1962
DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1962.0090
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tensile strength and modulus of elasticity of tooth structure and several restorative materials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

5
66
3
7

Year Published

1998
1998
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 213 publications
(81 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
5
66
3
7
Order By: Relevance
“…The static elastic modulus of Vitrebond was 1.1 GPa (Tam, McComb & Pulver, 1991). Dentin has an elastic modulus in the range of 11-19.3 GPa (Renson & Braden, 1975;Bowen & Rodriguez, 1962;Sano & others, 1994;Lehman, 1967;Xu & others, 1998), which is similar to F2000. This might explain why the restorations supported by dentin and F2000 behaved similarly.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…The static elastic modulus of Vitrebond was 1.1 GPa (Tam, McComb & Pulver, 1991). Dentin has an elastic modulus in the range of 11-19.3 GPa (Renson & Braden, 1975;Bowen & Rodriguez, 1962;Sano & others, 1994;Lehman, 1967;Xu & others, 1998), which is similar to F2000. This might explain why the restorations supported by dentin and F2000 behaved similarly.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…As the tensile strengths of enamel and dentin are much lower than their respective compressive strengths 31,32) , tensile stress is much more destructive than compressive stress. In terms of restoration retention in dentin bonding agent trials, tensile stresses appear to be the most destructive, at least short-term.…”
Section: ⅳ Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have shown that enamel and dentin are less resistant to tensile stress than compressive stress [36][37][38][39] . In compressive stress, enamel can withstand forces up to 35 times greater than when subjected to tensile stress; meanwhile, dentin can resist compressive forces at least seven times greater than the amount of tensile stress that will cause it to fail 37,38) .…”
Section: ⅳ Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In compressive stress, enamel can withstand forces up to 35 times greater than when subjected to tensile stress; meanwhile, dentin can resist compressive forces at least seven times greater than the amount of tensile stress that will cause it to fail 37,38) . The tensile strengths of enamel and dentin are much lower than are their respective compressive strengths 38,39) . According to the experiment, tensile stress affected the result to the meaningful level while the effect of compressive stress was not.…”
Section: ⅳ Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%