Orthodontic Bonding Tray Mechanism for Smear-Free Bracket Placement

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional indirect bonding techniques face issues with adhesive smearing and excess adhesive application, leading to poor bonding, increased chair-time, and potential tooth staining or damage, especially when using transfer trays that attach orthodontic appliances parallel to the tooth surfaces.

Innovation Solution

An indirect bonding device with a first and second tray system, where the adhesive layer is initially spaced apart from the tooth surface, and the second tray engages to move the appliance towards the tooth surface, ensuring uniform adhesive application and precise positioning, reducing smearing and excess adhesive needs.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If traditional bonding devices with small bonding surfaces are used, then the bonding strength is insufficient, but increasing the bonding surface area requires larger device size which is not suitable for minor oral surgery

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebonding strengthVSAvoiddevice size
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSVolume of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The bonding surface is extended from a two-dimensional planar interface to a three-dimensional mesh structure with multiple bonding points distributed across the mesh surface. This dimensional transformation allows the bonding interface to cover a larger effective area without proportionally increasing the overall device volume, as the mesh structure utilizes spatial distribution efficiently.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Solution Approach 2:

The bonding surface is divided into multiple discrete bonding points or regions distributed across the mesh structure. Instead of relying on a single large bonding interface, the total bonding strength is achieved through the cumulative effect of multiple smaller bonding points, allowing the device to maintain compact size while providing sufficient overall bonding capacity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Measurement precision

If indirect bonding devices are used to improve positioning accuracy, then the bonding time and procedure complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepositioning accuracyVSAvoidbonding time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The mesh structure is pre-formed with predetermined bonding point locations and geometric configurations that correspond to optimal positioning on the bone surface. This preliminary preparation of the bonding interface geometry eliminates the need for time-consuming intraoperative adjustments and positioning procedures, allowing for rapid and accurate placement during surgery.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The mesh structure serves as an intermediary element between the bonding device and the bone surface, providing a standardized interface that simplifies positioning. The mesh acts as a mediator that translates complex positioning requirements into a simple placement procedure, maintaining high positioning accuracy while reducing procedural complexity and time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Strength

If larger bonding surfaces are created to improve bonding strength, then the device complexity and manufacturing difficulty increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebonding strengthVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The mesh structure serves multiple functions simultaneously: it provides the bonding surface, acts as a positioning template, serves as a structural framework, and enables drainage or fluid management. This multi-functionality consolidates what would otherwise require multiple separate components into a single integrated device, reducing overall device complexity while maintaining enhanced bonding strength.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The mesh structure allows for parameter optimization where the bonding surface area, mesh density, and pore size can be adjusted independently through manufacturing parameters rather than requiring complex geometric designs. This enables tuning of bonding strength and other performance parameters through simple parameter changes during manufacturing, avoiding increased device complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentEP4267035B1Indirect bonding device
Publication Date: 2026.05.06 SOLVENTUM INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES CO
  • EP4267035B1 patent drawingFigure 1A~1B
  • EP4267035B1 patent drawingFigure 2A~2B
  • EP4267035B1 patent drawingFigure 2C

AI summary

An indirect bonding device includes a first tray and a second tray. The first tray is configured to be detachably coupled to a tooth having a tooth surface. The second tray is configured to be detachably coupled to the first tray. The first tray includes a cavity at least partially extending from a first inner surface to a first outer surface along a longitudinal axis. An orthodontic appliance is at least partially and detachably received within the cavity. An adhesive layer is disposed on a base surface of the orthodontic appliance. Upon detachable coupling of the first tray to the tooth, the adhesive layer is spaced apart from the tooth surface. Furthermore, upon detachable coupling of the second tray to the first tray, the second tray engages the first tray to move the orthodontic appliance towards the tooth surface, such that the adhesive layer contacts the tooth surface.