论文部分内容阅读
目的研究7种不同的光复合树脂热循环试验后的机械性能,探讨各性能之间的关系。方法将每种树脂(A110:AH、ESTELITE∑:ET、AELITE:AT、Z250:ZS、CharmFil plus:CP、Z350:ZH、Grandio:GD,其中AH、ET为微充填复合树脂,AT、ZS、CP为混合型复合树脂,ZH、GD为纳米型复合树脂)制成直径为12 mm,厚度为1.0 mm的实验样本。所得样本在37℃的蒸馏水中浸泡24 h,然后在5℃和55℃下间隔15 s冷热循环1 000次。应用尖端速率为0.5 mm/min的双轴挠曲强度试验测量材料的强度值(ISO4049),所得数据采用Weibull和ANOVA统计学分析。样本断面经扫描电镜观察,剩余样本碎片经Knoop硬度试验测试(负载50 g,时间10 s)。结果最高和最低的Weibull系数值分别出现在AH(18.752)和AT(5.290)组,最高和最低的双轴挠曲强度值分别出现在ZS(158.2MPa)和ET(54.0 MPa)组。不同填料的强度值大小依次为混合型复合树脂>纳米型复合树脂>微充填复合树脂,具有相同类型填料的复合树脂之间的强度值差异没有统计学意义(P>0.05),且强度试验所得碎片的数量与材料强度大小成正相关。GD组的硬度值最大(110.81±14.77)kg/mm2,AH组平均硬度值最小(42.81±1.91)kg/mm2,复合树脂的强度值与硬度值成正相关。扫描电镜观察显示树脂基质和填料之间是裂痕形成的薄弱部位。结论纳米型复合树脂比混合型复合树脂更适于临床应用。Knoop硬度实验是否适用于复合树脂材料的硬度测量还需要进一步证实。
Objective To study the mechanical properties of seven different kinds of composite resin after thermal cycling test, and to explore the relationship between each performance. Methods Each resin (A110: AH, ESTELITEΣ: ET, AELITE: AT, Z250: ZS, CharmFil plus: CP, Z350: ZH, Grandio: GD, CP mixed composite resin, ZH, GD nano-composite resin) made of 12 mm in diameter, a thickness of 1.0 mm of the experimental sample. The resulting sample was soaked in distilled water at 37 ° C for 24 h and then circulated for 1 000 cycles at 5 ° C and 55 ° C for 15 s. The biaxial flexural strength test at a tip speed of 0.5 mm / min was used to measure the strength of the material (ISO 4049) and the data was statistically analyzed using Weibull and ANOVA. The cross section of the sample was observed by scanning electron microscopy. The remaining sample fragments were tested by Knoop hardness test (load 50 g, time 10 s). Results The highest and lowest Weibull coefficient values appeared in the AH (18.752) and AT (5.290) groups, respectively. The highest and lowest biaxial flexural strength values appeared in the ZS (158.2 MPa) and ET (54.0 MPa) groups, respectively. The strength values of different fillers were mixed composite resin> nano-composite resin> micro-filled composite resin, and the composite resin with the same type of filler had no statistical difference in strength value (P> 0.05) The number of fragments is positively related to the strength of the material. The hardness of GD group was the highest (110.81 ± 14.77) kg / mm2, while that of AH group was the lowest (42.81 ± 1.91) kg / mm2. The strength of composite resin was positively correlated with the hardness value. Scanning electron microscopy showed a weak area between the resin matrix and the filler, which was formed by the crack. Conclusion Nanocomposite resin is more suitable for clinical application than mixed compound resin. Knoop hardness test is applicable to the composite resin hardness measurement needs further confirmed.