Beom-Jin Choi1, Sungsik Yoon2, Yong-Woon Im3, Jung-Hwan Lee4, Hyung-Jo Jung2, Hae-Hyoung Lee5. 1. Department of Biomaterials Science, College of Dentistry, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, South Korea. 2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon 34141, South Korea. 3. Department of Biomaterials Science, College of Dentistry, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, South Korea; Department of Dental Laboratory, Kyungdong University, Wonju 26495, South Korea. 4. Department of Biomaterials Science, College of Dentistry, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, South Korea; Institute of Tissue Regeneration Engineering, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, South Korea. 5. Department of Biomaterials Science, College of Dentistry, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, South Korea; Institute of Tissue Regeneration Engineering, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, South Korea. Electronic address: haelee@dku.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Comparing strengths under different loading conditions provides useful information on the mechanical behaviour of restorative materials under multiaxial masticatory loading in the oral cavity. The aims of this study was to investigate the flexural strengths and the reliability of resin-composite blocks for CAD/CAM by uniaxial and biaxial flexure tests and to compare the elastic properties measured by different methods including digital image correlation (DIC). METHODS: Four resin-composite blocks for CAD/CAM, namely, VE (Vita Enamic), LU (Lava Ultimate), MD (Mazic Duro), and CS (Cerasmart), were investigated. Beam specimens (4.0×1.4×18.0mm3) and disks (12-14mmϕ×1.5mm) were prepared to determine the uniaxial (three-point bending) and biaxial (ball-on-ring, BOR) flexural strengths and flexural moduli. A compression test (8×4×18mm3) with DIC analysis was utilized to measure the elastic modulus and Poisson's ratio. Data were analysed by a 2-parameter Weibull function and ANOVA with Scheffe's test. RESULTS: The mean uniaxial and biaxial strengths and Weibull moduli of the specimen groups were as follows: uniaxial VE (140.1±7.0, 24.1), LU (159.1±6.3, 31.5), MD (144.9±13.3, 13.6), and CS (165.4±16.9, 11.2) and biaxial VE (153.6±10.4, 19.0), LU (231.0±29.3, 9.7), MD (148.9±23.8, 7.4), and CS (249.7±22.4, 13.8). Although the ranking of both sets of strength data remained unchanged, the strength reliability was significantly affected by the loading; the Weibull moduli of the specimens decreased when they were subjected to biaxial tests (except for that of CS). The elastic modulus values of the materials varied significantly under the different test loadings, although they were in the same order regardless of the test method: VE>>LU≈MD>CS. The DIC technique yielded elastic moduli that were in good agreement with those measured by the uniaxial flexure test. SIGNIFICANCE: The flexural strength, reliability, and elastic modulus of resin-composite block materials differed with the uniaxial and biaxial flexural loading and the test method. The different behaviours under both loadings should be considered in the evaluation of the mechanical performance of those materials.
OBJECTIVE: Comparing strengths under different loading conditions provides useful information on the mechanical behaviour of restorative materials under multiaxial masticatory loading in the oral cavity. The aims of this study was to investigate the flexural strengths and the reliability of resin-composite blocks for CAD/CAM by uniaxial and biaxial flexure tests and to compare the elastic properties measured by different methods including digital image correlation (DIC). METHODS: Four resin-composite blocks for CAD/CAM, namely, VE (Vita Enamic), LU (Lava Ultimate), MD (Mazic Duro), and CS (Cerasmart), were investigated. Beam specimens (4.0×1.4×18.0mm3) and disks (12-14mmϕ×1.5mm) were prepared to determine the uniaxial (three-point bending) and biaxial (ball-on-ring, BOR) flexural strengths and flexural moduli. A compression test (8×4×18mm3) with DIC analysis was utilized to measure the elastic modulus and Poisson's ratio. Data were analysed by a 2-parameter Weibull function and ANOVA with Scheffe's test. RESULTS: The mean uniaxial and biaxial strengths and Weibull moduli of the specimen groups were as follows: uniaxial VE (140.1±7.0, 24.1), LU (159.1±6.3, 31.5), MD (144.9±13.3, 13.6), and CS (165.4±16.9, 11.2) and biaxial VE (153.6±10.4, 19.0), LU (231.0±29.3, 9.7), MD (148.9±23.8, 7.4), and CS (249.7±22.4, 13.8). Although the ranking of both sets of strength data remained unchanged, the strength reliability was significantly affected by the loading; the Weibull moduli of the specimens decreased when they were subjected to biaxial tests (except for that of CS). The elastic modulus values of the materials varied significantly under the different test loadings, although they were in the same order regardless of the test method: VE>>LU≈MD>CS. The DIC technique yielded elastic moduli that were in good agreement with those measured by the uniaxial flexure test. SIGNIFICANCE: The flexural strength, reliability, and elastic modulus of resin-composite block materials differed with the uniaxial and biaxial flexural loading and the test method. The different behaviours under both loadings should be considered in the evaluation of the mechanical performance of those materials.