A1 Refereed original research article in a scientific journal
Layer structure and load-bearing properties of fibre reinforced composite beam used in cantilever fixed dental prostheses
Authors: Alander Pasi, Perea-Lowery Leila, Vesterinen Kalevi, Suominen Auli, Säilynoja Eija, Vallittu Pekka Kalevi
Publisher: Japanese Society for Dental Materials and Devices
Publication year: 2021
Journal: Dental Materials Journal
Journal name in source: Dental materials journal
Journal acronym: Dent Mater J
Volume: 40
Issue: 1
First page : 165
Last page: 172
ISSN: 0287-4547
eISSN: 1881-1361
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2019-428
Web address : https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2019-428
Abstract
This study evaluates the effect of fiber reinforcement quantity and position on fracture load of fixed dental prostheses specimens with different fibre reinforced composite (FRC)/ particulate filler composite (PFC) ratio in a cantilever beam test. Three types of specimen structures where made: Specimens with FRC, PFC, or with a combination of both. Specimen’s size was 2.0×2.0×25 mm3 and the thicknesses of the FRC layers were 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 mm. The layers of FRC were placed at the top or at the bottom. Eight groups of specimens were evaluated (n=15/group). The test specimens were statically-loaded until fracture. The fracture loads were linearly dependent on the quantity of the FRC reinforcement when placed at the top (R2=0.941) and bottom (R2=0.896) of the specimens. ANOVA revealed that reinforcement position on the tension side and higher FRC reinforcement volume in the test specimens had positive effect to load bearing capacity (p<0.001).
This study evaluates the effect of fiber reinforcement quantity and position on fracture load of fixed dental prostheses specimens with different fibre reinforced composite (FRC)/ particulate filler composite (PFC) ratio in a cantilever beam test. Three types of specimen structures where made: Specimens with FRC, PFC, or with a combination of both. Specimen’s size was 2.0×2.0×25 mm3 and the thicknesses of the FRC layers were 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 mm. The layers of FRC were placed at the top or at the bottom. Eight groups of specimens were evaluated (n=15/group). The test specimens were statically-loaded until fracture. The fracture loads were linearly dependent on the quantity of the FRC reinforcement when placed at the top (R2=0.941) and bottom (R2=0.896) of the specimens. ANOVA revealed that reinforcement position on the tension side and higher FRC reinforcement volume in the test specimens had positive effect to load bearing capacity (p<0.001).
UTU Research Portal