How reliable is the finite element model compared to laboratory torsional tests?
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: To evaluate a finite element method for analyzing the torsional strength of Reciproc and Reciproc Blue, comparing the results with those obtained from an in vitro test based on ISO 3630-1 standards.
Materials and Methods: Reciproc and Reciproc Blue (n=10) were tested under torsion by ISO 3630-1 to determine maximum torsional torque (N.cm) and the angle at which the instruments failed (°). The mean values from these tests were used to simulate torsion via finite element analysis on virtual models of the instruments. Data from the in vitro torsion tests were analyzed using the student’s t-test, with a significance level set at 5%. One-tailed and two-tailed t-tests were employed to compare the angular deflection profiles with finite element analysis predictions.
Results: The maximum torsional torque and rotation angle for Reciproc were 1.4 N.cm and 224.4°, while for Reciproc Blue, they were 1.38 N.cm and 306.5°. Significant differences were observed between Reciproc Blue and Reciproc only in the rotation angles (P<0.05). Finite element analysis showed rotation angles of 216.4° for Reciproc and 310.2° for Reciproc Blue, with Reciproc Blue exhibiting a significantly larger rotation angle (P<0.05). No significant differences were found between the in vitro ISO torsion tests and finite element analysis results (P>0.05). Conclusion: The finite element method developed in this study accurately predicted the angular deflection of the instruments and produced results consistent with the ISO 3630-1 in vitro torsion tests.
Article Details
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
References
2. Akkoç Hİ, Keskin C, Aslantaş K. Dynamic analysis of a NiTi rotary file by using finite element analysis: Effect of cross-section and pitch length. Aust Endod J. Published online October 3, 2024. doi:10.1111/aej.12892
3. Roda-Casanova V, Pérez-González A. Computerized Generation of Endodontic Files by Reproducing the Flute Grinding Manufacturing Process. Bioengineering (Basel). 2024;11(8). doi:10.3390/bioengineering11080751
4. Eken R, Sen OG, Eskitascioglu G, Belli S. Evaluation of the Effect of Rotary Systems on Stresses in a New Testing Model Using a 3-Dimensional Printed Simulated Resin Root with an Oval-shaped Canal: A Finite Element Analysis Study. J Endod. 2016;42(8):1273-1278. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2016.05.007
5. El-Anwar MI, Yousief SA, Soliman TA, Saleh MM, Omar WS. A finite element study on stress distribution of two different attachment designs under implant supported overdenture. Saudi Dent J. 2015;27(4):201-207. doi:10.1016/j.sdentj.2015.03.001
6. De-Deus G, Leal Vieira VT, Nogueira da Silva EJ, Lopes H, Elias CN, Moreira EJ. Bending resistance and dynamic and static cyclic fatigue life of Reciproc and WaveOne large instruments. J Endod. 2014;40(4):575-579. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.013
7. Yoo YS, Cho YB. A comparison of the shaping ability of reciprocating NiTi instruments in simulated curved canals. Restor Dent Endod. 2012;37(4):220-227. doi:10.5395/rde.2012.37.4.220
8. Alcalde MP, Duarte MAH, Bramante CM, de Vasconselos BC, Tanomaru-Filho M, Guerreiro-Tanomaru JM, et al. Cyclic fatigue and torsional strength of three different thermally treated reciprocating nickel-titanium instruments. Clin Oral Investig. 2018;22(4):1865-1871. doi:10.1007/s00784-017-2295-8
9. Ajuz NCC, Armada L, Gonçalves LS, Debelian G, Siqueira JF. Glide path preparation in S-shaped canals with rotary pathfinding nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod. 2013;39(4):534-537. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2012.12.025
10. Gharechahi M, Moezzi S, Karimpour S. Comparative Analysis of Stress Distribution through Finite-Element Models of 3 NiTi Endodontic Instruments while Operating in Different Canal Types. J Dent (Shiraz). 2023;24(1):60-65. doi:10.30476/DENTJODS.2022.90785.1522
11. Martins JNR, Pinto R, Silva EJNL, Simões-Carvalho M, Marques D, Martins RF, et al. 3D Surface Scanning-A Novel Protocol to Characterize Virtual Nickel-Titanium Endodontic Instruments. Materials (Basel). 2023;16(10). doi:10.3390/ma16103636
12. Montalvão D, Alçada FS, Braz Fernandes FM, de Vilaverde-Correia S. Structural characterisation and mechanical FE analysis of conventional and M-Wire Ni-Ti alloys used in endodontic rotary instruments. ScientificWorldJournal. 2014;2014:976459. doi:10.1155/2014/976459
13. Chien PYH, Walsh LJ, Peters OA. The extended finite element method in endodontics: A scoping review and future directions for cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium instruments. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2024;10(3):e893. doi:10.1002/cre2.893
14. Bonessio N, Pereira ESJ, Lomiento G, Arias A, Bahia MGA, Buono VTL, et al. Validated finite element analyses of WaveOne Endodontic Instruments: a comparison between M-Wire and NiTi alloys. Int Endod J. 2015;48(5):441-450. doi:10.1111/iej.12333
15. Wakabayashi N, Ona M, Suzuki T, Igarashi Y. Nonlinear finite element analyses: advances and challenges in dental applications. J Dent. 2008;36(7):463-471. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2008.03.010
16. Alcalde MP, Tanomaru-Filho M, Bramante CM, Duarte MAH, Guerreiro-Tanomaru JM, Camilo-Pinto J, et al. Cyclic and Torsional Fatigue Resistance of Reciprocating Single Files Manufactured by Different Nickel-titanium Alloys. J Endod. 2017;43(7):1186-1191. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2017.03.008
17. Vivan RR, Alcalde MP, Candeiro G, Gavini G, Caldeira CL, Duarte MAH. Torsional fatigue strength of reciprocating and rotary pathfinding instruments manufactured from different NiTi alloys. Braz Oral Res. 2019;33:e097. doi:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2019.vol33.0097
18. García-Braz SH, Prados-Privado M, Zanatta LCS, Calvo-Guirado JL, Prados-Frutos JC, Gehrke SA. A Finite Element Analysis to Compare Stress Distribution on Extra-Short Implants with Two Different Internal Connections. J Clin Med. 2019;8(8). doi:10.3390/jcm8081103
19. Necchi S, Petrini L, Taschieri S, Migliavacca F. A comparative computational analysis of the mechanical behavior of two nickel-titanium rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2010;36(8):1380-1384. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2010.03.026