Cargando…

Effect of interface surface design on the fracture behavior of bilayered composites

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different interface designs on the load‐bearing capacity of bilayered composite structures (BLS). Cylindrical specimens of BLS were prepared from base composite of 3.5 mm thickness and surface composite of 1.5 mm thickness (n = 80). Two different base compo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Omran, Tarek A., Garoushi, Sufyan, Lassila, Lippo V., Vallittu, Pekka K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6617810/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31002749
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eos.12617
_version_ 1783433775805366272
author Omran, Tarek A.
Garoushi, Sufyan
Lassila, Lippo V.
Vallittu, Pekka K.
author_facet Omran, Tarek A.
Garoushi, Sufyan
Lassila, Lippo V.
Vallittu, Pekka K.
author_sort Omran, Tarek A.
collection PubMed
description This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different interface designs on the load‐bearing capacity of bilayered composite structures (BLS). Cylindrical specimens of BLS were prepared from base composite of 3.5 mm thickness and surface composite of 1.5 mm thickness (n = 80). Two different base composites – flowable bulk‐fill (FBF) [smart dentin replacement (SDR)] and short fiber‐reinforced (FRC) (everX Posterior) – were evaluated, and conventional composite (G‐ænial Posterior) was used as the surface layer. Four different interface designs were used: (i) pyramidal; (ii) mesh; (iii) linear grooves; and (iv) flat surface (control). Three‐dimensional printed molds were fabricated to standardize the interface design between the surface and the base composites. The specimens were then statically loaded with a steel ball until fracture using a universal testing machine. Fracture types were classified into catastrophic, complete, and partial bulk. anova revealed that both the material and the interface design had a statistically significant effect on the load‐bearing capacity. Flowable bulk‐fill showed lower mean load‐bearing capacity than FRC in all the interface designs tested, except for the flat surface design. Fracture analysis showed that FRC demonstrated up to 100% partial bulk fractures with the pyramid interface design, but no incidence of catastrophic bulk fracture. By contrast, FBF demonstrated up to 84.6% and 40% catastrophic bulk fractures with the flat interface design but no incidence of partial bulk fracture. Consequently, the interface designs studied enhanced the fracture behavior of BLS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6617810
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66178102019-07-22 Effect of interface surface design on the fracture behavior of bilayered composites Omran, Tarek A. Garoushi, Sufyan Lassila, Lippo V. Vallittu, Pekka K. Eur J Oral Sci Original Articles This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different interface designs on the load‐bearing capacity of bilayered composite structures (BLS). Cylindrical specimens of BLS were prepared from base composite of 3.5 mm thickness and surface composite of 1.5 mm thickness (n = 80). Two different base composites – flowable bulk‐fill (FBF) [smart dentin replacement (SDR)] and short fiber‐reinforced (FRC) (everX Posterior) – were evaluated, and conventional composite (G‐ænial Posterior) was used as the surface layer. Four different interface designs were used: (i) pyramidal; (ii) mesh; (iii) linear grooves; and (iv) flat surface (control). Three‐dimensional printed molds were fabricated to standardize the interface design between the surface and the base composites. The specimens were then statically loaded with a steel ball until fracture using a universal testing machine. Fracture types were classified into catastrophic, complete, and partial bulk. anova revealed that both the material and the interface design had a statistically significant effect on the load‐bearing capacity. Flowable bulk‐fill showed lower mean load‐bearing capacity than FRC in all the interface designs tested, except for the flat surface design. Fracture analysis showed that FRC demonstrated up to 100% partial bulk fractures with the pyramid interface design, but no incidence of catastrophic bulk fracture. By contrast, FBF demonstrated up to 84.6% and 40% catastrophic bulk fractures with the flat interface design but no incidence of partial bulk fracture. Consequently, the interface designs studied enhanced the fracture behavior of BLS. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-04-19 2019-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6617810/ /pubmed/31002749 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eos.12617 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Eur J Oral Sci published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Omran, Tarek A.
Garoushi, Sufyan
Lassila, Lippo V.
Vallittu, Pekka K.
Effect of interface surface design on the fracture behavior of bilayered composites
title Effect of interface surface design on the fracture behavior of bilayered composites
title_full Effect of interface surface design on the fracture behavior of bilayered composites
title_fullStr Effect of interface surface design on the fracture behavior of bilayered composites
title_full_unstemmed Effect of interface surface design on the fracture behavior of bilayered composites
title_short Effect of interface surface design on the fracture behavior of bilayered composites
title_sort effect of interface surface design on the fracture behavior of bilayered composites
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6617810/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31002749
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eos.12617
work_keys_str_mv AT omrantareka effectofinterfacesurfacedesignonthefracturebehaviorofbilayeredcomposites
AT garoushisufyan effectofinterfacesurfacedesignonthefracturebehaviorofbilayeredcomposites
AT lassilalippov effectofinterfacesurfacedesignonthefracturebehaviorofbilayeredcomposites
AT vallittupekkak effectofinterfacesurfacedesignonthefracturebehaviorofbilayeredcomposites