Full-text resources of PSJD and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl
Preferences help
Polish version English version Language
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results

Results found: 5

Number of results on page
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Nanomechanical Behaviour and Surface Roughness of New Generation Dental Fissure Sealants

100%
Arslanoğlu Z., Altan H., Kale E., Bılgıç F., Şahin O.
Acta Physica Polonica A
|
2016
|
vol. 130
|
issue 1
388-393
EN
The aim of this study is the comparative evaluation of surface roughness, elastic modulus and hardness values of some new generation fissure sealants using nanoindentation method and triboindenter. In this study, we have tested five different materials of dental fissure sealant in five groups with six specimens in each. Tested specimens were prepared from the following materials; Fuji Triage as a glass ionomer, Glass Seal as a glass carbomer, Ultra Seal XT Hydro, Teethmate F-1 and Defence Chroma as three resin composites. In the study, Hysitron Triboindenter TI 950 machine was used for nanohardness measurements. This machine has load resolution of less than 1 nN and displacement resolution of 0.04 nm. Data were statistically analysed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z tests. Hardness values of Fuji Triage, Glass Seal, Ultra Seal XT Hydro were fairly close. Same situation was seen between Teethmate F-1 and Defence Chroma. However, hardness values of the Teethmate F-1 and Defence Chroma was lower than in other examined materials. We can also say that the Defence Chroma has the lowest elastic modulus and Fuji Triage has the highest one among the examined materials. Surface of Teethmate F-1 was the roughest. On the other hand, Ultra Seal XT Hydro has the smoothest surface.
2
Content available remote

Evaluation of Surface Properties of Four Tooth-Colored Restorative Materials

100%
Arslanoglu Z., Altan H., Sahin O., Tekin M., Adigüzel M.
Acta Physica Polonica A
|
2015
|
vol. 128
|
issue 2B
B-310-B-313
EN
The aim of this study is to compare microhardness, roughness and micromorphology of the examined materials of a newly developed glass carbomer dental filling material to two different resin modified glass ionomers and a glass ionomer dental filling material. Specimens tested were prepared from a glass carbomer without gloss (Glass Carbomer, GCP), a glass carbomer (Glass Carbomer, GCP) with gloss, two different resin modified glass ionomers (Fuji II LC, GC and Riva LC, SDI) and a glass ionomer (Equia, GC). Seven specimens of each material were prepared according to manufacturer's recommendations. After setting, samples were polished and stored in 37°C distilled water for 24 h. Indentation microhardness of examined restorative materials was measured using the Vickers indenters. In addition surface roughness of the materials was measured using surface profilemeter. Surface morphology was analyzed by using scanning electron microscopy. There was a significant difference in microhardness and roughness between the restorative materials (p<0.05). The highest microhardness was measured for Equia and lowest for glass carbomer with gloss. The roughness was fully definite for the glass carbomer with gloss and indefinite for the glass carbomer without gloss. Small cracks and voids were observed in all groups. High viscosity glass ionomer cement Equia exhibits the high physical strength than RMGIC. Gloss application does not influence the hardness behavior of GCP.
3
Content available remote

Effects of Third-generation LED LCU on Nanomechanical Properties of Orthodontic Adhesives

86%
Bilgic F., Altan H., Akinci Sözer Ö., Arslanoglu Z., Kale E., Özarslan S.
Acta Physica Polonica A
|
2017
|
vol. 132
|
issue 3
697-701
EN
The aim of this study was to compare the hardness and elastic modulus of orthodontic adhesives cured with different light-curing units, based on light-emitting diodes. Standardized samples of orthodontic adhesives, Transbond™ XT, Opal® Bond™ and Light Bond™ were prepared in cylinder blocks and cured for three seconds with Valo Ortho LED (Ultradent Products, South Jordan, Utah) and Valo LED High-Power Mode. After grinding and polishing, specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for one day. Specimens were investigated using nanoindenter. Employment of Valo Ortho unit has resulted in significantly higher elastic modules for Transbond™ XT (p=0.041). The highest nanohardness and elastic modules were measured for Transbond™ XT cured with Valo Ortho (9.47 GPa; 81.85 GPa, respectively) and lowest for Opal® Bond™ for both Valo Ortho (0.44 GPa; 14.52 GPa, respectively) and Valo High-Power groups (0.44 GPa; 11.84 GPa, respectively).
4
Content available remote

Nanomechanical Properties of Different Dental Restorative Materials

86%
Altan H., Bilgic F., Arslanoglu Z., Kale E., Köroğlu Kale A., Altan A., Sahin O.
Acta Physica Polonica A
|
2016
|
vol. 130
|
issue 1
394-396
EN
The aim of this study is to determine the hardness and roughness of glass ionomer cement, glass carbomer, and compomer by nanoindentation. Three different dental restorative materials: glass ionomer cement, glass carbomer cement, and compomer were used. Disc specimens (10 mm × 1 mm) were prepared from each material using teflon mold. All specimens were light cured according to the manufacturer's instructions. The specimens were then mounted in polyacrilic resin. After grinding and polishing the specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 1 day. The specimens were investigated using nanoindenter. The highest nanohardness was measured for glass ionomer cement and the lowest for glass carbomer. Regarding roughness, glass ionomer cement and compomer showed the highest mean values. Glass ionomer cement and compomer exhibited similar nanomechanical properties. Glass carbomer had superior ability to be polished up.
5
Content available remote

Nanomechanical Comparison of Commonly Used Dental Crown Cements to a Newly Developed One

86%
Kale E., Arslanoğlu Z., Altan H., Bılgıç F., Tuzlali M., Köroğlu A., Özarslan S.
Acta Physica Polonica A
|
2017
|
vol. 132
|
issue 3
954-958
EN
The main goal of nanoindentation tests is to obtain elastic modulus and hardness of the specimen material from load-displacement measurements. With this study, it was aimed to establish a quantitative relationship between the nanomechanical properties of commonly used dental cements in comparison to a newly developed crown cement and to predict its performance potential. Nanomechanical properties of polycarboxylate cement (PCC), glass-ionomer cement (GIC), dual-cure self-adhesive cement (SAC) and a newly developed glass-carbomer cement (GCC) were investigated by nanoindentation tests. All samples were fabricated according to their respective manufacturer's instructions. Available damage on the surface due to manipulation was removed by grinding with 1200, 2400 and 4000 grit sandpaper, and then polishing on 6, 3, and 1 μm diamond-lap-wheel was performed. Nano-mechanical measurements were done using nanoindenter machine with resolution less than 1 nN and displacement resolution of 0.04 nm. Berkovich diamond indenter tip was used for the nanoindentation tests. For each indentation, a set of nanoindentation tests at least on 6 different locations per specimen surface were performed to obtain more representative mean results. Indentation test load-displacement curves were analysed using Oliver-Pharr method, and one-way ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis test, following Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk, was used to compare the results. Nanohardness (H_{nano}) values were 0.52± 0.25, 0.45± 0.18, 1.03± 0.82 and 0.43± 0.18 GPa for GIC, GCC, PCC, and SAC, respectively. Reduced elastic modulus (E_{r}) values were 9.51± 6.17, 11.77± 5.04, 27.37± 20.61, 10.33± 5.08 GPa for GIC, GCC, PCC, and SAC, respectively. There was no statistical difference between the tested materials. PCC was the hardest, and GIC was the least hard material, whereas the newly developed GCC was the second, in terms of H_{nano}, before SAC. PCC also had the highest E_{r} mean, compared to the other dental crown cements, suggesting lower elastic properties. SAC was more elastic than GCC and less elastic than GIC. GCC had the second highest E_{r}, standing closer to SAC and GIC. Within the limitations of the current study, it can be concluded that the newly developed glass-carbomer cement is comparable to the other tested commonly used dental crown cements, regarding H_{nano} and E_{r}.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.