IADR Abstract Archives
Evaluation of Six LED Light Curing Units
Objectives: To evaluate 6 LED curing lights using new and improved criteria.
Methods: Six curing lights (Valo, Valo Grand, Bluephase Style, Elipar Deep Cure-S, Demi Ultra, SmartLite Focus) were examined. The light tip diameter was measured with a digital micrometer and the area calculated. The spectral and total radiant power was measured 10 times with a 6 inch integrating sphere (Labsphere) attached to a fiberoptic spectrometer (USB 4000). In addition, the effect of distance from 0 to 10 mm was assessed as a % of the maximum power entering a 6 mm aperture into the sphere. The light beam profile was assessed using a laser beam profiler (Ophir Spiricon). The ability of the lights to cure Mosaic A2 and TPH LV A2 resin composites was evaluated by measuring the Knoop hardness at 45 locations across the top and bottom surfaces of specimens that were 2 mm thick and 12 mm in diameter. Results were subjected to ANOVA followed by Fisher’s PLSD tests (alpha=0.05).
Results: Table presents results. The Valo Grand had twice the emitting area of the Demi Ultra and the SmartLite Focus. The Valo Grand delivered the greatest radiant power, although, due to the difference in tip diameter, the irradiance was similar to the Valo. The Valo, Valo Grand and Bluephase Style are broad spectrum, multi-wavelength peak LED curing lights. The output from the Valo Grand was the least affected by distance.
The Valo, Valo Grand and Elipar Deep Cure-S delivered the most uniform beam profiles. The Elipar Deep Cure-S, Demi Ultra, and SmartLite Focus are all single peak wavelength LED lights, but their spectral emission peaks were very different. Overall, the Valo Grand produced the greatest hardness values and the SmartLite Focus and Demi Ultra produced the lowest values.
Conclusions: Overall the Valo Grand delivered the greatest radiant power, the widest emission spectrum, most uniform beam profile, was least affected by distance from the light tip, and the most uniform hardness values in the two resin composites tested.
Methods: Six curing lights (Valo, Valo Grand, Bluephase Style, Elipar Deep Cure-S, Demi Ultra, SmartLite Focus) were examined. The light tip diameter was measured with a digital micrometer and the area calculated. The spectral and total radiant power was measured 10 times with a 6 inch integrating sphere (Labsphere) attached to a fiberoptic spectrometer (USB 4000). In addition, the effect of distance from 0 to 10 mm was assessed as a % of the maximum power entering a 6 mm aperture into the sphere. The light beam profile was assessed using a laser beam profiler (Ophir Spiricon). The ability of the lights to cure Mosaic A2 and TPH LV A2 resin composites was evaluated by measuring the Knoop hardness at 45 locations across the top and bottom surfaces of specimens that were 2 mm thick and 12 mm in diameter. Results were subjected to ANOVA followed by Fisher’s PLSD tests (alpha=0.05).
Results: Table presents results. The Valo Grand had twice the emitting area of the Demi Ultra and the SmartLite Focus. The Valo Grand delivered the greatest radiant power, although, due to the difference in tip diameter, the irradiance was similar to the Valo. The Valo, Valo Grand and Bluephase Style are broad spectrum, multi-wavelength peak LED curing lights. The output from the Valo Grand was the least affected by distance.
The Valo, Valo Grand and Elipar Deep Cure-S delivered the most uniform beam profiles. The Elipar Deep Cure-S, Demi Ultra, and SmartLite Focus are all single peak wavelength LED lights, but their spectral emission peaks were very different. Overall, the Valo Grand produced the greatest hardness values and the SmartLite Focus and Demi Ultra produced the lowest values.
Conclusions: Overall the Valo Grand delivered the greatest radiant power, the widest emission spectrum, most uniform beam profile, was least affected by distance from the light tip, and the most uniform hardness values in the two resin composites tested.