Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Jack L. Ferracane
Dental Materials Science Program, Baylor
College of Dentistry, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Objectives
The objective of this study was to determine the nature of the correlation
between the Knoop hardness and the
degree of conversion of carbon double
bonds, as determined by IR analysis,
for unfilled dental restorative resins.
An attempt was also made to compare
the time frames at which maximum
hardness and degree of conversion are
acquired in these quick-setting resins.
Methods
12
Ferracane
DC (%) vs log t
100
90
80
.....
70
~:f2
60
/ t~r~
50
/ ~/"
--
.&-
..~ !
~J
30
10
// "
40
20
c i " .9"
i/
9
r//
o- . . . . . .
-z
e-.--.--.
//
9-
--
Delton
Concise
-A
Profile
(EB)
(BA)
/
I
10
I
100
I
1,000
10,000
t(min)
Fig. 1. Degree of Conversion (DC) vs. log time for three unfilled resins. Each point represents an average of three values.
specimens were sanded fiat with 320
emery paper before the initial test to
insure that any air-inhibited surface
layer of resin had been removed. At
least 10 specimens were made for each
resin. An individual specimen was
tested at alternate time periods to
insure that it had been allowed to cure
at 37~ for the entire specified time
before testing. Each hardness reading
was made at 23~ under a 100 g toad on
a Tukon hardness tester (Page-Wilson
Corp., Bridgeport, Conn.) using a
Knoop diamond indenter. At least five
values were recorded at each time interval from five different specimens for
each resin.
The DC and hardness results were
analyzed by analysis of variance and
Scheffes test for making multiple comparisons between unconfounded means
at the p -< 0.05 level (10). Regression
DC (%)*
5 min
10 min
20 min
30 min
60 min
120 min
6h
24 h
62.4_+2.0
65.8_+0.7
68.2_+0.7
69.4_+0.7
70.5_+0.6
71.2_+0.7
74.7_+0.5
77.6+1.8
Delton
KHN (kg/mm2)+
9.8_+0.2[
10.0+0.9
10.9-+0.9
12.0_+0.7
13.3_+0.8
14.9_+0.9
19.0_+I.0
18.6_+1.5
Profile (BA)
DC
KHN
43.4_+2.8
47.5+1.6
50.6+1.9
51.8_+1.5
55.7+-0.5
57.2+0.9
58.6_+0.2
62.0+_0.8
8.1-+0.8
9.4+0.9 I
10.6-+0.5
11.2-+0.4
13.1+0.5
15.3_+0.6
18.2+ 1.4
18.9-+0.8
b=2.
+ b_>5.
DC
Concise (EB)
KHN
58.5+1.0
62.7+1.3
66.0-+1.4
66.9+_2.0
67.7-+1.1
70.1+0.3
72.2-+0.7
76.9-+0.6
6.4+0.3
7.6+0.3
9.1_+0.7
9.7_+0.2
11.2_+0.4
12.7+_0.5
17.5-+0.3
17.6-+0.7
13
D C fit K H N
% of Max vs log
100
90
80
,~
60
5O
3O
2O
--
-- D C
: KHN
10
1
10
I
100
I
1,000
10,000
t(min)
Fig. 2. Comparison of the percent of maximum DC and maximum hardness (KHN) vs. log
time for Delton. Each point represents an average of three values for DC and at least 5
values for KHN.
specific hardness value cannot be correlated to a specific DC when comparing different resin formulations. For
example, Delton achieves a DC of
62.4% at 5 min with a hardness value of
9.8 KHN. Concise (EB) achieves
62.7% conversion at l0 rain, with a
hardness value of 7.6 KHN. The
maximum DC for Profile ( B A ) i s
KHN
vs DC.
9 Z
18.0
[]
/~/e'
,;I"
/"
,/)/
16.0
//
/ /9
14.0
E 1oo
/ 9
/ */
"r"
0.o
all points
r=~498
r=.498
,,;P%
,,;:/ -
,,::/ 9
//
/
"
/~,.
4.0
,/~/
/I/i
/~/"
,S/
9
o- . . . . . . -~ D e l t o n
o-.--.--e Concise
(EB)
* - - - - --* P r o f i l e
(BA)
/7
/,y
"7
2.0
~/-
/2 ~
[] .,,:?.
~
8.0
0/ "/ / "
//
/~t
Discussion
50
60
70
DC
r =
r =
r =
.937
.944
.961
//__
0
100
(%)
Fig. 3. Correlation between KHN and DC for three individual resins and for all resins combined (solid line). Each point represents an average value for the different time periods.
14
Ferracane
References
1. RUYTERIE, GYOROSIPP. A n infrared spectroscopic study of sealants. Scand J
Dent Res 1976: 84: 396--400.
2. RUYTER ID, SVENDSEN SA. Remaining methacrylate groups in composite restorative materials. Acta Odontol Scand 1978: 36: 75-82.
3. ASMUSSENE. Factors affecting the quantity of remaining double bonds in restorative resin polymers. Scand J Dent Res 1982: 90: 490-6.
4. FERRACANEJL, GREENER EH. Fourier transform infrared analysis of degree of
polymerization in unfilled resins - methods comparison. J Dent Res (in press).
5. TIRTHAR, FAN PL, DENNISON JB, POWERSJM. In vitro depth of cure of photoactivated composites. J Dent Res 1982: 61: 1184-7.
6. LEUNG RL, FAN PL, JOHNSTON WM. Post-irradiation polymerization of visible
light-activated composite resins. J Dent Res 1983: 62: 363-5.
7. ASMUSSEN E. Restorative resins: hardness and strength vs. quantity of remaining double bonds. Scand J Dent Res 1982: 90: 484-9.
8. FERRACANEJ. The correlation between the physical properties and degree of
conversion in unfilled Bis-GMA-based dental resins. Evanston, Illinois:
Northwestern University. 1983. 314 pp. Dissertation.
9. RUYTER IE, SJOVIK IJ. Composition of dental resins and composite materials.
Acta Odontol Scand 1981: 39: 133-46.
10. CICCHETTIDV. Extension of multiple-range tests to interaction tables in the
analysis of variance: a rapid approximate solution. Psych Bull 1972: 77: 405-8.
11. SPIEGEL MR. Probability and Statistics. Schaum Outline Series. New York:
McGraw Hill~ 1975.
12. HORIE K, OTAGAWAA, MURAOKA, M, MITA I. Calorimetric investigation of
polymerization reactions. V. crosslinked copolymerization of methylmethacrylate with ethylene dimethacrylate. J Polym Sci Polym Chem Ed 1975: 13:
445-54.