6.
ing 1 mm displacement at tip keeping the edge fixed.
The magnitude of support reaction developed is smallest for
Equivalent von-Mises stress distribution obtained is shown s-rectangular file model as compared to other cross section.
in Figure 4. The variation in maximum stress is very less The square file model shows higher reaction as compared
for various number of threads with similar cross sections. to other file models. The support reaction decreases with
Maximum von-Mises stress was observed between two increase in number of thread. Variation in moment of iner-
cutting edges in the region of tip. tia along the length of file is mainly responsible for such
Torsional stiffness was also calculated for each file behavior. As the shape of files is continuously changing
model when subjected torsional loads. Figure 5 shows the with length, it is difficult to compute and compare the val-
variation in magnitude of torsional stiffness when NiTi ues of moment of inertia for all cross section.
behavior was considered as linear elastic and non lin-
ear. The results shown in Figure 5 are also compared
with the results presented by Baek8 and it was found that 5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
results match well. Figure 5 shows that the files analyzed After performing finite element analysis on file models
considering linear elastic material behavior shows more with four cross sections with varying number of threads,
Fig. 3. Equivalent von-Mises stress distribution in file models subjected to torsional loading.
ARTICLE
(i) 5 threads (ii) 10 threads (iii) 15 threads
(b) S-Rectangle
(c) Rectangle
Fig. 4. Equivalent von-Mises stress distribution in file models subjected to bending loads.
0.35
0.3
5 Linear 5 Non Linear Workbench software to carry out this work.
10 Linear 10 Non Linear
0.25
15 Linear 15 Non Linear
0.2
0.15 References and Notes
0.1 1. H. Walia, W. Brantley, and H. Gerstein, Journal of Endodontics
0.05 14, 346 (1988).
0 2. S. Thompson, International Endodontic Journal 33, 297 (2000).
Triangle S-Rectangle Rectangle Square 3. O. Zienkiewicz, R. Taylor, and J. Zhu, The Finite Element
Method: Its Basis and Fundamentals, 6th edn., Elsevier, Butterworth
Fig. 6. Variation in support reaction for four cross sections calculated
Heinemann, Germany (2005).
considering linear and non linear behavior of NiTi.
4. K. Bathe, Finite Element Procedures, 2nd edn., edited by
W. Stenquist, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1995).
5. E. Berutti, G. Chiandussi, I. Gaviglio, and A. Ibba, Journal of
Endodontics 29, 15 (2003).
ARTICLE