American Journal of ORTHODONTICS

Volume 80, Number I

ORIGINAL

July,

1981

ARTICLES

Dr. Burstone
Traditionally, orthodontists have varied the size of the wire in order to produce a
range of light to heavy forces. A new approach to force control is presented which
allows wire size to remain relatively constant and the material of the wire is selected
on the basis of clinical requirements. When the material instead of the cross section is
varied, superior orientation should be achieved with fewer wires during tooth
alignment, and bracket-wire play becomes independent of the forces needed. Since
wire sttrness is determined by wire cross section and material, a simpltjied numbering
system is described which aids clinicians in evaluating any orthodontic wire.
Key words: Modulus of elasticity, wire stiffness, constant-cross-section therapy,
preferential orientation, wire-stiffness numbers, leveling

n the past the usual method of regulating the magnitude of force from an
orthodontic appliancewas variation in the cross sectional dimensionsof the wires used.
Although configurations such as loops have been used to lower forces, the primary
determinantof force magnitude has been the size of the wire used. Hence, traditional
orthodontics may be describedas variable-cross-sectionorthodontics where small wires
were used for light forces and large wires for heavier ones. Variable-modulusorthodontics, on the other hand, will take advantageof different materials while maintaining the
same or similar cross sections. As will be seen, there are definite advantagesin using
wires of varying materials in optimizing control of tooth movement.

From the University of Connecticut School of Dental Medicine, Department of Orthodontics.

This study was supported by Research Grant DE03953 from the National Institute of Dental Research. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md.
OOOZ-9416/81/07ooO1+16$01.M)/0

1981 Tbe C. V. Mosby

Co.

Burstow

EXCESSIVE
OPTIMAL

Fig. 1. Varying force levels produced during deactivation of a wire: excessive, optimal, s&optimal, and
subthreshold. During treatment the optimal zone is present only over a small range.
Optimal forces and wire stiffness

If a simple, plain wire is insertedinto bracketsfor the purposeof alignment, the force
is not constantas the teeth move. Fig. 1 shows a premolarbeing moved buccally with an
alignment arch. One could differentiate four zones of force magnitude as the force is
dissipatedduring deactivation of the wire. At full engagementthe forces may well be
excessive,leading to underminingresorptionand concomitanttissue damage,including a
lowering of pain thresholds.As the force is reducedwith further buccal tooth movement
of the premolar, the force rangesbecomeoptimal, with direct boneresorptionproceeding
and minimal lowering of pain thresholds.If the wire is left in place, the forces will be
further reducedand a suboptimalzone is reachedin which tooth movementwill continue
but ratesof tooth movementwill be smaller and less efficient. Finally, in the fourth zone,
becauseof dissipation of force, a threshold has been reachedand below it, in a subthreshold zone, no tooth movement whatsoeveroccurs. A straight alignment arch producesa rangeof force valuesand in many situationsfrom excessiveto subthreshold.In the
exampledescribedwhen simple tipping is required,very low forces are capableof producing movementsince the thresholdis very low. On the other hand, in translationof teeth,
suboptimal and subthresholdzonesbecomeclinically more significant.
Becauseof the changing force values as an appliance works out, and becauseof
changinggeometriesas well, a clinician will notice that a light alignmentarch may move
the teeth only partly to their final position. A typical solution to this problem has beento
use a series of increasingly heavier alignment or leveling arches to complete the tooth
movement(for example, 0.016 inch followed by 0.018 inch followed by 0.018 by 0.025
inch). What the orthodontistis accomplishingmight be called a replacementapproach,
which is nothing more than varying the force at the time of insertion by using wires with
increasing stiffnesses,that is, increasingthe load-deflectionrates in sequentialwires. I
have recommendedanotherapproachin which one wire is usedwith a low load-deflection
rate, so that the force magnitudeis delivered more constantly.- This allows the orthodontist to approachoptimal force magnitudesand to negateexcessiveand subthreshold
force zones. This is shown diagrammatically in Fig. 2, in which a wire with a low
load-deflectionrate is formed beyondwherethe final position of the tooth shouldbe. Note
that it would be possiblefor the force zonesto vary only from optimal to suboptimaland
the tooth movement would be stoppedbefore a subthresholdzone was reached.

Volume 80
Number I

Variable-modulus

orthodontics

OPTIMAL
SUBOPTIMAL
SUBTHRESHOLD
Fig. 2. Overbant wire with low load-deflection rate. Tooth will reach desired position before subthreshold force zone is reached. Replacement of wires is not required in constant force approach.

This approachto alignmentcould be referredto as the constant-forceapproach. It

can be achievedwith either plain wires or looped configurations.
Regardlessof the solutionto the dissipationof force in an orthodonticappliance,either
by a replacementor a constant-forceapproach,traditionally the orthodontisthasvariedthe
cross sectionof wires usedand has used the samematerial, namely, stainlesssteel.
Variable-cross-section

orthodontics

The selectionof the properwire size shouldbe primarily basedon the load-deflection
rate requiredin the appliance.Secondarily,of course,it is dependentupon the magnitude
of the forcesand momentsrequired.Many orthodontistswill selectthe crosssectionof the
wire on the basisof two factors which, althoughvalid, are not as significant. It may be
believed that one reasonthat increasinglyheavier wires are neededin a replacement
technique is that one is eliminating the play betweenthe wire and the bracket. In an
edgewiseappliancethe ligature wire minimizes a greatamountof the play in a first-order
direction since wires seatfully within the brackets.With narrow edgewisebracketsplay
may be present in a second-orderdirection, but even there the ligature tie tends to
minimize play, even with smaller cross-sectionwires. One thereforedoes not selectan
0.018 inch wire over an 0.016 inch primarily becauseof the differencein play. A second
reasonthat a wire may be selectedis the belief that the smallerthe wire, the greaterwill be
the amountof maximum elastic deflectionpossible.In other words, the smallerthe wire,
the more one can deflect it without permanentdeformation.
This is true, but maximum elastic deflectionvariesinverselywith the diameterof the
wire. An 0.016 inch wire w$uld only have 1.15times as much maximumelasticdeflection
as an O .Oi8 inch wire; theefore, the differencesare negligible from a clinical point of
view. If the differencesare two to one, as in 0.010 inch versus0.020 inch, then, of
course,this factor becomesclinically significant. The major reasonthat the orthodontist
shouldselecta particularwire size is the stiffnessof the wire or its load-deflectionrate. In
a replacementtechnique,for instance,one might begin with an 0.014 inch wire which,
deflectedover 2 mm., could give a desiredforce. After the tooth has moved 1 mm., the
wire can be replacedwith an 0.018 inch wire which would give approximatelythe same
force with 1 mm. of activation.
Small changesin crosssectionproducelarge changesin the load-deflectionrate, since
the load-deflectionrate varies as the fourth power of the diameter in round wires. In
bending,the stiffnessor load-deflectionrate is determinedbythe momentof inertia of the

Table I. Cross-sectional stiffness numbers (C,) of round wires

(Inches)

(mm.)

0.004
0.010
0.014
0.016
0.018
0.020
0.022
0.030
0.036

Table II. Cross-sectional

CA

0.102
0.254
0.356
0 406
0.457
0.508
0.559
0.762
0.914

1.OO
39.06
150.06
256.00
410.06
625.00
915.06
3.164.06
6,561 .oo

stiffness numbers (C,) of rectangular and square wires

Cross section

Shape
Rectangular
Rectangular
Rectangular
Rectangutar
Rectangular

(Inches)
0.010
0.016
0.018
0.021
0.0215

x
x
X
x
x

C
(mm.)

0.020
0.022
0.025
0.025
0.028

0.254
0.406
0.457
0.533
0.546

X
X
X
X
X

0.508
0.559
0.635
0.635
0.711

1st order

2nd order

530.52
1129.79
1865.10
217.5. 95
3129.83

132.63
597.57
966.87
1535.35
1845.37

Cross section
Shape
Square
Square
Square

(Inches)

(mm.)

C.8

0.016 x 0.016
0.018 x 0.018
0.021 x 0.021

0.406 X 0.406
0.457 x 0.457
0.533 x 0.533

434.60
696.14
1289.69

cross sectionof the wire with respectto the neutral axis. The clinician is interestedin the
relative stiffnessesof the wires that he uses,but he has neitherthe time nor the inclination
to use engineeringformulas to determine these stiffnesses. For that reason, a simple
numbering system has been developed,based on engineeringtheory, which gives the
relative stiffnessesof wires of different cross sectionsif the material compositionof the
wire is the same.The cross-sectionalstiffnessnumberC, uses0.1 mm. (0.004 inch} round
wire as a base of 1. An 0.006 inch wire has a C, of 5.0, which meansfor the same
activation five times as much force is delivered.TablesI and II list, underthe C, column,
stiffness numbersbasedon nominal cross sections. Manufacturingvariation in wires or
mislabelingof wires obviously can significantly alter the C, number. Two C, numbersare
needed for rectangularwires-one for the first-order direction and the other for the
second-orderdirection.
Wire with a cross sectionof 0.016 inch has a numberof 256, which implies that, for
an identical activation, it would deliver 256 times as much force as a 0.004 inch round
wire. The cross section number of 0.018 by 0.025 inch wire in a first-orderdirection is

Volume so
Number 1

Variable-modulus orthodontics

.cO4

a2

x114

a6

.018

.016X .ol6X m3x

.Ol&
.02211) .022(23 .025(l) .025(2)

Wire Cross Section--Inches

Fig. 3. Cross-section stiffness numbers (CS) of orthodontic wires. Forces for any given activation are
proportional to the number. By varying cross section, stiffnesses can vary as much as 10 or more
between wires.

1,865. Since0.016 inch has a numberof 256, an 0.018 by 0.025 inch wire in a first-order
direction delivers 7.3 times as much force for the sameactivation. We are assumingfor
now, for purposesof comparison,that the wire configuration and the alloy that it is
constructedof are identicaland that only tbe crosssectionis being varied.To compareany
two sectionsof wire for stiffness,one hasonly to divide the cross-sectionstiffnessnumber
of one into the other.
Fig. 3 showsthe cross-sectionnumbersgraphicallyfor 0.014 to 0.018 by 0.025 inch
wires. Although the full spectrumof all available wire crosssectionsis not shown, it is
apparentthat one can vary load-deflectionrates by factors of ten or more by using
different-sizedwires if a constantmaterial, such as stainlesssteel, is used.
Varying the material rather than the cross section

The traditional world of orthodonticsis one in which the crosssectionhasbeenvaried

to producedifferent stiffnesses.The cross-sectionalstiffness number can be useful in
being more precisein determiningthe stiffnessesof our appliancesonly if the samealloy
is used.The over-all stiffnessof our appliance(S) is determinedby two factors;one factor
relatesto the wire itself, (W,), and the other is the designof the appliance(A,):
S = Applianceload-deflection
rate
S = W, X As

W, = Wire stiffness
As = Design stiffness factor

In generalterms,
Appliance stiffness = Wire stiffness X Design stiffness
As we changeour appliancedesign by increasingwire betweenbracketsor adding

Table III. Material-stiffness numbers (M,) of orthodontic alloys anal braided steel u ire\-

Alloys

Stainlesssteel (ss)
TMA
Nitinol
Elgiloy blue
Elgiloy blue (heat-treated)

I .oo
0.42
0.26
1.19
1.22

Braids

Twist-flex
Force-9
Drect
Respond
*Based on E = 25

0.18
0.14
0.04
0.07

~
-

0.20
0.16
0.08
0.08

106p.s.i.

loops, the stiffness can be reducedas the designstiffnessfactor is changed;however, we

are now concernedonly with ways that we can alter the wire stiffness. Wire stiffness is
determinedby two factors-the cross section and the material of the wires:
W, = M, x Cs

W, = Wire stiffnessnumber
MS= Materialstiffnessnumber
C, = Cross sectional stiffness number

In generalterms,
Wire stiffness = Material stiffness x Cross-sectionalstiffness
Wire stiffness is determinedby a cross-sectionalproperty, suchas momentof inertia, and
a materialsproperty, the modulus of elasticity.
Previously, since most orthodontistsused only stainlesssteel with almost identical
moduli of elasticity, it was only the size of the wire that was varied and no concern was
given to the materialpropertywhich determineswire stiffness. It is now our intent to show
that one may elect to maintain the samecross section of wire but use different materials
with different stiffnessesto produce the wide range of forces and load-deflectionrates
requiredfor comprehensiveorthodontics.
Just as it was useful to develop a simple numberingsystem to describethe relative
stiffnessof wires basedon cross section, a similar numberingsystemis now suggestedto
consider relative stiffness basedon the material. The material stiffness number (M,) is
baaedon the modulus of the elasticity of the material, which is the property that determines its stiffness. Since steel is the most commonly used alloy at this time in orthodontics, its (M,) numberhas beenarbitrarily set at 1.O. This is basedon an averagemodulus
of elasticity of 25,000,OOO
p.s.i.j, 6 Our studieshave shown that the modulusof elasticity
can vary from 23,000,OOOto 28,ooO,OOO
p.s.i. for orthodontic stainless steel wires.
Typical stiffness numbersfor other alloys are given in Table III. The data are basedon
bending tests for wires 0.016 inch in diameter.6 Although the modulus of elasticity is
considereda constant, it should be rememberedthat the history of the wire (particularly
that of the drawing process)may have some influence on the modulus. Furthermore,
differencesin chemistry may make small alterationsin the recordedmodulus. For practical clinical purposes,however, the material stiffness number (M,) can be used to determine the relative amountof force that a wire will give per unit activation. Note that TMA

Volume 80
Number 1

Variable-modulus orthodontics

Fig. 4. Material-stiffness numbers (MS). Stainless steel has a base number of 1. The numbers for the
other alloys and braids denote their stiffness in comparison to stainless steel. By varying the material, a
range of stiffnesses is available equivalent to varying the cross section.

has a (M,) number of 0.42, which meansthat, for the same applianceand wire cross
section, a given activation delivers approximately0.4 as much force as steel. Nitinol
would deliver 0.26 as much force as comparablewires of stainlesssteel. Elgiloy wires
deliver slightly more force than comparablewires of stainlesssteel but, for all practical
purposes,this increasein negligible.
In addition to new alloys, braided wires have been introduced into orthodon
Braids take advantageof smaller cross sectionswhich have higher maximum elastic
deflectionsand, in the process,producewires that have relatively low stiffnesses.If one
were to pretendthat a braid was a solid wire, and if the nominal crosssectionwere used,
one could establishan apparentmodulus of elasticity. Basedon apparentmodulus, the
material stiffnessnumberswere found for representativebraidedwires and are shown in
Table III. For instance,an 0.018 inch Respondwire braid has a M, of 0.07 and delivers
only 0.07 the force of an 0.018 inch steel wire. The variation in M, numbersis shown
graphically in Fig. 4.
Let us now seehow one could changethe load-deflectionrate and maintain the same
wire size and vary the load-deflectionrate as significantly as one could by altering the
crosssection. If we wantedto maintain a crosssectionof 0.018 by 0.025 inch wire, the
wire stiffness(W,) is shownin Fig. 5. To obtain W, number,the M, was multiplied by the
C, number. For example, in a second-orderdirection for TMA:
W, = M, x C,
w, = .42 x 967
W, = 406.1

TMA wire with dimensionsof 0.018 by 0.025 inch hasa stiffnessnumberof 406.1, which
is equivalentto an 0.018 inch round steelwire. Nitinol wire with dimensionsof 0.018 by

Stiffness of .018 x .025

Wires--Second Order
Flg. 5. Wire-stiffness numbers (WS) of 0.018 by 0.025 inch wires in second-order direction. Forces for
the same activations are proportional to the WS numbers. A full range of forces is obtained by using a
constant cross section, as 0.018 by 0.025 inch in different materials.

0.025 inch has a stiffness number of 25 1.4, which is similar to 0.016 inch steel wire.
Braided wire with dimensions of 0.018 by 0.025 inch (W, = 75.4) is similar to an 0.012
inch steel wire. One can obtain a full range of forces by varying the material of the wire
and keeping the cross section the same. Note, in Fig. 4, that the ratio of the smallest wire
stiffness number to the largest is greater than 10: 1. W, numbers for 0.018 inch round
wires of different materials are shown in Fig. 6.
Advantages of variable-modulus

orthodontics

Using the principle of variable-cross-section orthodontics, the amount of play between

the attachment and the wire will vary, depending upon the stiffness required. With small
low-stiffness wires, excessive play may lead to lack of control over tooth movement. On
the other hand, if the principle of variable-modulus orthodontics is employed, the clinician
determines the amount of play that is required before selecting the wire. In some instances, more play is needed to allow freedom of movement of brackets along the arch
wire. In other situations, very little play is required to allow good orientation and effective
third-order movements. Once the desired amount of play has been established, the desired
stiffness of the wire can be produced by using a material with a proper material stiffness.
In this way, the play between the wire and the attachment is not dictated by the stiffness
required but is under the full control of the operator.
The variable-modulus principle allows for the use of oriented rectangular wires or
square wires in light force, as well as heavy force applications and stabilization. A
rectangular wire orients in the bracket and hence offers greater control in delivering the
desired force system. It is easier to bend since one can carefully check the orientation of
the wire and, more important, when placed in the brackets it will not turn or twist so that

Volume

80

Variable-modulus

Number 1

SS

TMA

NIT

orthodontics

RES

Stiffness of ,018 Round W ires

Fig. 6. W ires-stiffness numbers (WS) for 0.018 inch round wires. Figs. 5 and 8 show wide stiffness
ranges, keeping the occlusogingival wire dimension constant at 0.018 inch.

Fig. 7. Ribbon braids, 0.022 by 0.016 inch. W ire has low stiffness labiolingually and higher stiffness
occlusogingivally for definite leveling. A, Note labiolingual overcontouring. B, After tie-in. The free ends
of the anterior segment allow wire to slide through brackets, further reducing the stiffness and increasing efficiency. C, Overcontoured braid to rotate mesial aspect of incisors to the labial.

forces are dissipated in improper directions. If the constant-force principle is used where
wires are overcontoured, this is particularly significant because turning of wires can
become more apparent than in simple straight wire configurations. Fig. 7 shows a rectangular braid (D-rect) which has been overbent and oriented in a ribbon direction. The 0.022
by 0.016 inch braided wire has a wire stiffness number of 29.9 in a first-order direction.
This would be the equivalent of a 0.009 inch + round solid stainless steel wire. Since the

10

Burstonr

Fig. 8. T M A wire, 0.018 by 0.025 inch, with loops for occlusogingival alignment. By using a material with
a stiffness .42 of steel, forces equivalent to an 0.018 inch are produced. One advantage over a round
wire is good orientation in the brackets.

Fig. 9. T M A ribbon wire, 0.020 by 0.016 inch. Small first-order bends can be made to overrotate teeth.
Ribbon is more efficient than edgewise for first-order movement and orients well for torque control.

stiffness is low, the wire is overbent to assure more constant delivery of force to the
incisor. In Fig. 8 an 0.018 by 0.025 inch arch is shown with loops for second-order
movement. The arch wire is composed of beta titanium with a M, of 0.42 and a W,
number of 406.1 (second-order). This is slightly less than a solid 0.018 inch round
stainless steel wire with a wire stiffness number of 410.0. The advantage of rectangular
over round wire is the good orientation of the wire in the brackets, allowing the forces to
work out in a proper direction and aiding patient comfort since orientation prevents loops
from turning into the cheek or into the gingiva. The loops lower the load-deflection rate
and minimize side effects. Finally, it should be pointed out that rectangular wires allow
for the delivery of moments as well as forces, so that during the alignment procedure
better control is maintained over the roots. The ability to produce moments and forces at
the bracket instead of single forces, as with round wires, has a definitive advantage in
alignment procedures.
The possibility of using rectangular wires that orient in the brackets with varying
stiffness allows for preferential orientation. Although many operators who use the
edgewise appliance, by habit, place all wires in an edgewise direction, it can be advantageous to reorient the direction of the wire so that a ribbon arch is used. Fig. 9 shows an
0.020 by 0.016 inch solid TMA ribbon wire from canine to canine. The differential
stiffness between the second order and first order is 1.6 : 1. The ribbon orientation is useful
if labiolingual alignment is needed with minimal occlusogingival stepping between
brackets. The greater stiffness in the second-order direction can complete occlusogingival
leveling. The first-order W, number is 228.2 and the second-order number is 356.5. This

Volume 80
Number 1

Variable-modulus orthodontics

11

Fig. 10. Preferential orientation. A 0.020 by 0.016 inch ribbon anterior braided segment is twisted 90
degrees into the right lateral to reduce stiffness and increase play in an occlusogingival direction.

Fig. 11. Preferential orientation with a segmented arch. Posterior segments, 0.016 by 0.025 inch
edgewise TMA (WS 763, 406). Anterior segment 0.022 by 0.016 inch braided ribbon (WS 30, 41).
Segmented procedures use the principles of varying moduli and orientation in the anterior and posterior
regions. Posterior segments are not changed during treatment. A, Occlusal view. 6, Junction of anterior
and posterior segments.

is equivalent to using an 0.016 inch steel wire for first-order movements and an 0.019 inch
wire for second-order correction. The same principle of differential stiffness will hold for
an 0.022 by 0.016 inch steel wire; the differences are the lower stiffness and higher
maximal elastic deflection of TMA. Wires should be turned in a direction to optimize the
type of tooth movement required. If primarily second-order movement is needed, then
edgewise wire is indicated. If first-order movement, arch-width change, and labiolingual
tooth alignment are required, the choice of a ribbon orientation is preferable. For torque,
orientation direction is not important.
An 0.022 by 0.016 inch braided ribbon wire (D-rect) for alignment of the anterior
segment is shown in Fig. 10. It is twisted 90 degrees mesial to the right lateral incisor to
give reduced stiffness in a second-order direction to correct an occlusogingival discrepancy on the lateral incisor. The same concept can be used in a continuous arch-buccal
segments of edgewise wire and the anterior segment of ribbon wire. The 0.022 by 0.016
inch ribbon wire has a W, of 29.9 in the first order and 40.7 in the second direction. The
ratio of second order to first order is 1: 3, a smaller differential than found in a solid wire.
Posterior teeth frequently require greater stiffnesses than anterior teeth. Fig. 11 shows
a segmented arch in which an 0.018 by 0.025 inch TMA buccal wire is oriented in an
edgewise direction and an anterior 0.022 by 0.016 inch braided wire is placed ribbonwise.

12 Burstone
The differential of stiffness of posterior to anterior segments in a first-order direction is
26.1. Obviously, this cannot be achieved with a continuous arch of one material and
orientation; hence, the need for segmentation.
If both first- and second-order movements are required, a round or square cross section
may be indicated, particularly if there are large discrepancies. For alignment by simple
tipping and eruption, 0.0175 inch Respond (W, 25.3), 0.0175 inch Twist-Flex (W, 61.5),
0.016 inch nitinol (W, 66.6), or 0.016 inch Th4A (W, 107.5) wire without loops could be
considered.
Over all, the principle of variable-modulus orthodontics reduces the number of arch
wires needed for alignment since bracket play is eliminated. Wires work more efficiently
because of their orientation and their ability to be preferentially oriented and in many cases
because of the increased maximum elastic deflection of the newer alloys that are used.
Although the advantages of using rectangular wires have been discussed, this should
not imply that there is no role for a round wire. In instances where both Iirst- and
second-order movements are required, the round wire might well be the cross section of
choice. A much lower stiffness is available for similar cross sections. For example, an
0.018 by 0.018 inch square stainless steel wire has a wire stiffness number of 696 versus
410 for 0.018 inch round.
The minimization of friction between the arch wire and the bracket is another advantage of round wire in some instances. The major disadvantage, of course, is the lack of
orientation of round wire. Although more complicated, this problem can be solved by the
placing of orientation extensions or loops to prevent rolling.
The decision of slot size for the edgewise appliance has been debated over a number of
years. When steel was the only material available it could be argued that a smaller slot
(0.018 inch) would allow the use of wires that orient and have lower stiffnesses. Now,
with the potential of varying the modulus, it appears that the larger slot size (0.022 inch) is
the more desirable since one is no longer dependent on wire size for stiffness. A disadvantage of the 0.018 inch slot is that in many instances insufficient play between the wire and
the bracket is present in applications where a heavier wire is needed. Furthermore, the use
of a larger slot allows for preferential orientation, so that ribbon wires can be employed.
The wire-stiffness

number

In the past when the orthodontist varied stiffness by cross section with experience, he
developed a feel for the force produced by wires of different sizes. The selection of the
proper wire was much simpler since only one material (steel) was used. Even if the
clinical feel was somewhat inaccurate, 0.018 inch wire always produced more force than
0.016 inch wire. Now, since the clinician can vary both cross section and material,
selection of a wire becomes much more difficult. We have discussed examples of large
cross sections delivering much lighter forces than smaller cross sections. It was because of
this difficulty that the numbering system presented in this article was developed. The
stiffness of an orthodontic appliance or a component of an appliance is determined by the
wire itself and the appliance design. The stiffness of the wire is determined by two
factors-the modulus of elasticity and the cross-sectional geometry of the material. Both
of these values could be given to the clinician in engineering terms. For example, the
modulus of elasticity of steel is 25 x lo6 p.s.i. and the moment of inertia is 3.22 X 1OV
in.4 (0.016 inch round wire). The product EI = 8.05 x lo-* in.-lb. represents the stiff-

Vdume so
Number I

Variable-modulus orthodontics

Table IV. M,, C,,

Wire type
S.S.
S.S.
S.S.
S.S.
S.S.
S.S.
TMA
Nitinol
TMA
Nitinol
TMA
TMA
TMA
TMA
S.S.
S.S.
TMA
TMA
Nitinol
Nitinol
EB
EB
Es*
Es*
S.S.
S.S.

13

andW, numbersof solid wires

Cross section
(inches)

Cross section
(mm.)

0.009

0.229
@.305
0.356
0.406
0.457
0.508
0.406
0.406
0.457
0.457
0.406 x 0.508
0.406 x 0.508
0.406 X 0.556
0.406 X 0.556
0.457 x 0.635
0.457 X 0.635
0.457 X 0.635
0.457 X 0.635
0.457 x 0.635
0.457 X 0.635
0.457 X 0.635
0.457 x 0.635
0.457 X 0.635
0.457 X 0.635
0.533 x 0.635
0.533 x 0.635

0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
0.020
0.016
0.016
0.018
0.018
0.016 X 0.020
0.016 X 0.020
0.016 x 0.022
0.016 X 0.022
0.018 x 0.025
0.018 X 0.025
0.018 X 0.025
0.018 X 0.025
0.018 x 0.025
0.018 X 0.025
0.018 X 0.025
0.018 X 0.025
0.018 X 0.025
0.018 x 0.025
0.021 x 0.025
0.021 X 0.025

Order

1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd

M,
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1 .OO
0.42
0.26
0.42
0.26
0.42
0.42
0.42
0.42
1.00
1.00
0.42
0.42
0.26
0.26
1.19
1.19
1.22
1.22
1.00
1.00

C*

W,
CM, x cd

25.63
81.00
150.06
256.00
410.06
625.00
256.00
256.00
410.06
410.06
848.83
543.15
1129.79
597.57
1865.10
966.87
1865.10
966.87
1865.10
966.87
1865.10
966.87
1865.10
966.87
2175.95
1535.31

25.63
81.00
150.06
256.00
410.06
625.00
107.52
66.56
172.23
106.62
356.51
228.16
474.5 1
250.98
1865.10
966.87
783.34
406.08
484.93
251.38
2219.47
1150.57
2275.42
1179.58
2175.95
1535.31

*Heat-treated.
S.S. = Stainless steel.
Ee = Elgiloy blue.

nessof the wire. In a similar manner, in torsion G = 1.O x IO7p.s.i., J = 6.43 x 10eg
in.4, and GJ = 6.43 X 10e2in.-lb.
One could use the values for E, I, G, and J and the productsEI and GJ to denotethe
stiffness of orthodontic wires. To simplify and to make available to the clinician the
information required, a more meaningfulandpractical numberingsystemwas established.
Normalization is based on giving the average stainless steel modulus of elasticity
(25 x 106p.s.i.)aM,of 1.Themomentofinertiaof0.004inch(0.1 mm.)isalsogivena
C, of 1. In this system the orthodontist is comparing any existing or new alloy with
stainlesssteel, which he is familiar with by experience,in applying the M, number. In a
similar manner, the C, number relatesto an 0.004 inch wire.
Normalizing the values has a considerableadvantagefor the clinician. The numbers
are smaller than EI and are unitless. For an 0.016 inch round stainlesssteel wire,
W, = M, x C,
W, = 1 x 256 = 265
By normalizing the values, one finds that 256 applies in tension, bending, and torsion,
which is a further advantageand simplification. In most of the materials that we use in

14

Burstonr

Table V. M,, C,, W, numbers of braided wires

Wire type

D-rect
D-rect
D-rect
D-rect
D-rect
D-rect
D-rect
D-rect

Cross section
(inches)

0.016
0.016
0.018
0.018
0.019
0.019
0.021
0.021

X 0.022
x 0.022

X 0.025
x 0.025

x 0.025
x 0.025
x 0.025
X 0.025

---

Cross section
(mm.)

0.406
0.046
0.457
0.457
0.483
0.483
0.533
0.533

x 0.559
x 0.559
X 0.635
X 0.635
x 0.635
X 0.635
X 0.635
x 0.635

Order

M,

c,

1129.79
597.57
1865.10 .
966.87
1968.71
1137.13
2175.35
1535.35

W$
CM, x C.J

1St
2nd
I St
2nd
1St
2nd
1st
2nd

0.036
0.050
0.048
0.078
0.056
0.069
0.060
0.065

366.36
564.80
834.69

25.28
46.31
56.76

40.67
29.88
89.52
75.41
110.25
78.46
130.56
99.80

Respond
Respond
Respond

0.0175
0.0195
0.0215

0.4445
0.4953
0.5461

0.069
0.082
0.068

Force-9
Force-9

0.019 x 0.025
0.019 x 0.025

0.483 x 0.635
0.483 x 0.635

1st
2nd

0.162
0 135

1968.71
1137.13

318.93
153.51

0.015
0.0175
0.0195
0.0215

0.381
0.4445
0.4953
0.5461

0.175
0.168
0.153
0.204

197.75
366.36
564.80
834.69

34.61
61.55
86.41
170.28

Hi-T
Hi-T
Hi-T
Hi-T

Twist-Flex
Twist-Flex
Twist-Flex
Twist-Flex

orthodontics,thereis a constantrelationshipbetweendifferent materialsin their stiffnesses

in the tension,bending,and torsion. In using the materialstiffnessand the cross-sectional
stiffnessnumbers,one makesa meaningfulcomparisonto a base(steeland 0.004 inch),
which gives greatermeaningto the stiffnessnumber.TablesIV and V give representative
M,, C,, and W, numbersfor commonly usedorthodonticwires. Note that very different
c&s sectionsdeliver similar forces for any given activation. Wire-stiffness numbers
under50 include0.009 inch stainlesssteel (W, 26), 0.0175 inch Respond(W, 25), 0.015
inch Twist-Hex (W, 35), and 0.016 by 0.022 inch Drect (41, 30). It would seemadvantageousthat the wire-stiffnessnumberbe placedon packagesof orthodonticwires that are
distributedfor clinical use. This would allow the orthodontistto know exactly what might
be expectedfrom a wire. It is not enoughto label a wire 0.018 inch since0.018 inch wires
of steel, TMA, and nitinol and braided wires (Respond)may have respectivewirestiffness numbersof 410, 172, 107, and 25. Since there may be considerablevariation
betweenthe nominal cross section of the wire (the size listed on the package)and the
actual cross section, it would be helpful to use actual cross sectionsto determinethe
wire-stiffnessnumber.
Although the introductionof new materialsaddsto the complexity of orthodontics,a
new potential is availablewhich may allow the clinician to achieveresultsthat may have
been more difficult before. The use of a standardizednumbering system may help to
simplify and avoid someof the confusioninherentin the proliferation of both new cross
sections,alloys, and braidedwires.
Selecting

the proper wire

Three factors determine the selection of a proper wire for a clinical application:
stiffness,maximum force or moment, and maximum elastic deflection.In developingthe

Volume

80

Variable-modulus

Number 1

orthodontics

15

Levelingsequences
for edgewise
appliance
therapy(Twin brackets,0.022inch
slot, W , numbers
in parentheses)

Table VI.

Final wire

First wire
1. 0.018 inch Respond (25)

0.018 by 0.025

inchedgewise T M A

(783,406)

0.020 by 0.016 inch irbbon T M A (228, 356)

2. 0.022 by 0.016 inch D-rect ribbon (30, 41)

0.018 by 0.025 inch edgewise T M A (893,406)

or
0.020 by 0.016 inch ribbon T M A (228, 356)

3. 0.018 by 0.025 inch D-rect (90, 75)

0.018 by 0.025 inch edgewise T M A (783,406)

or
0.020 by.0.016 inch ribbon T M A (228, 356)

4. 0.018 inch Nitinol (107)

0.018 by 0.025 inch edgewise T M A (783,406)

or
0.020 by 0.016 inch ribbon T M A (228, 356)

5. 0.018 inch T M A (172)

0.018 by 0.025 inch edgewise T M A (783,406)

or
0.020 by 0.016 inch ribbon T M A (228, 356)

6. 0.018 by 0.025 inch T M A (783, 406)*

or
0.020 by 0.016 inch T M A ribbon (228, 356)

No final wire needed

*For minor discrepancies.

variable-modulusconceptof treatment,I have discussedonly stiffness. Although wires

may be comparablein stiffness(W, numbers),they may vary considerablyin the amount
of total force that can be delivered.Many of the new alloys andbraidsmay be activatedat
leasttwice the amountof stainlesssteelwires, so that higherforce rangescan be produced
thanis possiblewith steelwire of the samestiffness.Furthermore,an 0.018by 0.025 inch
Drect wire could efficiently align irregularitiesby eruptionand simple tipping but would
not deliver 2,000 to 3,000 G m ./m m . for canineroot movement.An 0.018 by 0.025 inch
TMA wire, for example,could work efficiently in this range.
Becauseof the larger maximal elastic deflection of the newer wires, it is usually
possibleto completealignmentprocedureswith one or two wires. A schemeof leveling
(alignment)possibilitiesis given in Table VI. W , numbersare listed after eachwire; the
first numberis first orderandthe secondis secondorder. Dependingon the amountof the
discrepancy,initial wires arechosenon the basisof stiffness.A largediscrepancyrequires
W , numbersunder 50. Using the constantforce approachby overcontouringwires, one
may eliminatethe needfor an intermediatewire or retying the arch. Note that stiffnesses
increasewith the initial leveling wire from sequence1 through6. Ribbonwire suggestions
aregiven wherepreferentialorientationis desirable,favoringfirst-ordermovement.These
recommendations
are basedon useof an 0.022 inch slot which allows sufficient play for
tooth movementwith 0.018 inch occlusogingivallydimensionedwires andadequateorientation with an edgewisewire. The 0.022 inch slot also allows the useof ribbon wires for

16 Btrr-storw
more efficient first-order corrections. If less play is required for torque delivery on incisors, the final wire can be larger (0.021 by 0.025 inch) or inserted as a ribbon (0.020 by
0.016 inch). Heavier steel wires can be indicated if more rigidity is required, as in a
stabilizing arch or when higher forces or moments are required. One example of the latter
is a root spring delivering over 4,000 Gm. /mm., which is used to purposefully displace an
arch forward. Normally, the rigidity of steel edgewise wires is not required and, if used,
should be relatively passive. A perusal of Table IV will show the high stiffness of steel
edgewise wires, particularly in the first-order direction.
Summary
The introduction of new alloys and braided wires into orthodontics offers a new
approach in controlling the magnitude of forces used for tooth movement. In the past,
stiffness was varied by using different cross sections of wire. In fact, appliances many
times were identified by wire size. This article has presented a new approach which bases
force-magnitude control on varying primarily the material rather than the cross section of
the wire. A full range of stiffnesses equivalent to what was previously produced by
changing wires sizes can be achieved. The advantages of variable-modulus orthodontics
includes better control over the amount of play between attachment and wire, orientation
of wires for directional distribution of forces, preferential orientation of rectangular wires,
and over-all reduction in the number of wires used for treatment.
Because of the great number of variables involved in the selection of the wire, both
cross section and material, a simplified numbering system which denotes the stiffness of
the wire and describes the contribution of both the material &d the cross section to the
stiffness is presented.
It is now possible to have wires that are capable of deliv&ng the full range of forces
from light to heavy, which can fully engage attachments and also control accurately the
play between wire and attachment for the various clinical ap&eations. These wires can be
simple in design, so-called straight wires, or more complicated in configuration, incorporating loops. The variable-modulus concept gives the orthodontist one more tool in the
efficient design and use of his appliances.
REFERENCES

I. Burstone,C. J.: Mechanicsof the segmented

arch technique,AngleOrthod.3Q:99-120,1966.
2. Burstone,C. J.: The rationaleof the segmented
arch, AM. J. ORTHOD. 48: 805-821, 1962.
3. Burstone,C. J., Baldwin,J. J., and Lawless,D. T.: The applicationof continuousforceto orthodontics,
AngleOrthod. 31: l-14, 1961.
4. Burstone,C. J.: TheBiomechanics
of toothmovement.In Kraus,B. S., andRiedel,R. A. (editors):Vistas
in orthodontics,Philadelphia,1962,Lea & Febiger,pp. 197-213.
5. Yoshikawa,D. K., Burstone,C. J., Goldberg,A. J., and Morton, J.: FJexuremodulusof orthodontic
stainlesssteel wires, J. Dent.Res.60: 139-145, 1981
6. Goldberg,A. J., and Burstone,C. J.: Determination
of the modulusof elasticityby flexural testing.(In
press.)
7. Burstone,C. J.: Applicationof bioengineering
to clinicalorthodontics.
In Graber,T. M. (editor):Current
orthodonticconceptsandtechniques,
ed. 2, Philadelphia,1975,W. B. Saunders
Company,pp. 230-258.