| Literature DB >> 35992560 |
Abstract
To improve the color stability of facial prosthesis silicone rubber, this paper studied the effect of nano titanium oxide with different surface treatments on the color stability of red pigment-colored silicone rubber. Under the simulated sunlight aging condition, this paper takes MDX4-4210 silicone rubber as the matrix, silicon aluminum-coated nano TiO2 as the shading agent, and cadmium red oil paint as the colorant, and it observes the values of silicon aluminum-coated nano-TiO2 silicone rubber film with 1 mm thickness and different concentrations (0, 0.05%, 0.10%, and 0.15%) before and after aging. The experimental results showed that in the four concentrations of silicon aluminum-coated nano-TiO2 film, the ΔE, ΔL ∗ , Δa ∗ , Δb ∗ values gradually decreased with the increase of the concentration of silicon aluminum-coated nano-TiO2. The lowest was in the 0.10% group; however, it increased in the 0.15% group. There was a significant difference among the concentration groups (P < 0.05). The method of covering nano-TiO2 silicone rubber film with different concentrations of silicon aluminum has a certain effect on delaying the discoloration of prosthetic silicone rubber, and it provides a new idea for improving the color stability of the prosthetic silicone rubber.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35992560 PMCID: PMC9385313 DOI: 10.1155/2022/1334903
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Anal Chem ISSN: 1687-8760 Impact factor: 1.698
Figure 1Preparation and photocatalytic performance of nano materials.
Figure 2L value before and after the aging of nano-TiO2 coated with silicon aluminum at different concentrations.
Figure 3a value before and after the aging of samples coated with nano-TiO2 film with different concentrations of silicon and aluminum.
Figure 4b value before and after the aging of samples coated with nano-TiO2 film with different concentrations of silicon and aluminum.
L value and differences before and after the aging of silicon aluminum-coated nano-TiO2 film-covered silicone rubber specimens with different concentrations (F = 7486.332, P < 0.05).
| Chromatic aberration | Concentration | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 0.05% | 0.10% | 0.15% | |
| Front | 39.16 ± 0.50 | 53.01 ± 0.70 | 56.83 ± 0.79 | 65.58 ± 0.29 |
| After | 42.13 ± 0.50 | 51.68 ± 0.72 | 56.03 ± 0.79 | 62.01 ± 0.28 |
| Δ | 2.98 ± 0.12− | −1.34 ± 0.04 | 0.80 ± 0.03 | −3.57 ± 0.05 |
a value and difference before and after the aging of silicone rubber specimens coated with nano-TiO2 with different concentrations of silicon and aluminum (F = 20779.00, P < 0.05).
| Chromatic aberration | Concentration | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 0.05% | 0.10% | 0.15% | |
| Front | 37.96 ± 0.30 | 29.30 ± 0.36 | 26.13 ± 0.26 | 16.94 ± 0.52 |
| After | 23.10 ± 0.23 | 26.62 ± 0.44 | 25.14 ± 0.24 | 15.69 ± 0.57 |
| Δ | −14.86 ± 0.14 | −2.69 ± 0.09 | −0.99 ± 0.04 | −1.25 ± 0.11 |
b value and difference before and after the aging of silicone rubber specimens coated with nano-TiO2 with different concentrations of silicon and aluminum (F = 1951.636, P < 0.05).
| Chromatic aberration | Concentration | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 0.05% | 0.10% | 0.15% | |
| Front | 15.22 ± 0.50 | 7.57 ± 0.48 | 5.15 ± 0.21 | 1.09 ± 0.09 |
| After | 23.20 ± 0.47 | 13.40 ± 0.52 | 9.72 ± 0.21 | 10.00 ± 0.15 |
| Δ | 7.98 ± 0.10 | 5.83 ± 0.10 | 4.57 ± 0.10 | 8.91 ± 0.12 |
Difference before and after the aging of silicone rubber specimens coated with nano-TiO2 with different concentrations of silicon and aluminum (F = 15623.69, P < 0.05).
| Chromatic aberration | Concentration | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 0.05% | 0.10% | 0.15% | |
| Δ | 17.15 ± 0.11 | 6.56 ± 0.09 | 4.75 ± 0.08 | 9.68 ± 0.10 |