1983
DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(83)90238-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Three factors affecting investment setting expansion and casting size

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

1984
1984
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Load was removed and marginal discrepancy was measured on the Travelling microscope to the nearest of 0.01 mm at 910 magnification on each casting ( Fig. 3) at 4 predetermined sites [10]. All readings were done from a perpendicular line of view [5].…”
Section: Measurement Of Marginal Discrepancymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Load was removed and marginal discrepancy was measured on the Travelling microscope to the nearest of 0.01 mm at 910 magnification on each casting ( Fig. 3) at 4 predetermined sites [10]. All readings were done from a perpendicular line of view [5].…”
Section: Measurement Of Marginal Discrepancymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• Restraining factors-rigidity of the pattern material, casting ring, and ring liner [1][2][3][17][18][19] • Nonrestraining factors-mixing time, mixing liquid, mixing device, volume mixed, and storage time and condition 17,[20][21][22] • Heating rate [23][24][25][26] • Environmental conditions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[ 13 ] The materials are also characterized by their high thermal expansions in comparison to gypsum-bonded investments. [ 13 14 ] It would be reasonable to assume that storing the waxed refractory casts for long periods would have resulted in some shrinkage. Despite its high thermal expansion, the investment material when heated exhibited an insufficient shrinkage compensation that further increased the inaccuracy of the final castings.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%