Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 16, 2026
Author Spotlight: 3D Movement Assessment of Maxillary Posterior Teeth in Clear Aligner Treatment
Published on: February 23, 2024
A Comparison Between the Expansion Force Exerted by Thermo-Printed Aligners and 3D Printed Aligners: An In Vitro
Samuele Avolese1,2, Simone Parrini2, Andrea Tancredi Lugas3
1Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Polytechnic University of Turin, 10100 Torino, Italy.
Background:
The fabrication of orthodontic aligners directly via three-dimensional (3D) printing presents potential to increase the efficiency of aligner production relative to traditional workflows; however, several aspects of the 3D printing process might affect the dimensional fidelity of the fabricated appliances. The aim of this study is to measure the forces expressed by a 3D printed aligner made with TC-85 DAC resin (Grapy Inc., Seoul, Republic of Korea) when an expansion movement of the entire upper dental arch is programmed, comparing the measured forces with those obtained by a common thermoformed aligner (Smart Track®, Align Technology, Santa Clara, CA, USA).
Materials And Methods:
A patient in transitional mixed dentition was selected, with the presence of all the first molars and permanent upper and lower incisors, and the canines and premolars have not started the exchange. From this patient, a virtual set up of the upper arch has been planned with an expansion of 0.2 mm and 0.4 mm per side; 3 mm horizontal rectangular attachments were added to the set up on the vestibular surface of the permanent molars, deciduous premolars, and deciduous canines. On this set up, 10 Smart Track aligners and 10 3D printed aligners with TC-85 DAC resin were produced. The fabricated aligners were mounted on the machinery used for the test (ElectroForce® Test Bench; TA Instruments, New Castle, DE, USA) by means of specific supports that simulate the upper arch of the patient (divided into two sides: right and left). To simulate the intraoral environment, the measurements were carried out in a thermostatic bath at a temperature of 37 °C.
Results:
The key results of this paper showed differences between Smart Track® and TC-85 DAC. In particular, the expanding force exerted by the 0.2 mm per side expanded Smart Track® aligners was on average +0.2162 N with a D.S. of ±0.0051 N during the 8 h; meanwhile, the force exerted by the 0.2 mm per side expanded TC-85 DAC 3D printed aligners was on average -0.0034 N with a D.S. of ±0.0036 N during the 8 h. The force exerted by the 0.4 mm per side expanded Smart Track® aligners was on average +0.7159 N with a D.S. of ±0.0543 N during the 8 h; meanwhile, the force exerted by the 0.4 mm per side expanded TC-85 DAC 3D printed aligners was on average +0.0141 N with a D.S. of ±0.004 N during the 8 h.
Conclusions:
Smart Track® aligners express a quantitatively measurable force in Newtons during the programmed movements to obtain a posterior expansion of the dental arches; on the contrary, aligners made with TC-85 DAC resin, in light of the results obtained from this study, express forces close to 0 during the realization of the movements programmed to obtain a posterior expansion of the dental arches.
