Continuous arch wire closing loop design, optimization,

and verification. Part H

Raymond E. Siatkowski, DMD
Akaroa, New Zealand

A systematic approach to closing loop design for use in continuous arch wires was presented in
Part I. The design process used Castigliano's theorem to derive equations for moment-to-force
ratio (M/F) in terms of loop geometry. The equations were used to optimize designs by optimizing
M/F to produce tooth movement via translation. Further refinements were performed by use of finite
element simulations of designs. In Part II the predicted results are verified experimentally. The result
of this process is a new design, the Opus loop, which is capable of delivering a nonvarying target
M/F within the range of 8.0-9.1 mm inherently, without adding residual moments by twist or bends
(commonly gable bends) anywhere in the arch wire or loop before insertion. The resulting precise
force systems delivered with nonvarying M/F can move groups of teeth more accurately to achieve
predetermined anteroposterior treatment goals for esthetics and/or stability. The experimental
results show that the loops must be bent accurately to achieve their design potential. The negative
impact on M/F of various dimensional changes to the loop design are presented. Experimental data
is presented illustrating the improved performance of the new design over standard available
designs. Suggested applications of the design for varying anchorage requirements are presented,
along with a case report in which rigorous protraction requirements were met. (Am J Orthod
Dentofac Orthop 1997;112:487-95.)

T h e systematic theoretical derivation of a MATERIAL AND METHODS

new loop design, the Opus 70 loop (Fig. 1), was
presented in Part I of this article. The design goal
was to produce a closing loop capable of delivering
an inherent M/F of between 8.0-9.1 ram, the range
necessary to achieve, translatory m o v e m e n t of
groups of teeth when a continuous arch wire is used.
Part II continues the process with experimental
verification of the design criteria via load, displace-
ment, and m o m e n t measurements of actual samples
of the loop. Clinical applications for the loop design
in continuous arch wires and a case report are
presented.
Systems for measuring uniplanar forces, mo-
ments, and displacements for orthodontic closing
loops have been developed by Solonche et al. 1 and
Gjessing. 2 Extension to measure these in all three
planes of space were developed by Faulkner et al?
and Drescher et al. 4 The latter are complex systems
that are beyond the needs of this study. Gjessing's
system 2 is well suited to the study's requirements
and was replicated in concept.
Supported by a grant from the American Association of Orthodontists
Foundation.
Reprint requests to: Dr. Raymond E. Siatkowski, P. O. Box 118, Akaroa,
New Zealand.
Copyright © 1997 by the American Association of Orthodontists.
0889-5406/97/$5.00 + 0 8/1/77119
Test runs of the various loops were performed on
the experimental apparatus. Siamese twin brackets,
0.018 × 0.025 inch, were epoxied to an aluminum
bracket mount threaded into the load cell (BL32!,
Sensotec, Columbus, Ohio) and to the moment trans-
ducer. The load cell measures pure force and is insen-
sitive to moments. The moment transducer, using four
strain gages in a 45-degree rosette (EA-13-250TK-
350LE, Measurements Group, Inc., Raleigh, N.C.), is
insensitive to applied force and measures pure moment.
Activation is performed by the digital micrometer (350-
712-10, Mitutoyu, Paramus, NJ), transmitted to the
load cell end via a swivel joint with no vertical play to a
square rod, which slides through a nonstick resin-lined
square barrel. The moment transducer can twist hori-
zontally, but its center is constrained from moving
vertically. The digital micrometer therefore measures
displacement and provides loop activation.
The system was calibrated by application of known
forces by dead weights up to 500 gm to the load cell and
known couples up to 2400 gm-mm to the moment trans-
ducer. Both were linear and insensitive to temperature
changes within a tested range of 15° to 30 ° C.
Closing loops made in stainless steel and TMA wire
(Ormco Corp., Glendora, Calif.) were tested. Wire sizes
were 0.017 × 0.025 inch in TMA and primarily 0.016 ×
0.022 inch in stainless steel, although some tests were
performed with 0.018 × 0.025 inch s.s. wire. Inter-
487
488 Siatkowski American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
November 1997

I_ --lOmm -1

lm__mt ( 1 ~
T
lOmm

_1
--~ ~ - U p to 1.5mm

Fig. 1. Dimensions of standard Opus 70 loop.

Table I. Activation (ram) at 100 gm and M/F when centered M/F variation had a standard deviation of 0.10 mm with a
and off-centeredat 13 mm IBD for various loops maximum range of +0.14/-0.16 mm.
Activation M/F (mm) M/F (ram)
Loop (mm) centered @centered RESULTS
8 m m Vertical 0.9 3.9 6.7
Experimental Findings
10 mm T 1.7 4.6 7.7 A summary of initial findings for various loops
Opus 90 1.6 5.8 8.6
Opus 90 X-legs 2.5 5.1 6.2 tested in the experimental apparatus at 13 mm
Opus 70 1.6 5.5 8.7 interbracket distance and 100 gm activation force is
0.017X.025 TMA 3.1 5.5 8.4
shown in Table I. The M/F was first measured with
0.018X.025 ss 1.0 5.6 8.7
7 m m high 1.2 3.0 5.9 the loops centered in the interbracket distance. No
12 mm long 2.0 5.5 8.7 loop generated M/F within the desired range of 8.0
64 degrees 2.0 4.8 7.2 through 9.1 mm in this position without gable bends.
8 mm long 1.5 3.0 8.0
End 9 mm high 1.6 5.5 7.6 When placed at 1.5 mm from the anterior bracket,
the helix end of non-gabled Opus loops could
Formed in 0.016 x 0.022 inch s.s., 0.018 × 0.025 inch s.s., and 0.017 ×
achieve the desired M/F range.
0.025 inch TMA; 13 mm IBD, helix end 100 gin; 0.016 × 0.022 ss unless
otherwise noted; 10 mm height and length unless otherwise noted. The dimensions of the standard Opus 70 loop
are shown in Fig. 1. Wire size and Young's modulus
have little effect on M/F although both have major
impact on load-deflection rate, F/D (see activation
for 100 gin, Table I). The greatest negative impact
bracket distance (IBD) was varied in 2 mm steps
on M/F in the off-centered position is crossing the
between 13 and 7 mm, simulating space closure. Each
loop was tested at the center of the IBD and then loop legs (Opus 90 vs. Opus 90 X-legs: 8.6 falls to
off-centered with one vertical leg 1.5 mm from the 6.2) and decreasing loop height (Opus 70 vs. Opus
moment transducer bracket. 70, 7 mm high: 8.7 to 5.9 mm). Decreasing the loop
A test run consisted of incremental activations, dis- angulation decreases M/F (Opus 70, 12 mm long vs.
placing the load cell end, measuring displacements (loop 12 mm long at 64 degrees: 8.7 to 7.2 ram). Dropping
activations) for applied loads of 50, 100, 150, and 200 gm; the anterior end of the loop decreases M/F (Opus 70
simultaneous measurements of activation force were vs. Opus 70, end 9 mm high: 8.7 to 7.6 ram).
made via the load cell at its end and moment at the other Increasing loop length beyond 10 mm does not
end. The loop was then reversed and all test runs were increase M/F, contrary to theoretical prediction
repeated to measure the moment at the loop's other end (Opus 70 vs. Opus 70, 12 mm long) but decreasing
so that M/F could be determined at both brackets for each loop length decreases M/F (Opus 70 vs. Opus 70, 8
test. Each test run was repeated at least once. If values
mm long: 8.7 to 8.0 mm). Placing "lingual" comfort
differed, that run was repeated yet again and calculated
mean values were used. bends in the anterior of the loop, putting the end out
Moment measurements were made by use of a 10 mm of plane, does not degrade M/F or F/D.
T-loop in 0.016 × 0.022 inch s.s. wire in the off-centered Neither the 8 mm vertical loop with one 3.5 mm
position with a 13 mm IBD loaded to 100 gm to check diameter helix nor the 10 mm high, 10 mm long
measurement variation. Repeated 12 times, the resulting T-loop can achieve the desired M/F range in any
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Siatkowski 489
Volume 112, No. 5

20.8 @

\
10

range

E e-
E

50 100 150 200

I I ~ ~ FORCE (g)

-- OPUS 70
w

=._
=_ ~ - - ~ 10mm

o o ~ 8mm
-5

Fig. 2. M/F at each bracket as a function of activation force for Opus 70 loop without
residual moments and T-loop and standard vertical loop with residual moments via
symmetrical gable bends. All loops off-centered in 13 mm interbracket distance in 0.016 ×
0.022 inch s.s. wire. Almost identical values are obtained for Opus 70 loop when tested in
0.018 × 0.025 inch s.s. wire and 0.017 × 0.025 inch TMA.

position without inducing residual moments (for
example, via gable bends). When symmetric bends
are placed in the loop legs sufficient to generate M/F
within the desired range when positioned 1 to 1.5
mm from the anterior bracket with 100 gm activa-
tion, as shown in Fig. 2, both of these loops cannot
maintain M/F within the desired range throughout
all activation force levels, although the T-loop per-
forms significantly better than the vertical loop. In
contrast, the Opus 70 loop maintains M/F within the
desired range at all activation force levels without
residual moments (again, there is little difference
between Opus 70 loops with 0.016 × 0.022 inch s.s.,
0.018 × 0.025 inch s.s., and 0.017 × 0.025 inch
TMA; the differences are too small to be apparent
on the vertical scale of Fig. 2).
The M/F at the posterior end is also shown in
Fig. 2. The gabled T and vertical loops generate
posterior moments that are in the same direction as
the moments at the anterior ends, whereas the Opus
70 loop's posterior moment is in the opposite direc-
tion (note that the loops are all positioned in the
off-centered, not centered, position in the IBD). All
loops here when in a continuous arch have sufficient
vertical stiffness to inhibit intrasegmental expression
of the vertical forces generated by unequal anterior
and posterior moments (the Opus 70 loop has 0.5
mm vertical deflection for 100 gm vertical force in
0.016 × 0.022 inch s.s. and 0.7 mm in 0.017 × 0.025
inch TMA). Therefore, the sum of the moments
have the potential to express as occlusal plane
change of the entire arch (with the caveat that if
gabled loops are left tied in for a very long time, the
anterior and posterior segments will eventually be-
gin to form two occlusal planes at an angle ap-
proaching the total of the gable bends' angles). The
490 Siatkowski American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
November 1997

10
• " ---~'--~ I Desired range
¢-
o

e-

n
5

I I IBD (mm)
5 15

e OPUS 70
-5 o~-O10mm T-loop no gable bends

Fig. 3. M/F at each bracket as a function of interbracket distance (IBD) for off-centered
0.016 inch x 0.022 inch s.s. Opus 70 and T-loops without residual moments for 100 gm
activation force.

2000 - lw°tnhgaTbll;~ 10-

I Desired range
°o°

E
13
70 5
°°"°t
1500 °° "°D,°.
E "'. , '''=,.[3,,o...,.o011
e-
A
E °0,°°.°.. 193 5
LI.

0 I I I , [ FORCE(g)
50 100 150 200

i 1000

-5

Fig. 5. M/F at each bracket as a function of activation

500 force while varying IBD (13, 11,9, 7 mm) for off-centered
0.016 x 0.022 inch s.s. Opus 70 (without residual
moments, by definition).

sum of the moments are additive for the T and

0 I I I iI vertical loops, increasing the total moment attempt-
0 50 100 150 200
ing to change occlusal plane, whereas the Opus 70
FORCE (g)
loop total moment is the difference between the
moments at the two ends they being in opposite
Fig. 4, Total moments expressed by off-centered
0.016 × 0.022 inch s.s. Opus 70 and gabled T-loops as directions, decreasing the tendency to change occlu-
a function of activation force for 13 mm interbracket sal plane. On the basis of the clinical observation
distance. that, when intruding mandibular incisors using a
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Siatkowski 491
Volume 112, No. 5

1500 -

Maximum
E 150g

,E 1000
03
I-
z
uJ

O
~= ~ / / ~ 1 0 0 g
.--I
<~
I.-
O 500
I--

~ 50g

] ~ , , , I , , , , I , , , , I
0 5 10 15
IBD (mm)

Fig. 6. Total moment expressed by off-centered 0.016 x 0.022 inch s.s. Opus 70 loop as
a function of interbracket distance while varying activation force.

base arch s with 40 gm vertical force with the remain- Table II. Activation (mm) necessary to achieve various
activation forces for the Opus 70 loop formed in 0.016 × 0.022
ing mandibular teeth connected by a continuous
s.s., 0.018 x 0.025 s.s., and 0.017 × 0.025 inch TMA wires
arch stepped gingivally to the incisors, no detectable
change to the posterior occlusal plane occurs, an Activation (ram)
Force
arbitrary safe maximum total moment of 1200
(gin) 0.016 × 0.022 s.s. 0.018 × 0.025 s.s. 0.017 x 0.025 TMA
gm-mm (40 gm × 30 mm, incisor to molar distance)
seems prudent, and--although perhaps overly con- 50 0.8 0.5 1.8
servative--is used hereinafter. 100 1.6 1.0 3.1
A comparison of the T and Opus 70 loops when 150 2.4 1.5 4.4
200 3.1 2.0 5.6
neither have induced residual moments but are
250 3.8 2.5 7.0
off-centered is shown in Fig. 3 for varying inter-
bracket distance with 100 gm activation force. Only
the Opus 70 can achieve M/F within the desired
range, and it does so at all interbracket distances. distance in four 2 mm steps between 13 and 7 mm
The total moment for the off-centered and simulating space closure, is shown in Fig. 5. It is only
gabled T-loop compared with the Opus 70 loop beyond 150 gm at 7 mm IBD, the end of space
for varying activation force levels is shown in Fig. closure, that the anterior M/F falls outside the
4 for an interbracket distance of 13 mm. The Opus desired range. The total moments from Fig. 5 are
70 loop exceeds the "safe" maximum beyond 170 summed at each position and shown in Fig. 6. The
gm activation whereas the gabled T-loop exceeds total moment exceeds the safe maximum only when
it beyond 110 gin. Fig. 2 shows that the gabled the activation force is 200 gm and the IBD is greater
T-loop exceeds the desired M/F range at less than than 9 mm. Activation force levels above 170 gm
80 gm activation; the gabled T-loop has a very may need to be avoided at the beginning and the
narrow range of acceptable performance (80-110 very end of space closure with this loop.
gm in s.s. at 13 mm IBD) when used in a Last, the activation distance needed to achieve
continuous arch. various activation force levels for an Opus 70 loop
The M/F for the off-centered Opus 70 loop as a of standard dimensions for the three wire types
function of activation force, varying interbracket used to form the loops tested are shown in Table
492 Siatkowski American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
November 1 9 9 7

a) Maximum Anchorage
Incisor retraction after canines retracted
Force: 100-150 g/side
M a x i m u m activation (ram)
0.016 x 0.022 S.S. 0.018 x 0,025 S.S. 0.017 x 0.025 TMA
2.5 1.5 4.5

= = _ _

b) Moderate Anchorage
A n t e r i o r retraction and posterior protraction
Force: 150-200 g/side
M a x i m u m activation (mm)
0.016 x 0.022 s.s. 0,018 x 0.025 S.S. 0.017 x 0.025 TMA
3.0 2.0 5.5

__ =

C ) Minimal A n c h o r a g e
Posterior protraction
Force: 75 g/side + CI Ill elastics (150 g/side)
M a x i m u m activation (mm)
0.016 x 0.022 S.S. 0.017 x 0.025 TMA
1.0 2.5

16 ° twist to generate
lingual root t o r q u e on
incisors o n l y

Fig. 7. A, Maximum anchorage retraction situations: suggested closing loop placement

and maximum activations. B, Moderate anchorage situations: suggested closing loop
placement and maximum activation distances. C, Minimal anchorage situation (posterior
protraction only required), 0.018 inch slot: suggested closing loop placement and
maximum activation distances when space exists between canines and premolars. If
space were distal to lateral incisors, loop would be placed just distal to lateral incisors.

II. Because there are no residual moments in-
duced in this loop via gable or other bends or
twists, the loop's neutral position, 6 the position at
which there is no activation force exerted, is
exactly the spacing of the vertical legs as bent. If
the horizontal spacing between the vertical legs is
1 mm when the arch wire is formed, there will be
no activation force when that spacing is 1 mm after
the arch wire is tied in. It is therefore possible to
achieve precisely the defined activation force de-
sired by simply increasing that horizontal spacing by
the activation amount in millimeters shown in Table
II. This is in contradistinction to loops requiring
residual moments, as shown by Burstone and Koe-
nig, 6where it is extremely difficult for the clinician to
judge the amount of activation force being delivered
after the arch wire is tied in.
DISCUSSION
On the basis of these findings, suggested ap-
plications of Opus closing loops for various situ-
ations are shown in Fig. 7. It is appropriate to
begin with a straight wire and bend the arch wire
in a torquing turret to achieve incisor axial incli-
nation control by inducing wire twist ("lingual
root torque") just enough to eliminate labiolin-
gual wire-bracket play in the incisor brackets. The
amount of such twist is dependent on the wire/
bracket sizes and slot torque used 7 and should be
removed distal to the Opus loop (leaving the wire
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Siatkowski 493
Volume 112, No. 5

Fig. 8. A, Opus 70 closing loop arch wire before insertion. Note apical anterior comfort
bend. B, Opus 70 closing loop arch wire tied in but not activated. The 10 mm high loop
does not intrude excessively into mucobuccal fold with standard bracket heights.
Clinically, the loop allows better oral hygiene of adjacent teeth than a vertical loop at the
same location. It is also more comfortable for the patient because the apical leg has more
net area than a vertical loop, to deflect adjacent buccal soft tissues instead of tending to
dig into those tissues. C, After activation for anterior retraction and posterior protraction.

twist in place while forming closing loops provides
a lingual comfort cant to the loops). If the loops
are located distal to the canines, wire twist should
be removed mesial to the canines to prevent
inappropriate canine lingual root torque (Fig. 8).
A torquing turret has been designed for use with
TMA wire. s Maximum incisor twist is appropriate
for posterior protraction (Fig. 7, C).
In Figs. 7 and 8, suggested maximum activation
force is achieved by the suggested maximum activa-
tion distance for the three wire types tested. The
desired M/F will be delivered throughout the acti-
vation range and anchorage requirements will be
met as long as the suggested maximum activation
distances are not exceeded. This simplifies the acti-
vation regimen considerably over previously avail-
able closing loops, and the clinician can safely
increase the appointment intervals during space
closure without concern for loss of anchorage con-
trol as long as the patient can be trusted to report
any damage to appliances if it occurs between
appointments.
Although less so than with other closing loop
designs, Opus loops do have the potential to steepen
the cant of occlusal plane in the maxillary arch and
flatten it in the mandibular arch. Although steepen-
ing occlusal plane can be useful for overtreatment of
Class III relationships (and flattening occlusal plane
for Class II relationships), that potential should be
monitored for possible intervention. Such interven-
tion could be reducing maximum activation force
levels or using an occipital headgear with short and
high outer bows to generate a moment tending to
flatten maxillary occlusal plane.
The configuration for patients with maximum
posterior anchorage requirements is shown in Fig. 7,
A. For the most severe anchorage required to
achieve treatment goals, second molars, if available,
could be included with the posteriors and/or a
Combi headgear used. For less severe or moderate
494 Siatkowski Amel~can Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
November i997

D t

Fig. g. A, Buccal view of unactivated protraction loop (0.018 × 0.025 inch s.s. Opus 90)
tied in 0.022 inch slots. The mandibular arch wire is 0.018 x 0.025 inch s.s. Loop height
and length are 10 mm and helix diameter is 1 mm. Incisor segment has 16 degrees of
lingual root torque. B, Frontal view of Opus 90 protraction loop, activated for 75 gm with
150 gm Class III elastics (worn 24 hrs/day and changed daily) in place. Activation was 1
mm every 5 weeks. C, Frontal view at debonding. I), Superimposition: before protraction
(solid lines) and end of treatment (dotted line: change noted).
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume 112, No. 5
anchorage, the canines could be incorporated with
the anteriors as in Fig. 7, B.
T h e configuration for posterior p r o t r a c t i o n is
shown in Fig. 7, C (for 0.018 inch slot). This
situation might occur late in t r e a t m e n t of a Class
II patient who exhibits m o r e horizontal mandibu-
lar growth than originally anticipated, in the m a n -
dibular arch w h e n less m a n d i b u l a r horizontal
growth than anticipated occurs, or in u n c o m m o n
situations such as the case report to follow. T h e
closing loop arch wire generates the m o m e n t s
required and some of the p r o t r a c t i o n force. Most
of the p r o t r a c t i o n force is g e n e r a t e d by the large
anterior m o m e n t and by the intermaxillary elastics
to a rigid rectangular arch wire in the opposing
arch. Intermaxillary Niti closed coil springs capa-
ble of delivering 150 gm force can be substituted
for the elastics. T h e potential exists for changing
occlusal plane in the opposing arch. Should such
cant changes begin to be observed, the intermax-
illary force can be reduced.
CASE REPORT
A 20-year old Japanese woman transfer patient
previously had impacted maxillary canines extracted
near the final stage of treatment with zero overjet but
with 3 mm spacing distal to the maxillary lateral incisors
bilaterally and the buccal teeth in Class III relation-
ships. The maxillary spaces needed to be closed by
protraction of the maxillary posterior teeth with no
anterior retraction allowed. Protraction options were
protraction headgear, tooth-by-tooth V-bend mechan-
ics, 9 o r en masse protraction using the Opus 90 system
of Fig. 9 (0.022 inch slots in place). The Opus 90 option
was chosen, protracting four premolars and four molars
without retracting four incisors (Figs. 9, A and B). The
loop was activated 1 mm every 5 weeks, and the
protraction was completed in three visits (Fig. 9, C).
Superimposition of a cephalometric radiograph taken
at the time of transfer (the beginning of protraction
mechanics) with that at the end of treatment (Fig. 9, D)
revealed no change in incisor position or inclination or
any other structures other than protracted maxillary
posterior teeth. 1°
The loop faces posteriorly with crossed legs. The
crossed legs reduce the load-deflection rate so that a
clinically practical activation of 1 mm produces 75 gm/side
using 0.018 × 0.025 inch s.s. wire even though moment
magnitudes are somewhat reduced. With legs crossed, the
apical portion of the loop faces posteriorly so that the
Opus 90 asymmetric moments result in the higher mo-
ment being delivered to the incisors.
Siatkowski 495
Current cases in progress with 0.022 inch slots are
being treated with 0.019 × 0.025 inch TMA in the Opus 70
configuration. This wire requires 20-degrees incisor twist
to eliminate wire-bracket play. An additional 20 degrees
of incisor twist may be placed when buccal teeth are being
protracted.
CONCLUSIONS
This report presented a systematic approach to
closing loop design for use in continuous arch wires by
using Castigliano's theorem, then refined, using FEM
simulations, and then verified experimentally. The re-
sult of this process is a new design, the Opus loop,
which is capable of delivering a target M/F within the
range of 8.0-9.1 mm inherently, without adding residual
moments, so that more precise force systems with
nonvarying M/F can be delivered by these closing loops
formed in a continuous arch wire. Groups of teeth
therefore can be moved more accurately to better
achieve predetermined anteroposterior-posterior treat-
ment goals for esthetics and/or stability. The experi-
mental results show that the loops must be bent accu-
rately to achieve their design potential.
Being free of residual moments, the design can pro-
duce a true rest period when deactivated and therefore
could be used with future technology to produce intermit-
tent force systems during space closure.
I gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Ann
Hoyle, Philip Tilson, and Dorothy Grigor in the prepara-
tion of this report, John Schultz in setting up and per-
forming initial FEM simulations while at the Carnegie
Mellon University Department of Mechanical Engineer-
ing, Derek Barwood and James Hood for assistance in
calibrating the experimental apparatus, and Jay Swope for
his expertise in setting up the data acquisition for the
experimental apparatus.
REFERENCES
1. Solonche DJ, Burstone CJ, Vanderby R. A device for determining the mechanical
behavior of orthodontic appliances. IEEE Trans Biomech Eng 1977; BME-24(4):
538-9.
2. Gjessing P. Biomechanical design and clinical evaluation of a new canine retraction
spring. Am J Orthod 1985;87:353~62.
3. Faulkner MG, Hay A, Fuchshuber P, Haberstock D. Development of a system for
the measurement' of forces and moments created by orthodontic appliances. Proc
VI lnt Cong on Expt Mech 1988;384-9.
4. Drescher D, Bouranel C, Thier M. Application of the orthodontic measurement
and simulation system (OMSS) in orthodontics. Eur J Orthod 1991;13:169-78.
5. Burstone CJ. Deep overbite correction by intrusion. Am J Orthod 1977;72:1-22.
6. Burstone CJ, Koenig HA. Optimizing anterior and canine retraction. Am J Orthod
1976;70:1-20.
7. Sebanc J, Brantley WA, Pincsak J J, Conover JP. Variability of effective root torque
as a function of edge bevel on orthodontic arch wires. Am J Orthod 1984;86:43-51.
g. Siatkowski RE. A new torquing turret for TMA wire. J Clin Orthod 1993;27:609-11.
9. Siatkowski RE. Force system analysis of V-bend sliding mechanics. J Clin Orthod
1994;28:539-46. Addendum: 1995;29:37-8.
10. Engel G, Spoher BM. Cephalometric and visual norms for a Japanese population.
Am J Orthod 1981;80:48-60.