期刊文献+

圆丝摇椅弯曲度与托槽摩擦力大小的实验研究

Study of friction between the round wire and bracket in different angle of gable bend
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的研究不同直径圆丝的摇椅曲度与直丝托槽之间摩擦力大小关系,为临床医师选择不同直径圆丝的摇椅曲度提供参考。方法选用标准石膏模型翻制成树脂模型,粘贴杭州新亚齿科材料生产的HX标准型网底直丝弓托槽,不锈钢结扎丝常规结扎,测量两种圆形弓丝(0.016英寸、0.018英寸,澳大利亚圆丝)在上颌尖牙和第二双尖牙之间加载不同的摇椅度数(0°、10°、20°、30°)时弓丝与托槽之间的摩擦阻力。整个实验均在干燥条件下进行。对测量结果分别进行单因素方差分析。结果 0.016英寸澳大利亚不锈钢圆丝于尖牙与第二双尖牙之间分别加载0°、10°、20°、30°的摇椅弯曲,平均滑动摩擦力除20°与30°组内比较无统计学意义外,其余各组内比较均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。0.018英寸澳大利亚不锈钢圆丝于尖牙与第二双尖牙之间加载0°、10°、20°、30°的摇椅弯曲,平均滑动摩擦力除10°与20°组内比较无统计学意义外,其余组内比较均,有统计学意义(P<0.05)。0.016和0.018英寸澳大利亚不锈钢圆丝在不同摇椅弯曲度的摩擦力曲线显示弓丝与托槽的滑动摩擦力跟弓丝尺寸呈正相关。结论弓丝与托槽的滑动摩擦力随着弓丝直径增大而增加,随着弓丝摇椅弯曲度数增加而增大。 Objective To identify the friction between different size round archwire and HX straight-wire metal bracket in different angle of gable bend. Methods A plastic model was duplicated from standard plaster model. The do- mestic HX straight-wire metal brackets were stieked up plastic mode. The archwire was fixed with ligature wire. Then the friction were measured between bracket and two size of archwire (0. 016 inch/0. 018 inch Australian wire) in different angle of gable bend with (0°/10°/20°/30°). The test had been done on dry condition. Results 0. 016 inch and 0. 018 inch archwire with different angle of gable bend showed 0. 016 inch archwire with angle of gable bend were at 0°, 10°, 20° and 30°, separately. There were significant difference, between 0° and 10°, 0° and 20°, 0° and 30° and between 10° and 20°, 10° and 30°(P〈O. 05). But 0. 016 inch archwire with angle of gable bend were at 20° and 30°. 0. 018 inch archwire with angle of gable bend were at 0°, 10°, 20°, 30°, separately. There were significant difference between 0° and 10°,0°and 20°, 0° and 30°and between 10°and 30°, 20°and 30°(P〈0.05 =. But 0. 018 inch archwire with angle of gable bend were at 10°and 20°. There was no significant difference (P〉0.05). 0. 016 and 0. 018 inch archwire with angle of gable bend were at 0°, 10°, 20° and 30°, separately. The friction between archwire and bracket showed a positive correlation. Conclusion The friction between round arehwire and bracket get higher while the archwire diameter get bigger. The friction between round archwire and bracket get higher while the angle of gable bend get bigger.
出处 《西部医学》 2012年第11期2067-2069,共3页 Medical Journal of West China
关键词 直丝托槽 弓丝 摩擦力 Straight-wire metal bracket Archwire Friction
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

  • 1Bednar JR. A comparative study of frictional forces between or- thodontic brackets and arch wires [J]. Am J Orthod, 1991,100 (6) :513-522.
  • 2李洪,林珠.正畸摇椅弓打开咬合的体会[J].牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志,2004,14(9):537-537. 被引量:4
  • 3Oliver CL, Daskalogiannakis J, Tompson BD. Archwire depth is a significant parameter in the frictional resistance of active and interactive, but not passive, self-ligating brackets [J].Angle Orthod, 2011,81 (6) : 1036-1044.
  • 4仇玲玲,白玉兴,厉松,王邦康.不同陶瓷托槽与金属弓丝间摩擦力的研究[J].北京口腔医学,2011,19(5):280-282. 被引量:6
  • 5杨力,封平平,白玉兴,王邦康.国产陶瓷托槽与金属弓丝间滑动摩擦力的研究[J].北京口腔医学,2012,20(1):25-28. 被引量:3
  • 6Nishio C. In vitro evaluation of frictional forces between archwire and ceramic brackets[J].Am J Orthod, 2004,125(1) :56-64.
  • 7林珊,罗小安,黄晓红.时效对正畸弓丝摩擦力影响的实验研究[J].口腔材料器械杂志,2004,13(4):183-185. 被引量:5
  • 8Ribeiro AA, Mattos CT, Ruellas AC, et al. In vivo comparison of the friction forces in new and used brackets[J]. Orthodontics (Chic), 2012,13 (1) : 44-50.
  • 9Husaln N, Kumar A. Frictional resistance between orthodontic brackets and archwire: an in vitro study[J]. J Contemp Dent Pratt, 2011,12(2) :91-99.
  • 10Marques IS, Arafijo AM, Gurgel JA, et al. Debris roughness and friction of stainless steel arehwires following clinical use[J]. Angle Orthod, 2010,80(3) :521-527.

二级参考文献31

  • 1杨力,封平平,白玉兴,王邦康.国产陶瓷托槽在转矩力作用下断裂强度的研究[J].北京口腔医学,2007,15(1):15-17. 被引量:6
  • 2杨力,封平平,白玉兴,王邦康,谢志鹏,秦晓桐.国产陶瓷托槽在近远中倾斜力下断裂强度的实验研究[J].北京口腔医学,2007,15(4):199-201. 被引量:5
  • 3朱鲲,王春玲,王娟,赵艳红.FAS自锁托槽与传统自锁托槽的摩擦力对比研究[J].华西口腔医学杂志,2007,25(4):371-374. 被引量:10
  • 4Omana HM, Moore RN, Bagby MD, et al. Frictional properties of metal and ceramic brackets. J Clin Orthod, 1992,26 (7) :425-432.
  • 5ReadWard GE, Jones SP, Davies EH. A Comparision of self-ligationg and conventional orthodontic bracket systems. British J Orthod, 1997, 24(4) :309-317.
  • 6Taylor NG, Ison K. Frictional resistance between orthodontic brackets and archwire in the buecal segments. Angle Orthod, 1996,66 ( 3 ) : 215-222.
  • 7Kusy RP, Whitley JQ, Prewitt MJ. Comparison of the frictional coefficients for selected archwire-bracket slot combination in the dry and wet states. Angle Orthod,1991,61 (4) :293-302.
  • 8Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Scribante A, et al. Evaluation of friction of conventional and metal-insert ceramic brackets in various bracket- archwire combinations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2003,124 (4) :403-409.
  • 9Kusy RP. Ongoing innovations in biomechanics and materials for the new millennium. Angle Orthod,2000,70(5 ) :366-376.
  • 10Nishio C, da Motta AF, Elias CN, et al. In vitro evaluation of frictional forces between archwires and ceramic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop ,2004,125 ( 1 ) :56-64.

共引文献14

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部