Examination of Scanner Precision by Analysing Orthodontic Parameters

Download Article

1 / Luka Čerče2 / Davorin Kramar2 / Mirko Soković2 / Branislav Glišić1 / Vidosav Majstorović3 / Srđan Živković4

1University of Belgrade, Faculty of Dentistry, Belgrade, Serbia
2University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Ljubljana, Slovenia
3University of Belgrade, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Belgrade, Serbia
4Military Technical Institute, Belgrade, Serbia


Background: 3D modelling in orthodontics is becoming an increasingly widespread technique in practice. One of the significant questions already being asked is related to determining the precision of the scanner used for generating surfaces on a 3D model of the jaw.

Materials and methods: This research was conducted by generating a set of identical 3D models on Atos optical 3D scanner and Lazak Scan laboratory scanner, which precision was established by measuring a set of orthodontic parameters (54 overall) in all three orthodontic planes. In this manner we explored their precision in space, since they are used for generating spatial models – 3D jaws.

Results: There were significant differences between parameters scanned with Atos and Lazak Scan. The smallest difference was 0.017 mm, and the biggest 1.109 mm.

Conclusion: This research reveals that both scanners (Atos and Lazak Scan), which belong to general purpose scanners, based on precision parameters can be used in orthodontics. Early analyses indicate that the reference scanner in terms of precision is Atos.

Keywords: Scanning; 3D modelling; Orthodontics; Precision


  1. EN ISO 10360-10; Geometrical product specifications (GPS)-Acceptance and reverification tests for coordinate measuring systems (CMS)- Part 10: Laser trackers for measuring point-to-point distances, ISO Geneva, April 2016.
  2. Juds S. Photoelectric Sensors and Controls, Selection and Application, First Edition. Opcon, Everett, Washington, 1998.
  3. Bräuer-Burchardt C, Kühmstedt P, Notni G.. Calibration of Stereo 3D Scanners with Minimal Number of Views Using Plane Targets and Vanishing Points. 16th International Conference CAIP, 2015; 61-73.
  4. Barone S, Paoli A, Razionale V. Automatic alignment of multi-view range maps by optical stereo-tracking. International Conference IMProVe, 2011; 368-376.
  5. De Angelis D, Sala R, Cantatore A, Grandi M, Cattaneo C. A new computer-assisted technique to aid personal identification. Int J Legal Med, 2009; 123:351-356.[Web of Science]
  6. El-etriby S. 3D Range Data Acquisition Using Structured Lighting and Accuracy Phase-Based Stereo Algorithm. Int J Comput Syst, 2015; 2: 337-348.
  7. Bathow C, Breuckmann B, Scopigno R. Verification and acceptance tests for high definition 3D surface scanners. VAST 2010, The 11th International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archeology and Cultural Heritage, Paris, 2010, 9-16.
  8. Keating A, Knox J, Bibb R, Zhurov A. A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy, J Orthod, 2008; 35:191-201.
  9. Siebert P, Bell A, Ayoub A. Assessment of the accuracy of a three-dimensional imaging system for archiving dental study models. J Orthod, 2003, 30, 219-223.
  10. ATOS Triple Scan-Revolutionary scanning technique, 2016,http://www.gom.com/metrology-systems/atos/atos-triple-scan.html
  11. Mujanović E. Uporaba optičnih 3D skenerjev za določanje položaja zob pri uporabi stalnega zobnega aparata, Fakulteta za strojništvo Ljubljana, 2016.
  12. Majstorović N, Mačužić J, Glišić B. Referent geometric entities in orthodontics on 3D models. Serb Dent J, 2014; 61:102-112.
  13. The American Board of Orthodontics (ABO). Digital Model Requirements,https://www.american boardortho.com
Citation Information: Balkan Journal of Dental Medicine. Volume 21, Issue 1, Pages 32–43, ISSN (Online) 2335-0245, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bjdm-2017-0005, March 2017