ARUP; ISBN: 978-0-9562121-5-3 - CMBBE 2012 - Cardiff University

The models in all cases were fixed on both section areas. The implant was loaded by the
force applied on the uppermost cross section of the implant model in the coronoapical
direction; specifically the force of 200 N was applied. Since all analyzed cases represent
osseointegrated implants the bone-implant contact surfaces were prevented from the
mutual movement. A practical realization of this boundary condition was provided by
the Bonded Always option in the contact element settings. The calculation was focused
on the following two mechanical quantities: the coronoapical displacement of the
implant characterizing a global stiffness of the system, and the strain intensity
distribution in the bone characterizing the bone condition from the physiological point
of view.
3. RESULTS
The dental implant displacements for the 1 st , 2 nd , 3 rd , and 4 th case are 3.2 µm, 4.4 µm,
2.9 µm, and 3.9 µm respectively. These representative displacements were obtained
from the loading site, specifically from the center of this circular section. Fig. 3a shows
a typical example of the displacements in the implant, and Fig. 3b shows an example of
the displacements in the buccolingual cross section. Representative 3D plots of the
displacements and strains in the overall model are presented in Fig. 3c, d.
a) b) c) d)
Fig. 3. Results: a) Implant displacements [mm]; b) Displacements [mm] in the
buccolingual section; c) Displacements [mm] in 3D view; d) Strain intensity in 3D view
a) b) c) d)
0
.0002 .0006 .001 .0015 .002 .0025 .004 max
Fig. 4. Strain intensity [-] results: a) BVF 0.149_00; b) BVF 0.149_01;
c) BVF 0.377_00; d) BVF 0.377_01