首页> 外文期刊>Brazilian Oral Research >Compressive strength and compressive fatigue limit of conventional and high viscosity posterior resin composites
【24h】

Compressive strength and compressive fatigue limit of conventional and high viscosity posterior resin composites

机译:常规和高粘度后树脂复合材料的抗压强度和抗压疲劳极限

获取原文
           

摘要

The purpose of this study was to compare the compressive strengths and compressive fatigue limits of three posterior composite resins (Filtek P-60, Surefil and Prodigy Condensable) and a universal restorative composite (Z-100). Cylindrical specimens (8 mm in length x 4 mm in diameter) were used. The dynamic test was performed using the staircase method, and the ratio between compressive fatigue limit and compressive resistance was also calculated (n = 15). The compressive strength and compressive fatigue limit data were analyzed by Anova and Tukey’s test. The Z-100 composite demonstrated higher compression strength (307.20 MPa) than Surefil (266.93 MPa) and Prodigy Condensable (222.08 MPa). The resistance of Filtek P-60 (270.44 MPa) was similar to the resistances of Z-100 and Surefil, while Prodigy Condensable presented the lowest compressive strength. In the compressive fatigue limit tests, Filtek P-60 demonstrated a higher value (184.20 MPa) than Prodigy Condensable (155.50 MPa). Surefil (165.74 MPa) and Z-100 (161.22 MPa) presented limits similar to those of Filtek P-60 and Prodigy Condensable. The compressive fatigue limit/compressive strength ratio was 70.01% for Prodigy Condensable, 68.11% for Filtek P-60, 62.09% for Surefil and 52.48% for Z-100. It was concluded that the Z-100 universal composite was more sensitive to the dynamic test than the high viscosity materials.
机译:这项研究的目的是比较三种后复合树脂(Filtek P-60,Surefil和Prodigy可压缩)和通用修复复合材料(Z-100)的抗压强度和抗疲劳极限。使用圆柱形样品(长8毫米x直径4毫米)。使用阶梯法进行动态测试,并计算出压缩疲劳极限与抗压强度之比(n = 15)。通过Anova和Tukey的测试分析了抗压强度和抗压疲劳极限数据。 Z-100复合材料的压缩强度(307.20 MPa)比Surefil(266.93 MPa)和Prodigy Condensable(222.08 MPa)高。 Filtek P-60的电阻(270.44 MPa)与Z-100和Surefil的电阻相似,而Prodigy Condensable的压缩强度最低。在压缩疲劳极限测试中,Filtek P-60的数值(184.20 MPa)比Prodigy Condensable(155.50 MPa)高。 Surefil(165.74 MPa)和Z-100(161.22 MPa)的极限值类似于Filtek P-60和Prodigy Condensable。 Prodigy Condensable的压缩疲劳极限/压缩强度比为70.01%,Filtek P-60为68.11%,Surefil为62.09%,Z-100为52.48%。结论是,Z-100通用复合材料比高粘度材料对动态测试更敏感。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号