Influence of the Coolant Concentration on the Final Surface Roughness of Chrome-Plated Parts

2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 445-448
Author(s):  
K. R. Muratov ◽  
E. A. Gashev ◽  
T. R. Ablyaz ◽  
M. S. Permyakov
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Final Surface

scholarly journals Comparative study of the surface roughness of Ormocer-based and conventional composites

2003 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 348-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonardo Gonçalves Cunha ◽  
Roberta Caroline Bruschi Alonso ◽  
Paulo Henrique dos Santos ◽  
Mário Alexandre Coelho Sinhoreti
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Statistical Difference ◽  
The Other ◽  
Initial Surface ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Metallic Mold ◽  
Tukey Test ◽  
Final Surface ◽  
Before And After

The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface roughness of two Ormocer-based resin composites before and after mechanical toothbrushing. The study compared the brands Admira and Definite with composites based on conventional monomer systems (Bis-GMA, Bis-EMA, UEDMA e TEGDMA), Z250 and A110. Eight samples of each material with 4mm in diameter and 2mm in height were prepared using a metallic mold. After 24 hours they were polished and examined with a profilometer for measurement of the initial surface roughness (Ra, mm) before mechanical toothbrushing (30,000 cycles). After toothbrushing, the samples were taken to the profilometer once again to check the final surface roughness. The results were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey test (5%). The Admira composite presented a higher mean of surface roughness before toothbrushing (0.132mm), with a statistical difference from the composite A110 (0.082mm). Definite (0.110mm) and Z250 (0.105mm) composites showed no differences between themselves or among the other composites. No statistical differences were observed after toothbrushing between the composites Definite (0.178mm), Z250 (0.187mm), Admira (0.181mm), and A110 (0.193mm). All composites showed a statistically significant increase in the surface roughness after toothbrushing.

Influence of Grinding Wheel Dressing on the Roughness of Final Surface and Cutting Force during GGG60 Grinding

2016 ◽  
Vol 686 ◽  
pp. 218-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Novák ◽  
Natasa Naprstkova ◽  
Hiroshi Kasuga
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Cutting Force ◽  
Surface Integrity ◽  
Cutting Forces ◽  
Geometric Shape ◽  
Grinding Wheel ◽  
Final Surface

Dressing of grinding wheel is important value, which can influence final surface. Therefore, it is necessary to address this issue some attention. Dressing is used for sharpening of clogged and blunted grinding wheel and adjustement of their geometric shape. The article deals with one of the experiments that are carried out in this area at FPTM JEPU in Ústí nad Labem. Experiments refer specifically to impact assessment of dressing size on the final selected values of surface integrity. Within the article, the assessment covered the surface roughness Ra, Rz and Rt. At the same time were also scanned using a dynamometer Kistler components of the cutting forces and even here it was possible to observe the influence of the dressing size of the grinding wheel on these values.

Final surface roughness in reaming holes

2013 ◽  
Vol 33 (9) ◽  
pp. 522-524 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. S. Zheleznov ◽  
S. G. Andreeva
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Final Surface

Influence of Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness of Composite Resins: Polishability of Composite Resins

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. E122-E132 ◽  
Author(s):  
L St-Pierre ◽  
C Martel ◽  
H Crépeau ◽  
MA Vargas
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Threshold Value ◽  
Lower Surface ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Initial Surface ◽  
Final Surface ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
One Step

SUMMARY Objectives: The objective of this in vitro study was to compare, with a threshold value of 200 nm, the surface roughness obtained when using 12 different polishing systems on four different composite resins (microfill, nanofill, and two nanohybrids). Methods and Materials: A total of 384 convex specimens were made using Durafill VS, Filtek Supreme Ultra, Grandio SO, and Venus Pearl. After sandblasting and finishing with a medium-grit finishing disc, initial surface roughness was measured using a surface roughness tester. Specimens were polished using 12 different polishing systems: Astropol, HiLuster Plus, D♦Fine, Diacomp, ET Illustra, Sof-Lex Wheels, Sof-Lex XT discs, Super-Snap, Enhance/Pogo, Optrapol, OneGloss and ComposiPro Brush (n=8). The final surface roughness was measured, and data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance. Pairwise comparisons were made using protected Fisher least significant difference. Results: There were statistical differences in the final surface roughness between polishing systems and between composite resins (p<0.05). The highest surface roughness was observed for all composite resins polished with OneGloss and ComposiPro Brush. Enhance/Pogo and Sof-Lex Wheels produced a mean surface roughness greater than the 200-nm threshold on Filtek Supreme Ultra, Grandio SO, and Venus Pearl. Data showed that there was an interaction between the composite resins and the polishing systems. Conclusions: A single polishing system does not perform equally with all composite resins. Except for Optrapol, multi-step polishing systems performed generally better than one-step systems. Excluding Enhance/Pogo, diamond-impregnated polishers led to lower surface roughness. Durafill VS, a microfill composite resin, may be polished more predictably with different polishers.

Study of the Effects of Growth Rate, Miscut Direction and Postgrowth Argon Annealing on the Surface Morphology of Homoepitaxially Grown 4H Silicon Carbide Films

2013 ◽  
Vol 740-742 ◽  
pp. 229-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimo Camarda ◽  
Andrea Canino ◽  
Patrick Fiorenza ◽  
Andrea Severino ◽  
Ruggero Anzalone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Growth Rate ◽  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Silicon Carbide ◽  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Surface Morphology ◽  
Monte Carlo Simulations ◽  
Equilibrium Conditions ◽  
Step Bunching ◽  
Final Surface

we study the surface morphology of homoepitaxially grown 4H silicon carbide in terms of growth rate, miscut direction of the substrate and post growth argon thermal annealings. All the results indicate that the final surface morphology is the result of a competition between energetic reorganization and kinetic randomness. Because in all observed conditions energetic reorganization favors surface ondulations (“step bunching”), out-of-equilibrium conditions are one of the keys to favor the reduction of the surface roughness to values below ~0.5 nm. We theoretically support these results using kinetics superlattice Monte Carlo simulations (KslMC)

Comparison of Experimental Stamping Punch Machinability Made out of Unconventional Materials

2014 ◽  
Vol 635 ◽  
pp. 81-84
Author(s):  
Peter Ižol ◽  
Dagmar Draganovská ◽  
Juraj Hudák ◽  
Miroslav Tomáš ◽  
Jozef Beňo
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Surface Quality ◽  
Experimental Work ◽  
Roughness Parameters ◽  
Scallop Height ◽  
Shaped Surface ◽  
Final Surface ◽  
Surface Roughness Parameters ◽  
Cam Software

The paper describes experimental stamping punch production from the view machinability and quality of stamping punch active surfaces. The tin car-body stamping punch has been chosen as a subject of experimental work. Two unconventional materials such as Textit J and Fibroflex 5 have been chosen for stamping punch. Milling strategies have been proposed, optimized and verified using CAM software SolidCAM considering the maximum Scallop Height. The final surface quality on selected areas of stamping punch shaped surface has been evaluated by surface roughness parameters Ra and Rz. These have been compared to Scallop Height set in CAM software. Manufactured areas on shaped surface were optically evaluated as well.

Finishing Systems on the Final Surface Roughness of Composites

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Koh ◽  
Gisele Neiva ◽  
Joseph Dennison ◽  
Peter Yaman
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Rough Surface ◽  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Artificial Saliva ◽  
Multiple Comparison ◽  
Final Surface ◽  
Plastic Bags ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Before And After

Abstract Aim This study evaluated differences in surface roughness of a microhybrid (Gradia™ Direct, GC America) and a nanofil (Filtek™ Supreme, 3M™ ESPE™) composite using four polishing systems: PoGo™/Enhance® (DENTSPLY/Caulk), Sof-Lex™ (3MTM ESPE™), Astropol® (Ivoclar Vivadent), and Optidisc™ (KerrHawe). Methods and Materials An aluminum mold was used to prepare 2 X 60 composite disks (10 mm X 2 mm). Composite was packed into the mold, placed between two glass slabs, and polymerized for 40 seconds from the top and bottom surfaces. Specimens were finished to a standard rough surface using Moore's disks with six brushing strokes. Specimens were rinsed and stored in artificial saliva in individual plastic bags at 36°C for 24 hours prior to testing. Specimens were randomly assigned to one of the four polishing systems and were polished for 30 seconds (10 seconds per grit) with brushing strokes according to the manufacturer's instructions. Mean surface roughness (Ra) was recorded with a surface-analyzer 24 hours after storage in artificial saliva, both before and after polishing. Means were analyzed using two-way and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey multiple comparison tests at p < 0.05. Results There was a statistically significant difference for baseline measures between Filtek™ and Gradia™ (p=0.0338). For Filtek™, Sof-Lex™ provided a significantly smoother surface (Ra=0.80 ± 0.21) than Optidisc™ (Ra=0.93 ± 0.28), Astropol® (Ra=1.15 ± 0.24), and Pogo™/Enhance® (Ra=1.39 ± 0.39). For Gradia, Sof-Lex™ provided a significantly smoother surface (Ra=0.47 ± 0.09) and Astropol® provided a significantly rougher surface (Ra=1.39 ± 0.19) than Pogo™/Enhance® (Ra=1.11 ± 0.20) and Optidisc™ (Ra=1.15 ± 0.18). There was no significant difference in roughness between composites for individual polishing systems (p=0.3991). Conclusion Filtek™ specimens were smoother than Gradia™ specimens after baseline roughening. Sof- Lex™ provided the smoothest final surface when used with either composite. Astropol® provided a rough surface for Gradia™ specimens. Citation Koh R, Neiva G, Dennison J, Yaman P. Finishing Systems on the Final Surface Roughness of Composites. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008 February;(9)2:138-145.

Development of Magnetic-Field Assisted Finishing (MAF) Process for Chromium-Alloyed Low Carbon Steel Sheet Metal

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guangchao Song ◽  
Bibek Poudel ◽  
Patrick Kwon ◽  
Haseung Chung ◽  
Zachary Detweiler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Field ◽  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Carbon Steel ◽  
Sheet Metal ◽  
Surface Finish ◽  
Low Carbon Steel ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Abrasive Particles ◽  
Steel Sheets ◽  
Final Surface

Abstract Magnetic-Field Assisted Finishing (MAF) is a polishing process that utilizes a slurry mixture made of ferrous and abrasive particles in a liquid medium, known as a brush. The brush attached to a magnetic tool directly interacts with the surface of a workpiece and removes any imperfections and defects in the surface giving a smooth and nice surface finish. In this study, two distinct MAF setups were applied to the surface of chromium alloyed low carbon steel sheets to achieve the surface finish. The preliminary studies were conducted on one setup to understand the polishing behavior of the sheets and the other setup was designed to polish larger areas of the sheets to mimic the practical sheet producing environment. The effect of processing conditions such as types and sizes of abrasives, brush composition, and finishing time to attain the final surface roughness of the sheets was studied. The brush with the weight composition of 4:1:1.5 (iron: 3 μm black ceramic: silicone) was found to be the optimal condition for polishing the sheet metal samples. The optimal conditions obtained were applied to the larger scaled experimental setup. The final surface roughness of 38 nm and 220 nm were achieved in these experimental setups, respectively.

scholarly journals Effect of the Polishing Procedures on Color Stability and Surface Roughness of Composite Resins

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vera Lucia Schmitt ◽  
Regina Maria Puppin-Rontani ◽  
Fabiana Scarparo Naufel ◽  
Flávia Pardo Salata Nahsan ◽  
Mário Alexandre Coelho Sinhoreti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Surface Texture ◽  
Color Stability ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Lower Degree ◽  
Color Measurement ◽  
Final Surface ◽  
Polishing Procedures ◽  
Initial Color ◽  
Multiple Step

Objectives. To evaluate the polishing procedures effect on color stability and surface roughness of composite resins. Methods. Specimens were distributed into 6 groups: G1: Filtek Supreme XT + PoGo; G2: Filtek Supreme XT + Sof-Lex; G3: Filtek Supreme XT + no polishing; G4: Amelogen + PoGo; G5: Amelogen + Sof-Lex.; G6: Amelogen + no polishing. Initial color values were evaluated using the CIELab scale. After polishing, surface roughness was evaluated and the specimens were stored in coffee solution at 37∘C for 7 days. The final color measurement and roughness were determined. Results. Sof-Lex resulted in lower staining. Amelogen showed the highest roughness values than Filtek Supreme on baseline and final evaluations regardless of the polishing technique. Filtek Supreme polished with PoGo showed the lowest roughness values. All groups presented discoloration after storage in coffee solution, regardless of the polishing technique. Conclusion. Multiple-step polishing technique provided lower degree of discoloration for both composite resins. The final surface texture is material and technique dependent.

scholarly journals Influence of a prophylaxis paste on surface roughness of different composites, porcelain, enamel and dentin surfaces

2012 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 001-008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haktan Yurdaguven ◽  
Arzu Aykor ◽  
Emre Ozel ◽  
Hilmi Sabuncu ◽  
Mubin Soyman
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
The Other ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Initial Surface ◽  
Final Surface ◽  
Multiple Comparison Test ◽  
Diamond Polishing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Roughness Measurements

ABSTRACTObjective: To investigate the effect of a prophylaxis paste on surface roughness of different composites, enamel, dentin and porcelain surfaces.Methods: Three different composites (FiltekZ250/Group1, Filtek Supreme XT/Group2, Premise/ Group3), enamel/Group4, dentin/Group5 and porcelain/Group6 samples were used in this study. All specimens were prepared flat by SiC discs and polished with a diamond polishing paste. The surface roughness measurements were determined with a profilometer after polishing (initial surface roughness). Prophylaxis paste was applied to the samples for 12 seconds, renewing every 6 seconds. After cleaning the samples, roughness values were measured again. Data were analyzed by Kruskal Wallis and Dunn’s multiple comparison test. Wilcoxon test was performed for the comparison of the initial and final surface roughness values (P<.05). The results were evaluated within the P<.05 confidence level.Results: The mean %SMHC was:C=77.27%, CL= 72.45%, SL=78.43%, G=66.65% and P=67.95%. Comparing the %SMHC promoted by 5 soft drinks, SL = C > CL > P = G (P<.05). There was not significant correlation between %SMHC and the other variables tested for the five drinks (P>>.05)Results: The initial and final surface roughness values (μm) were determined as follows: Group1: 0.039±0.009 and 0.157±0.018, Group2: 0.023±0.005 and 0.145±0.027, Group3: 0.028±0.008 and 0.109±0.012, Group4: 0.024±0.006 and 0.071±0.015, Group5: 0.030±0.007 and 0.143±0.029, Group6: 0.024±0.006 and 0.064±0.014. Significant difference was determined between the initial and final values for all groups.Conclusions: Composite and dentin surfaces were more affected by the application of prophylaxis paste than enamel and porcelain surfaces. The prophylaxis paste increased the surface roughness of all groups, but did not reach the bacterial retention roughness rate of 0.2μm. (Eur J Dent 2012;6:1-8)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document