ORIGINAL ARTICLE

A nonlinear finite element analysis of the

periodontal ligament under orthodontic tooth
loading
Stephanie R. Toms, DDS, PhD,a,b and Alan W. Eberhardt, PhDa
Birmingham, Ala

The stressed state of the periodontal ligament (PDL) is understood to play a critical role in the tooth
movement initiated by orthodontic treatment. Finite element simulations have been used to describe PDL
stresses for orthodontic loading; however, these models have predominantly assumed linear mechanical
properties for the PDL. The present study sought to determine the importance of using nonlinear mechanical
properties and nonuniform geometric data in computer predictions of periodontal ligament stresses and
tooth movements. A 2-dimensional plane-strain finite element model of a mandibular premolar was
constructed based on anatomic data of transverse sections of tooth, PDL, and bone from a 24-year-old
cadaveric man. A second model was constructed of the same tooth but with a PDL of uniform thickness.
Each of these was prescribed linear or nonlinear elastic mechanical properties, as obtained in our own
experiments. Predictions of the maximum and minimum principal stresses and von Mises stresses in the PDL
were determined for extrusive and tipping forces. The results indicated that biofidelic finite element models
predicted substantially different stresses in the PDL for extrusive loading than did the uniform thickness
model, suggesting that incorporation of the hourglass shape of the PDL is warranted. In addition,
incorporation of nonlinear mechanical properties for the PDL resulted in dramatic increases in the stresses
at the apex and cervical margin as compared with the linear models. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;
123:657-65)

A
pplication of light and continuous forces to the
crown of a tooth is recommended in orthodon-
tics. Under low force magnitudes, the peri-
odontal ligament (PDL) vasculature is partially oc-
cluded, and cellular activity within the ligament
rescaffolds the alveolus by frontal bone resorption. In
contrast, heavy forces are more likely to cause ischemia
and cell death in the PDL and undermine bone resorp-
tion.1,2 Whereas light forces cause physiologic and
steady tooth movement, heavy loads induce abrupt
starts and stops of migration synchronous with collapse
of necrosed bone and cementum.3 Thus, the stressed
condition of the PDL sets the stage for the ensuing
favorable or unfavorable tooth movement.4,5 Because
of geometric and mechanical complexities, however,
few studies have related stress in the PDL to the applied
orthodontic force. Clinicians therefore tend to rely on
experience when adjusting appliances.
From the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
Department of Biomedical Engineering.
b
Department of Orthodontics.
Reprint requests to: Alan W. Eberhardt, PhD, HOEHN Room 370, 1075 13th
Street South, Birmingham, AL 35294-4440; e-mail, Aeberhar@eng.uab.edu.
Submitted, April 2002; revised and accepted, July 2002.
Copyright © 2003 by the American Association of Orthodontists.
0889-5406/2003/$30.00 ⫹ 0
doi:10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00164-1
Finite element (FE) analyses offer a means of
determining stresses in tooth, ligament, and bone struc-
tures for a broad range of orthodontic loading scenar-
ios. Stress profiles of the PDL have been quantified for
canines,6-11 maxillary incisors,12,13 premolars,14,15 and
molars.16 Centers of rotation of teeth have been ana-
lytically determined,9,13,17 and the effect of bone loss
has been investigated.18-20 These computer models
generally incorporated homogeneous, isotropic, linear
elastic PDL properties. Few studies have assigned
nonlinear mechanical properties to the PDL10,21,22 or
nonuniform PDL geometry.12
Accuracy of the computer models depends on
assigned constitutive properties, among other things.
Whereas the hard tissue properties have been docu-
mented,23 a comprehensive mathematical description
of the PDL has not been reported. This lack of
information is a source of error in computer simula-
tions of orthodontic tooth movement.10,11,20,24 Al-
though the mechanical behavior of the PDL is
understood to be nonlinearly elastic,25-28 many in-
vestigators assign linear mechanical properties be-
cause of lack of scientific quantitative data.11,24
Other investigators have performed parametric anal-
yses to determine the influence of the PDL linear
657
658 Toms and Eberhardt
Fig 1. A, Isometric view of transverse section of tooth,
PDL, and bone of harvested mandibular premolar. B,
Example of digital photograph of specimen from which
PDL and tooth dimensions were measured.
elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio on the center of
rotation of a canine.9
Recently, we quantified nonlinear elastic and aniso-
tropic stress-strain behavior of the PDL of cadaveric
mandibular premolars for low force.29 In this study, we
sought to incorporate this experimental data of PDL
geometry and nonlinear stress-strain characteristics as
input to an FE model of a tooth, ligament, and bone
structure to compare stresses and deformations with
models of uniform PDL thickness and linear mechani-
cal properties.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A mandibular premolar from a 24-year-old male
cadaver was sliced transversely into sections approxi-
mately 0.85 mm thick (Fig 1, A).29 Digital photographs
of the specimens (Fig 1, B) were taken from apical and
coronal views, from which tooth perimeter (P) and PDL
dimensions were measured with Sigma Scan 4.0 soft-
ware (Jandel, Chicago, Ill). PDL thickness (WL) for
each view was taken as the average of 8 evenly spaced
measurements around the perimeter. Specimen thick-
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
June 2003
ness (T) was the average of 4 evenly spaced caliper
measurements of the tooth thickness. Stress area (AS)
for extrusive loading was defined as AS ⫽ TP. Stress
was calculated as the applied force/AS, and elongation
(⌬l) was the actuator displacement (Fig 2). Extrusive
shear strain was the angular deformation of the liga-
ment, ␥ ⫽ tan⫺1(⌬l/ WL).29
Fixtures were fabricated to clamp the bony part of
each specimen firmly and allow for extrusive loading of
the specimens immersed in saline solution (Fig 2).
Custom washers were machined to closely approximate
the contour of each PDL section and support as much
bone as possible. The specimens were centered under
an indentor that was attached to the actuator of a
materials-testing machine (MTS 858 Mini Bionix,
MTS, Eden Prairie, Minn). The tissue was cyclically
loaded for 3 cycles to the strain required to produce
0.05 MPa ligament stress. Load-displacement data for
each specimen were taken from at least the third cycle
of loading.29
An FE model was created with commercial soft-
ware (Cosmos/M, version 2.5, Structural Research and
Analysis, Los Angeles, Calif) for each transverse sec-
tion, based on the measured dimensions (Fig 3, A).
Symmetry of the root about the long axis was assumed
in these axisymmetric models. Mechanical properties
for dentin and bone were taken from previous FE
studies12 (Table I). Nonlinear mechanical properties
were assigned to the FE model of the PDL based on our
experimental data of applied load as a function of tooth
displacement.29 A detailed explanation of how the
nonlinear mechanical properties were developed is
provided in the Appendix. The FE prediction of load
and displacement were compared for each transverse
specimen (Fig 3, B), thereby validating the assigned
nonlinear mechanical properties.
Two-dimensional plane-strain FE models of the
intact mandibular premolar were then constructed (Fig
4) by stacking the models of the transverse sections of
tooth, PDL, and bone. One model had a nonuniform
PDL thickness based on the geometry of the cadaveric
specimen. The PDL thickness was 0.291 mm at the
lingual and buccal cervical margins, 0.204 mm at
midroot, and 0.300 mm at the apex. A second model
was developed that had a PDL of uniform (250 ␮m)
thickness, as assumed by other investigators.7,8,30 The
models had 1674 eight-node quadrilateral elements and
5205 nodes, with a high density of elements in the PDL,
where large displacement gradients were anticipated.
Either linear or nonlinear mechanical properties
were assigned to the PDL. Linear mechanical proper-
ties of the PDL were calculated as the secant modulus
of the elastic stress-strain curves at 0.05 MPa stress for
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Toms and Eberhardt 659
Volume 123, Number 6

Fig 2. A, Specimen and test fixture. Downward motion of MTS actuator (MTS 858 Mini Bionix, MTS,
Eden Prairie, Minn) moves indenter through opening in lexan clamping plate, applying load to center
of tooth. B, Magnified view of specimen clamped between lexan and washer for loading in extrusion
before load application, and C, after loading.

Fig 3. A, Axisymmetric FE model of transverse section of experimental tooth, PDL, and bone
subjected to extrusive orthodontic loading, using nonlinear mechanical properties of PDL deter-
mined experimentally. B, Load and displacement values predicted by FE model were in agreement
with experimental data.

each section. Nonlinear mechanical properties derived Table I. Mechanical properties for the structural
for the transverse sections were assigned for the non- elements used in the current study
linear analyses.
Models were analyzed to determine (1) the effects Young’s modulus Poisson’s
Material (MPa) ratio
of PDL thickness variations around the buccolingual
plane, (2) linear versus nonlinear elastic behavior of Dentin 19600 0.3
PDL, and (3) load direction (extrusive or tipping) on Bone 13700 0.3
PDL stresses and tooth displacements (Table II). A 1-N PDL (linear elastic)
MP1 0.303 0.45
equivalent line load was delivered in 0.1-N increments MP2 0.208 0.45
to the occlusogingival midpoint of the crown, and the MP3 0.143 0.45
bone was fixed at the base of the mandible. PDL MP4 0.179 0.45
stresses were analyzed at the buccocervical margin, MP5 0.25 0.45
linguocervical margin, and apex for the uniform and PDL (nonlinear elastic) Calculated, see Appendix 0.45
nonuniform thickness models using linear mechanical Properties for the hard tissues were taken from literature. Both linear
properties. Differences in predicted stresses exceeding and nonlinear mechanical properties for PDL were based on experi-
25% were considered substantial. Comparisons were mental data.
made of the maximum and minimum principal stresses
(ie, tension or compression) and von Mises stresses (a
660 Toms and Eberhardt
Fig 4. Two-dimensional FE model of mandibular premo-
lar subjected to extrusive or tipping orthodontic loading at
occlusogingival midpoint on buccal (B) aspect of crown.
PDL thickness in this parametric analysis was either
0.25-mm uniform thickness or nonuniform (not shown).
Mechanical properties (MP) of PDL depended on ana-
tomic location. Buccocervical margin (BCM), linguocervi-
cal margin (LCM), and apex areas are identified.
measure of 3-dimensional distortional stress) in the
center of the PDL as predicted by the models. In
addition, instantaneous centers of rotation of the man-
dibular premolar were calculated for each 0.1-N incre-
ment of loading, as done previously.13
RESULTS
For the cases of extrusion, maximum principal
stresses (P1) and minimum principal stresses (P3) for
the uniform and nonuniform linear models followed
similar curves for all regions along the root. As indi-
cated in Figure 5, A, P1 values were less than 38.6 kPa
at all locations and were highest at the apex. P3 values
were likewise lowest at the linguocervical margin
(⫺11.6 kPa) (Fig 5, B). The von Mises stress curves
were similar for the uniform and nonuniform thickness
models; however, the peak stresses occurred approxi-
mately midroot on the buccal aspect (17.7 kPa for
nonuniform and 14.8 kPa for uniform thickness) (Fig 5,
C).
Stresses (P1, P3, and von Mises) across the PDL
thickness from the tooth to the bone at the linguocer-
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
June 2003
Finite element models included in the
Table II.
parametric analysis of stresses in periodontal
ligament of a mandibular premolar
Study Load Description
Linear/uniform Extrusive Linear elastic PDL,
uniform PDL
thickness (0.25 mm)
Linear/nonuniform Extrusive Linear elastic PDL,
nonuniform PDL
thickness
Nonlinear/Extrusion Extrusive Nonlinear elastic PDL,
nonuniform PDL
thickness
Nonlinear/Tipping Tip Nonlinear elastic PDL,
nonuniform PDL
thickness
vical margin, apex, and buccocervical margin were
plotted (Fig 6) for the uniform and nonuniform thick-
ness models. At all locations, the stress distributions
across the PDL for the uniform thickness model were
similar to the distributions for the nonuniform thickness
model; however, the curves were not coincident. The
average stresses across the PDL space were calculated
(Table III). The average difference in P1 was calculated
to be between 17.25% and 35.27% for the 3 regions.
The average difference in P3 varied from 14.14% to
44.49%, and von Mises varied from 18.05% to 26.63%.
Substantial differences were found in P1 at the lingual
cervical margin (35.27%), in the von Mises stresses at
the apex (26.63%), and in P3 at the buccocervical
margin (44.49%).
The nonlinear, nonuniform model with an extrusive
load predicted the highest P1 stresses at the apex (111
kPa), but much smaller magnitudes (⬍26.4 kPa) for the
midroot and cervical margin locations on both buccal
and lingual aspects (Fig 5, A). The P3 stresses were
lowest at the linguocervical margin (7.98 kPa) (Fig 5,
B). The von Mises stresses were highest at the apex
(29.3 kPa) and near zero in the midroot regions;
however, they increased at the buccocervical margin
(8.99 kPa) and linguocervical margin (3.82 kPa) (Fig 5,
C).
The nonlinear, nonuniform model with a tipping
load predicted the greatest P1 stresses at the buccocer-
vical margin (73.5 kPa) (Fig 5, A). The model predicted
the lowest P3 stresses immediately adjacent to the apex
on the buccal side (⫺117 kPa) and at the linguocervical
margin (⫺71.5 kPa) (Fig 5, B). The von Mises stresses
were greatest at the lingual and buccocervical margins
(24.9 kPa) (Fig 5, C).
The instantaneous center of rotation (ICR) for the
linear, nonuniform model was located on the midline of
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Toms and Eberhardt 661
Volume 123, Number 6

Fig 5. A, Maximum principal stresses; B, minimum principal stresses; and C, von Mises stresses in
PDL predicted by FE models of mandibular premolar subject to orthodontic force.

Average stress across the PDL from tooth to bone as predicted by FE models with uniform PDL
Table III.
thickness and nonuniform PDL thickness
Linguocervical margin Apex Buccocervical margin

P1 P3 von Mises P1 P3 von Mises P1 P3 von Mises

Uniform ⫺2.6932 ⫺11.6090 7.7574 36.9586 28.4971 8.0320 13.2804 1.2330 10.4613
Nonuniform ⫺1.9910 ⫺9.4540 6.4919 31.5214 24.9671 6.3430 11.0600 0.8533 8.8620
Difference ⫺35.27 ⫺22.79 ⫺19.49 ⫺17.25 ⫺14.14 ⫺26.63 ⫺20.08 ⫺44.49 ⫺18.05

All stresses are expressed as kPa.

the tooth approximately 4.3 mm from the apex and did
not move during extrusive load application (Fig 7, A).
The ICR for the nonlinear, nonuniform model started at
this point but was displaced off the midline 0.0025 mm
to the buccal side and 1 mm toward the apex during
load application from 0 to 0.7 N. Additional loading
redirected the ICR back to the midline of the root but to
a more apical location. The nonlinear model subjected
to a tipping force predicted movement of the ICR from
the midline to the lingual side of the root during load
application, approximately 3.8 mm from the apex (Fig
7, B).
DISCUSSION
As hypothesized, stresses predicted in the PDL by
computer simulations depended on assigned mechani-
cal properties and PDL geometry. Predicted stresses
using a uniform thickness PDL were substantially
662 Toms and Eberhardt American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
June 2003

Fig 6. Stresses across PDL at A, linguocervical margin; B, apex; and C, buccocervical margin.
Node 0 is at tooth and PDL interface, and node 8 is at PDL and bone interface. VON, von Mises
stresses.

Fig 7. A, ICR of mandibular premolar during application of 1 N extrusive loading in 0.1-N increments
(inset) assuming linear and nonlinear mechanical properties (MP) of PDL. B, ICR during application
of 1 N extrusive and tipping forces in 0.1-N increments (inset), assuming nonlinear mechanical
properties for PDL. Tooth is approximately 24 mm in length, and root tip is at origin. Center of
rotation deviates from long axis of tooth when nonlinear mechanical properties are used for PDL.
Center of rotation is stationary when linear mechanical properties are used.

different from stresses predicted using a nonuniform nonlinear mechanical properties were different from
thickness PDL. In addition, predicted stresses using predicted stresses using linear mechanical properties.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume 123, Number 6
Maximum principal stresses in the PDL for the
uniform linear model were highest at the apex and
tapered more at the linguocervical margin than at the
buccocervical margin. This agrees with previous
findings of an asymmetric stress pattern about the
long axis of the root with a 3-dimensional, linearly
elastic PDL model of a maxillary canine in extru-
sion.8
The differences in predicted stresses for the FE
model with a uniform PDL thickness and nonuniform
PDL thickness, in which linear mechanical proper-
ties were applied, were substantial for the linguocer-
vical margin (P1), apex (von Mises), and buccocer-
vical margin regions (P3). These results were
expected, because stress in a mechanical system is a
function of its dimensions and applied load. At the
apex, the P1 stresses were higher for the uniform
thickness PDL than for the nonuniform thickness
PDL, likely a result of the narrower PDL thickness
for the uniform model. P1 stresses were likewise
higher at the buccal and lingual cervical margins,
owing to the narrower dimension for the uniform
model. The data suggest that a PDL thickness based
on actual dental anatomy is necessary for accurate
prediction of stresses by FE models. To our knowl-
edge, the present analysis is the first to examine the
influence of PDL geometry on predicted stresses in
the PDL.
Incorporation of nonlinear mechanical properties
for the PDL resulted in a dramatic departure from the
stresses predicted by the linear models for P1, P3,
and the von Mises stresses. Apical P1 stresses in the
nonlinear model were 2.4 times higher than those
calculated by the linear models, whereas the P1
stresses in the midroot regions were lower for the
nonlinear model than the linear model. The nonlinear
model predicted maximum von Mises stresses at the
apex; however, the linear model predicted that the
buccal midroot region would have the highest von
Mises stresses. These data suggest that linear models
can, in general, underestimate PDL P1 and von Mises
stresses at the apex and overestimate them in the
midroot locations. A similar observation was previ-
ously found in comparing predicted stresses in the
PDL of a root tip subjected to a tipping load22 for
linear and nonlinear mechanical properties. Some
have suggested that a linear, homogeneous represen-
tation of the PDL is adequate for very low force6;
however, our data imply that a more sophisticated
representation based on experimental data is war-
ranted.
The ICR predicted by the linear elastic model
was located on the long axis of the root approxi-
Toms and Eberhardt 663
mately 4.3 mm from the apex and did not change
during extrusive load application. In contrast, the
ICR moved during load application for both the
extrusive and the tipping nonlinear models. To our
knowledge, this is the first report of movement of the
center of rotation within a tooth under orthodontic
loading. Because the model is 2-dimensional, a
3-dimensional biofidelic rendering of a premolar
may provide a better prediction of the motion of the
ICR during load application.
The present FE analyses of a mandibular premolar
subjected to tipping and extrusive orthodontic forces
indicated that the inclusion of nonuniform geometry
and nonlinear mechanical properties for the PDL sub-
stantially alters predictions of stresses in the PDL.
Although the 2-dimensional plane-strain model cannot
accurately represent all aspects of a complex 3-dimen-
sional dental structure, it suggests that behavior of the
PDL and the tooth under low force depends on the
mechanical properties of the soft tissue and dimensions
assigned to the PDL.
REFERENCES
1. Begg P. Begg orthodontic theory and technique. Philadelphia:
W. B. Saunders; 1977.
2. Graber T, Vanarsdall R, editors. Orthodontics: current principles
and techniques. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2000.
3. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Ackerman JL, Sinclair PM, Thomas PM,
Tulloch JF. Contemporary orthodontics. 2nd ed. Baltimore:
Mosby-Year Book; 1993.
4. Storey E. The nature of tooth movement. Am J Orthod 1973;63:
292-314.
5. Davidovitch Z, Finkelson MD, Steigman S, Shanfeld JL, Mont-
gomery PC, Korostoff E. Electric currents, bone remodeling, and
orthodontic tooth movement: increase in rate of tooth movement
and periodontal cyclic nucleotide levels by combined force and
electric current. Am J Orthod 1980;77:33-47.
6. Middleton J, Jones ML, Wilson AN. Three-dimensional analysis
of orthodontic tooth movement. J Biomed Eng 1990;12:319-27.
7. McGuinness BN, Wilson AN, Jones M, Middleton J, Robertson
NR. Stresses induced by edgewise appliances in the periodontal
ligament—a finite element study. Angle Orthod 1992;62:15-21.
8. Wilson AN, Middleton J, Jones ML, McGuinness NJ. The finite
element analysis of stress in the periodontal ligament when
subject to vertical orthodontic forces. Br J Orthod 1994;21:
161-7.
9. Williams KR, Edmundson JT, Morgan G, Jones ML, Richmond
S. Orthodontic movement of a canine into an adjoining extraction
site. J Biomed Eng 1986;8:115-20.
10. Middleton J, Jones M, Wilson A. The role of the periodontal
ligament in bone modeling: the initial development of a time-
dependent finite element model. Am J Orthod Dentofacial
Orthop 1996;109:155-62.
11. Qian H, Chen J, Katona T. The influence of PDL principal fibers
in a 3-dimensional analysis of orthodontic tooth movement.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;120:272-9.
664 Toms and Eberhardt American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
June 2003

12. Tanne K, Yoshida S, Kawata T, Sasaki A, Knox F, Jones ML. An APPENDIX

evaluation of the biomechanical response of the tooth and
The nonlinear mechanical properties for the PDL were
periodontium to orthodontic forces in adolescent and adult
patients. Br J Orthod 1998;25:109-15. derived from experimental load displacement data of
13. Williams KR, Edmundson JT. Orthodontic tooth movement transverse sections of tooth, PDL, and bone specimens.
analysed by the finite element method. Biomaterials 1984;5:347- Shear stress was calculated as ␶ ⫽ force/AS and shear
51. strain was calculated as ␥ ⫽ tan⫺1(⌬l/WL). The data
14. Selna LG, Shillingburg HT, Kerr P. Finite element analysis of were curve-fitted to a rising exponential equation.28
dental structures—axisymmetric and plane stress idealizations.
J Biomed Mater Res 1975;9:237-52. ␶ ⫽ A(eB␥ ⫺ 1) (1)
15. Tanne K, Sakuda M, Burstone CJ. Three-dimensional finite
element analysis for stress in the periodontal tissue by orthodon- Commercial software (Sigma Plot, Jandel, Chicago,
tic forces. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987;92:499-505. Ill) was used to determine A and B for each trans-
16. Takahashi N, Kitagami T, Komori T. Behaviour of teeth under verse section, and close agreement between the data
various loading conditions with finite element method. J Oral
points and the curve-fit equation was achieved (r 2 ⬎
Rehabil 1980;7:453-61.
17. Yettram AL, Wright KWJ, Houston WJB. Centre of rotation of 0.9) for each transverse specimen (example, Fig 8).
a maxillary central incisor under orthodontic loading. Br J Shear stress and strain were calculated for 10 data
Orthod 1977;4:23-7. points were Equation 1. The slope between adjacent
18. Cobo J, Arguelles J, Puente M, Vijande M. Initial stress induced data points was computed to determine a piecewise
in periodontal tissue with diverse degrees of bone loss by an linear shear modulus (Gi) from which the elastic
orthodontic force: tridimensional analysis by means of the finite
element method. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993;104:
modulus (Ei) was then calculated with equation 2.
448-54.
19. Cobo J, Sicilia A, Arguelles J, Suarez D, Vijande M. Dentoal-
Ei ⫽ 2Gi(1 ⫹ ␯) ␯ ⫽ 0.45, i ⫽ 1, 2, . . . 9 (2)
veolar stress from bodily tooth movement at different levels of A set of 10 data points (⑀i, ␴i) was calculated with the
bone loss. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;110:256-62.
elastic modulus according to Equation 3.
20. Jeon PD, Turley PK, Ting K. Three-dimensional finite element
analysis of stress in the periodontal ligament of the maxillary first
␴i ⫺ ␴i⫺1 ⫽ El(εi ⫺ εi⫺1) i ⫽ 1, 2, . . . 10 (3)
molar with simulated bone loss. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2001;119:498-504. These data points were used as input to the FE
21. Durkee M. Periodontal ligament stress patterns in a nonlinear
software to describe the nonlinear mechanical prop-
finite element model. J Dent Res 1997;76(special issue):198.
22. Durkee M, Rekow ED, Thompson VP. PDL stress patterns in a erties of the PDL. The load displacement data
3D nonlinear finite element model. J Dent Res 1998;77:277. predicted by the FE model were compared with the
23. Bowen RL, Rodriguez MS. Tensile strength and modulus of experimental load displacement data to validate the
elasticity of tooth structure and several restorative materials. nonlinear mechanical properties. The set of points
J Am Dent Assoc 1962;64:378-87. for all 5 mechanical properties used in the model is
24. Andersen KL, Mortensen HT, Pedersen EH, Melsen B. Deter-
mination of stress levels and profiles in the periodontal ligament
provided (Table IV).
by means of an improved three-dimensional finite element model
for various types of orthodontic and natural force systems.
J Biomed Eng 1991;13:293-303.
25. Viidik A. Mechanical properties of parallel-fibred collagenous
tissues. In: Viidik A, Vuust J, editors. Biology of collagen. New
York: Academic Press; 1980. 237-55.
26. Chiba M, Yamane A, Ohshima S, Komatsu K. In vitro measure-
ment of regional differences in the periodontal ligament in the rat
mandibular incisor. Arch Oral Biol 1990;35:153-61.
27. Komatsu K, Yamazaki Y, Yamaguchi S, Chiba S. Comparison of
biomechanical properties of the incisor periodontal ligament
among different species. Anat Rec 1998;250:408-17.
28. Toms SR, Dakin GJ, Lemons JE, Eberhardt AW. Quasi-linear
viscoelastic behavior of the human periodontal ligament. J Bio-
mech 2002;35:1411-5.
29. Toms SR, Lemons JE, Bartolucci AA, Eberhardt AW. Nonlinear
stress-strain behavior of periodontal ligament under orthodontic
loading. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;122:174-9.
30. McGuinness NJP, Wilson AN, Jones ML, Middleton J. A stress Fig 8. Curve-fitting algorithm was applied to experi-
analysis of the periodontal ligament under various orthodontic mental data to derive equation for shear stress-strain
loadings. Eur J Orthod 1991;13:231-42. relationship for PDL.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Toms and Eberhardt 665
Volume 123, Number 6

Table IV.Piecewise linear mechanical property values describing nonlinear elastic stress–strain behavior of PDL
(values were input to FE model)
MP1 MP2 MP3 MP4 MP5

ε ␴ ε ␴ ε ␴ ε ␴ ε ␴

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0251 0.0008 0.0316 0.0001 0.1963 0.0019 0.1468 0.0025 0.1009 0.0030
0.0473 0.0021 0.0635 0.0004 0.2327 0.0043 0.1850 0.0062 0.1180 0.0049
0.0755 0.0050 0.1285 0.0027 0.2704 0.0098 0.2241 0.0153 0.1353 0.0080
0.1009 0.0102 0.1622 0.0068 0.2782 0.0115 0.2401 0.0218 0.1528 0.0130
0.1266 0.0197 0.1969 0.0172 0.3017 0.0187 0.2562 0.0312 0.1705 0.0212
0.1526 0.0374 0.2203 0.0315 0.3342 0.0359 0.2727 0.0446 0.1884 0.0345
0.1789 0.0706 0.2329 0.0435 0.3509 0.0497 0.2893 0.0639 0.2065 0.0562
0.1883 0.0882 0.2498 0.0664 0.3680 0.0690 0.3063 0.0915 0.2250 0.0914
0.2051 0.1309 0.2706 0.1104 0.3908 0.1057 0.3235 0.1312 0.2437 0.1488