• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.255-265
• /
• 1996

The purpose of this study was to investigate if there were a significant difference between cephalometric measurements of mandibular position derived from a centric occlusion tracing compared to those of a converted centric relation tracing in the Class III malocclusion. The sample consisted of 25 Class III malocclusion and 25 normal occlusion persons who had no orthodontic treatment. The records included an lateral cephalometrics in centric occlusion, centric relation and centric occlusion bite registration and diagnostic casts mounted on the SAM II articulator in CR. The amount of CR-CO discrepancy of condyle was recorded using a MPI(Mandibular Position Indicator, MPI $200^{(R)}$, Great Lakes Orthodontics, USA). The conversion of the CO cephalogram to CR using the MPI readings was performed on the Conversion work sheet. Measures of mandibular position were chosen for the purpose of this study. The comparison of the difference between CO and CR cephalometric measurements in the normal occlusion and Class III malocclusion group were studied. The results were as follows: 1. In the features of CR-CO discrepancy of the condyle, the condyle was displaced posterior and inferior when the teeth were in centric occlusion. The horizontal component(${\Delta}X$) in Class HI malocclusion group was greater than the vertical component(${\Delta}Z$) and also greater than the horizontal component(${\Delta}X$) in normal occlusion group. There was no statistically significant correlation between MPI measurements and the groups of normal occlusion and Class III malocclusion group. 2. In the comparison of the cephalometric measurements in each group, Normal occlusion group showed significant difference in measurements such as ANB, Facial angle, Facial convexity and ODI. Class HI malocclusion group showed significant difference in measurements such as ANB, Facial angle, Facial convexity, ODI, SNB, APDI, L1-FP and it had more significance than the normal occlusion group. 3. The Value of cephalometric measurements was significantly different between CO and CR but there were no differences between the groups of normal occlusion and Class III malocclusion. The results of this study suggest that if the discrepancies are greater than the amount of normal displacement from clinically captured centric relation, centric relation should be considered as the starting point for proper diagnosis and treatment planning.

• Journal of the Korea institute for structural maintenance and inspection
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.73-80
• /
• 2022

In this study, details of NRC beam-column connections were developed in which beam and columns pre-assembled in factories using steel angles were bolted on site. The developed joint details are NRC-J type and NRC-JD type. NRC-J type is a method of tensile joining with TS bolts to the side and lower surfaces of the side plate of the NRC column and the end plate of the NRC beam. NRC-JD type has a rigid joint with high-strength bolts between the NRC beam and the side of the NRC column for shear, and with lap splices of reinforcing bar penetrating the joint and the beam main reinforcement for bending. For the seismic performance evaluation of the joint, three specimens were tested: an NRC-J specimen and NRC-JD specimen with NRC beam-column joint details, and an RC-J specimen with RC beam-column joint detail. As a result of the repeated lateral load test, the final failure mode of all specimens was the bending fracture of the beam at the beam-column interface. Compared to the RC-J specimen, the maximum strength of the specimen by the positive force was 10.1% and 29.6% higher in the NRC-J specimen and the NRC-JD specimen, respectively. Both NRC joint details were evaluated to secure ductility of 0.03 rad or more, the minimum total inter-story displacement angle required for the composite intermediate moment frame according to the KDS standard (KDS 41 31 00). At the slope by relative storey displacemet of 5.7%, the NRC-J specimen and the NRC-JD specimen had about 34.8% and 61.1% greater cumulative energy dissipation capacity than the RC specimen. The experimental strength of the NRC beam-column connection was evaluated to be 30% to 53% greater than the theoretical strength according to the KDS standard formula, and the standard formula evaluated the joint performance as a safety side.