Next Article in Journal
Effect of Differential Speed Rotation Technology on the Forming Uniformity in Flexible Rolling Process
Previous Article in Journal
Poisson’s Ratio of Closed-Cell Aluminium Foams
Open AccessArticle

Compatibility of a Silicone Impression/Adhesive System to FDM-Printed Tray Materials—A Laboratory Peel-off Study

1
Section Medical Materials Science & Technology, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
2
Department of Prosthodontics at the Centre of Dentistry, Oral Medicine, and Maxillofacial Surgery with Dental School, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
3
Department of Dental Surgery, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Bolshaya Pirogovskaya Street, 19с1, Moscow 119146, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2018, 11(10), 1905; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11101905
Received: 1 August 2018 / Revised: 21 September 2018 / Accepted: 4 October 2018 / Published: 7 October 2018
(This article belongs to the Section Manufacturing Processes and Systems)
Computer-aided design (CAD) and additive manufacturing (AM) have shown promise in facilitating the fabrication of custom trays. Due to the clinical requirements, custom tray materials should achieve good bonding to the impression/adhesive systems. This study evaluated the retention of three fused deposition modeling (FDM) custom tray materials to a silicone impression/adhesive system before and after gritblasting (GB) by peel-off test. CAD-designed experimental test blocks were printed by FDM using acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), polyethylene terephthalate glycol copolyester (PETG), and high impact polystyrene (HIPS), and the reference test blocks were made of a conventional light-curing resin (n = 11). Before and after GB, the surface topography of all tray materials was analysed, and the maximum strength of the test block peeled off from a silicone impression/adhesive system was measured. After GB, the arithmetic mean height (Sa) and the valley fluid retention index (Svi) of the four material groups declined (p < 0.05). The peel-off strength of each of the four material groups significantly decreased by GB (p < 0.05), but no statistical difference could be found among them before or after GB. In all peel-off tests, adhesive failure occurred at the adhesive-impression material interface. The results indicated ABS, HIPS, and PETG could provide sufficient adhesion to the adhesive as the conventional light-curing resin, and GB could reduce the roughness generated by FDM and weaken the bonding between the adhesive and the silicone impression. View Full-Text
Keywords: additive manufacturing; FDM; custom tray; peel-off strength; surface topography additive manufacturing; FDM; custom tray; peel-off strength; surface topography
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

MDPI and ACS Style

Xu, Y.; Unkovskiy, A.; Klaue, F.; Rupp, F.; Geis-Gerstorfer, J.; Spintzyk, S. Compatibility of a Silicone Impression/Adhesive System to FDM-Printed Tray Materials—A Laboratory Peel-off Study. Materials 2018, 11, 1905.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop