SmartAligners are direct-printed from the approved digital plan.
That gives the clinical team a clearer route to variable thickness,
designed pressure regions and a shape-memory material evaluated at
oral temperature.
ISOBiocompatibility documentation for clinician review
01 / Capture the case
Every plan starts with a digital scan, not a stock impression tray.
An intraoral scan captures the arch before any plan is proposed.
It replaces a physical impression, not the clinician's
examination or diagnosis, and the digital file becomes the
single reference the whole case is planned and printed from.
Graphy's clinical guide frames the technology around three manufacturing limits: one uniform sheet thickness, a fixed rectangular pressure area and a physical model between the digital plan and the appliance. These
are design and material differences in how the appliance is made.5
The appliance comes directly from its digital design.
Traditional clear-aligner production commonly thermoforms a
plastic sheet over a model. Direct printing removes that
model-forming step. Published laboratory work reports that
thermoforming can alter material thickness and geometry; direct
printing creates a different production route, but its result
still depends on validated print and post-processing controls.2
The appliance is only released once it passes inspection.
WashUncured resin removed from the shell surface and interior.
Post-curePolymerisation completed under validated time and temperature.
Separate and finishSupports removed, margins finished back to the designed trim line.
Inspect and recordEdges, clarity and fit checked; the batch is recorded against the case.
04 / Material behaviour
Shape memory describes a material response, not a guaranteed smile
result.
In a 2022 laboratory study, TC-85 specimens recovered toward their
original form at 37°C after controlled deformation. The authors
also reported different viscoelastic and thickness behavior from
the PETG control.2
The study was a material test, not a randomized patient trial.
Clinical movement still depends on diagnosis, staging, biology,
wear and review.
Specimen test · TC-85 at 37 °C
What "shape memory" actually measured.
Swipe to see all seven time points
Elapsed time
Elapsed time
0
10 sec
30 sec
1 min
5 min
10 min
60 min
Bending angle (°)
177.00 ± 1.44
146.27 ± 3.92
107.23 ± 7.05
79.43 ± 6.45
31.53 ± 5.48
20.32 ± 5.49
6.90 ± 2.68
Shape recovery ratio (%)
0
17.36 ± 2.06
39.42 ± 3.90
55.12 ± 3.64
82.19 ± 3.09
88.52 ± 3.10
96.11 ± 1.50
Evidence, with context
What is supported, and how strongly?
The label beneath each point matters as much as the claim itself.
Laboratory material study
Temperature-responsive shape recovery
TC-85 specimens showed recovery toward their original form at
37°C under the reported test conditions.
A 2023 review described direct-printable orthodontic materials
as an active area of research and called for stronger
standardized and clinical evidence.
Graphy reports 99.6% dimensional accuracy for direct printing in its own product data.
Manufacturer summary, 2023 study
Recovery across a wear window
Graphy's clinical guide summarises Schupp et al. (Journal of Aligner Orthodontics, 2023) as recovering about
70-80% of force in the first 6-8 days and continuing through day
14.
Material testing · TC-85, Lee et al. 2022
Two measured limits of the printed material.
Bending kinetics
Residual bending angle at oral temperature.
Measured values
Mean residual deformation angle of U-shaped TC-85 specimens over 60 minutes in a 37 °C water bath (N = 6). The angle falls fastest in the first minute and flattens toward a small residual.
Elapsed
Residual angle
Recovery
0 s
177.00° ± 1.44
0%
10 s
146.27° ± 3.92
17.4%
30 s
107.23° ± 7.05
39.4%
1 min
79.43° ± 6.45
55.1%
5 min
31.53° ± 5.48
82.2%
10 min
20.32° ± 5.49
88.5%
60 min
6.90° ± 2.68
96.1%
Tensile elastic range
Elastic strain limit before permanent deformation.
Strain at yield in a static tensile test at 25 °C (Lee et al. 2022). PETG reached the higher yield stress: 44.20 MPa against 32.31 MPa for TC-85.
Δ +0.73 percentage points (+18.6% relative elastic range before permanent deformation)
Measured values
Tensile strain a specimen can take before crossing into permanent plastic deformation, under standardised test conditions.
Material
Elastic limit
TC-85 resin (Graphy)
4.65%
Conventional PETG
3.92%
Sources
Linked so you can read the original rather than a summary of it.
Manufacturer information
Graphy. Shape Memory Aligner Workflow. Accessed July
2026.
Lee SY, Kim H, Kim HJ, et al. Thermo-mechanical properties of 3D
printed photocurable shape memory resin for clear aligners.
Scientific Reports. 2022;12:6246.
Grant J, Foley P, Bankhead B, et al. Forces and moments generated
by 3D direct printed clear aligners of varying labial and lingual
thicknesses during lingual movement of maxillary central incisor:
an in vitro study. Progress in Orthodontics. 2023;24:23.
Goracci C, Juloski J, D'Amico C, et al. Clinically Relevant
Properties of 3D Printable Materials for Intraoral Use in
Orthodontics: A Critical Review of the Literature.
Materials. 2023;16(6):2166.
Bae BG, et al. A study on the compressive strength of
three-dimensional direct printing aligner material for specific
designing of clear aligners. Scientific Reports. 2025;15:2489.
Choi JY, Kim H, Kim SH, et al. Mechanical and viscoelastic properties of a temperature-responsive photocurable resin for 3D printed orthodontic clear aligners. Scientific Reports. 2025;15:23530.
Koenig N, Choi JY, McCray J, et al. Comparison of dimensional accuracy between direct-printed and thermoformed aligners. Korean Journal of Orthodontics. 2022;52(4):249-257.
Oyonarte R, et al. Mechanical properties of thermoformed and direct-printed aligner materials after immersion in 37 °C water: a 14-day in vitro study. Scientific Reports. 2026;16:5864.
