Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jan 18;18(2):441.
doi: 10.3390/ma18020441.

Mechanical Behavior of PEEK and PMMA Graphene and Ti6Al4V Implant-Supported Frameworks: In Silico Study

Mariano Herrero-Climent  1 , Fernando Sanchez-Lasheras  2   3 , Jordi Martinez-Lopez  4 , Javier Gil  5 , Aritza Brizuela-Velasco  6
Affiliations

Mechanical Behavior of PEEK and PMMA Graphene and Ti6Al4V Implant-Supported Frameworks: In Silico Study

Mariano Herrero-Climent et al. Materials (Basel). .

Abstract

A comparative analysis has been carried out between three different dental materials suitable for the prostheses manufacturing. The analysis performed is based on the finite elements method (FEM) and was made to evaluate their performance under three different loading conditions. Three different materials were modeled with 3D CAD geometry, all of them suitable to be simulated by means of a linear elastic model. The materials employed were graphene polymethyl methacrylate (G-PMMA) with 0.25% of graphene, polyether ether ketone (PEEK), and Ti6Al4V. Three loading conditions have been defined: distal, medial, and central. In all cases under study, the load was applied progressively, 5 N by 5 N until a previously fixed threshold of 25 N was reached, which always ensures that work is carried out in the elastic zone. The behavior of G-PMMA and PEEK in the tests performed is similar. Regarding maximum deformations in the model, it has been found that deformations are higher in the G-PMMA models when compared to those made of PEEK. The highest values of maximum stress according to the von Mises criteria are achieved in models made of Ti6Al4V, followed by G-PMMA and PEEK. G-PMMA is more prone to plastic deformations compared to Ti6Al4V. However, due to its relatively higher stiffness compared to other common polymers, G-PMMA is able to withstand moderate stress levels before significant deformation occurs, placing it in the intermediate position between Ti6Al4V and PEEK in terms of stress capacity. It should be noted that there is also a difference in the results obtained depending on the applied load, whether distal, medial, or central, proving that, in all simulations, it is the distal test that offers the worst results in terms of presenting a higher value for both displacement and tension. The results obtained allow us to identify the advantages and limitations of each material in terms of structural strength, mechanical behavior, and adaptability to loading conditions that simulate realistic scenarios.

Keywords: G-PMMA; PEEK; Ti6Al4V; finite element simulation; implant-supported frameworks.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Finite elements model: (a) Meshed 3D view of the model employed for the present research; (b) detail of the mesh.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Load application points in the models under study (D: distal, M: medial, and C: central). Positions A, B, C, D and E are where dental implants are placed.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Prosthetic structure obtained for the mechanical tests.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Flexural mechanical test (a) G-PMMA, (b) PEEK, (c) Ti6Al4V.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Mid-plane deformation map of the distally loaded G-PMMA model (units: mm).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Deformation map of the Ti6Al4V bushing most affected by the application of the distal load in the G-PMMA model (units: mm).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Stress map of the G-PMMA model with distal loading (units: MPa).
Figure 8
Figure 8
Stress map of the most loaded bushing of Ti6Al4V in the G-PMMA model with distal load.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Mid-plane deformation map of the distally loaded PEEK model (units: mm).
Figure 10
Figure 10
Deformation map of the Ti6Al4V bushing most affected by the application of the distal load in the PEEK model (units: mm).
Figure 11
Figure 11
Stress map of the PEEK model with distal loading (units: MPa).
Figure 12
Figure 12
Stress map of the most loaded bushing of Ti6Al4V in the PEEK model with distal load.
Figure 13
Figure 13
Mid-plane deformation map of the distally loaded Ti6Al4V model (units: mm).
Figure 14
Figure 14
Deformation map of the Ti6Al4V bushing most affected by the application of the distal load in the Ti6Al4V model (units: mm).
Figure 15
Figure 15
Stress map of the Ti6Al4V model with distal loading (units: MPa).
Figure 16
Figure 16
Stress map of the most loaded bushing of Ti6Al4V in the Ti6Al4V model with distal load.
Figure 17
Figure 17
Maximum deformation of all the models (in mm.) by materials and force position.
Figure 18
Figure 18
Maximum stress values according to the von Mises criteria of all the models (MPa.) by materials and force position.
Figure 19
Figure 19
Maximum deformation values (in mm.) achieved in the most loaded bushes of each model by materials and force position.
Figure 20
Figure 20
Maximum stress by von Mises criteria (in MPa) achieved in the most loaded bushes of each model by materials and force position.
Figure 21
Figure 21
Deformation in millimeters obtained under a load of 150 N in flexural tests.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lekholm U., van Steenberghe D., Herrmann I., Bolender C., Folmer T., Gunne J., Henry P., Higuchi K., Laney W., Lindén U. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of partially edentulous jaws: A prospective 5-year multicenter study. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 1994;9:627–635.
    1. Aparicio C., Manero J.M., Conde F., Pegueroles M., Planell J.A., Vallet-Regí M., Gil F.J. Acceleration of apatite nucleation on microrough bioactive titanium for bone-replacing implants. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A. 2007;82:521–529. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.31164. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Buser D., Janner S.F., Wittneben J.G., Bragger U., Ramseier C.A., Salvi G.E. 10-year survival and success rates of 511 titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: A retrospective study in 303 partially edentulous patients. Clin. Implants Dent. Relat. Res. 2012;14:839–851. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2012.00456.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Grandi T., Guazzi P., Samarani R., Grandi G. Immediate loading of four (all-on-4) post-extractive implants supporting mandibular cross-arch fixed prostheses: 18-month follow-up from a multicenter prospective cohort study. Eur. J. Oral Implantol. 2012;5:277–285. - PubMed
    1. Padrós R., Punset M., Molmeneu M., Velasco A.B., Herrero-Climent M., Rupérez E., Gil F.J. Mechanical properties of cocr dental-prosthesis restorations made by three manufacturing processes. influence of the microstructure and topography. Metals. 2020;10:788. doi: 10.3390/met10060788. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources