scholarly journals Effect of toothbrush/dentifrice abrasion on weight variation, surface roughness, surface morphology and hardness of conventional and CAD/CAM denture base materials

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yen-Hao CHANG ◽  
Chen-Yi LEE ◽  
Ming-Sung HSU ◽  
Je-Kang DU ◽  
Ker-Kong CHEN ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Surface Morphology ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Base Materials ◽  
Roughness Surface ◽  
Weight Variation ◽  
Cad Cam

scholarly journals Rotary Ultrasonic Machining of Alumina Ceramic: An Experimental Investigation of Tool Path and Tool Overlapping

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1667 ◽  
Author(s):  
Basem M. A. Abdo ◽  
Abdualziz El-Tamimi ◽  
Emad Abouel Nasr
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Surface Morphology ◽  
Surface Quality ◽  
Tool Path ◽  
Removal Rate ◽  
Ultrasonic Machining ◽  
Rotary Ultrasonic Machining ◽  
Roughness Surface ◽  
Tool Wear Mechanisms

Pocket milling has been regarded as one of the most widely used operations in machining. The surface quality of the machined pockets is an essential aspect of any engineering and medical applications. In the current study, rotary ultrasonic machining (RUM) was applied for milling micro-pockets on alumina (Al2O3) ceramic. The objective of this research was to analyze the effect of the tool overlapping parameters on the surface roughness, surface morphology and the profiles of the machined pockets. Subsequently, the effect of different tool path strategies was analyzed on the surface quality and the material removal rate (MRR) of the machined pockets. A scanning electron microscope is used for analyzing the tool wear mechanisms. The experimental results provide evidence that the surface roughness, surface morphology and the MRR have been significantly affected by the considered tool overlapping and the tool path strategies. Furthermore, among the selected tool overlapping parameters (5–25%) and the tool path strategies, the best surface roughness (Ra = 0.155 μm and Rt = 1.432 µm) of the machined pockets can be found at 20% of the tool overlapping with a mix of uni-directional and zigzag tool path strategy.

scholarly journals A Color Stability Comparison of Conventional and CAD/CAM Polymethyl Methacrylate Denture Base Materials

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cagatay Dayan ◽  
Melahat Celik Guven ◽  
Burc Gencel ◽  
Canan Bural
Keyword(s):  
Polymethyl Methacrylate ◽  
Color Stability ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Base Materials ◽  
Cad Cam

scholarly journals Surface Characteristics of Milled and 3D Printed Denture Base Materials Following Polishing and Coating: An In-Vitro Study

Materials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 3305
Author(s):  
Pablo Kraemer Fernandez ◽  
Alexey Unkovskiy ◽  
Viola Benkendorff ◽  
Andrea Klink ◽  
Sebastian Spintzyk
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
3D Printing ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Surface Characteristics ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Liquid Resin ◽  
Base Materials ◽  
Superior Surface ◽  
3D Printed

(1) Background: To date, no information on the polishability of milled and 3D-printed complete denture bases has been provided, which is relevant in terms of plaque accumulation. (2) Methods: three groups (n = 30) were manufactured using the cold-polymerization polymethilmethacrilate, milling (SM) and 3D printing (AM). 10 specimens of each group were left untreated (reference). 10 more specimens were pre-polished (intermediate polishing) and 10 final specimens were highgloss polished. An additional 20 specimens were 3D printed and coated with the liquid resin (coated), 10 of which were additionally polished (coated + polished). For each group Ra and Rz values, gloss value and REM images were obtained. (3). The “highgloss-polished” specimens showed statistically lower Ra and Rz values in the SM, followed by AM and conventional groups. In the AM group statistically lower surfaces roughness was revealed for highgloss-polished, “coated + polished”, and “coated” specimens, respectively. (4) Conclusions: The milled specimens demonstrated superiors surface characteristics than 3D printed and conventionally produced after polishing. The polished specimens demonstrated superior surface characteristics over coated specimens. However, the surface roughness by both polished and coated specimens was within the clinically relevant threshold of 0.2 µm.

Comparison of Mechanical Properties of 3D‐Printed, CAD/CAM, and Conventional Denture Base Materials

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 524-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Prpić ◽  
Zdravko Schauperl ◽  
Amir Ćatić ◽  
Nikša Dulčić ◽  
Samir Čimić
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Properties ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Base Materials ◽  
Cad Cam ◽  
3D Printed

scholarly journals Comparison of Hardness and Surface Roughness of Two Denture bases Polymerized by Different Methods

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farideh Bahrani ◽  
Mahroo Vojdani ◽  
Anahita Safari ◽  
Ghasem Karampoor
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Property ◽  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Injection Molding ◽  
Vickers Hardness ◽  
T Test ◽  
Hardness Testing ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Hardness Tester ◽  
Base Materials ◽  
Acrylic Resins

ABSTRACT Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate mechanical property hardness and surface roughness (Ra) of different polymerization acrylic resins used for denture bases. Materials and methods A total of 30 specimens were prepared and divided in two groups. A total of 15 samples were processed by the compression molding technique using Meliodent (heatcured). Another 15 samples were processed with cold-cured resin Futura Gen via the injection molding technique. Hardness testing was conducted using a Vickers hardness tester. The Ra test was performed by a profilometer. Data were analyzed using the independent sample t-test and differences were statistically significant at the 0.05 level. Results The Vickers hardness numbers (VHN) were 20.8 ± 2.39 for Meliodent and 21.18 ± 1.42 for FuturaGen, which was not significantly different (p > 0.05). The Ra of Meliodent was 0.92 ± 0.23 µm and for FuturaGen it was 0.84 ± 0.37 µm. There were no significant changes in roughness. Conclusion The hardness and Ra of Meliodent and FuturaGen were not significantly different. Therefore, we recommend the use of FuturaGen for manufacturing denture base materials. How to cite this article Bahrani F, Safari A, Vojdani M, Karampoor G. Comparison of Hardness and Surface Roughness of Two Denture bases Polymerized by Different Methods. World J Dent 2012;3(2):171-175.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document