ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Effect of root and bone morphology on the stress distribution in

the periodontal ligament

Kwangchul Choy, DDS, PhD,a Eung-Kwon Pae, DDS, MSc, PhD,b Youngchel Park, DDS, PhD,c Kyung-
Ho Kim, DDS, PhD,d and Charles J. Burstone, DDS, MSe
Seoul, Korea, and Farmington, Conn

To achieve predictable and physiologic orthodontic tooth movement, estimating the axis of rotation of a tooth
and the level and location of maximum stress distributed in the periodontal ligament is essential. An extracted
upper canine was scanned into a computer 2-dimensionally and divided into 80 nodes along the long axis of
the tooth. A mathematical formula was derived, and stress was calculated on each node. The purpose of this
study was to reveal the center of resistance, axis of rotation, and an ideal force magnitude associated with
various periodontal conditions, such as potential root resorption, alveolar bone loss, and varying anatomic root
shape by analyzing the stress distribution in the periodontal ligament. The study demonstrates that the location
of center of resistance changes significantly with variation of shape and length of the root embedded in alveolar
bone. In contrast, in response to alveolar bone loss, the relative location of the center of resistance to total root
length remains constant. Analysis of the stress distribution pattern in our 2-dimensional model reveals that the
relationship between location of force and axis of rotation is determined by s2 (that is) a constant depends on
shape and length of a root in alveolar bone. Tapered and short roots that result from alveolar bone loss or
apical root resorption are prone to tipping. The optimal orthodontic force may vary depending on the maximum
stress in the periodontal ligament. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000;117:98-105)

To achieve predictable and physiologic
orthodontic tooth movement, the axis of rotation and
level and location of maximum stress should be identi-
fied. Once force is applied to a tooth, stress is distrib-
uted instantly along the periodontal ligament to achieve
a state of equilibrium. The axis of rotation and location
of maximum stress level can be revealed by investigat-
ing this stress distribution.
Because direct investigation inside the periodon-
tium is impossible in vivo, mathematical analytical
studies,1-5 double exposure laser holographic interfer-
ometry or reflection studies,6-8 displacement transduc-
ers,9 and finite element methods10-12 have been used to
reveal the axis of rotation and stress distribution.
Synge13 introduced the concept of the axis of rota-
tion when a tooth is subjected to force. Burstone1 and
aAssistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei
University.
bAssistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine,
University of Connecticut.
cProfessor, Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University.
dAssistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei
University.
eProfessor, Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University
Christiansen and Burstone2 showed the relationship
between the axis of rotation and the location of force
relative to root length in a 2-dimensional parabolic root.
Nikolai3 has described the center of resistance and the
axis of rotation in a rhomboid root shape with a mathe-
matical analytical model. Davidian14 and Halazonetis15
used a computer model to study the center of resistance
and the axis of rotation. Despite the highly sophisticated
methods used in each of these studies, variable results
were obtained that showed that the mechanism of stress
distribution had not been clearly illustrated.
The purpose of this study is 2-fold: (1) to better
understand the location of the center of resistance, the
relationship between the location of force, and the axis
of rotation, and (2) to identify the ideal force magni-
tude associated with various periodontal conditions,
such as root resorption, alveolar bone loss, and varying
root shape.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The lateral view of an extracted upper canine was
scanned 2-dimensionally, and the scanned image was
divided into 80 nodes (Fig 1A). The width of each node

of Connecticut.
Reprint requests to: Eung-Kwon Pae, DDS, MSc, PhD, Assistant Professor,
Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Con-
necticut, Farmington, Conn 06030-1725; e-mail, pae@up.uchc.edu
Copyright © 2000 by the American Association of Orthodontists.
0889-5406/2000/$12.00 + 0 8/1/102179
98
became 0.2 mm along the long axis of the tooth. Fig 1
shows detailed specifications of the model used in this
study. A canine was chosen because it is the tooth most
often translated a long distance. A computer program,
Visual Basic 4.0, was used to calculate the geometry of
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Choy et al 99
Volume 117, Number 1

Table II. Changes in location of the center of resistance

in relation to varying root shape, amount of alveolar
bone loss, and amount of apical root resorption
Percentage of total Distance from
Tooth length of the root bracket slot (mm)

Rectangular root 50.0 13.4

Blunt root 43.9 12.4
Standard root 41.8 12.1
Tapered root 39.0 11.6
Triangular root 33.0 10.8
A Amount of alveolar bone
loss in standard root
2 mm 41.2 13.2
4 mm 40.9 14.3
6 mm 40.7 15.5
8 mm 40.4 16.6
10 mm 40.1 17.8
12 mm 40.1 19.0
14 mm 41.0 20.2
Amount of apical root
resorption in standard root
2 mm 44.8 11.7
B 4 mm 46.7 11.0
6 mm 47.9 10.2
Fig 1. A, Specifications of standard model used in this 8 mm 48.8 9.3
study: a is distance between applied force and center of 10 mm 49.7 8.4
resistance; b is distance between center of resistance 12 mm 50.3 7.4
and axis of rotation. B, Schematic drawing of various
root shapes and location of center of resistance.

Table I. Typical results on location of the center of resis-
tance1,3,7,9,10
Model used in study (method) Percentage of root length*
2D parabola of Burstone (calculation)
3D parabola of Burstone (experiment)
2D Rhomboid of Nikolai (calculation)
Tooth of Burstone (experiment) 27 - 42
3D of Tanne (calculation)
2D standard model in this study (calculation)
*Measured from the alveolar crest
the scanned canine. All data were manipulated with
Microsoft Excel 97.
This standard model is not an exact parabola, but
approximates Burstone’s parabola.1,2 With this as a
standard model, conditions were varied according to
root shape and alveolar bone quantity. First, the shape of
the root was varied (triangular, tapered, blunt, and rec-
tangular), while keeping the root length constant (Fig
1B). Second, the amount of alveolar bone loss and root
resorption at the apex was gradually changed at 2-mm
increments. It was assumed that the tooth is a rigid
body, the periodontal ligament is homogenous isotropic,
and stress and strain are linearly related. A computer
program was encoded to calculate area of root surface,
the level of stress at each node, moment, and moment of
inertia. The center of resistance and the axis of rotation
were obtained in each case.
40 When a line of action of force perpendicular to
33 the long axis of a restrained object varies the appli-
55 cation point at which stress is uniformly distributed,
the center of resistance can be calculated similar to
24
41.8 obtaining a centroid.16 When the line of action does
not pass through the center of resistance, this force
can be relocated to the center of resistance with the
addition of a moment; this is the concept of equiva-
lent force systems. Therefore, the stress at an arbi-
trary point in the periodontal ligament is the sum of
the stress of the force applied at the center of resis-
tance and its accompanying moment.
M F
σ = –   + 
I A
can be derived (M, moment; y, distance from center of
resistance to the node; I, moment of inertia; F, applied
force; A, area of root).16
The node where stress is zero would be the axis of
rotation. As the stress is linearly increased from this
point, maximum stress (σmax) should be found at the
most distant node from the axis of rotation where y = c
100 Choy et al
A A
B B
Fig 2. Position of center of resistance (Cr) in response
to the amount of alveolar bone loss in relation to the
bracket (A) and in relation to the root length (B).
(c is distance from center of resistance to apex of the
root). Maximum stress was obtained using
M F
σmax = –   + .
I A
The relationship between the location of applied
force and the axis of rotation was determined with a
× b = s2, where a is the distance between the applied
force and the center of resistance, b is the distance
between the center of resistance and the axis of rota-
tion, and s2 indicates the variance of distribution of
stress (Fig 1A).
Based on these formulas, the location of the center
of resistance, s2, and a location and level of maximum
stress was determined for that of varying root form,
amount of loss of the alveolar bone, and amount of root
resorption. Physiologic optimal magnitude of ortho-
dontic force was also estimated with respect to the
maximum stress level.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
January 2000
Fig 3. Position of center of resistance (Cr) in response
to apical root resorption in relation to the bracket slot (A)
and in relation to the root length (B).
RESULTS
Change of the Center of Resistance in Accordance
with the Variation in Root Shape
The location of the center of resistance was
reported to be between 24% and 55% of root length
measured from alveolar crest to root apex depending
on boundary conditions. Typical results of previous
investigations are summarized in Table I. The center of
resistance of the standard model used in this study was
41.8% of total root length measured from alveolar
crest. Assuming that the bracket is placed at the center
of the crown, the center of the resistance would be 12.1
mm from the bracket slot (Table II). In other words, a
M/F ratio of 12.1 is required at the bracket to translate
this standard model. This value was very similar to that
of the 2-dimensional model of Burstone1 and Chris-
tiansen and Burstone2 with a parabolic-shaped root
(40%). The evaluation of root shape on location of the
center of resistance showed that as the shape of the root
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Choy et al 101
Volume 117, Number 1

was gradually tapered from a rectangular to a triangu- Table III.The value of s2 in response to anatomic root
lar shape with the root length and maximum width kept shape, amount of alveolar bone loss, and amount of api-
cal root resorption; s2 decreases as the root becomes
constant, the location of the center of resistance was tapered and as alveolar bone loss and root resorption
50.0% in rectangular, 43.9% in blunt, 41.8% in stan- increase. A decrease of s2 is associated with greater sen-
dard, 39.0% in tapered, and 33.0% in triangular shape, sitivity to tooth tipping.
respectively (Fig 1B, Table II). It was found that the Tooth s2
location of the center of resistance is not constant even
though the width and length of the root is kept constant, Rectangular root 27.929
Blunt root 23.215
but it was affected by the anatomic shape of the root.
Standard root 17.520
The more the root tapers, the more coronal the location Tapered root 16.349
of the center of resistance moved. Triangular root 9.540
Amount of alveolar bone loss in standard root
Change of Center of Resistance in Relation to the 2 mm 13.505
Amount of Alveolar Bone Loss 4 mm 9.921
6 mm 7.451
As the amount of alveolar bone loss increased, the 8 mm 4.393
center of resistance gradually moved apically. For 10 mm 2.490
instance, the center of resistance moved 1.1 mm api- 12 mm 1.131
cally when 2 mm of alveolar bone was lost. In an 14 mm 0.292
Amount of apical root resorption in standard root
extreme example, loss of 14 mm of alveolar bone
2 mm 14.873
would cause the center of resistance to move apically 4 mm 11.397
8.1 mm. It was noted that the relationship between 6 mm 8.055
alveolar bone loss and changes in the center of resis- 8 mm 5.191
tance was almost linear when measured from the 10 mm 2.958
12 mm 1.332
bracket. The relative location of the center of resistance
to the total root length is quite constant from 40.1% to
41.8% (Table II, Fig 2).
bracket slot. With a rectangular root with a large s2,
Change of Center of Resistance in Relation to changes in the axis of rotation were much smaller than
Root Resorption those in a triangular root (Table IV, Fig 4).
When the apical part of the root is resorbed, the shape
and length of the root change simultaneously. As the root Pattern of Stress Distribution in the Periodontal
was shortened, the center of resistance moved coronally. Ligament in Relation to the Amount of Alveolar
The center of resistance moved 0.4 mm coronally when Bone Loss and Root Resorption
root was resorbed 2 mm; 12 mm of root resorption Length of the root embedded in alveolar bone
resulted in the center of resistance moving 4.7 mm coro- decreased as the amount of alveolar bone loss or root
nally. The relative location of the center of resistance to resorption increased. The value of s2 was affected
total root length varied from 41.8% to 50.3% as the greatly by the amount of alveolar bone loss and root
amount of root resorption increased (Table II, Fig 3B). resorption (Table III). Location of the axis of rotation
in relation to amount of alveolar bone loss and root
Pattern of Stress Distribution in the Periodontal resorption is shown in Fig 4. The data suggested that a
Ligament in Relation to Root Shape very exact placement of force is required for the given
Table III showed changes in the value of s2 accord- axis of rotation as s2 decreases.
ing to various root shapes. The relationship between
the location of force and the axis of rotation based on Optimal Magnitude of Orthodontic Force
the formula is shown in Table IV. The value of s2 The optimal magnitude of orthodontic force was
decreases as the shape of the root tapered. Fig 4 determined based on the pattern of stress distribution in
demonstrates that a minor change in positioning a force the periodontal ligament. For practical reasons, we con-
around the center of resistance results in a large change sidered maximum stress (σmax) in the periodontal liga-
in the axis of rotation depending on the root shape. For ment only. It was postulated that a stress greater than
example, in a triangular root that had a smaller s2, a blood pressure could make the capillary blood vessel in
clinically insignificant error such as ±1 mm in posi- the periodontal ligament collapse and can in turn cause
tioning of a horizontal force to the center of resistance a blocking of the blood supply. Conversely, if maximum
moves the axis of rotation from the root apex to the stress is less than the blood pressure, the capillary
102 Choy et al
Table IV. Relationship between the axis of rotation and M/F ratio with varying root shapes
Location of the axis of rotation (Type of tooth movement)
Between Cr and apex Apex
M/F ratio at bracket (uncontrolled tipping) (controlled tipping)
Standard model 0 10.2
Rectangular root 0 9.9
Triangular root 0 9.8
would not be collapsed in any part of the periodontal
ligament. If we assume that a rate of tooth movement is
proportional to the magnitude of force, the optimum
force level would exist when the force producing the
maximum stress was equal to the blood pressure.
Because normal systolic blood pressure is 120 mm
Hg (1.56 g/mm2) and the surface area of the root of our
standard model is 94.1 mm2, more than 147 g of force
for translation would result in a collapse of all capillar-
ies at the compression site (147 g/94.1 mm2 = 1.56
g/mm2); 74 g of force for tipping at the apex, 20 g for
uncontrolled tipping, and 83 g for root movement with
the center of rotation at the tip of a bracket would ren-
der 1.56 g/mm2 of stress in maximum.
DISCUSSION
When orthodontic force is applied to a tooth, stress
is distributed throughout the periodontal ligament and
reaches a state of equilibrium within 2 minutes.8,17
Biologic responses such as bone resorption and apposi-
tion follow in response to strain in the periodontal lig-
ament. An instant tooth movement within the peri-
odontal ligament is called a primary displacement,
whereas the movement followed by a biologic response
is called a secondary displacement. The exact relation-
ship between these 2 types of tooth movement is com-
pounded by biologic variation. For instance, tissue
response to orthodontic force in older patients is much
slower than that in younger patients. Thus, the sec-
ondary displacement would occur at a slower pace.18
Nevertheless, secondary displacement can be predicted
by the primary tooth movement that, in turn, can be
determined by analyzing the stress distribution pattern
in the periodontal ligament.1,19,20 In our idealized
model, uniform strain should be found along the com-
pression site to allow the teeth to be translated. The
location of force at which the tooth is translated is
defined as the center of resistance. The position of the
center of resistance is influenced not only by alveolar
bone loss or apical root resorption, but also by the vari-
able shape of the root. When apical root resorption
occurs, the root shape becomes more rectangular with
the center of resistance at 50% of total root length. In
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
January 2000
Infinity Bracket
(bodily movement) (root movement)
12.1 13.6
13.4 15.5
10.7 11.6
contrast, during alveolar bone loss, the root anatomy
remained unchanged. This may explain why the rela-
tive location of the center of resistance remained con-
stant (40.1% to 41.8%) during alveolar bone loss.
The results of this study demonstrate the importance
of s2 a concept developed by Nägerl et al.9 If we imag-
ine a tooth as a stick and periodontal ligament fibers as
small springs, the center of resistance is a mean value of
the distribution of the spring constant. The schematic
drawing (Fig 5) shows that continuous distribution of
the springs can be substituted with 2 large and more
rigid springs per side with the distance s apart from cen-
ter of resistance (Fig 5A). The value s may be consid-
ered as a standard deviation of the distribution of spring
constant (Fig 5B). In the formula developed by Chris-
tiansen and Burstone2 and Nägerl et al,9 y × (M/F) =
0.068h2, 0.068h2 is a special case of s2 when root shape
is exactly a parabola. Fig 5C shows zero s. Force
applied to other than the center of resistance will rotate
the tooth around the center of resistance regardless of
the location of the force and the magnitude of force.
Translating the tooth is almost impossible in such a
case. In Fig 5D, the force is applied at a = s. Although
the force application point is same as in Fig 5C, the
tooth will rotate around the point b, and less tipping will
be developed. Therefore, s2 or s may be a constant that
represents the distribution of stress when translation
occurs. Clinically, the greater the s2, the less the tooth
will tip. Thus, s2 can be considered as an index for sen-
sitivity of tipping. The center of resistance and s appear
to be analogous to the mean and standard deviation in
statistics. As s becomes smaller, the location of force
should be more precisely located for a given axis of
rotation. An s2 is influenced by shape and length of the
root embedded in alveolar bone. The axis of rotation
was influenced only by the constant s and the location
of applied force, yet it was independent from a modulus
of elasticity (E) of the periodontal ligament or the mag-
nitude of force. It may be a common misunderstanding
that less tipping will occur with a lighter force.
Clinicians are interested in an optimal magnitude of
orthodontic force. The optimal force magnitude should
be modified depending on the type of tooth movement.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume 117, Number 1
B mal for a controlled tipping (center of rotation at apex) of
Fig 4. A, Relationship between the location of force and
the axis of rotation (Arot) in response to alveolar bone
loss. B, Relationship between the location of force and
the axis of rotation (Arot) in response to apical root
resorption. The value in parentheses of the graph inset
indicates s2. Some lines in the graphs are omitted pur-
posely for better visualization.
Smith and Storey21 studied clinically optimal orthodontic
forces. Unfortunately, a tipping occurred with an appli-
ance designed to produce translation. Their results illus-
trated that 150 to 200 g was optimal for single canine
Choy et al 103
A B
C D
Fig 5. Stick diagrams of tooth; springs represent peri-
odontal fibers. A, Continuous periodontal fibers are rep-
resented by a series of small springs. B, Continuous
periodontal fibers are represented by 2 stiff springs per
side. C, When s = 0, force acting on any point other than
Cr will produce a rotation around Cr. D, When s = a, the
axis of location lies at distance b from Cr. Note that the
stick shows less tendency to tip in D compared with C.
movement. The actual force that the tooth felt should
have been much lower because friction was not consid-
ered in the study. In the present study, an optimal ortho-
dontic force was derived based on the assumption that the
stress does not exceed the capillary blood pressure.
Approximately 222 g (= 74 g × 3) per side would be opti-
6 anterior teeth retraction. This approximates the value
Burstone et al22 suggested. Considering the result of
Weinstein23 (2 g) and this study (20 g), it is noted that
even a very light force could result in an uncontrolled tip-
ping produced by a horizontal force on the crown of the
tooth. A single force applied at the crown, such as retrac-
tion of anterior teeth with round wires or by a removable
appliance, can cause uncontrolled tipping. If heavier
forces are used, there may be a higher risk of root resorp-
tion. The force level should also be reduced in cases of
alveolar bone resorption or root resorption, not only
because the total root area is small, but also because, with
a smaller s2, these teeth tip more easily.
104 Choy et al
The model used for the current study has been pur-
posely oversimplified. It is 2-dimensional and assumes
the periodontal ligament to be homogenous and
isotropic with a linear stress-strain relationship. It also
ignores variation in periodontal ligament thickness, as
well as irregularity in the bone and tooth. Nevertheless,
it has been useful in delineating some fundamental rela-
tionships between applied force and tooth movement.
CONCLUSIONS
The distribution of stress in the periodontal liga-
ment during tooth movement was investigated to find
the location of center of resistance and to elucidate the
relationship between force and the axis of rotation. In
addition, optimal magnitude of orthodontic forces in
various simulated conditions were examined. Signifi-
cant findings are the following:
1. The location of the center of resistance in the upper canine
is found at 42% of the root length measured from the alve-
olar crest. The more a root tapers, the more the center of
resistance moves coronally.
2. As the amount of alveolar bone loss increases, the center
of resistance moves apically proportionally, but its per-
centage of total root length remains unchanged.
3. As the amount of apical root resorption increases, the center
of resistance moves coronally with a nonlinear relationship.
4. The value s2, which explains the distribution of stress,
decreases with increased root taper, increased alveolar
bone loss, and increased apical root resorption. A tooth
with a small s2 may therefore be more prone to tipping as
it is difficult to manage its axis of rotation.
5. Optimal orthodontic force for tooth movement may be
defined by maximal limit of stress that capillary blood
vessels in the periodontal ligament can withstand. The
optimal orthodontic force varies with the location of axis
of rotation. Optimal forces increase in tooth movement
approaching translation.
REFERENCES
1. Burstone CJ. The biophysics of bone remodeling during orthodontics-optimal force con-
sideration. In: Biology of tooth movement. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 1989. p. 321-33.
2. Christiansen RL, Burstone CJ. Centers of rotation within the periodontal space. Am J
Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1969;55:353-69.
3. Nikolai RJ. Periodontal ligament reaction and displacements of a maxillary central
incisor loading. J Biomech 1974;7:93-9.
4. Steyn CL, Verwoerd WS, Merwe EJ, Fourie OL. Calculation of the position of the axis
of rotation when single rooted teeth are orthodontically tipped. Br J Orthod
1978;5:153-6.
5. Sutcliffe WJ, Atherton JD. The mechanics of tooth mobility. Br J Orthod 1980;7:171-8.
6. Burstone CJ, Every TW, Pryputniewicz RJ. Holographic measurement of incisor
extrusion. Am J Orthod 1982;82:1-9.
7. Burstone CJ, Pryputniewicz RJ. Holographic determination of center of rotation pro-
duced by orthodontic forces. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1980;77:396-409.
8. Burstone CJ, Pryputniewicz RJ, Bowley WW. Holographic measurement of tooth
mobility in three-dimensions. J Periodont Res 1978;13:283-94.
9. Nägerl H, Burstone CJ, Becher B, Messenburg DK. Center of rotation with transverse
forces: an experimental study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991;99:337-45.
10. Tanne K, Koenig HA, Burstone CJ. Moment to force ratios and center of rotation. Am
J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;94:426-31.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
January 2000
11. Tanne K, Nagataki T, Inoue Y, Sakuda M, Burstone CJ. Patterns of initial tooth dis-
placements associated with various root length and alveolar bone height. Am J Orthod
Dentofacial Orthop 1991;100:66-71.
12. Yettram AL, Wright KWJ, Houston WJB. Center of rotation of a maxillary central
incisor under orthodontic loading. Br J Orthod 1977;4:23-7.
13. Synge JL. The tightness of teeth, considered as a problem concerning the equilibrium
of a thin incompressible elastic membrane. Philos Trans R Soc Lond, Series A 231,
1933;435-70.
14. Davidian EJ. Use of a computer model to study the force distribution on the root of
the maxillary central incisor. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1971;59:581-8.
15. Halazonetis DJ. Computer experiments using a two-dimensional model of tooth sup-
port. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;109:598-606.
16. Popov EP. Mechanics of materials. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall 2nd Ed., 1978.
17. Pryputniewicz RJ, Burstone CJ. The effect of time and force magnitude on orthodon-
tic tooth movement. J Dent Res 1979;58:1754-64.
18. Reitan K, Rygh P. Biomechanical principles and reactions. In: Graber TM, Vanarsdall
RL Jr, eds. Orthodontics, current principles and techniques. St Louis: CV Mosby;
1994. p. 96-192.
19. Burstone CJ. The biomechanics of tooth movement. In: Kraus BS, Reidel RS, editors.
Vistas in orthodontics. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1962. p. 197-213.
20. Burstone CJ. Application of bioengineering to clinical orthodontics. In: Graber TM,
Swain BF, eds. Orthodontics, current principles and techniques. St Louis: CV Mosby;
1985. p. 194-227.
21. Storey E, Smith R. Force in orthodontics and its relation to tooth movement. Aus J
Orthod 1952;56:11-8.
22. Burstone CJ, Steenbergen EV, Hanley K. Modern edgewise mechanics and the seg-
mented arch technique. Glendora, CA: Ormco Co; 1995.
23. Weinstein S. Minimal forces in tooth movement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
1967;53:881-903.
APPENDIX
1. Tooth translates when force passes through center of
resistance. Stress is evenly distributed along the peri-
odontal ligament for a tooth to be translated (Appendix
Fig 1A). Sum of all forces should be zero to satisfy the
first condition of state of equilibrium.
 – F = 0
Sum of all moments measured from the X axis should be
zero to satisfy the second condition of state of equilibrium.
F × d – y = 0
y
d = 
A
if d = 0 then y = 0
2. Tooth rotates around center of resistance when a couple is
applied. When a couple is applied to a tooth, maximum
stress(σmax) is found at the most distant node from the
axis of rotation (z axis) (Appendix Fig 1B). Stress at arbi-
trary nodes are linearly increasing from the z axis. There-
fore, stress at arbitrary node is
y
–  σmax
c
To satisfy the first condition of equilibrium, the sum of all
forces acting at each node along the periodontal ligament
should be zero.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Choy et al 105
Volume 117, Number 1

A B
F Force
M Moment
a Distance between center of resistance and force
b Distance between center of resistance and axis of rotation
y Distance between node and center of resistance
c Distance between center of resistance and apex
A Total area of root
A Area of a node
I Moment of inertia
σ Stress
σmax Maximum stress

Appendix Fig 1

As force and moment is applied simultaneously at the cen-

y
 (–   max)  = 0 ter of resistance, a total stress is
c
My F
As c or σmax is not zero, y = 0 =– —+—
A A
In y = yA, as A is not zero, y = 0
3. The relationship between location of force and axis of As b = y, and M/F = a
rotation is a × b = s2 where a is the distance between the
I (Appendix Fig 1B)
force and the center of resistance, b is the distance ab = —
between the center of resistance and the axis of rotation. A
As a tooth is in equilibrium,
I y2
As — =  resembles the variance
Mz = 0 A 
 = s2
—
y σ ax A
M =  (–   max)  = – m y2
c c ab = s2
Mc
σmax = –  (I = y2A) As maximum stress (σmax) occurs where y = c,
I
My Mc F
 = –  σmax = – — + —
I I A