Literature DB >> 22217606

Strength and fracture origins of a feldspathic porcelain.

George D Quinn1, Kathleen Hoffman, Janet B Quinn.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To identify the strength limiting flaws in in vitro test specimens of a fine-grained feldspathic dental porcelain.
METHODS: Four-point flexural strengths were measured for 26 test specimens. The fracture origin site of every test specimen was studied using stereoptical and scanning electron microscopy. A fractographically labeled Weibull strength distribution graph was prepared.
RESULTS: The complex microstructure of the feldspathic dental porcelain included a variety of feldspars, tridymite, and a feldspathoid as well as pores/bubbles and residual glass. The relatively high flexural strength is due in part to the fine grain size. Fractography revealed five flaw types that controlled strength: baseline microstructural flaws, pores/bubbles, side wall grinding damage, corner machining damage, and inclusions. The baseline microstructural flaws probably were clusters of particular crystalline phases. SIGNIFICANCE: Each flaw type probably has a different severity and size distribution, and hence has a different strength distribution. The Weibull strength distribution graph blended the strength distributions of the five flaw types and the apparent good fit of the combined data to a unimodal strength distribution was misleading. Polishing failed to eliminate deeper transverse grinding cracks and corner damage from earlier preparation steps in many of the test pieces. Bend bars should be prepared carefully with longitudinal surface grinding whenever possible and edge chamfers should be carefully applied. If the grinding and preparation flaws were eliminated, the Weibull modulus for this feldspathic porcelain would be greater than 30. Pores/bubbles sometimes controlled strength, but only if they touched each other or an exposed surface. Isolated interior bubble/pores were harmless.
Copyright © 2011 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22217606      PMCID: PMC3485682          DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.12.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dent Mater        ISSN: 0109-5641            Impact factor:   5.304


  9 in total

1.  Weibull analysis and flexural strength of hot-pressed core and veneered ceramic structures.

Authors:  Alvaro Della Bona; Kenneth J Anusavice; Paul H DeHoff
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.304

2.  Slow crack growth and reliability of dental ceramics.

Authors:  Carla Castiglia Gonzaga; Paulo Francisco Cesar; Walter Gomes Miranda; Humberto Naoyuki Yoshimura
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 5.304

3.  Relationship between fracture toughness and flexural strength in dental porcelains.

Authors:  Paulo Francisco Cesar; Humberto Naoyuki Yoshimura; Walter Gomes Miranda; Caroline Lumi Miyazaki; Luciana Mayumi Muta; Leondardo Eloy Rodrigues Filho
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.368

4.  Predicting lifetimes of materials and material structures.

Authors:  J E Ritter
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 5.304

5.  Fracture behavior of lithia disilicate- and leucite-based ceramics.

Authors:  Alvaro Della Bona; John J Mecholsky; Kenneth J Anusavice
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 5.304

6.  Phase identification in dental porcelains for ceramo-metallic restorations.

Authors:  M M Barreiro; O Riesgo; E E Vicente
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 5.304

7.  Fracture toughness (KIc) of a dental porcelain determined by fractographic analysis.

Authors:  S S Scherrer; J R Kelly; G D Quinn; K Xu
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.304

Review 8.  A practical and systematic review of Weibull statistics for reporting strengths of dental materials.

Authors:  Janet B Quinn; George D Quinn
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2009-11-28       Impact factor: 5.304

9.  Influence of microstructure and chemistry on the fracture toughness of dental ceramics.

Authors:  J B Quinn; V Sundar; I K Lloyd
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.304

  9 in total
  6 in total

1.  Chipping fracture resistance of dental CAD/CAM restorative materials: part I--procedures and results.

Authors:  G D Quinn; A A Giuseppetti; K H Hoffman
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2014-03-29       Impact factor: 5.304

2.  Surface treatment of dental porcelain: CO2 laser as an alternative to oven glaze.

Authors:  Ricardo Sgura; Mariana Cavalcante Reis; Antonio Carlos Hernandes; Márcia Carvalho de Abreu Fantini; Marcello Rubens Barsi Andreeta; Igor Studart Medeiros
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 3.161

3.  Mono or polycrystalline alumina-modified hybrid ceramics.

Authors:  Marina R Kaizer; Ana Paula R Gonçalves; Priscilla B F Soares; Yu Zhang; Paulo F Cesar; Sergio S Cava; Rafael R Moraes
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2016-01-02       Impact factor: 5.304

4.  Preparation Techniques Used to Make Single-Unit Crowns: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

Authors:  Helena M Minyé; Gregg H Gilbert; Mark S Litaker; Rahma Mungia; Cyril Meyerowitz; David R Louis; Alan Slootsky; Valeria V Gordan; Michael S McCracken
Journal:  J Prosthodont       Date:  2018-11-08       Impact factor: 2.752

5.  Functionalized pink Al2O3:Mn pigments applied in prosthetic dentistry.

Authors:  Mário Thadeo R Cruzeiro; Fernando A Moraes; Marina R Kaizer; Mário Lúcio Moreira; Yu Zhang; Rafael R Moraes; Sergio S Cava
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2017-04-03       Impact factor: 3.426

6.  Fracture load of CAD/CAM-fabricated and 3D-printed composite crowns as a function of material thickness.

Authors:  Moritz Zimmermann; Andreas Ender; Gustav Egli; Mutlu Özcan; Albert Mehl
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2018-10-27       Impact factor: 3.573

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.