Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2001 28; 678±683
Fracture strength of copy-milled and conventional
In-Ceram crowns
JUNG-WON HWANG & JAE-HO YANG Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry and Dental Research
Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
SUMMARY The purpose of this study was to compare
the fracture resistance of copy-milled and conven-
tional In-Ceram crowns. Four groups of 10 uniform
sized all-ceramic anterior crowns were fabricated for
this test: (1) In-Ceram Spinell (2) In-Ceram Alumina
(3) Celay In-Ceram Spinell, and (4) Celay In-Ceram
Alumina crowns. All specimens were cemented on
stainless steel master die with resin cement and
stored in 37 °C water for one day prior to loading
into a universal testing machine. Using a steel ball at
a crosshead speed of 0á5 mm min)1, the crowns were
loaded at 30 °C angle until catastrophic failure
Introduction
There has been increasing interest in all-ceramic restor-
ations as more techniques have become available.
However, the fracture resistance of all-ceramic crowns
remains a concern for clinical success (ProÈbster & Diehl,
1992). The In-Ceram systemÒ*, described by Sadoun
in 1984, uses a reinforcing aluminium oxide core to
provide enhanced mechanical properties (ProÈbster,
3 1992; Giodano et al., 1995). The fabrication of the
In-Ceram core is accomplished in a two-step procedure:
First, a sintered alumina framework is created in a slip-
casting process using a duplicate plaster die. Second, this
porous framework is in®ltrated with molten glass. Very
densely stacked alumina particles lead to dispersion
strengthening of the ceramic. The resulting bending
strengths are the highest reported for dental ceram-
ics(Seghi et al., 1990; Giodano et al., 1995; Seghi &
Sorensen, 1995), and the aluminous core provides an
enhanced structural support while retaining some trans-
*Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad SaÈckingen, Germany.
Ó 2001 Blackwell Science Ltd
occurred. Mean fracture strength was analysed and
compared. Under the conditions of this study and
the materials used, the following conclusions were
drawn: 1. The strength of Celay In-Ceram anterior
crowns had a slightly higher fracture strength
than conventional In-Ceram crowns. 2. In-Ceram
Alumina crowns had a signi®cantly higher fracture
strength than In-Ceram Spinell crowns in both
conventional and copy milling methods.
2 Keywords: In-Ceram, celay, copy-milling, alumina,
spinel, fracture strength
lucency and offering good marginal integrity (Pera et al.,
1994).
The aesthetics and strengths of In-Ceram has
increased by using other core materials instead of
aluminium oxide core. For example, by substituting
aluminium oxide with magnesium aluminate
(MgAl2O4) spinel, the In-Ceram resulted in an
improved translucency, partly because of the crystalline
habit of the spinel and lower index of refraction
compared with alumina. However, the spinel-based
core ceramic was not as strong as the alumina-based
material(Seghi & Sorensen, 1995). Also, an In-Ceram
like ceramic block, optimized for the Celay machine²
that was introduced in 1992, is now available. Under
factory conditions, a porous pre-formed alumina as
strong as many dental porcelains even before glass
in®ltration is manufactured. Copings for single unit
crowns and frameworks for simple ®xed partial den-
4 tures are machined from these blocks with the Celay
machine and then in®ltrated with glass. The completed
²
Mikrona AG, Spreitenbach, Switzerland.
678
1 FRACTURE STRENGTH OF COPY-MILLED IN-CERAM CROWNS 679

core is then veneered with aluminous porcelain

(Vitadur Alpha³).
The purpose of this study was to compare the fracture
resistance of copy-milled and conventional In-Ceram
crowns as well as In-Ceram Spinell§ and In-Ceram
Alumina.

6°
Materials and methods

Die production and crown fabrication

For this study, 10 uniform sized models of maxillary 1mm 1mm

central incisor having a shoulder preparation were
prepared using a stainless steel alloy. The dimensions of
the specimens were similar to those of natural maxillary
incisor. The shoulder width was 1á0 mm at a 6-degree
convergence angle (Fig. 1). To consider all possible
sources of error in the process of manufacturing, the
study followed the clinical procedure. The master dies
were duplicated with the additional type silicone
material (Extrude¶) to form 40 working dies, 10 for
each sample. Two hours later, the impressions were
poured into a type IV dental stone (Silky Rock**).
Twenty incisor dies were used to produce conventional
In-Ceram Alumina and In-Ceram Spinell crowns. The
remaining 20 dies were used for copy-milled In-Ceram
Alumina and Spinell crowns. Accordingly, the 40
working dies were distributed evenly among the 11 with the Celay system (Fig. 2), two layers of die spacer
following four groups:
(i) conventional In-Ceram Alumina crowns.
(ii) Cealy In-Ceram Alumina crowns.
(iii) conventional In-Ceram Spinell crowns.
(iv) Celay In-Ceram Spinell crowns.
The conventional In-Ceram crowns were processed
according to the manufacturer's directions. After
placing one layer of die spacer, the working dies were
duplicated with an additional type silicone (Provil²²) to blank (Vita Celay*** Alumina blank and Spinel blank).
produce the special plaster (In-Ceram special plaster³³) To eliminate the deviation among operators, one
models needed to compensate for the sintering shrink-
age of the slip casting. After covering the models with
the slip-casting alumina and spinel material to form the
crown substructures, they were sintered for 10 h in a
³
Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad SaÈckingen, Germany.
§
Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad SaÈckingen, Germany.
5 ¶Kerr Mfg Co., Romulus, MI, USA.
**Whip Max, Louisville, KY, USA.
²²
Bayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany.
³³
Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad SaÈckingen, Germany.
Fig. 1. Dimension of master die.
special furnace (In-Ceramat§§). All axial surfaces of the
sintered units were 0á5±0á6 mm thick prior to glass
in®ltration. The models were ®red for glass in®ltration
for 4 h at 1100 °C. After glass in®ltration, the excess
glass was removed from all the specimens by grinding
and sandblasting particle abrading (aluminium oxide
50 lm grain/2á5 bar); then, the core was adjusted to
0á5 mm thickness.
For the production of copy-milled In-Ceram core
were applied on the working dies. The prototype resin
copings were directly modelled on the working dies by
using light-activated resin (Celay Tech¶¶). The thick-
ness of these resin patterns was controlled with 0á6 mm
depth former so that the thickness was equal to that of
the conventionally produced cores. The structures were
scanned using the Celay system and simultaneously
milled from industrially sintered alumina and spinel
operator milled all the units following a standardized
routine.
Subsequent to the milling process, the specimens
were removed from the vise and ®nished. Although no
sintering was necessary, the units were glass-in®ltrated
as with the conventional technique. As the pre-fabri-
cated blanks had a higher capillary effect, the glass
§§
Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad SaÈckingen, Germany.
¶¶
Espe, Seefeld, Germany.
***Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad SaÈckingen, Germany.

Ó 2001 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 28; 678±683

680 JUNG-WON HWANG & JAE-HO YANG
Fig. 2. (a) Celay machine, (b) Celay In-Ceram blank.
in®ltration was shortened to 40 min and was per-
formed prior to veneering in a conventional ceramic
furnace. The excess glass was removed in all the
specimens by grinding and sandblasting (aluminium
oxide 50 lm grain/2á5 bar). The core adjusted to
0á5 mm thickness.
Ó 2001 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 28; 678±683
Fig. 3. Dimension of crown.
Following the glass in®ltration, the copings were
veneered with aluminous porcelain for both tech-
niques. To obtain closely identical dimensions, the
dimension shown in Fig. 3 was obtained by two
ceramic ®ring cycles and by adjusting at 22 speci®c
points of the crown. The thickness of crown was
controlled to an accuracy of 0á1 mm.
Loading of the specimens
The crowns were luted to the master metal die using
resin cement (Panavia TC²²²). A constant ®nger pres-
sure was applied for 3 min, and the die was stored at
37 °C distilled water for 24 h. The fracture strength
testing was carried out using a universal testing
machine (Instron 4462³³³) at a crosshead speed of
0á5 mm min)1. The samples were loaded using a ball
instrument with 4 mm in diameter. The load was
applied extra-axially at an angle of 30°, in 1á5 mm
cervically from the centre of incisal edge (Fig. 4). All
crowns were loaded until catastrophic failure occurred.
The testing machine automatically recorded the frac-
ture force, and the fracture pattern was noted. Statis-
tical evaluation was completed with one way ANOVA
(an analysis of variance).
6 ²²²Kuraray Co., Osaka, Japan.
³³³
Instron Co., Canton, MA, USA.
1 FRACTURE STRENGTH OF COPY-MILLED IN-CERAM CROWNS 681

Table 2. Comparative value of fracture strength (N)

Type N Mean s.d. Min Max

In-Ceram A 10 876á19 92á2 792 1065

Celay A 10 984á81 103á67 788 1107
In-Ceram S 10 687á90 90á26 585 848
Celay S 10 706á32 70á59 637 878

N, number; s.d.; standard deviation; Min, minimum; Max,

maximum; In-Ceram A, Conventional In-Ceram Alumina; Celay
A, Celay In-Ceram Alumina; In-Ceram S, Conventional In-Ceram
Spinell; Celay S, Celay In-Ceram Spinell.

Fig. 4. Specimen in place in the universal testing instrument.

Results
The copy-milled In-Ceram Alumina crowns, with the
mean of 984á8 N, showed a signi®cantly higher fracture
strength than the conventionally fabricated crowns
(Tables 1 and 2)(P < 0á05). The mean fracture strength
of conventional In-Ceram Alumina was 876á2 N. The
signi®cant difference could be detected at the 12%
level. In the case of crowns having spinel core, although
Celay In-Ceram Spinell (706á32 ‹ 70á59 N) had slightly
higher fracture strength than conventional In-Ceram Fig. 5. In-Ceram crowns after fracture test.

Spinell (687á90 ‹ 90á26 N), no signi®cant difference in

fracture strength between the two methods was
observed (P > 0á05). In-Ceram crowns having alumina
core showed a signi®cantly higher fracture strength
than those having spinel core in both methods. No
signi®cant difference was observed in the s.d. of the
fracture strength between copy-milling technique and
conventional technique. The fracture initiated from the
loading point and propagated to the labial side(Fig. 5).
Three samples that had fracture strength above 1000 N
showed a two phase fracture mode: a crack initiation
followed by a catastrophic failure.
Discussion
The fracture force of conventional In-Ceram crowns
demonstrated the good mechanical properties of this

Table 1 Fracture load measured (N)

Tooth number In-Ceram A Celay A In-Ceram S Celay S

1 1065á2 1042á0 640á0 636á9

2 832á2 873á7 613á7 729á5
3 849á2 1074á0 717á7 719á5
4 791á7 787á5 620á6 678á2
5 819á2 925á0 708á9 671á9
6 837á9 987á5 636á3 705á7
7 871á6 998á7 847á9 878á4
8 1023á0 1104á0 677á3 648á0
9 809á0 1107á0 584á9 651á9
10 862á9 948á7 831á7 743á2

mean ‹ s.d. 876á19 ‹ 92á2 984á81 ‹ 103á67 687á90 ‹ 90á26 706á32 ‹ 70á59

Ó 2001 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 28; 678±683

682 JUNG-WON HWANG & JAE-HO YANG
material (Kang et al., 1992). ProÈbster (1992) and Rinke
et al. (1995) reported the fracture strength of In-Ceram
Alumina to be 964, 1307 N, respectively. In the present
study, the mean fracture strength of In-Ceram Alumina
was 876 N. The deviations in the reported fracture
forces may be explained by different crown designs,
different wall thickness of the aluminous core, elastic
modulus of die material (Scherrer & de Rijk, 1993), type
of cement (Burke & Watt, 1994; Burke, 1995), diameter
of loading stylus, and loading point and angulation
(Ludwing, 1991). In this study, stainless steel dies were
used as abutments. Several authors used steel or resin
dies for the fracture testing of crowns (Ludwing, 1991;
7 Kang et al., 1992; ProÈbster, 1992). Steel dies are very
rigid and have a higher elastic modulus (E ˆ 7200 GPa)
than dentin (E ˆ 18á3 GPa) so that these dies deform
less, which result in a lower shear stress at the inner
crown surface (Scherrer & de Rijk, 1993). Therefore,
the obtained strength value may be higher than that of
dentin dies. However, metal dies are better for
standardized preparation and in producing identical
physical quality crowns. All crowns were luted with
Panavia TC resin cement. Many studies showed a
strong enhancement of the breaking strength of all-
ceramic crowns bonded to die versus non-bonded
crowns (Doering et al., 1987; Burke, 1995). Feldspathic
porcelain and glass ceramic treated with hydro¯uoric
acid etching followed by the application of silane
coupling agent and resin cements showed a greater
bonding strength than conventional zinc phosphate
cement or glass±ionomer cement (Burke & Watts, 1994;
Burke, 1995). In-Ceram cores are composed of alumina
particle and few silica material less than 5 wt% (Sadoun
8 & Asmussen, 1994), so the use of acid etching and
silane agent are not effective in enhancing the bonding
strength between In-Ceram and Bis-GMA resin cement.
The bonding between alumina and silane coupling
agent is very weak and unstable (Kern & Thompson,
1994). Several studies showed that sandblasting the
inner surface of In-Ceram and luting with phosphate
monomer containing resin cement or tribochemical
silica coating followed by the use of the conventional
Bis-GMA resin cement enhanced the bonding strength
of resin cement (Kern & Thompson, 1994, 1995;
Sadoun & Asmussen, 1994). All the specimens were
loaded into a universal testing machine until catastro-
phic fracture occurred. In this study, an extra-axial
angle of 30° was chosen to observe catastrophic
fracture. Compared with the conventional In-Ceram
Ó 2001 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 28; 678±683
technique, using the industrially sintered alumina core
material led to a higher fracture force. This higher
fracture force can be explained by the fact that the
industrially pre-fabricated In-Ceram core material has
more homogeneous microstructure and 10% higher
¯exural strength (500 Mpa) than the conventional core
material. Rinke et al. (1995) reported that the use of an
industrially sintered alumina core, instead of slip cast
core, did not significantly affect the fracture force of a
pre-molar crown where an axial load was applied.
However, he also reported the increased fracture
strength of anterior Celay In-Ceram crown where
the tensile vector increased. It can be concluded
that the fracture strength of anterior all-ceramic
crown is in¯uenced by the ¯exural strength of the
core.
In-Ceram Alumina showed a signi®cantly higher
fracture strength than In-Ceram Spinell in both meth-
ods. We concluded that the higher fracture strength
was a result of the higher ¯exural strength of the
alumina core. Seghi and Sorensen (1995) reported that
the ¯exural strength of spinel was about 75% of the
alumina core.
Several studies showed that the initial fracture
strength of all-ceramic crowns should be at least
400 N for the anterior region and 600 N for the
9 posterior region (Schwickerath, 1987, 1988). These
values were calculated with the fatigue strength being
about 60% of the initial strength and mean masticatory
forces of anterior and posterior region being 200 and
300 N, respectively. Although these strengths are not
supported with in vivo studies, these values may be
clinically helpful in choosing the type of all-ceramic
crown. According to this study, all samples showed the
fracture strength above 687 N; thus, it can be conclu-
ded that In-Ceram Spinell with improved aesthetics as
well as In-Ceram Alumina have enough strength to be
used in anterior region. The impact test in this study
cannot revive the clinical failure caused by chronic
stress and strain in oral condition. But this test may be
more meaningful in clinical view than ¯exural test. In
all-ceramic crowns that have a dual structure like
In-Ceram, the veneering material as well as core
material can in¯uence the fracture strength (Sorensen
et al., 1992). If there were any defects in veneer, the
fracture resistance will be diminished (McLean et al.,
1994). No fracture patterns like semilunar fracture that
occur in clinical situation were observed in this study. A
semilunar fracture results from a chronic stress and
 1 FRACTURE STRENGTH OF COPY-MILLED IN-CERAM CROWNS
strain, thermal shock, degradation in moist condition
and defects of ceramic. But these conditions were not
simulated in this test. In this study, a wedge type
fracture occurred from the loading point to buccal
cervix. Three samples with the fracture strength above
1000 N showed a two-phase failure pattern where a
crack was followed by catastrophic fracture. These
results were also observed in previous studies
(Dickinson et al., 1989; Ludwing, 1991; ProÈbster,
1992; Rinke et al., 1995). The main advantage of Celay
In-Ceram is the shortened fabrication time. This system
removes the procedure of ceramic processing from
dental laboratory, and hence allows microstructural
control. Copy-milling abbreviates the processes of
special plaster die fabrication, build-up of slip casting
material, and sintering. The process of glass in®ltration
can be performed in a conventional ceramic furnace in
about 40 min. Thus, an In-Ceram crown can be made
in one day by using the Celay system.
Conclusions
Within the conditions and limitations of this study, the
following conclusions can be drawn:
(i) The strength of Celay In-Ceram anterior crowns had
a slightly higher fracture strength than conventional
In-Ceram crowns.
(ii) In-Ceram Alumina crowns had a signi®cantly
higher fracture strength than In-Ceram Spinell crowns
in both conventional and copy milling methods.
(iii) In-Ceram Spinell as well as In-Ceram alumina also
showed enough strength to be used in anterior teeth.
10 References
BURKE , F.J. (1995) The effect of variations in bonding procedure
on fracture resistance of dentin-bonded all-ceramic crowns.
Quintessence International, 26, 293.
BURKE , F.J. & WATTS , D.C. (1994) Fracture resistance of teeth
restored with dentin-bonded crowns. Quintessence International,
25, 335.
DICKINSON, A.J.G., MOORE , B.K., HARRIS , R.K. & DYKEMA , R.W.
(1989) A comparative study of the strength of aluminous
porcelain and all ceramic crowns. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry,
61, 297.
DOERING , J., JENSEN , M.E., SHETH , J., TOLLIVER , D. & CHAN , D.
(1987) Fracture resistance of resin bonded etched-porcelain full
veneer crown. Journal of Dental Research, 66, 207.
Ó 2001 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 28; 678±683
683
GIORDANO , R., PELLETIER , L., CAMPBELL , S. & POBER , R. (1995)
Flexural strength of an infused ceramic, glass-ceramic, and
feldspathic porcelain. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 73, 411.
KANG , S.K., SORENSEN , J.A. & AVERA , S.P. (1992) Fracture
strength of ceramic crown system. Journal of Dental Research,
71, 321.
KERN , M. & THOMPSON , V.P. (1994) Sandblasting and silica coating
of a glass-in®ltrated alumina ceramic: volume loss, morphology,
and changes in the surface composition. Journal of Prosthetic
Dentistry, 71, 453.
KERN , M. & THOMPSON , V.P. (1995) Bonding to glass in®ltrated
alumina ceramic: adhesive methods and their durability. Journal
of Prosthetic Dentistry, 73, 240.
LUDWING , K. (1991) Studies on the ultimate strength of all-
ceramic crown. Dental Laboratory, 5, 647.
MCLEAN
CL EAN , J.W., JEANSONNA , E.E., CHICHE , G.J. & PINAULT , A.
(1994) All-ceramic crowns and foil crowns. In: Esthetics of
Anterior Fixed Prosthodontics (eds G.J. Chiche, & A. Pinault), 1st
edn, p. 97. Quintessence, Chicago, IL.
PERA , P., GILODI , S., BASSI , F. & CAROSSA , S. (1994) In vitro
marginal adaptation of alumina porcelain ceramic crowns.
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 72, 585.
PR oÈBSTER , L. (1992) Compressive strength of two modern all-
ceramic crowns. International Journal of Prosthodontics, 5, 409.
PR oÈBSTER , L. & DIEHL , J. (1992) Slip-casting alumina ceramics
for crown and bridge restorations. Quintessence International,
23, 25.
RINKE , S., HUÈ LS , A. & JAHN , L. (1995) Marginal accuracy and
fracture strength of conventional and copy-milled all-ceramic
crowns. International Journal of Prosthodontics, 8, 303.
SADOUN , M. & ASMUSSEN , E. (1994) Bonding of resin cements to
an aluminous ceramic: a new surface treatment. Dental Mat-
erials, 10, 185.
SCHERRER , S.S. & DE RIJK , W.G. (1993) The fracture resistance of
all-ceramic crowns on supporting structures with different
elastic moduli. International Journal of Prosthodontics, 5, 462.
SCHWICKERATH , H.C. & COCA , I. (1987) Einzelkronen aus Glaske-
ramik. Philipp Journal Restaur Zahnmed, 4, 336.
SCHWICKERATH , H.C. (1988) Vollkeramische BruÈcken-GeruÈste aus
Kern- oder Hartkernmassen. Dental-Laboratory, 36, 1081.
SEGHI , R.R., SORENSEN , J.A., ENGELMAN , M.J., ROUMANAS , E. &
TORRES , T.J. (1990) Flexural strength of new ceramic materials.
Journal of Dental Research, 69, 299.
SEGHI , R.R. & SORENSEN , J.A. (1995) Relative ¯exural strength of
six new ceramic materials. International Journal of Prosthodontics,
8, 239.
SORENSEN , J.A., AVERA , S.P. & FANAUSCU , M.I. (1992) Effect of
veneer porcelain on all-ceramic crown strength. Journal of
Dental Research, 71, 320.
Correspondence: Dr Jae-Ho Yang, Department of Prosthodontics,
College of Dentistry, Seoul National University, 28 Yonkon-Dong
Chongro-Gu, Seoul, 110-749, Korea.
E-Mail: jhoyang@snu.ac.kr