Abstract
This short report evaluated the differences in stress concentration and the load to fracture of multilayered and monolayer glass ceramic discs. Using a static structural analysis, the 3D model of the discs received a load of 150N and results in maximum principal stress were obtained. For the in vitro analysis, the samples (ø 12 mm) were submitted to a compressive test (100kgf, 1mm/min). The data was analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey test (?=5%). The monolayer group showed a lower stress peak (129.24 MPa) and higher load to fracture (118.38N) than the multilayered group with 211.04MPa and 48.34N, respectively. All samples presented catastrophic failure with its origin on the tensile surface. Therefore, the monolayer ceramic group showed superior mechanical behavior than the multilayered group.
Highlights
Dental ceramics are widely used in restorative treatments due to their excellent aesthetics, biocompatibility, and compressive strength[1]
The present study aimed to evaluate the stress distribution on ceramic discs arranged in monolayer and multilayers by finite element analysis (FEA), and evaluate the fracture load of this ceramic design
The alternative hypothesis was that neither biaxial flexural strength nor stress distribution would be influenced by the ceramic design
Summary
Dental ceramics are widely used in restorative treatments due to their excellent aesthetics, biocompatibility, and compressive strength[1]. Some authors define that the multilayer arrangement provides early failure due to the incompatibility of materials with different mechanical properties[4]. Among different methodologies used in dental material studies, finite element analysis (FEA) consists in a reliable mathematic method to analyze complex mechanical behavior conditions. This mathematical tool shows harmful stress concentration areas and the most probable points of failure[3]. The present study aimed to evaluate the stress distribution on ceramic discs arranged in monolayer and multilayers by FEA, and evaluate the fracture load of this ceramic design. The alternative hypothesis was that neither biaxial flexural strength nor stress distribution would be influenced by the ceramic design
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
