Influence of printing procedure and printing axis of dental alloys on dimensional accuracy, surface roughness, and porosity

IF 0.7 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
M. Berger, S. Graf, N. Rohr
{"title":"Influence of printing procedure and printing axis of dental alloys on dimensional accuracy, surface roughness, and porosity","authors":"M. Berger, S. Graf, N. Rohr","doi":"10.25259/apos_27_2022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\nThis study aimed to evaluate the printing procedure and printing axis and its influence on the dimensional accuracy, surface roughness, porosity, and strength of 3D-printed dental alloys used in orthodontics prepared using binder jetting (BJ), electron beam melting (EBM), or selective laser melting (SLM).\n\n\n\nSpecimens with a dimension of 50 mm × 12 mm were produced using BJ, EBM, and SLM techniques of dental alloys and were printed either along the X-, Y-, or Z-axis (n = 8 per group). Specimen dimension was chosen according to the ISO standard 6892-1 for tensile strength test specimens. Surface roughness parameters Sa, Sz, Sq, and Ssk were obtained using a 3D laser microscope and porosities were visualized with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The specimen surfaces were optically scanned and volumetric deviations from the original stereolithography files were calculated. Afterward, tensile strength was measured.\n\n\n\nThe printing method and printing axis significantly affected surface roughness parameters (P < 0.05). Overall, the lowest surface roughness Sa values were found for BJ (9.1 ± 3.4 µm) followed by SLM (39.8 ± 24.2 µm) and EBM (50.4 ± 6.4 µm). BJ showed the smallest dimensional deviation followed by EBM and SLM. SEM analysis revealed a porous structure of BJ while fewer pores were observed on EBM and SLM samples. The ultimate tensile strength was only determined for BJ (495 ± 6 MPa) and EBM (726 ± 50 MPa) as the strength of SLM superseded the strength of the holder of the universal testing machine.\n\n\n\nBJ printing provides the highest dimensional accuracy with the smoothest surfaces irrespective of the printing axis. However, the remaining porosities owed to this printing procedure may have decreased the strength of the material.\n","PeriodicalId":42593,"journal":{"name":"APOS Trends in Orthodontics","volume":"89 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"APOS Trends in Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/apos_27_2022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the printing procedure and printing axis and its influence on the dimensional accuracy, surface roughness, porosity, and strength of 3D-printed dental alloys used in orthodontics prepared using binder jetting (BJ), electron beam melting (EBM), or selective laser melting (SLM). Specimens with a dimension of 50 mm × 12 mm were produced using BJ, EBM, and SLM techniques of dental alloys and were printed either along the X-, Y-, or Z-axis (n = 8 per group). Specimen dimension was chosen according to the ISO standard 6892-1 for tensile strength test specimens. Surface roughness parameters Sa, Sz, Sq, and Ssk were obtained using a 3D laser microscope and porosities were visualized with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The specimen surfaces were optically scanned and volumetric deviations from the original stereolithography files were calculated. Afterward, tensile strength was measured. The printing method and printing axis significantly affected surface roughness parameters (P < 0.05). Overall, the lowest surface roughness Sa values were found for BJ (9.1 ± 3.4 µm) followed by SLM (39.8 ± 24.2 µm) and EBM (50.4 ± 6.4 µm). BJ showed the smallest dimensional deviation followed by EBM and SLM. SEM analysis revealed a porous structure of BJ while fewer pores were observed on EBM and SLM samples. The ultimate tensile strength was only determined for BJ (495 ± 6 MPa) and EBM (726 ± 50 MPa) as the strength of SLM superseded the strength of the holder of the universal testing machine. BJ printing provides the highest dimensional accuracy with the smoothest surfaces irrespective of the printing axis. However, the remaining porosities owed to this printing procedure may have decreased the strength of the material.
牙科合金的打印工艺和打印轴对尺寸精度、表面粗糙度和孔隙率的影响
本研究旨在评估打印工艺和打印轴及其对3d打印牙科合金的尺寸精度、表面粗糙度、孔隙率和强度的影响,这些3d打印牙科合金采用粘合剂喷射(BJ)、电子束熔化(EBM)或选择性激光熔化(SLM)制备。采用牙科合金的BJ、EBM和SLM技术制作尺寸为50 mm × 12 mm的样品,并沿X、Y或z轴进行打印(每组n = 8)。拉伸强度试验试样尺寸按ISO标准6892-1选择。利用三维激光显微镜获得表面粗糙度参数Sa、Sz、Sq和Ssk,并用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)观察孔隙率。对样品表面进行光学扫描,并计算与原始立体光刻文件的体积偏差。然后测量抗拉强度。打印方式和打印轴对表面粗糙度参数有显著影响(P < 0.05)。总体而言,BJ的表面粗糙度Sa值最低(9.1±3.4µm),其次是SLM(39.8±24.2µm)和EBM(50.4±6.4µm)。BJ的尺寸偏差最小,其次是EBM和SLM。SEM分析显示BJ的多孔结构,而EBM和SLM样品的孔隙较少。由于SLM的强度取代了万能试验机支架的强度,因此仅测定了BJ(495±6 MPa)和EBM(726±50 MPa)的极限抗拉强度。BJ印刷提供了最高的尺寸精度和最光滑的表面,而不考虑印刷轴。然而,由于这种印刷过程而产生的剩余孔隙可能会降低材料的强度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
APOS Trends in Orthodontics
APOS Trends in Orthodontics DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信