• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.5 no.3
• /
• pp.248-255
• /
• 2013

PURPOSE. This study compared the effect of three intraoral repair systems on the bond strength between composite resin and zirconia core. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty zirconia specimens were divided into three groups according to the repair method: Group I-CoJet$^{TM}$ Repair System (3M ESPE) [chairside silica coating with $30{\mu}m$ $SiO_2$ + silanization + adhesive]; Group II-Ceramic Repair System (Ivoclar Vivadent) [etching with 37% phosphoric acid + Zirconia primer + adhesive]; Group III-Signum Zirconia Bond (Heraus) [Signum Zirconia Bond I + Signum Zirconia Bond II]. Composite resin was polymerized on each conditioned specimen. The shear bond strength was tested using a universal testing machine, and fracture sites were examined with FE-SEM. Surface morphology and wettability after surface treatments were examined additionally. The data of bond strengths were statistically analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tamhane post hoc test (${\alpha}$=.05). RESULTS. Increased surface roughness and the highest wettability value were observed in the CoJet sand treated specimens. The specimens treated with 37% phosphoric acid and Signum Zirconia Bond I did not show any improvement of surface irregularity, and the lowest wettability value were found in 37% phosphoric acid treated specimens. There was no significant difference in the bond strengths between Group I ($7.80{\pm}0.76$ MPa) and III ($8.98{\pm}1.39$ MPa). Group II ($3.21{\pm}0.78$ MPa) showed a significant difference from other groups (P<.05). CONCLUSION. The use of Intraoral silica coating system and the application of Signum Zirconia Bond are effective for increasing the bond strength of composite resin to zirconia.

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.520-527
• /
• 1999

For the purpose of providing some suggestions in selection of filling materials used in 'sandwich technique', the bond strengths between glass ionomer cement bases and composite resins were investigated and compared. For lining materials, 'Vitrebond' and 'Ketac-fil' were used. Using these two as bases, 10 of each following resins were built up on the top ; Z-100 (light curing resin) Clear-fil (chemical curing resin), Bis-core (dual cure resin), Dyract (compomer), therfore 10 specimens of each group and total of 80 specimens were made. After storing specimens in $37^{\circ}C$ deionized water for 24 hours, the shear bond strengths were measured under universal testing machine with 50 kg of full load scale and 1mm/min of cross-head speed and obtained the results as follows : 1. Over Vitrebond base, Z-100 showed the lowest bond strength but the other three did not show any difference in bond strength. 2. Over Ketac-fil base, Clear-fil showed the highest bond strength followed by Dyract, Bis-core, and Z-100 showed the lowest bond strengths. 3. Whereas Clear-fil showed the similar bond strengths on the Vitrebond base as other resins, it showed the highest bond strength on Ketac-fil base, which showed some difference in bond strength by differing GIC bases. 4. The bond strengths between base materials and composite resin showed a stronger resin-dependence tendency in cases with Ketac-fil bases rather than with Vitrebond bases.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.33 no.5 s.100
• /
• pp.359-370
• /
• 2003

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to metal bar with chemically cured adhesive (Ortho-one, Bisco Co, USA) in various types and directions of force application. Three types of metal bracket with different bracket base configurations; Micro-Loc base(Tomy Co, Japan), Chessboard base(Daesung Co, Korea), Non-etched Foil-Mesh base(Dentaurum, Germany); were used in this study. Peel, shear, tensile bond strengths were measured by universal testing machine and compared each other. The peel force directions applied were $0^{\circ},\;15^{\circ},\;30^{\circ},\;45^{\circ},\;60^{\circ},\;75^{\circ},\;90^{\circ}$ And then, in consideration of the different surface area of the bracket bases, the bond strength Per unit area were calculated and compared. The results obtained were summarized as follows: 1. The bond strengths according to the types and the directions of the forces were greatest at the shear forces in all three bracket base configuration groups(p<0.01). 2. As the peel force direction grew higher in degree, peel bond strength decreased. The Patterns of peel bond strength change according to force direction was similar in all three bracket base configurations. The minimum bond strength was 60 degree-peel bond strengths in all three bracket base configurations. 3. In Micro-Loc base group, minimum peel bond strength$(_{60}PBS)$ was in $29\%$ level of shear bond strength and $52\%$ level of tensile bond strength. In Chessboard base group, $_{60}PBS$ was in $34\%$ level of shear bond strength and $61\%$ level of tensile bond strength. In Non-etched Foil-Mesh base group, $_{60}PBS$ was in $34\%$ level of shear bond strength and $55\%$ level of tensile bond strength. 4. The bond strengths per unit area were lowest in Non-etched Foil-Mesh base group and highest in Chessboard base group(p<0.05). However, there were no differences in shear bond strength, tensile bond strength, $75^{\circ}\;and\;90^{\circ}$ per unit area between Micro-Loc and Chessboard base groups.

• International Journal of Highway Engineering
• /
• v.19 no.6
• /
• pp.37-46
• /
• 2017

PURPOSES : A composite pavement utilizes both an asphalt surface and a concrete base. Typically, a concrete base layer provides structural capacity, while an asphalt surface layer provides smoothness and riding quality. This pavement type can be used in conjunction with rollercompacted concrete (RCC) pavement as a base layer due to its fast construction, economic efficiency, and structural performance. However, the service life and functionality of composite pavement may be reduced due to interfacial bond failure. Therefore, adequate interfacial bonding between the asphalt surface and the concrete base is essential to achieving monolithic behavior. The purpose of this study is to investigate the bond characteristics at the interface between asphalt (HMA; hot-mixed asphalt) and the RCC base. METHODS : This study was performed to determine the optimal type and application rate of tack coat material for RCC-base composite pavement. In addition, the core size effect, temperature condition, and bonding failure shape were analyzed to investigate the bonding characteristics at the interface between the RCC base and HMA surface. To evaluate the bond strength, a pull-off test was performed using different diameters of specimens such as 50 mm and 100 mm. Tack coat materials such as RSC-4 and BD-Coat were applied in amounts of 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9, and $1.1l/m^2$ to determine the optimal application rate. In order to evaluate the bond strength characteristics with temperature changes, a pull-off test was carried out at -15, 0, 20, and $40^{\circ}C$. In addition, the bond failure shapes were analyzed using an image analysis program after the pull-off tests were completed. RESULTS : The test results indicated that the optimal application rate of RSC-4 and BD-Coat were $0.8l/m^2$, $0.9l/m^2$, respectively. The core size effect was determined to be negligible because the bond strengths were similar in specimens with diameters of 50 mm and 100 mm. The bond strengths of RSC-4 and BD-Coat were found to decrease significantly when the temperature increased. As a result of the bonding failure shape in low-temperature conditions such as -15, 0, and $20^{\circ}C$, it was found that most of the debonding occurred at the interface between the tack coat and RCC surface. On the other hand, the interface between the HMA and tack coat was weaker than that between the tack coat and RCC at a high temperature of $40^{\circ}C$. CONCLUSIONS : This study suggested an optimal application rate of tack coat materials to apply to RCC-base composite pavement. The bond strengths at high temperatures were significantly lower than the required bond (tensile) strength of 0.4 MPa. It was known that the temperature was a critical factor affecting the bond strength at the interface of the RCC-base composite pavement.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.45 no.2
• /
• pp.216-227
• /
• 2007

Statement of problem: For the long-term success of removable partial dentures, the bonding between metal framework and denture base resin is one of the important factors. To improve bonding between those, macro-mechanical retentive form that is included metal framework design has been generally used. However it has been known that sealing at the interface between metal framework and denture base resin is very weak, because this method uses mechanical bonding. Purpose: Many studies has been made to find a simple method which induces chemical bond, now various bonding system is applied to clinic. In this experiment, shear bond strengths of heat-cured denture base resin to the surface-treated Co-Cr alloy were measured before and after thermocycling. Chemically treated groups with Alloy $Primer^{TM}$, Super-Bond $C&B^{TM}$, and tribochemically treated group with $Rocatec^{TM}$ system were compared to the beadtreated control group. The data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA. Result: 1. Shear bond strength of bead-treated group is highest, and Alloy $Primer^{TM}$ treated group, Super-Bond $C&B^{TM}$ treated group, RocatecTM system treated group were followed. Statistically significant differences were found in each treated group(p<0.05). 2. Surface treatment and thermocycling affected shear bond strength(p<0.05), however there was no interaction between two factors(p>0.05). 3. Shear bond strengths of bead-treated group and Alloy $Primer^{TM}$ treated group showed no statistically significant difference before and after thermocycling(p>0.05), and those of Super-Bond $C&B^{TM}$ treated group and $Rocatec^{TM}$ system treated group showed statistically significant difference after thermocycling(p<0.05).

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.26-39
• /
• 1999

Bis-GMA, the representative monomer of bonding resin, contributes to the rigidity of bonding layer. Hydrophilic monomer contributes to the permeability into dentin substrates while weaken the bonding layer due to its small molecular weight. The degree of conversion also contributes to the ultimate strength of the bonding layer. This study was performed for the correlation analysis of monomer ratio and dentin bonding strength via degree of conversion. 7 experimental bonding resins were prepared with Bis-GMA, ratio from 20% to 80% by 10% increment, and hydrophilic HEMA monomer. Their degree of conversion and shear bond strength to dentin were compared with Scotchbond Multi-Purpose adhesive, and the fractured surfaces were examined microscopically. The results were as follows; 1. The degree of conversion increased when, the ratio of Bis-GMA increased from 20% to 70%, whereas it decreased when the ratio of Bis-GMA was 80%. 2. Shear bond strengths of the experimental bonding resins of 80%, 70%, 60% ratio of Bis-GMA were significantly higher than those of the experimental bonding resin of 50% ratio of Bis-GMA and Scotchbond Multi-Purpose adhesive. Lower shear bond strengths were obtained with the experimental bonding resins of 40%, 30%, 20% ratio of Bis-GMA (p<0.05). 3. Adhesive fractures were associated with the bonding resins of the lower bond strength, while cohesive fractures within the bonding resin layer were associated with the bonding resins of higher bond strength. Bonding resins with shear bond strength higher than 18MPa showed some cohesive fractures within the composite resin or within the dentin. 4. Correlations between Bis-GMA ratio and the degree of conversion (r=0.826), between Bis-GMA ratio and shear bond strength (r=0.853), and between the degree of conversion and shear bond strength (r=0.786) were significant (p<0.05).

• Magazine of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.67-75
• /
• 1983

The objectives of this paper were to measure the bond strengths of reinforced concrete in which the steel rods were coated with five different kinds of anticorrosion paints, and to compare their prevention effects in salt water. The paints used in the study were epoxy resin I . II . III, Z.R. P., and silicone resin, which were applied at rates recommended by the manufacturers. The bond strengths were measured on the 7-, 14-, and 28-th days after molding. Corrosion conditions of coated steel plate under fresh water, seawater, 10 % salt water, and 20% salt water, were inspected every month during four months test peoriods, respectively. The results obtained from tests are summarized as follows: 1. Paint-coating may reduce the bond strengths of reinforced concrete. Silicone resin paint showed some 20% reduction in the strength compared to those without the paint. However, the other paints seemed not to significantly affect the strength. 2. Picture analyses showed that epoxy resin I and II significantly prevented corrosion steel plates in seawater. Epoxy resin I and silicone resin coating did not do a good job in corrosion prevention. Z.R. P. paint was found to be moderate as preventive coating paint. 3. Varying soluble salt contents had little effects on the corrosion prevention of tested paints. 4. Epoxy resin I and II were found to be appropriate as a coating material to prevent the corrosion of steel rods in seawater. Z.R.P. may also be used for the purpose.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.45 no.5
• /
• pp.621-632
• /
• 2007

Statement of problem: The failure of adhesion between the resilient denture liner and the denture base is a serious problem in clinic. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of denture base resin surface pretreatments (mechanical and/or chemical) on the tensile bond strength between a resilient liner and processed denture resin. Material and method. Acrylic-based resilient liners (Soft liner; GC co., Japan & Coe-Soft; GC America Inc. USA) and silicone-based resilient liners (Mucosoft, Parkell Inc., USA & Dentusil; Bosworth co., USA) were used. Specimens in each soft lining material were divided two groups with or without mechanical pretreatment. Each denture base specimen received 1 of 4 chemical pretreatments including: (1) no treatment, (2) 30-s acetone treatment, (3) 15-s methylene chloride treatment, (4) 180-s methyl methacrylate treatment. All specimens were thermocycled and placed under tension until failure in a universal testing machine. Results: 1. Silicone-based resilient liners exhibited significantly higher tensile bond strengths than acrylic-based resilient liners (P<.05). 2. Grinding the denture base resin improved tensile bond strengths of silicone-based resilient liners, but reduced tensile bond strengths of acrylic-based resilient liners (P<.05). 3. In acrylic-based resilient liners, treating with acetone significantly increased the bond strength of Soft liner and treating with methyl methacrylate significantly increased the bond strength of Coe-Soft (P<.05). However they were not effective compared to silicone-based resilient liner. 4. In silicone-based resilient liners, treating with all chemical etchants significantly increased the bond strength of Mucosoft to denture base, and treating with methylene chloride and methyl methacrylate increased the bond strength of Dentusil to denture base (P<.05). Conclusion: Although chemical and mechanical pretreatments were not effective on tensile bond strength of acrylic-based resilent liner to denture base, treating the denture base resin surface with appropriate chemical etchants after mechanical pretreatment significantly increased the tensile bond strength of silicone-based resilient liner to denture base.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.156-165
• /
• 1999

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface treatments on the shear bond strength between new and old composites. Circular cavities prepared on the center of acrylic resin mold and the prepared cavities were filled with composite resin. They randomly assigned into control group and 8 groups according to the difference in surface treatments of old composites; Control group: no surface treatment, Group 1: surface treated with #120 SiC paper & bonding agent, Group 2: surface treated with #400 SiC paper & bonding agent, Group 3: surface treated with #120 SiC paper, 32% $H_3PO_4$ & bonding agent, Group 4: surface treated with #400 SiC paper, 32% $H_3PO_4$ & bonding agent, Group 5: surface treated with #120 SiC paper, primer & bonding agent, Group 6: surface treated with #400 SiC paper, primer & bonding agent, Group 7: surface treated with #120 SiC paper, 32% $H_3PO_4$, primer & bonding agent, Group 8: surface treated with #400 SiC paper, 32% $H_3PO_4$, primer & bonding agent. New composites were applicated on the old composites of experimental groups. The shear bond strengths for the experimental specimen were measured and the results were analyzed by using one way ANOVA. The observations of surface morphology after SiC paper roughening and debonded surface morphology after shear bond strength test were done by SEM. The results were as follows; 1. Shear bond strengths for specimens roughened with #120 SiC paper matching with the particle size of coarse diamond bur were significantly higher than those for the specimens with #400 SiC paper(P<0.05). By SEM, the surface of the specimens roughened with #120 SiC paper was more irregular than the specimens with #400 SiC paper. 2. Shear bond strengths for specimens treated with 32% $H_3PO_4$ etchant, primer, bonding resin were significantly higher than those for specimens treated with 32% $H_3PO_4$ and bonding resin(P<0.05). 3. Shear bond strengths for the specimens treated with 32% $H_3PO_4$ etchant and bonding resin were significantly higher than those for specimens treated with only bonding resin(P<0.05). There was no remarkable change of surface morphology after 32% $H_3PO_4$ etching. 4. It was possible to observe mixed fracture patterns (the cohesive fracture of old composite and the adhesive fracture between old and new composite) in the specimens roughened with #120 SiC paper, but almost adhesive fracture in the specimens roughened with #400 SiC paper.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.416-425
• /
• 1999

The purpose of this study was to evaluate shear bond strength of glass ionomer cements and compomer according to dentin surface treatment method. The materials used in this study were dentin conditioner and cavity conditioner for dentin treatment: Ketacfil, Fuji II LC, and Dyract for restoration. In this study, 90 sound bovine teeth were selected and then the teeth were embeded in improved stone and were grounded with 400 to 600 grit silicon carbide paper to create a flat dentin surfaces. The teeth were divided into nine groups as follows ; Group 1A : Samples bonded to dentin surface with Ketacfil after no treatment Group 1B : Samples bonded to dentin surface with Ketacfil after applicating dentin conditioner Group 1C : Samples bonded to dentin surface with Ketacfil after applicating cavity conditioner Group 2A : Samples bonded to dentin surface with Fuji II LC after no treatment Group 2B : Samples bonded to dentin surface with Fuji II LC after applicating dentin conditioner Group 2C : Samples bonded to dentin surface with Fuji II LC after applicating cavity conditioner Group 3A : Samples bonded to dentin surface with Dyract after no treatment Group 3B : Samples bonded to dentin surface with Dyract after applicating dentin conditioner Group 3C : Samples bonded to dentin surface with Dyract after applicating cavity conditioner Treated dentin surfaces were observed under SEM. After filling of each materials, shear bond strenth was evaluated and then debonded surfaces were observed under SEM. The following results were obtained; 1. The shear bond strengths obtained were decreased as Fuji II LC, Dyract, Ketacfil in that order and there was statistically significant difference(p<0.05). 2. About Group 1. the shear bond strengths were decreased as 1C, 1B and 1A in that order. But there was no significant difference between group 1B and 1C (p<0.05). 3. About Group 2, the shear bond strengths were decreased as group 2B, 2A and 2C in that order. And there was significant difference between group 2B and 2C (p<0.05). 4. About Group 3, the shear bond strengths were decreased as group 3A, 3C and 3B in that order. And there was signicant difference between group 3A and 3B (p<0.05). 5. As a result of observation under SEM, the fracture patterns of Fuji II LC and Dyract were adhesive failures, but those of Ketacfil were cohesive failure of material and mixture of cohesive and adhesive failure.