Disclosing Agent for Resin Composite Based on Adsorption Surface Treatment

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (9) ◽  
pp. 7222-7233
Author(s):  
Yara Oweis ◽  
Amir El-Hadad ◽  
Mohamed Mezour ◽  
Mohamed-Nur Abdallah ◽  
Jean Retrouvey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Adsorption Surface

scholarly journals Effect of sizing agent on interfacial properties of carbon fiber-reinforced PMMA composite

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 2633366X2097865
Author(s):  
Li Jian
Keyword(s):  
Shear Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Photoelectron Spectroscopy ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Contact Angles ◽  
Static Contact ◽  
Before And After ◽  
C Value ◽  
Interlayer Shear Strength ◽  
Pmma Resin

The surface treatment of carbon fibers (CFs) was carried out using a self-synthesized sizing agent. The effects of sizing agent on the surface of CFs and the interface properties of CF/polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) composites were mainly studied. Scanning electron microscopy, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and static contact angle were used to compare and study the CFs before and after the surface treatment, including surface morphology, surface chemical element composition, and wettability of the surface. The influence of sizing agent on the mechanical properties of CF/PMMA resin composite interface was investigated. The results show that after sizing treatment, the CF surface O/C value increased by 35.1% and the contact angles of CF and resin decreased by 16.2%. The interfacial shear strength and interlayer shear strength increased by 12.6%.

scholarly journals Surface Treatment Effect on Shear Bond Strength between Lithium Disilicate Glass-Ceramic and Resin Cement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siripan Simasetha ◽  
Awiruth Klaisiri ◽  
Tool Sriamporn ◽  
Kraisorn Sappayatosok ◽  
Niyom Thamrongananskul
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Glass Ceramic ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Lithium Disilicate ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ceramic Bond

Abstract Objective The study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDGC) and resin cement (RC) using different surface treatments. Materials and Methods LDGC blocks (Vintage LD Press) were prepared, etched with 4.5% hydrofluoric acid, and randomly divided into seven groups (n = 10), depending on the surface treatments. The groups were divided as follows: 1) no surface treatment (control), 2) Silane Primer (KS), 3) Signum Ceramic Bond I (SGI), 4) Signum Ceramic Bond I/Signum Ceramic Bond II (SGI/SGII), 5) experimental silane (EXP), 6) experimental silane/Signum Ceramic Bond II (EXP/SGII), and 7) Experimental/Adper Scotchbond Multi-purpose Adhesive (EXP/ADP). The specimens were cemented to resin composite blocks with resin cement and stored in water at 37 °C for 24 hours. The specimens underwent 5,000 thermal cycles and were subjected to the SBS test. Mode of failure was evaluated under the stereo microscope. Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed with Welch ANOVA and Games-Howell post hoc tests (α = 0.05). Results The highest mean SBS showed in group EXP/ADP (45.49 ± 3.37 MPa); however, this was not significantly different from group EXP/SGII (41.38 ± 2.17 MPa) (p ≥ 0.05). The lowest SBS was shown in the control group (18.36 ± 0.69 MPa). This was not significantly different from group KS (20.17 ± 1.10 MPa) (p ≥ 0.05). Conclusions The different surface treatments significantly affected the SBS value between LDGC and RC. The application of pure silane coupling agent with or without the application of an adhesive improved the SBS value and bond quality.

Effect of Argon Plasma Surface Treatment on Bond Strength of Resin Composite Repair

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. E75-E82 ◽  
Author(s):  
APA Ayres ◽  
R Hirata ◽  
BM Fronza ◽  
BB Lopes ◽  
GMB Ambrosano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Argon Plasma ◽  
Composite Plates ◽  
Composite Surface ◽  
Group 4 ◽  
One Year ◽  
Aged Composite

SUMMARY Objectives: This study evaluated the effect of argon plasma treatment (PLA) and its combination with sandblasting (SAN), silanization (SIL), and hydrophobic bonding resin (HBR) application on the micro-shear bond strength of water-aged restorative resin composite to a newly placed composite, simulating restoration repair. Methods and Materials: Forty-five light-cured composite plates (20-mm long × 20-mm wide × 4-mm thick) were fabricated using a hybrid composite and stored at 37°C in distilled water for six months. The aged composite surfaces were treated according to the following experimental groups, varying both treatment and order of application: 1) SAN + SIL + HBR (control), 2) SAN + PLA for 30 seconds + SIL + HBR, 3) SAN + SIL + PLA + HBR, 4) PLA + SIL + HBR, 5) PLA + SIL, 6) PLA + HBR, 7) SIL + PLA + HBR, 8) SIL + PLA, and 9) PLA. After the surface treatments, four fresh resin composite cylinders (1.5-mm high × 1.5-mm diameter) of the same composite were built on each aged composite surface using a silicone mold. After water storage for 24 hours or one year, the specimens were submitted to shear bond strength testing. Data were statistically analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test (5%). Results: Groups 1, 2, and 4 presented significantly higher bond strength means at 24 hours, although group 4 did not differ from group 7. Groups 5, 8, and 9 demonstrated significantly lower means than the other groups. Even though groups 1 and 2 had a significant bond strength reduction after 1 year, they still demonstrated higher bond strength at one year of storage. Conclusions: While PLA application combined with surface treatment methods demonstrated high bond strength results, this treatment alone was not as beneficial as other methods that included SAN, SIL and HBR.

scholarly journals Influence of Different Surface Treatments on Bond Strength of Resin Composite Using the Intrinsic Characterization Technique

2012 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 635-643 ◽  
Author(s):  
DC Barcellos ◽  
MT Palazon ◽  
CR Pucci ◽  
LH Aizawa ◽  
SEP Gonçalves
Keyword(s):  
Phosphoric Acid ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Aluminum Oxide ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
The Other ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Intrinsic Characterization ◽  
Color Pigment

SUMMARY Objective: This study evaluated the influence of different surface treatments on the resin bond strength/light-cured characterizing materials (LCCMs), using the intrinsic characterization technique. The intrinsic technique is characterized by the use of LCCMs between the increments of resin composite (resin/thin film of LCCM/external layer of resin covering the LCCM). Materials and Methods: Using a silicone matrix, 240 blocks of composite (Z350/3M ESPE) were fabricated. The surfaces received different surface treatments, totaling four groups (n=60): Group C (control group), no surface treatment was used; Group PA, 37% phosphoric acid for one minute and washing the surface for two minutes; Group RD, roughening with diamond tip; and Group AO, aluminum oxide. Each group was divided into four subgroups (n=15), according to the LCCMs used: Subgroup WT, White Tetric Color pigment (Ivoclar/Vivadent) LCCM; Subgroup BT, Black Tetric Color pigment (Ivoclar/Vivadent) LCCM; Subgroup WK, White Kolor Plus pigment (Kerr) LCCM; Subgroup BK, Brown Kolor Plus pigment (Kerr) LCCM. All materials were used according to the manufacturer's instructions. After this, block composites were fabricated over the LCCMs. Specimens were sectioned and submitted to microtensile testing to evaluate the bond strength at the interface. Data were submitted to two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) (surface treatment and LCCMs) and Tukey tests. Results: ANOVA presented a value of p<0.05. The mean values (±SD) for the factor surface treatment were as follows: Group C, 30.05 MPa (±5.88)a; Group PA, 23.46 MPa (±5.45)b; Group RD, 21.39 MPa (±6.36)b; Group AO, 15.05 MPa (±4.57)c. Groups followed by the same letters do not present significant statistical differences. The control group presented significantly higher bond strength values than the other groups. The group that received surface treatment with aluminum oxide presented significantly lower bond strength values than the other groups. Conclusion: Surface treatments of composite with phosphoric acid, diamond tip, and aluminum oxide significantly diminished the bond strength between composite and the LCCMs.

scholarly journals Influence of surface treatment on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 54-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ione Helena Vieira Portella Brunharo ◽  
Daniel Jogaib Fernandes ◽  
Mauro Sayão de Miranda ◽  
Flavia Artese
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Aluminum Oxide ◽  
Sodium Bicarbonate ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
Treatment Methods ◽  
Hybrid Resin

INTRODUCTION: The shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to micro-hybrid and micro-particulate resins under different surface treatment methods was assessed. METHODS: Two hundred and eighty test samples were divided into 28 groups (n = 10), where 140 specimens were filled with Durafill micro-particulate resin and 140 with Charisma composite. In 140 samples, a coupling agent (silane) was applied. The surface treatment methods were: Phosphoric and hydrofluoric acid etching, sodium bicarbonate and aluminum oxide blasting, stone and burs. A Universal Instron Machine was used to apply an occlusal shear force directly to the resin composite bracket surface at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. The means were compared using analysis of variance and multivariate regression to assess the interaction between composites and surface treatment methods. RESULTS: Means and standard deviations for the groups were: Sodium bicarbonate jet 11.27±2.78; burs 9.26±3.01; stone 7.95±3.67; aluminum oxide blasting 7.04±3.21; phosphoric acid 5.82±1.90; hydrofluoric acid 4.54±2.87, and without treatment 2.75±1.49. An increase of 1.94 MPa in shear bond strength was seen in Charisma groups. Silane agent application reduced the Charisma shear bond strength by 0.68 Mpa, but increased Durafill means for bicarbonate blasting (0.83), burs (0.98) and stone drilling (0.46). CONCLUSION: The sodium bicarbonate blasting, burs and stone drilling methods produced adequate shear bond strength and may be suitable for clinical use. The Charisma micro hybrid resin composite showed higher shear bond means than Durafill micro particle composite.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document