N de Jager1, A J Feilzer, C L Davidson. 1. ACTA, Department of Dental Materials Science, Louwesweg 1, 1066 EA Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In order to adjust occlusion, the functional surfaces of porcelain restorations are often ground and mechanical machining is even an essential part of the CAD-CAM process for these restorations. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of the finishing procedures on the biaxial flexure strength of four commercial porcelains. METHODS: Four commercial porcelains of which two are used for metal-ceramic restorations (Flexo Ceram Dentine and Vita VM K68) and two for veneers and inlays (Duceram LFC Dentine and Cerinate BODY) are used in this study. For each porcelain, sixty discs (Ø = 22 mm, h = +/- 2.0 mm) were produced using twelve different finishing procedures. Twenty discs were left untreated, twenty discs were milled, using a high-speed diamond disc, and twenty discs were machined in a high-speed grinding/polishing device. Half of the samples were glazed. In each of these six groups, half of the samples were stored for 16 h at 80 degrees C in a 4% acetic acid solution. The biaxial flexure strength was determined using the ball-on-ring method. In each group the roughness of the surface was determined and examined via SEM. RESULTS: With the exception of Flexo Ceram Dentine, a significant correlation was found between the roughness of the surface and the biaxial strength: the smoother the surface, the stronger the sample. The differences in biaxial strength may be attributed to the stress concentration of an applied load due to the roughness of the surface caused by mechanical finishing or chemical action. The fact that the strength of Flexo Ceram Dentine was not affected by the different surface treatments is probably due to the size of the leucite particles, which apparently induce more stress concentration than the surface flaws and the roughness of the surface. SIGNIFICANCE: It was concluded that surface roughness determines the strength of a porcelain material, except where the inner structure of the material causes greater stress concentration than that caused by the combination of surface roughness and surface flaws.
OBJECTIVES: In order to adjust occlusion, the functional surfaces of porcelain restorations are often ground and mechanical machining is even an essential part of the CAD-CAM process for these restorations. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of the finishing procedures on the biaxial flexure strength of four commercial porcelains. METHODS: Four commercial porcelains of which two are used for metal-ceramic restorations (Flexo Ceram Dentine and Vita VM K68) and two for veneers and inlays (Duceram LFC Dentine and Cerinate BODY) are used in this study. For each porcelain, sixty discs (Ø = 22 mm, h = +/- 2.0 mm) were produced using twelve different finishing procedures. Twenty discs were left untreated, twenty discs were milled, using a high-speed diamond disc, and twenty discs were machined in a high-speed grinding/polishing device. Half of the samples were glazed. In each of these six groups, half of the samples were stored for 16 h at 80 degrees C in a 4% acetic acid solution. The biaxial flexure strength was determined using the ball-on-ring method. In each group the roughness of the surface was determined and examined via SEM. RESULTS: With the exception of Flexo Ceram Dentine, a significant correlation was found between the roughness of the surface and the biaxial strength: the smoother the surface, the stronger the sample. The differences in biaxial strength may be attributed to the stress concentration of an applied load due to the roughness of the surface caused by mechanical finishing or chemical action. The fact that the strength of Flexo Ceram Dentine was not affected by the different surface treatments is probably due to the size of the leucite particles, which apparently induce more stress concentration than the surface flaws and the roughness of the surface. SIGNIFICANCE: It was concluded that surface roughness determines the strength of a porcelain material, except where the inner structure of the material causes greater stress concentration than that caused by the combination of surface roughness and surface flaws.
Authors: Ryan N Chan; Brian R Stoner; Jeffrey Y Thompson; Ronald O Scattergood; Jeffrey R Piascik Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2013-06-12 Impact factor: 5.304
Authors: Camila da Silva Rodrigues; Iana Lamadrid Aurélio; Marina da Rosa Kaizer; Yu Zhang; Liliana Gressler May Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2019-03-04 Impact factor: 5.304
Authors: Camila da Silva Rodrigues; Iana Lamadrid Aurélio; Sara Fraga; Marina da Rosa Kaizer; Yu Zhang; Liliana Gressler May Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2021-04-15 Impact factor: 5.687