Hang Wang1, Prem Pallav, Giuseppe Isgrò, Albert J Feilzer. 1. Department of Prosthodontics, West China College of Stomatology, Sichuan University, 14 Block 3 of RenMinNanLu, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare three fracture toughness test methods, using four commercial dental porcelains. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The fracture toughness test techniques involved were: the single-edge-notched beam (SENB), the indentation strength method (IS), and a rather convenient ASTM standard for advanced ceramics, which is still rarely used in dental ceramic research, the Chevron-notched beam method (CN). Duceram, Duceram LFC, Sintagon Zx and Carrara Vincent were chosen for study. Data was analyzed by two-way and paired ANOVA. RESULT: No statistical difference was found between the CN and SENB methods with four dental porcelains, but IS was not always in statistical agreement with SENB or CN. Statistical agreement among all three methods occurred only with Duceram LFC. CONCLUSION: The different test methods did not always lead to the same ranking or values of fracture toughness. Yet the toughness results of the SENB method were comparable to those of the CN method for all the four dental porcelains tested in this study.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare three fracture toughness test methods, using four commercial dental porcelains. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The fracture toughness test techniques involved were: the single-edge-notched beam (SENB), the indentation strength method (IS), and a rather convenient ASTM standard for advanced ceramics, which is still rarely used in dental ceramic research, the Chevron-notched beam method (CN). Duceram, Duceram LFC, Sintagon Zx and Carrara Vincent were chosen for study. Data was analyzed by two-way and paired ANOVA. RESULT: No statistical difference was found between the CN and SENB methods with four dental porcelains, but IS was not always in statistical agreement with SENB or CN. Statistical agreement among all three methods occurred only with Duceram LFC. CONCLUSION: The different test methods did not always lead to the same ranking or values of fracture toughness. Yet the toughness results of the SENB method were comparable to those of the CN method for all the four dental porcelains tested in this study.