IADR Abstract Archives
Effects of Curing on Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed Materials
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different curing methods on the flexural strength (FS) of various 3D-printed dental resins.
Methods: Three 3D-printed dental resins were tested: Sprintray Ceramic Crown, Rodin Titan, and Rodin Sculpture 2.0. Flexural strength (FS) was measured using a three-point bend test. Bars (25mm x2mm x2mm) were printed with an Asiga Max printer for Rodin materials and a SprintRay Pro 95S for SprintRay materials. Specimens were stored in a cool, dark, dry environment prior to testing. Specimens (n=75) were cured using five different methods: Procure (9 mins), Nanocure (2.5 mins), Oven (100°C for 15 mins), and Otoflash with and without nitrogen (4000-5000 cycles). Specimens were tested as printed and subjected to three-point bending using an Instron Model 5566A at a crosshead speed of 1.0mm/min. A least square mean regression model was used to evaluate the effect of both resin type and curing method on the FS (p<0.05).
Results: While the overall effect of curing method on FS was not statistically significant (p=0.1692), trends indicated improved FS with nitrogen-enriched Otoflash and Oven curing. Oven-curing and nitrogen-enhanced Ottoflash demonstrated consistently higher FS across materials, suggesting enhanced mechanical performance in comparison to Procure.
Refer to Table 1
Conclusions: Though overall differences were not statistically significant, curing methods involving nitrogen and higher temperatures showed trends of improved FS, especially in Rodin materials. Selecting optimal curing protocols could enhance the mechanical properties of 3D-printed dental restorations.
Methods: Three 3D-printed dental resins were tested: Sprintray Ceramic Crown, Rodin Titan, and Rodin Sculpture 2.0. Flexural strength (FS) was measured using a three-point bend test. Bars (25mm x2mm x2mm) were printed with an Asiga Max printer for Rodin materials and a SprintRay Pro 95S for SprintRay materials. Specimens were stored in a cool, dark, dry environment prior to testing. Specimens (n=75) were cured using five different methods: Procure (9 mins), Nanocure (2.5 mins), Oven (100°C for 15 mins), and Otoflash with and without nitrogen (4000-5000 cycles). Specimens were tested as printed and subjected to three-point bending using an Instron Model 5566A at a crosshead speed of 1.0mm/min. A least square mean regression model was used to evaluate the effect of both resin type and curing method on the FS (p<0.05).
Results: While the overall effect of curing method on FS was not statistically significant (p=0.1692), trends indicated improved FS with nitrogen-enriched Otoflash and Oven curing. Oven-curing and nitrogen-enhanced Ottoflash demonstrated consistently higher FS across materials, suggesting enhanced mechanical performance in comparison to Procure.
Refer to Table 1
Conclusions: Though overall differences were not statistically significant, curing methods involving nitrogen and higher temperatures showed trends of improved FS, especially in Rodin materials. Selecting optimal curing protocols could enhance the mechanical properties of 3D-printed dental restorations.