Friction and Wear of Restorative Dental Materials

Tillitson, E.W.; Craig, Robert G.; Peyton, F.A.

doi:10.1177/00220345710500011001

Cited by 70 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Reeh et al 18 reported that friction coefficient between enamel-to-enamel surfaces was about 0.9 under water lubrication. Tillitson et al 19 found coefficients of friction from 0.5-0.6 when testing hemispherical BE counterfaces against flat BE surfaces and obtained coefficients of friction of 0.5-0.9 when testing similar BE counterfaces against flat porcelain discs under wet conditions. Schuh et al 1 reported friction coefficients of 0.25-0.48 between low-fusing ceramics and alumina ball without lubrication.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Friction and Wear Behavior of Selected Dental Ceramics

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to determine the friction coefficients and wear rates of six commercially available dental ceramics including IPS Empress 2 (E2), Cergo Pressable Ceramic (CPC), Cercon Ceram (CCS) and Super porcelain EX-3 (SPE). Bovine enamel (BE) was also tested as a reference material for comparison purposes. Samples of the dental ceramics were prepared according to the instructions described by the manufacturers in disk-shape with nominal dimensions of 12 mm × 2 mm. The wear tests were performed by means of a pin-on-disk type tribometer. The friction coefficients and specific wear rates of the materials were determined at a load of 10 N and rotating speed of 0.25 cm/s without lubrication. Surface morphology of the wear tracks was examined using a scanning electron microscope. Statistical analyses were made using one-way ANOVA and Turkey's HSD (P < 0.05). Surf. Rev. Lett. 2009.16:653-661. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com by MCGILL UNIVERSITY on 02/05/15. For personal use only.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Friction and Wear Behavior of Selected Dental Ceramics

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the absence of information about precise organic properties of the bone, mucosa, compact bone and trabecular bone, they were assumed to be homogeneous, isotropic and linearly elastic (10, 11) as were the other materials used in the analysis. The material properties used in the 3D finite element analysis are shown in Table 1 (13).…”

Section: Materials and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Stress distributions in maxillary bone surrounding overdenture implants with different overdenture attachments

Chun

Park

Han

et al. 2005

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, effects of different overdenture attachments on the stress distributions in the maxillary bone surrounding the overdenture implants are studied. Four different types of attachment are considered. They are rigid Dalbo Stud, movable Dalbo Stress Broken, movable Dalro, and movable O-ring attachments. Three-dimensional finite element analysis was conducted with commercial package to obtain the stress distributions in the maxillary bone. Varying the attachment types and angle of inclination of load, the stress distributions in the portions of compact bone and trabecular bone were monitored separately. The analysis was conducted by assuming two different boundary conditions at the interface between cap and overdenture abutment in order to evaluate influence of interface boundary condition on stress distribution in the maxillary bone. They were perfect bonding condition and contact with friction at the interfaces. However, it is preferable to assume perfect bond condition at the interface for rigid type attachment systems and contact with friction at the interface for movable type attachment systems. From the numerical results, it was found that the load transfer mechanism of the implant system is altered significantly by the types of the overdenture attachment and also special care must be taken to assign proper boundary conditions at the interface for the analysis. The movable type Dalro attachment generated the highest maximum effective stress in the maxillary bone among the models under the same inclined loading condition for contact with friction. The rigid type Dalbo Stud attachment generated the smallest maximum effective stress in the maxillary bone among the models under the same inclined loading condition for perfect bonding condition.

show abstract

“…Artificial teeth made from different materials were tested and the volume loss was measured through weight control. Throughout the 1970s, numerous artificial wear test methods and machines were developed varying in force application and motion pattern ( Tillitson, Craig & Peyton, 1971; Jones, Jones & Wilson, 1972; Harrison & Lewis, 1975; Craig & Powers, 1976; Dickson, 1979).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wear of composite resin veneering materials in a dual‐axis chewing simulator

Kern

Strub

1999

J of Oral Rehabilitation

190

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The attritional wear of human enamel and four different composite resins for the veneering of crowns was evaluated in a dual-axis chewing simulator over up to 1200000 loading cycles. Enamel showed less wear than the composite resins. However, an ultrafine compact-filled composite resin (Targis) showed a wear not statistically significantly different from that of enamel. The other composite resins showed a statistically significantly higher wear than enamel regardless whether microfine, ultrafine midway-filled or ultrafine compact-filled.

show abstract

Friction and Wear of Restorative Dental Materials

Abstract: Friction coefficients for a variety of material couples are reported. The relative abrasive wear of materials followed the order of their hardness, with one exception.

Cited by 70 publications

References 7 publications

Friction and Wear Behavior of Selected Dental Ceramics

Friction and Wear Behavior of Selected Dental Ceramics

Stress distributions in maxillary bone surrounding overdenture implants with different overdenture attachments

Wear of composite resin veneering materials in a dual‐axis chewing simulator

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About