Arthur Simoes Seidler, Lucas Simino de Melo, João Pedro Justino de Oliveira Limirio, Aldieris Alves Pesqueira, Leandro Augusto Hilgert, Rodrigo Antonio de Medeiros
{"title":"使用不同型号的三维打印机比较咬合夹板用三维打印机树脂的机械性能。","authors":"Arthur Simoes Seidler, Lucas Simino de Melo, João Pedro Justino de Oliveira Limirio, Aldieris Alves Pesqueira, Leandro Augusto Hilgert, Rodrigo Antonio de Medeiros","doi":"10.4317/jced.61734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Considering the development of new 3D printing technologies that use different printing techniques, further studies must be conducted to evaluate the impact of different printing systems on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed materials. This study aimed to evaluate the mechanical properties of 3D-printed materials for occlusal devices using different 3D printers and printing layer thicknesses.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Ninety rectangular samples were manufactured and divided into nine groups according to the 3D printer model they were printed on (AnyCubic Mono X, Elegoo Mars 2, or FlashForge Hunter) and the layer thickness (20, 50, or 100 µm) and were subjected to superficial microhardness, flexural resistance, and elasticity modulus tests. The results were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's statistical tests, with a significance level of 5%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The type of 3D printer significantly affected superficial microhardness (<i>p</i> = 0.007). Flexural strength showed a significant interaction between the 3D printer and layer thickness (<i>p</i> = 0.005), with both factors independently influencing flexural strength (printer: <i>p</i>< 0.001, layer thickness: <i>p</i>< 0.001). Elasticity modulus was significantly influenced by the 3D printer type (<i>p</i>< 0.001) and the interaction between both factors (<i>p</i> = 0.004). The AnyCubic Mono X 3D printer with a 20 µm layer thickness exhibited more consistent mechanical properties than the other printers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Variations in printing systems and layer thicknesses can impact the mechanical properties of 3D-printed materials. <b>Key words:</b>CAD-CAM. Bruxism. Temporomandibular disorders. Mechanical tests; 3-D printing.Care Team.</p>","PeriodicalId":15376,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","volume":"16 9","pages":"e1067-e1071"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11470457/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of mechanical properties of 3D printer resins for occlusal splints using different models of 3D printers.\",\"authors\":\"Arthur Simoes Seidler, Lucas Simino de Melo, João Pedro Justino de Oliveira Limirio, Aldieris Alves Pesqueira, Leandro Augusto Hilgert, Rodrigo Antonio de Medeiros\",\"doi\":\"10.4317/jced.61734\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Considering the development of new 3D printing technologies that use different printing techniques, further studies must be conducted to evaluate the impact of different printing systems on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed materials. This study aimed to evaluate the mechanical properties of 3D-printed materials for occlusal devices using different 3D printers and printing layer thicknesses.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Ninety rectangular samples were manufactured and divided into nine groups according to the 3D printer model they were printed on (AnyCubic Mono X, Elegoo Mars 2, or FlashForge Hunter) and the layer thickness (20, 50, or 100 µm) and were subjected to superficial microhardness, flexural resistance, and elasticity modulus tests. The results were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's statistical tests, with a significance level of 5%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The type of 3D printer significantly affected superficial microhardness (<i>p</i> = 0.007). Flexural strength showed a significant interaction between the 3D printer and layer thickness (<i>p</i> = 0.005), with both factors independently influencing flexural strength (printer: <i>p</i>< 0.001, layer thickness: <i>p</i>< 0.001). Elasticity modulus was significantly influenced by the 3D printer type (<i>p</i>< 0.001) and the interaction between both factors (<i>p</i> = 0.004). The AnyCubic Mono X 3D printer with a 20 µm layer thickness exhibited more consistent mechanical properties than the other printers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Variations in printing systems and layer thicknesses can impact the mechanical properties of 3D-printed materials. <b>Key words:</b>CAD-CAM. Bruxism. Temporomandibular disorders. Mechanical tests; 3-D printing.Care Team.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"16 9\",\"pages\":\"e1067-e1071\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11470457/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.61734\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.61734","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:考虑到使用不同打印技术的新型三维打印技术的发展,必须开展进一步研究,以评估不同打印系统对三维打印材料力学性能的影响。本研究旨在评估使用不同 3D 打印机和打印层厚度的咬合装置 3D 打印材料的机械性能:根据打印的三维打印机型号(AnyCubic Mono X、Elegoo Mars 2 或 FlashForge Hunter)和打印层厚度(20、50 或 100 µm),制作了 90 个矩形样品并将其分为九组,分别进行表面显微硬度、抗弯强度和弹性模量测试。结果采用双向方差分析和 Tukey 统计检验进行分析,显著性水平为 5%:结果:3D 打印机的类型对表面显微硬度有明显影响(p = 0.007)。挠曲强度在三维打印机和层厚度之间存在显著的交互作用(p = 0.005),这两个因素对挠曲强度都有独立影响(打印机:p< 0.001,层厚度:p< 0.001)。弹性模量受三维打印机类型(p< 0.001)和两个因素交互作用(p = 0.004)的显著影响。与其他打印机相比,层厚为 20 µm 的 AnyCubic Mono X 三维打印机表现出更一致的机械性能:结论:打印系统和打印层厚度的变化会影响三维打印材料的机械性能。关键词:CAD-CAM。磨牙症。颞下颌关节紊乱。机械测试;3-D 打印。
Comparison of mechanical properties of 3D printer resins for occlusal splints using different models of 3D printers.
Background: Considering the development of new 3D printing technologies that use different printing techniques, further studies must be conducted to evaluate the impact of different printing systems on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed materials. This study aimed to evaluate the mechanical properties of 3D-printed materials for occlusal devices using different 3D printers and printing layer thicknesses.
Material and methods: Ninety rectangular samples were manufactured and divided into nine groups according to the 3D printer model they were printed on (AnyCubic Mono X, Elegoo Mars 2, or FlashForge Hunter) and the layer thickness (20, 50, or 100 µm) and were subjected to superficial microhardness, flexural resistance, and elasticity modulus tests. The results were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's statistical tests, with a significance level of 5%.
Results: The type of 3D printer significantly affected superficial microhardness (p = 0.007). Flexural strength showed a significant interaction between the 3D printer and layer thickness (p = 0.005), with both factors independently influencing flexural strength (printer: p< 0.001, layer thickness: p< 0.001). Elasticity modulus was significantly influenced by the 3D printer type (p< 0.001) and the interaction between both factors (p = 0.004). The AnyCubic Mono X 3D printer with a 20 µm layer thickness exhibited more consistent mechanical properties than the other printers.
Conclusions: Variations in printing systems and layer thicknesses can impact the mechanical properties of 3D-printed materials. Key words:CAD-CAM. Bruxism. Temporomandibular disorders. Mechanical tests; 3-D printing.Care Team.
期刊介绍:
Indexed in PUBMED, PubMed Central® (PMC) since 2012 and SCOPUSJournal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is an Open Access (free access on-line) - http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/indice.htm. The aim of the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is: - Periodontology - Community and Preventive Dentistry - Esthetic Dentistry - Biomaterials and Bioengineering in Dentistry - Operative Dentistry and Endodontics - Prosthetic Dentistry - Orthodontics - Oral Medicine and Pathology - Odontostomatology for the disabled or special patients - Oral Surgery