Investigation of the correlation between the different mechanical properties of resin composites

Jun, Soo-Kyung; Kim, Dong-Ae; Goo, Hyo-Jin; Lee, Hae‐Hyoung

doi:10.4012/dmj.2012-178

Cited by 49 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, the compressive strength results recorded for resin composites showed values in accordance to other previous studies [28,29]. However, higher values of compressive strength of glass-ionomer materials are reported in literature [8].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Mechanical Strength and Wear of Dental Glass-Ionomer and Resin Composites Affected by Porosity and Chemical Composition

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of porosity, microstructure, and chemical composition on the wear and compressive strength of dental glass-ionomer or resin composite. Cylindrical samples (6 9 4 mm) were prepared from a nano-hybrid resin composite (Grandio Ò SO/RC, VOCO), a resin-modified glass ionomer (Vitremer TM /VI, 3 M-ESPE) and a conventional glass ionomer (Ionofil Ò Molar/CO, VOCO). Porosity and topography of the materials were evaluated by optical and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Roughness was evaluated by R a and R t parameters at 0.1 mm/s under cutoff of 0.8 mm. Then, compressive tests were performed at 1 mm/min. Wear tests were carried out at 20 N, 2.5 mm of displacement, at 1 Hz for 90 min in artificial saliva solution. The results were statistically analyzed with a one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (p \ 0.05). Resin composite revealed a significantly lower porosity (1.21 ± 0.20 %) than glass-ionomer restoratives (5.69-7.54 %) as well as lower values of R a and R t roughness (p \ 0.05). Also, resin composite showed significantly higher values of mechanical strength (334 ± 15.9 MPa) compared to conventional (78.78 ± 13.30 MPa) or modified glass ionomer (169.50 ± 20.98 MPa) (p \ 0.05). For maximal depth of wear, resin composite also showed significantly lower values than glass ionomer (p \ 0.05). Homogeneous wear morphology was noticed by SEM analyses on glass ionomers in opposition to resin composite. Glass ionomers showed a poor mechanical behavior associated to a high porosity and wear rate when compared to resin composite.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Mechanical Strength and Wear of Dental Glass-Ionomer and Resin Composites Affected by Porosity and Chemical Composition

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dental composites have previously been shown to conform reasonably well to predictive models based on mechanics of complex viscoelastic structures, and not to a simple "rule of mixtures" relationship where the property is linearly related to the filler volume [2]. More recent studies confirm this dependence of mechanical properties on filler loading in commercial composites [3]. However, filler size, shape, and distribution are also important, especially for properties such as wear [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 66%

Microstructural Features of Current Resin Composite Materials

Ferracane

Pfeifer

Hilton

2014

Curr Oral Health Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dental resin composites have become the primary choice of most practitioners for the direct restoration of teeth owing to their esthetics and properties, both of which are highly dependent upon the microstructure of the materials. The type, size, amount, and distribution of the reinforcing fillers are all critical determinants of the optical and physical properties of the composite. The chemistry of the resin monomers and the quality of the highly cross-linked network formed during the polymerization reaction significantly influences these properties. Finally, the transfer of stress from the weaker resin matrix to the stronger and stiffer reinforcing fillers is accomplished by ensuring a strong interfacial linkage between the two phases, typically via a silane coupling agent. Recent work characterizing and describing the influence of the microstructure of dental composites on their properties and performance are reviewed in this manuscript.

show abstract

“…The flowable BFMs have been recommended for use in low load bearing areas and was aimed to place in one layer of 4 mm thickness to reduce polymerization stress being mandatory covered by a 2 mm layer of conventional RBC, [17,18] because the modulus elasticity and hardness were reduced [19]. The manufacturers of these materials stated some changes in composition in order to achieve the adequacy of bulk curing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bulk Fill Resin Composite Materials Cured with Single-Peak versus Dual-Peak LED LCUs

Aldossary

Roebuck

Santini

2016

Acta Medica Marisiensis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Manufactures claim that recently introduced bulk fill materials (BFM) can be cured adequately in 4 mm increments. This requires adequate light energy to be transmitted through the material to ensure adequate polymerization at the bottom of the increment. Aim: To compare the total light energy transmission through three BFMs and bottom/top (B/T) surface Vickers hardness (VH) when cured with single-peak versus dual-peak LED LCUs. Methods and Materials: Samples (n=5) of two viscous BFMs, Tetric EvoCeram ® Bulk Fill X-tra fil ® [XF] flowable SureFil, were prepared. A conventional RBC, Tetric EvoCeram ® was used as a control. Using MARC ® RC, the irradiance delivered to top surface of samples was adjusted to 1200 mW/cm 2 . Samples were cured with singlepeak EliparTM S10 or dual-peakBluephase ® G2 for 10 seconds and irradiance transmitted to the bottom surface measured. Samples were stored for 24 hours, prior to VH measurements B/T VH ratios were calculated. Statistically analysed used oneway ANOVA (α=0.05).Results: There was no statistically significant difference for B/T total energy transmission between materials except XF with EliparTM S10 (P<0.001). Total energy transmission ranged from 0.7 J/cm2 to 1.5 J/cm2. There was no statistically significant difference for B/T VH ratios between materials (P>0.05) when materials were cured with single-peak versus dual-peak LCU's, XF>SDR>TEC>TBF. TBF alone, did not reach the generally accepted B/T VH of 80%. Conclusions: Both single-peak and dual-peak LCU's were equally effective for curing the studied bulk fill materials. Manufacture's recommended total energy delivered to the top surface may not always be sufficient for effective curing.

show abstract

Investigation of the correlation between the different mechanical properties of resin composites

Cited by 49 publications

References 67 publications

Mechanical Strength and Wear of Dental Glass-Ionomer and Resin Composites Affected by Porosity and Chemical Composition

Mechanical Strength and Wear of Dental Glass-Ionomer and Resin Composites Affected by Porosity and Chemical Composition

Microstructural Features of Current Resin Composite Materials

Bulk Fill Resin Composite Materials Cured with Single-Peak versus Dual-Peak LED LCUs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About