Abstract
Objectives: Evaluate the effect of testing system compliance on polymerization stress and stress distribution of composites. Methods: Composites tested were Filtek Z250 (FZ), Herculite (HL), Tetric Ceram (TC), Helio Fill-AP (HF) and Heliomolar (HM). Stress was determined in 1-mm thick specimens, inserted between two rods of either poly(methyl methacrylate), PMMA, or glass. Experimental nominal stress (σexp) was calculated by dividing the maximum force recorded 5 min after photoactivation by the cross-sectional area of the rod. Composites' elastic modulus (E) was obtained by three-point bending. Data were submitted to one-way ANOVA/Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Stress distribution on longitudinal (σy) and transverse (σx) axes of models representing the composites with the highest and lowest E (FZ and HM, respectively) were evaluated by finite element analysis (FEA). Results: σexp ranged from 5.5 to 8.8 MPa in glass and from 2.6 to 3.4 MPa in PMMA. Composite ranking was not identical in both substrates, since FZ showed σexp statistically higher than HM in glass, while in PMMA FZ showed values similar to the other composites. A strong correlation was found between stress reduction (%) from glass to PMMA and composite's E (r2 = 0.946). FEA revealed that system compliance was influenced by the composite (FZ led to higher compliance than HM). σx distribution was similar in both substrates, while σy distribution showed larger areas of compressive stresses in specimens built on PMMA. Significance: σexp determined in PMMA was 53-68% lower than in glass. Composite ranking varied slightly due to differences in substrates' longitudinal and transverse deformation.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 645-652 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Dental Materials |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - May 2008 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Finite element analysis
- Polymerization stress
- Resin composite
- Three-point bending
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Dentistry(all)
Cite this
Polymerization stress of resin composites as a function of system compliance. / Gonçalves, Flavia; Pfeifer, Carmem; Meira, Josete B C; Ballester, Rafael Y.; Lima, Raul G.; Braga, Roberto R.
In: Dental Materials, Vol. 24, No. 5, 05.2008, p. 645-652.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Polymerization stress of resin composites as a function of system compliance
AU - Gonçalves, Flavia
AU - Pfeifer, Carmem
AU - Meira, Josete B C
AU - Ballester, Rafael Y.
AU - Lima, Raul G.
AU - Braga, Roberto R.
PY - 2008/5
Y1 - 2008/5
N2 - Objectives: Evaluate the effect of testing system compliance on polymerization stress and stress distribution of composites. Methods: Composites tested were Filtek Z250 (FZ), Herculite (HL), Tetric Ceram (TC), Helio Fill-AP (HF) and Heliomolar (HM). Stress was determined in 1-mm thick specimens, inserted between two rods of either poly(methyl methacrylate), PMMA, or glass. Experimental nominal stress (σexp) was calculated by dividing the maximum force recorded 5 min after photoactivation by the cross-sectional area of the rod. Composites' elastic modulus (E) was obtained by three-point bending. Data were submitted to one-way ANOVA/Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Stress distribution on longitudinal (σy) and transverse (σx) axes of models representing the composites with the highest and lowest E (FZ and HM, respectively) were evaluated by finite element analysis (FEA). Results: σexp ranged from 5.5 to 8.8 MPa in glass and from 2.6 to 3.4 MPa in PMMA. Composite ranking was not identical in both substrates, since FZ showed σexp statistically higher than HM in glass, while in PMMA FZ showed values similar to the other composites. A strong correlation was found between stress reduction (%) from glass to PMMA and composite's E (r2 = 0.946). FEA revealed that system compliance was influenced by the composite (FZ led to higher compliance than HM). σx distribution was similar in both substrates, while σy distribution showed larger areas of compressive stresses in specimens built on PMMA. Significance: σexp determined in PMMA was 53-68% lower than in glass. Composite ranking varied slightly due to differences in substrates' longitudinal and transverse deformation.
AB - Objectives: Evaluate the effect of testing system compliance on polymerization stress and stress distribution of composites. Methods: Composites tested were Filtek Z250 (FZ), Herculite (HL), Tetric Ceram (TC), Helio Fill-AP (HF) and Heliomolar (HM). Stress was determined in 1-mm thick specimens, inserted between two rods of either poly(methyl methacrylate), PMMA, or glass. Experimental nominal stress (σexp) was calculated by dividing the maximum force recorded 5 min after photoactivation by the cross-sectional area of the rod. Composites' elastic modulus (E) was obtained by three-point bending. Data were submitted to one-way ANOVA/Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Stress distribution on longitudinal (σy) and transverse (σx) axes of models representing the composites with the highest and lowest E (FZ and HM, respectively) were evaluated by finite element analysis (FEA). Results: σexp ranged from 5.5 to 8.8 MPa in glass and from 2.6 to 3.4 MPa in PMMA. Composite ranking was not identical in both substrates, since FZ showed σexp statistically higher than HM in glass, while in PMMA FZ showed values similar to the other composites. A strong correlation was found between stress reduction (%) from glass to PMMA and composite's E (r2 = 0.946). FEA revealed that system compliance was influenced by the composite (FZ led to higher compliance than HM). σx distribution was similar in both substrates, while σy distribution showed larger areas of compressive stresses in specimens built on PMMA. Significance: σexp determined in PMMA was 53-68% lower than in glass. Composite ranking varied slightly due to differences in substrates' longitudinal and transverse deformation.
KW - Finite element analysis
KW - Polymerization stress
KW - Resin composite
KW - Three-point bending
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=40749153447&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=40749153447&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.dental.2007.06.032
DO - 10.1016/j.dental.2007.06.032
M3 - Article
VL - 24
SP - 645
EP - 652
JO - Dental Materials
JF - Dental Materials
SN - 0109-5641
IS - 5
ER -