Literature DB >> 28392020

ADM guidance-Ceramics: Fracture toughness testing and method selection.

Paulo Francisco Cesar1, Alvaro Della Bona2, Susanne S Scherrer3, Michael Tholey4, Richard van Noort5, Alessandro Vichi6, Robert Kelly7, Ulrich Lohbauer8.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objective is within the scope of the Academy of Dental Materials Guidance Project, which is to provide dental materials researchers with a critical analysis of fracture toughness (FT) tests such that the assessment of the FT of dental ceramics is conducted in a reliable, repeatable and reproducible way.
METHODS: Fracture mechanics theory and FT methodologies were critically reviewed to introduce basic fracture principles and determine the main advantages and disadvantages of existing FT methods from the standpoint of the dental researcher.
RESULTS: The recommended methods for FT determination of dental ceramics were the Single Edge "V" Notch Beam (SEVNB), Single Edge Precracked Beam (SEPB), Chevron Notch Beam (CNB), and Surface Crack in Flexure (SCF). SEVNB's main advantage is the ease of producing the notch via a cutting disk, SEPB allows for production of an atomically sharp crack generated by a specific precracking device, CNB is technically difficult, but based on solid fracture mechanics solutions, and SCF involves fracture from a clinically sized precrack. The IF test should be avoided due to heavy criticism that has arisen in the engineering field regarding the empirical nature of the calculations used for FT determination. SIGNIFICANCE: Dental researchers interested in FT measurement of dental ceramics should start with a broad review of fracture mechanics theory to understand the underlying principles involved in fast fracture of ceramics. The choice of FT methodology should be based on the pros and cons of each test, as described in this literature review.
Copyright © 2017 The Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dental ceramics; Fractography; Fracture toughness; Mechanical properties

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28392020     DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2017.03.006

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


  6 in total

Review 1.  Evaluating dental zirconia.

Authors:  Yu Zhang; Brian R Lawn
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2018-08-29       Impact factor: 5.304

2.  Fracture toughness of different monolithic zirconia upon post-sintering processes.

Authors:  Niwut Juntavee; Apa Juntavee; Thipradi Phattharasophachai
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2021-10-01

3.  Effect of A Rapid-Cooling Protocol on the Optical and Mechanical Properties of Dental Monolithic Zirconia Containing 3-5 mol% Y2O3.

Authors:  Hee-Kyung Kim
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2020-04-19       Impact factor: 3.623

4.  Normative Approaches for Oral Health: Standards, Specifications, and Guidelines.

Authors:  G Schmalz; N Jakubovics; F Schwendicke
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2021-10-25       Impact factor: 8.924

5.  Effect of surface treatments on biaxial flexural strength, fatigue resistance, and fracture toughness of high versus low translucency zirconia.

Authors:  Alaaeldin Elraggal; Moustafa Aboushelib; Islam M Abdel Raheem; Rania R Afifi
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2022-09-19       Impact factor: 3.747

Review 6.  The trends of dental biomaterials research and future directions: A mapping review.

Authors:  Sundus Iftikhar; Noureen Jahanzeb; Mehvish Saleem; Shafiq Ur Rehman; Jukka Pekka Matinlinna; Abdul Samad Khan
Journal:  Saudi Dent J       Date:  2021-01-14
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.