Some remarks concerning the paper ' Porcelain adherence vs. Force to failure for palladium-gallium alloys: a critique of metal-ceramic bond testing', E. Papazoglou, W. A. brantley (Dent. Mater. 14 (1998) 112-119)

摘要

In their paper the authors undertook the worthy attempt to compare the practicability of two metal-ceramic bond tests, namely a biaxial constant-strain flexure test and the three- point flexure bond test [1] which was proposed by our work- ing group as a replacement for the then current ISO standard 9693 [2]. Whereas in the three-point bending test the bend- ing force leading to failure is measured (to which a bond strength can be assigned), the biaxial flexure test aims to determine the amount of porcelain adhering to the alloy substrate after fracture, in analogy to the former ISO bond test.