Equilibrium situations in bend force systems

Christian Demange, DCD, SQODF, CECSMO*

Lyon, France

This article provides a simple theoretical approach to the equilibrium situations encountered in
biomechanics. Basic differences between the moment of a force and the moment of a couple are
described. The concept of the center of resistance is defined and applied to the case of a force
system (R,). Three equilibrium situations are schematically described: the off-center V bend, the
centered V bend, and the step bend. Two clinical examples are detailed (one from the Begg
technique and one from the Ricketts technique) to demonstrate clinical applications of force in these
three situations. (AM J ORTHODDENTOFACORTHOP1990;98:333-9.)

O r t h o d o n t i c literature contains numerous ar-
ticles on biomechanics in general and on equilibrium
situations in particular. ~7 But, however excellent these
publications may be, comprehending them is sometimes
difficult. Furthermore, the theoretical models they pre-
sent are often inapplicable in everyday clinical practice.
The present article aims to provide a simple explanation
of these equilibrium situations that will enable the prac-
titioner to recognize them more easily and thus achieve
a more precise adjustment of the force system for op-
timal therapeutic effect.
ELEMENTARY BIOMECHANICS
Force
A given force may be represented by a vector, which
is characterized by direction. This direction, in turn, is
characterized by a sense (indicated by the head of the
arrow) and by a line of action. The location of the point
of application on the line of action has no influence on
the type of movement obtained; the only thing that
counts is the relationship of the line of action to the
center of resistance. The magnitude of the force is pro-
portional to the length of the vector. In orthodontic
biomechanics it is also important to consider duration
and rhythm in applications of force, although these
two factors do not participate directly in basic biome-
chanics.
Center of resistance
The center of resistance of a force is defined by its
relationship to the force: a force for which the line of
action passes through the center of resistance produces
*Assistant ~ la facult6 d'Odontologie de Lyon.
811116190
a movement or pure translation. It must be noted that,
for a given tooth, this movement may be mesiodistal
or vestibulolingual, intrusive or extrusive.
Because a tooth is a restrained body, the center of
resistance may be compared to the center of gravity, or
the barycenter, of a free body. The position of the center
of resistance is directly dependent on what may be
called the "clinical root" of the tooth. This concept takes
into account the root volume, including the periodontal
bone-a definition that is close to that given by Burstone
and Pryputniewicz8 of the position of the center of re-
sistance. These authors define the position of the center
of resistance according to the distance between the al-
veolar crest and the apex, incrementing this value with
the thickness (i.e., the surface) of the root. 9
The position of the center of resistance is also a
function of the nature of the periodontal structures, ~°-~3
and the density of the alveolar bone and the elasticity
of the desmodontal structures are strongly related to the
patient's age.ta These considerations have led Valet and
Pagin ~ to speak of the "center of resistance associated
with the tooth," rather than of "the center of resistance
of the tooth."
Moment and couple
A force for which the line of action does not pass
through the center of resistance produces a moment of
force (M) on the center of resistance. The magnitude
of this moment is equal to the magnitude of the force
multiplied by the perpendicular distance of the line of
action of the force with respect to the center of resis-
tance. The moment exists only insofar as the force is
delivered on the center of resistance.
Conversely, the moment of a couple is a free system
that produces an identical effect on the center of resis-

333
334 Demange Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop.
October 1990

d lb..- - - q l el

Fig. 1. a, R~ = R2; b, R~ > Rz

tance (pure rotation), regardless of the position of the

couple on the tooth. A couple consists of two forces of
equal magnitude, with parallel but noncolinear lines of -- c~ ~ > " ~ c2 --
action and opposite senses. The moment of this couple
is equal to the magnitude of one of the forces multiplied
by the perpendicular distance between the two lines of
action.

Center of rotation
The center of rotation depends exclusively on the .~1. ~ M

system of forces applied. Its position relative to the

center of resistance determines the type of movement
obtained. If the center of rotation is a long distance
from the tooth, translation occurs. If the center of ro- ix
tation and the center of resistance are identical, then
the movement is pure rotation. Between these two ex-
G ,T
treme situations, combined effects of rototranslation
may occur. The graphic determination of the center of
rotation is fairly simple 6 and its distance from the
center of resistance may be determined by use of the
moment/force ratio. 6":6't7

THREE BRACKET-WIRE
EQUILIBRIUM SITUATIONS
Three bracket-wire conditions will be examined
here: (a) the off-centered V bend, which exists when
the bend is off-center (as in the Begg anchor bend), (b)
the centered V bend, which exists when the arch has a
V bend midway between the two brackets, and (c) the
step bend.
These situations may be represented by two dental
u n i t s - - f o r example, a molar and an incisor. Before
examining each case in detail, we must define the center
of resistance for each system (R,) since, as we will see,
the magnitudes of force and the moments they produce
vary with the position of the R,. The center of resistance
of a system is located somewhere along the line between
the centers of resistance of the two teeth. If the two
teeth have the same anchorage value, the center of
resistance of the system will be located halfway be-
Fig. 2. Off-center V bend: general case.
tween the centers of resistance of the two teeth. If the
anchorage values are different, the center of resistance
of the system will be closer to the tooth with the highest
anchorage value (Fig. 1).
The off-center V bend
Let us consider the case of two teeth, TI and T2
(Fig. 2) with the same anchorage value that we located
at a specific distance (2d) from each other (d = the
distance between the center of resistance of the system
and T~ or 1"2). Let us introduce into the bracket of each
tooth a wire with an off-center bend, thus causing an
off-center V.
In Fig. 2, a two forces are produced at the mesial
and distal ends of each bracket: F2 and F'2 for T2, and
Volume 98 Bend force systems 335
Number 4

F~ and F'~ for T~. On each tooth, these forces are par- T1 1"2
allel, of opposite sense, and of equal magnitude, thus
forming a couple (Fig. 2, b). Furthermore, since the - . . % ,.--... -,2 ,.-
angle between the wire and the bracket is wider on the
T~ side, couple C, will be stronger than couple C:.
According to the laws of Newton, if the system is at
equilibrium, the net effect of all the forces and moments
of the system is nil in any spot of the system. To sim-
plify, we will consider the center of resistance of the
system R, (Fig. 2, c). The moments, C~ and C2 pro-
duced by the couples, may be placed in R, without any b -- cl
modification. To obtain a nil net effect, we must intro- s
duce a moment, M, opposite to C~, the magnitude of
which is equal to the difference between C~ and Cz
(Fig. 2, d). The system is then at equilibrium. To vi-
sualize the effects produced by M on T~ and T2, we C2
Cl •
must resolve M into two forces, X and Y (Fig. 2, e),
acting respectively on T~ and T:.
In summary (Fig. 2, J'), acting on Tt are an upward Fig. 3. Off-center V bend with displacement of the center of
vertical force and a counterclockwise moment; and on resistance of the system: a = %X; b = 2X.
"1"2, a downward vertical force and a clockwise moment
that is weaker than the one acting on T~. This is a classic
representation of an off-center V b e n d - - i . e . , a bend Furthermore:
with two opposite moments of different magnitudes and
two opposite forces of identical magnitude.
3d
If R, moves to an off-center position because the
anchorage values of the two teeth differ, then the mag-
b•d2=
nitudes of the vertical forces will vary. if b = 4X - 3a
Let us consider the same force system as above, d 3d
(4X - 3a)~ = -~-a
with a center of resistance (R,) at a distance % from
T~ (Fig. 3). In R,', the sum of the moments must be 4X - 3a = 3a
nil and the reactional moment (M) has the same ori-
4X=6a
entation and magnitude as in the example shown in
Fig. 2. However, the forces obtained by resolving M 2
a = ~X
into its components and acting on T~ and Tz will be
different because of the off-center position of the Rs'. b = 4X- 3(%X)
According to the laws of leverage, the vertical force b = 2X
(b) produced on T~ is greater than the vertical force (a)
produced on T2. By a simple calculation, we may de- We see that the vertical force acting on T~ doubles,
termine the magnitudes of the forces a and b according while the vertical force acting on T2 is reduced by 2,6.
to those of X and Y. If the center of resistance of the system moves to-
ward T~ because of an increase in the anchorage value
of the tooth, with R," at distance % from T~ and 5%
The two moments are equal, and X-Y. from Tz, then the two vertical forces have a value of
a = % X a n d b = 3X.
3d d It must be emphasized that the increase in magni-
-~-a + ~b = 2dX
tude of the force acting on T~ does not necessarily lead
3da + db clinically to a stronger extrusion of the tooth, since there
= 2dX is a simultaneous increase in the anchorage value.
2

d(3a + b__._.~=) 2dX The centered V bend

2
This situation represents a particular case of V bends
3a + b = 4X in which the apex of the V bend is centered between
b = 4X - 3a the two brackets.
 Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop.
336 Demange October 1990

T1 "12

. :3c .

_ cl ~ c= _-
',½2'
Fig. 4. Centered V bend: general case.

Fig. 4 shows, as does Fig. 2, the reactions that

occur. Because the apex of the bend is centered, the d Cl~>'~ C2
moments CI and C2 produced on each tooth are of equal
but opposite magnitude, since the angle between the
bracket and the wire is the same on the left side and
on the right side. At R,, the two moments cancel each
other and there is no resulting vertical force.
It must be noted that in this force system, contrary
to what is observed in the off-center V model, the
distance between the center of resistance of the system
and T~ and T2 has no influence on the reactions pro-
Fig. 5. Step bend: general case.
duced. There will always be a counterclockwise rotation
of T~ and a clockwise rotation of T2.

The step bend
In this situation, the wire has two bends (Fig. 5).
Both TI and "1"2are submitted to two vertical forces
(Fig. 5, a) that produce couples (Fig. 5, b). If the
angles between each of the brackets and the wire are
the same, the two couples, C~ and C2, are of equal
magnitude and identical sense (counterclockwise for
both C~ and C~). At the center of resistance of the
system, the moments of the couples add up, producing
a reactional moment (M) (Fig. 5, c) of clockwise ori-
entation and a magnitude twice that of C1 (or of C2).
This moment can be resolved at the level of T~ and T2
into two equal and opposite vertical forces, X and Y
(Fig. 5, d).
Fig. 5, e shows the final result on T~ and T2, with
two moments of identical orientation and magnitude
and two opposite vertical forces. This is the classic
representation of a step bend.
It is easy to understand that the forces generated in
this type of situation are stronger than those generated
in an off-center V bend. Indeed, for a given angle be-
tween the wire and the brackets, the two moments, C1
and C2, add up in the step bend, yielding a stronger
reactional moment, as well as stronger vertical forces.
If the position of the center of resistance changes,
there are the same consequences on the magnitudes of
the vertical forces as those described in the off-center
V bend, for the same reasons.
CLINICAL APPLICATIONS
Variations in magnitudes of forces and moments
To optimize the force system that is produced, it is
helpful to be able to predict variations in the magnitudes
of forces and moments.
In the off-center V bend, the magnitude of the mo-
ment and of the resulting vertical force varies with the
relative angle between the brackets and the wire. This
relative angle is a function of three parameters: the bend
of the wire, the width of the brackets, and the distance
between the brackets.
Volume 98
Number 4
T1 T2
b
m
C • C1 ~ i ]M • force system. This has been demonstrated experimen-
c •
Fig. 6. Ingression archwire in Begg technique.
The wider the bend of the wire, the stronger the
couples C, and C2, the more intense the reactional mo-
ment, and the stronger the vertical force. The bend of
the wire is also directly related to its mesiodistal po-
sition, which is therefore a factor acting on the force
system. 7
The use of wider brackets produces the same effects
as those produced by wider bend of wire.
The distance between the brackets acts in a similar
manner. For a given bend of wire, reducing the distance
between the brackets causes an increase in the angle
between the wire and the brackets and a corresponding
increase in magnitude of the forces and moments pro-
duced.
In the centered V bend situation, the three factors
just described act identically on the magnitude of the
two moments. If the bend of the wire is no longer
centered, then the situation is that of an off-center V
bend.
Bend force systems 337
a b
Fig. 7. Transverse movement in Begg technique.
In the step bend, the angle between the wire and
the brackets is the only factor that determines the mag-
nitude of the forces and the moments. It is simple to
understand that, contrary to the height of the step, the
mesiodistal position of the step does not modify the
tally by Burstone and Koenig. 7
It must be noted that an off-center V bend may be
transformed into a step bend by a permanent defor-
mation of the wire.
Clinical examples
To simplify the above explanation, the two clinical
examples presented will be considered as having their
centers of resistance halfway between the two dental
units. In this case, by definition, the total amount of
root surface area is identical in the incisor area and in
the molar area. If the molar anchorage value increases
(if, for example, the second molars are taken into ac-
count), the center of resistance will be displaced toward
the molar, thereby increasing the magnitude of the re-
actional vertical force, as shown in Fig. 3. Conversely,
if the anchorage value of the anterior unit is increased
(by taking into account the two canines with the inci-
sors, as in the Begg technique, for example), then the
vertical force on the molars will decrease.
The problem is that the exact location of the center
of resistance of a system consisting of multiple dental
units is not easy to determine in the clinic, although
the location determines the magnitude of the forces.
Ingression archwire in the Begg technique
This example is a simple illustration of the off-
center V bend. Fig. 6 shows a lower incisor ingression
archwire between the first molar, which bears a tube,
and the incisor, which has a unipoint bracket. When
the system is put into place, two vertical forces of equal
magnitude and opposite orientation are produced on T,
(Fig. 6, a), corresponding to a couple C1 (Fig. 6, b).
At the center of resistance of the system, this couple
causes a reactional moment, M (Fig. 6, c), which may
be resolved into two opposite vertical forces of equal

338 Demange
T~
b • • •
C • Cl ~ i ~M
c •
C •
Fig. 8. Basic archwire in Ricketts technfque.
magnitude, F~ and F2, acting on T~ and "I"2(Fig. 6, d).
To determine the reactions that occur at the level of
each tooth, it is necessary to consider the center of re-
sistance of each of these forces (Fig. 6, e). At R~, there
are the vertical force and the couple C~ (free system).
At R2, the ingressive force does not pass through the
center of resistance, thereby producing a moment m2,
which leads to a coronal labioversion of the lower in-
cisor. The wider the initial angle between the tooth and
the occlusal plane, the stronger this moment will be.
On the molar, and in the sagittal plane, the vertical
force does not produce a moment at the center of re-
sistance, since it passes through it. However, in the
frontal plane (Fig. 7), this egressive force produces a
moment that tends to tip the crown of the molar lin-
gually. In the Begg technique, this tipping may be pre-
vented by an extensive widening of the archwire.
As in the general case of the off-center V bend, a
displacement of the center of resistance toward the too-
Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop.
October 1990
T2
I-
• g
1:2
m2
C2
lar will lead to an increase of the egressive force on
this tooth and a decrease of the ingressive force on the
incisor, with consequences on the magnitudes of the
moments produced locally.
Basic archwire in the Ricketts technique
In the basic archwire of the Ricketts technique, the
V bend is off center, with the wire placed passively in
the bracket of '1"2(Figs. 8, a - d ) . This leads to a situa-
tion (Fig. 8, e) in which a moment, m2, tends to tip
the incisors labially. To control this side effect, a
coronolingual torque, represented by the couple C2
(Fig. 8, .1') is placed into the incisor bracket. The sit-
uation then becomes that of a step bend, with the mo-
ment C2 causing an increase in the magnitude of the
reactional moment M' (Fig. 8, g). This increase, in
turn, causes an increase in magnitude of the forces F~
and F2 (Fig. 8, h). On the incisor, the increase of F2
produces an increase of the moment m2. The increase
Volume 98
Number 4
o f m 2 tends to labialize the incisor, thereby countering
the effect for which the torque was inserted (Fig. 8, i).
The antagonism between the moments m2 and C2 partly
explains the difficulty involved in adjusting this type
of archwire precisely.
The control of this type of force system is further
complicated by the non-median position of the center
of resistance of the system, which leads to variations
in the forces.
CONCLUSION
In this article we have tried to describe equilibrium
situations as clearly and schematically as possible. A
totally direct application to the clinical setting is not
possible because of the complexity of the biologic phe-
nomena involved in dental movement. However, a thor-
ough knowledge of the schematic situations encoun-
tered often helps to explain the side effects observed
clinically.
I thank Dr. Annie Brunner-Labarge for her critical anal-
ysis of this manuscript and Dr. Charles Dumontet for his help
with the English translation.
Rt=FERENCE$
1. Burstone CJ, Koenig HA. Force systems from an ideal arch. AM
J ORTHOD 1974;65:270-89.
2. Mulligan TF. Common sense mechanics. J Clin Orthod
1979;13:676-83; 1980;14:265-72, 336-42, 412-16, 481-88.
3. Hocevar RA. Understanding, planning, and managing tooth
movement: orthodontic force system theory. AM J ORTtIOD
1981 ;80:457-77.
4. Hocevar RA. Orthodontic force systems: technical refinements
for increased efficiency. AM J ORTtIOD 1982;81:1-11.
5. Nikolai ILl. Analytical mechanics and analysis of orthodontic
tooth movements. Ar,i J OR'I'HOD 1982;82:164-6.
Bend force systems 339
6. Smith RJ, Burstone CJ. Mechanics of tooth movement. AM J
ORa'HOD 1984;85:294-307.
7. Burstone CJ, Koenig HA. Creative wire bending--the force
system from step and V bends. AM J OR'I'HODDENTOFACORTHOP
1988;93:59-67.
8. Burstone CJ, Pryputniewicz. Holographic determination ofcen-
ters of rotation produced by orthodontic forces. AM J ORTHOD
1980;77:396-409.
9. Bulke MMV, Burstone CJ, Sachdeva RCL, Dermaut LR. Lo-
cation of the centers of resistance for anterior teeth during re-
traction using the laser reflection technique. AM J ORTHODDEN-
TOFACORTHOP 1987;91:375-84.
10. Davidian El. Use of a computer model to study the force dis-
tribution on the root of the maxillary central incisor. AM J OR-
~XOD 1971;59:581-8.
II. Yettram AL, Wright KWJ, Houston WJB. Center of rotation of
a maxillary central incisor under orthodontic loading. Br J Orthod
1977;4:23-7.
12. Synge JL. The tightness of the teeth, considered as a problem
concerning the equilibrium of a thin incompressible elastic mem-
brane. Philos Trans R Soc Lond 1933;231A:435-77.
13. Hay GE. The equilibrium of a thin compressible membrane. Can
J Res 1939;17:106-21.
14. Bridges T, King G, Mohammed A. The effect of age on tooth
movement and mineral density in the alveolar tissues of the rat.
AM J ORTtIOD DENTOFACORTHOP 1988;93:245-50.
15. Valet R, Pagin J. The center of resistance. Rev Orthop Dento-
Faciale 1987;21:115-29.
16. Kusy RP, Tulloch JFC. Analysis of moment/force ratios in the
mechanics of tooth movement. AM J ORTHODDENTOFACORTttOP
1986;90:127-31.
17. Tanne K, Koenig HA, Burstone CJ. Moment to force ratios and
the center of rotation. AM J ORTHOD DENIOFAC ORTHOP
1988;94:426-31.
Reprint requests to:
Dr. Christian Demange
189 rue Garibaldi
69428 Lyon Cedex 03
France