IADR Abstract Archives
Endurance Testing Of Dental Light Curing Units
Objectives: The objective of this study was to investigate the performance of low-cost light curing units (LCUs) by measuring the radiant exitance over the complete discharge of their batteries.
Methods: Ten popular economical (ECO) LCUs were newly purchased for under $100 USD each (www.Amazon.ca) and one control LCU was purchased for approximately $1500 USD. All were fully charged before being mounted onto a light measurement system (MARC Light Collector, BlueLight Analytics Inc) with an automated actuator. The LCU cycle durations were approximately ten seconds and the dwell time between cycles was two minutes. The radiance exitance was measured in compliance section 7.4 of the ISO 10650(2018). Each LCU was run until the battery was fully discharged, completing a full endurance test run. Three endurance runs were performed on each LCU except for the LCUs that encountered a failure.
Results: Section 5.2.1 of the ISO 10650 (2018) requires initial radiant exitance measurements to be within 20 % of the radiant exitance stated by the manufacturer; six of the ECO LCUs were outside of this range. Four of the ECO LCUs did not complete three full endurance runs because of mechanical or electrical failures. All ten ECO LCUs experienced an average decrease ≥ 20 % in radiant exitance from the initial cycle measured to the final with the largest single LCU decrease being 96 %.
Conclusions: ● The manufacturer stated radiant exitance can be an unreliable indicator of performance for an ECO LCU.
● The control light was very consistent through the entire battery discharge.
● The difference in radiant exitance observed from the ECO LCUs over the battery life could impact the curing times used for specific light cured dental materials. Therefore it would be recommended that ECO LCUs are tested before every use.
Methods: Ten popular economical (ECO) LCUs were newly purchased for under $100 USD each (www.Amazon.ca) and one control LCU was purchased for approximately $1500 USD. All were fully charged before being mounted onto a light measurement system (MARC Light Collector, BlueLight Analytics Inc) with an automated actuator. The LCU cycle durations were approximately ten seconds and the dwell time between cycles was two minutes. The radiance exitance was measured in compliance section 7.4 of the ISO 10650(2018). Each LCU was run until the battery was fully discharged, completing a full endurance test run. Three endurance runs were performed on each LCU except for the LCUs that encountered a failure.
Results: Section 5.2.1 of the ISO 10650 (2018) requires initial radiant exitance measurements to be within 20 % of the radiant exitance stated by the manufacturer; six of the ECO LCUs were outside of this range. Four of the ECO LCUs did not complete three full endurance runs because of mechanical or electrical failures. All ten ECO LCUs experienced an average decrease ≥ 20 % in radiant exitance from the initial cycle measured to the final with the largest single LCU decrease being 96 %.
Conclusions: ● The manufacturer stated radiant exitance can be an unreliable indicator of performance for an ECO LCU.
● The control light was very consistent through the entire battery discharge.
● The difference in radiant exitance observed from the ECO LCUs over the battery life could impact the curing times used for specific light cured dental materials. Therefore it would be recommended that ECO LCUs are tested before every use.
3183074_File000000.jpg
3183074_File000001.JPG