• 대한치과기공학회지
• /
• 제29권2호
• /
• pp.9-15
• /
• 2007

As the development of nanotechnology, the use of composite resins which containing nanofillers becomes popular. The purpose of this study was to test the degree of polymerization of nanofillercontaining composite resins. For the study, three different nanofiller-containing composite resins and two different light-curing units were used. To evaluate the degree of polymerization, the maximum polymerization shrinkage taking place during the light curing, and the microhardness, after the light curing, were measured. As results, two light-curing units exhibited a similar emission spectrum to that of the included photoinitiator, camphorquinone. The only difference between the light-curing units were the width of the emission spectrum. Three different composite resins showed different microhardness values. Among them, Grandio showed the greatest microhardness value. However, there was less microhardness difference on the top and bottom surfaces due to the difference of the light-curing units. The maximum polymerization shrinkage values were also similar in the tested specimens regardless of the difference of the light-curing units. However, Grandio showed the least polymerization shrinkage. According to the manufacturers' data, Grandio showed the highest filler content(vol%).

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제10권1호
• /
• pp.145-152
• /
• 1984

The purpose of this study was to compare combinations of the four visible light irradiating appliances (Translux, Heliomat, Pluraflex HL 150, Omega) and the four visible light activated composite resins (Durafil, Heliosit, Plurafil-super, Silux) to determine the depth of polymerization of each combination. Twenty samples were made with Durafil. Five samples were polymerized for 20 seconds using Translux, five with Heliomat, five with Pluraflex HL 150, five with Omega. Twenty samples were made with Heliosit, twenty with Plurafil-super, and twenty samples with Silux. A 20-second polymerization time was applied with each of 4 visible light irradiating appliances to 5 samples of each material. Eighty samples were treated in a like manner, but polymerization was extended to 40 seconds. Depth of polymerization were measured with caliper. The results were as follows. 1) Of the two time exposures, 40-second exposure provided a significantly greater depth of polymerization than 20-second for each light with each material. 2) Durafill-Translux system showed minimum depth of polymerization, and Plurafil-Pluraflex system showed maximum depth of polymerization. 3) Visible light irradiating appliances were able to harden the resins cured by tire visible lights of other makers' apparatuses. 4) In all circumstances, depth of polymerization was between 3.0-3.8mm.

• 대한소아치과학회지
• /
• 제25권2호
• /
• pp.368-382
• /
• 1998

The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the results of argon laser for 5 seconds, argon laser for 10 seconds, and visible light for 40 seconds photo-polymerization in compressive strength, microhardness, curing depth, temperature rising during polymerization, and polymerization shrinkage. Hybrid type composite resin(Z-100) and compomer(Dyract) were used to be compared. The compressive strength was measured by an Instron(1mm/min cross head speed) in 60 specimens and the microhardness of the surface was expressed by Vickers Hardness Number(VHN) in 30 specimens. The curing depth was evaluated comparing the different values of upper and lower VHN according to irradiation time and thickness for the light source polymerization in 60 specimens. The temperature rising during photopolymerization was observed by the temperature change with thermocouple sensitizer beneath 40 specimens at the argon laser for 10 seconds and visible light 40 seconds irradiation. The polymerization shinkage was evaluated by calculating the decrease of % volume by using a dilatometer in 30 specimens. The results were as follows ; 1. In the case of compressive strength, the argon laser polymerization groups were higher than visible light group in Z-100 (p<0.05). In Dyract, the argon laser 5 seconds group did not show a significant difference with the visible light 40 seconds group. The argon laser 10 seconds group showed the markedly low value when compared with other groups (p<0.05) 2. In microhardness, Z-100 was better than Dyract when comparing by VHNs (p<0.05); however, there was not a significant difference between two materials in the visible light 40 seconds group and the argon laser 10 seconds group. 3. In the study of curing depth, Z-100 showed the consistent polymerization in argon laser irradiation because there was no difference in the VHN decrease according to the thickness change. Over the thickness control, the results did not show a significant difference between visible light and argon laser group in Z-100; however, in the case of Dyract, the visible light 40 seconds group was better than the argon laser groups(p<0.05). 4. There was a significant difference between the two materials in temperature rising during polymerization (p<0.05), but not a significant difference between irradiation times, 5. There was not a significant difference between the two materials in polymerization shrink age. The argon laser 5 seconds group was smaller than the other groups (p<0.05). It could be concluded that Z-100 polymerization was recommended to use the argon laser for reduction of the irradiation time while Dyract was recommended to use the visible light polymerization.

• 대한치과보철학회지
• /
• 제52권3호
• /
• pp.195-201
• /
• 2014

목적: 본 연구에서는 세 가지 중합 방법에 따른 이원 중합 레진 시멘트의 중합 수축률을 비교하고 광조사가 중합 정도에 미치는 영향에 관하여 알아보고자 하였다. 재료 및 방법: 네 가지 종류의 이원 중합형 레진 시멘트(Smartcem 2, Panavia F 2.0, Clearfil SA Luting, Zirconite)가 사용되었다. 각 재료 당 세가지 서로 다른 중합 방법(자가 중합, 즉시 광중합, 5분 지연 광중합)으로 중합하였으며, 각 방법 당 5개의 시편을 사용하였다. Bonded disk method를 사용하여 $37^{\circ}C$에서 30분간, 시간에 따른 중합 수축률을 측정하였다. 측정값은 일원분산분석과 다중 분석을 위한 Scheff$\acute{e}$ test를 사용하였고, 유의수준은 0.05으로 하였다. 결과: Panavia F 2.0를 제외한 나머지 세 종류의 이원 중합 레진 시멘트들은 지연 광중합 반응에서 가장 높은 중합 수축률을 보였다. Panavia F 2.0의 중합 수축률은 중합 방법간에 통계학적 유의성이 없었다. 중합이 개시된 초기 10분 내에 즉시 혹은 지연 광중합에서 모든 시멘트는 90% 이상의 중합수축을 보였다. 결론: 이원 중합 레진 시멘트의 지연 광중합이 중합 효율을 높인다.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제27권2호
• /
• pp.135-141
• /
• 2002

Objectives : The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of light intensity variation on the polymerization rate of composite resin using IB system (the experimental equipment designed by Dr. IB Lee) by which real-time volumetric change of composite can be measured. Methods : Three commercial composite resins [Z100(Z1), AeliteFil(AF), SureFil(SF)] were photopolymerized with Variable Intensity Polymerizer unit (Bisco, U.S.A.) under the variable light intensity (75/150/225/300/375/450mW$^2$) during 20 sec. Polymerization shrinkage of samples was detected continuously by IB system during 110 sec and the rate of polymerization shrinkage was obtained by its shrinkage data. Peak time(P.T.) showing the maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage was used to compare the polymerization rate. Results : Peak time decreased with increasing light intensity(p<0.05). Maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage increased with increasing light intensity(p<0.05). Statistical analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between peak time and inverse square root of the light intensity (AF:R=0.965, Zl:R=0.974, SF:R=0.927). Statistical analysis revealed a significant negative correlation between the maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage and peak time(AF:R=-0.933, Zl:R=-0.892, SF:R=-0.883), and a significant positive correlation between the maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage and square root of the light intensity (AF:R=0.988, Zl:R=0.974, SF:R=0.946). Discussion and Conclusions : The polymerization rate of composite resins used in this study was proportional to the square root of light intensity Maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage as well as peak time can be used to compare the polymerization rate. Real-time volume method using IB system can be a simple alternative method to obtain the polymerization rate of composite resins.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제27권5호
• /
• pp.488-492
• /
• 2002

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of plasma arc curing (PAC) unit for composite and compomer curing. To compare its effectiveness with conventional quartz tungsten halogen (QTH) light curing unit, the polymerization shrinkage rates and amounts of three composites (Z100, Z250, Synergy Duo Shade) and one compomer, that had been light cured by PAC unit or QTH unit, was compared using a custome made linometer. The measurement of polymerization shrinkage was peformed after polymerization with either QTH unit or PAC unit. In case of curing with the PAC unit, the composite was light cured with Apollo 95E for 6s, the power density of which was recorded as 1350 mW/$\textrm{cm}^2$ by Coltolux Light Meter. For light curing with QTH unit, the composite was light cured for 30s with the XL2500, the power density of which was recorded as 800 mW/$\textrm{cm}^2$ by Coltolux Light Meter. The amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was recorded in the computer every 0.5s for 60s. Ten measurements were made for each material. The amount of linear polymerization shrinkage for each material in 10s and 60s which were cured with PAC or QTH unit were compared with t test. The amount of polymerization shrinkage in the tested materials were compared with 1way ANOVA with Duncan's multiple range test. As for the amounts of polymerization shrinkage in 60s, there was no difference between PAC unit and QTH unit in Z250 and Synergy Duo Shade. In Z100 and Dyract AP, it was lower when it was cured with PAC unit than when it was cured with QTH unit (p<0.05). As for the amounts of polymerization shrinkage in 10s, there was no difference between PAC unit and QTH unit in Z100 and Dyract AP. The amounts of polymerization shrinkage was significantly higher when it was cured with PAC unit in Z250 and Synergy Duo Shade (p<0.05). The amounts of polymerization shrinkage in the tested materials when they were cured with QTH unit were Z250 (6.6um) < Z100 (9.3um), Dyract AP (9.7um) < Synergy Duo Shade (11.2um) (p<0.05). The amount of polymerization shrinkage when the materials were cured with PAC unit were Dyract AP (5.6um) < Z100 (8.1um), Z250(7.0um) < Synergy Duo Shade (11.2um) (p<0.05).

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제28권4호
• /
• pp.354-359
• /
• 2003

This study evaluated the effectiveness of the light emitting diode(LED) units for composite curing. To compare its effectiveness with conventional quartz tungsten halogen (QTH) light curing unit. the microhardness of 2mm composite. Z250, which had been light cured by the LEDs (Ultralume LED2, FreeLight, Developing product Dl) or QTH (XL 3000) were compared on the upper and lower surface. One way ANOVA with Tukey and Paired t-test was used at 95% levels of confidence. In addition. the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was compared between composites which were light cured by QTH or LEDs using a custom-made linometer in 10s and 60s of light curing, and the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was compared by one way ANOVA with Tukey. The amount of polymerization shrinkage at 10s was XL3000 > Ultralume 2. 40. 60 > FreeLight, D1 (P<0.05) The amount of polymerization shrinkage at 60s was XL3000 > Ultralume 2, 60> Ultralume 2.40 > FreeLight, D1 (P<0.05) The microhardness on the upper and lower surface was as follows ; (equation omitted) It was concluded that the LEDs produced lower polymerization shrinkage in 10s and 60s compared with QTH unit. In addition. the microhardness of samples which had been cured with LEDs was lower on the lower surfaces than the upper surfaces whereas there was no difference in QTH cured samples.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제33권4호
• /
• pp.341-351
• /
• 2008

지금까지 다수의 연구자들에 의해 광중합형 복합 레진을 중합하는 방법에 있어서 광조사 강도, 시간을 조절하여 중합수축의 속도를 감소시키기 위한 시도가 있었으나, 간헐적 중합법에 관한 구체적인 연구가 부족하다. 이에 저자는 광중합 복합 레진을 간헐적으로 광중합시켜 기존의 연속 중합법과 비교하여 중합 수축의 속도를 측정하고 교두 변위에 대한 영향을 평가해 보고자 하였다. 실험에 사용된 수복 재료는 2종의 광중합형 복합 레진으로 Heliomolar와 Pyramid이며, 중합 수축량을 측정하기 위해 자체 제작한 Linometer (R&B Inc., Daejon, Korea)을 사용하였고 광중합시 광조사 차단장치를 시편과 Linometer 사이에 위치시켜 각각의 서로 다른 중합 주기: (1) 연속 광중합 (60초간 계속 광조사); (2) 2초 광조사, 1초 광차단 (90초 시행), (3) 1초 광조사, 1초 광차단 (120초 시행), (4) 1초 광조사, 2초 광차단 (180초 시행)로 중합시켰다. 군 별로 조사된 총에너지량이 동일하도록 중합 시간을 조절하였고, 최종 중합 수축량을 측정하였으며 중합 수축의 최고속도 ($R_{max}$)와 최고속도를 나타낸 peak time (PT)을 계산하였다. 교두 변위의 측정을 위해서는 각 군별로 10개의 건전한 상악 소구치에 변형시킨 제2급 와동을 형성한 다음 상아질 접착제를 도포하고 일정량의 복합 레진을 충전한 후 치아를 자체 제작된 치아 변위 측정기 (R&B Inc., Daejon, Korea)에 위치시켜 교두 변위양을 알아보았다. 통계분석은 ANOVA test를 이용하여 군 간의 비교를 하였고, 재료간의 비교를 위해서는 t-test를 시행하였다. 실험 결과는 1) 선수축량은 군 간에 차이가 없었고 (p > 0.05), Pyramid가 Heliomolar보다 중합 수축량이 컸다 (p < 0.05). Peak time은 Heliomolar와 Pyramid 레진 모두에서 간헐적 광중합시 더 늦게 나타났다. $R_{max}$는 Heliomolar는 4군 < 3군, 2군 < 1군 순이었고, Pyramid는 3군 < 4군 < 2군, 1군 순으로 측정되었다. 2) Heliomolar는 4군 < 3군 < 2, 1군 그리고 Pyramid는 4, 3군 < 2, 1군 순으로 교두 변위가 컸으며 (p < 0.05), Pyramid가 Heliomolar보다 교두 변위가 크게 나타났다 (p < 0.05). 이번 실험을 통해 복합 레진을 광조사 차단장치를 이용하여 간헐적 광중합시켜 중합수축 속도를 늦춤으로써 교두 변위 양이 감소됨을 알 수 있었다.

• 대한치과교정학회지
• /
• 제36권3호
• /
• pp.198-206
• /
• 2006

제논 플라즈마 아크 광중합기나 LED 광중합기가 치과영역에 소개된 이후로 기존의 텅스텐 할로겐 광중합기를 사용할 때에 비해 교정장치의 부착시간이 현저하게 줄어들 수 있게 되었다. 제논 플라즈마 아크 광중합기에 대한 중합시간과 전단강도에 대해서는 여러 연구가 있어왔던 반면, LED 광중합기를 이용하여 교정용장치의 부착을 위한 중합시간에 대한 연구는 미진하다. 본 연구의 목적은 LED 광중합기의 중합시간에 따른 결합강도를 플라즈마 아크 광중합기와 비교하여 적절한 브라켓의 부착강도를 얻기 위해 요구되는 중합시간을 알아보는데 있다. 120개의 발치된 사람의 소구치에 컴포짓 레진으로 브라켓을 부착시킨 후 4초, 6초, 8초 동안 플라즈마 아크 광원과 LED 광원으로 각각 중합시켰다. 그 후 결합강도를 만능시험기(Universal Testing Machine)로 계측한 결과, 플라즈마 아크 광중합기에서는 4초 이상에서, LED 광중합기에서는 8초 이상의 중합시간에서 기존의 할로겐 광원을 40초간 노출시켰을 때와 비슷한 전단결합강도를 나타내었다. 플라즈마 아크 광중합기와 LED 광중합기의 중합시간이 접착제 잔류지수 (adhesive remnant index) 수치에 대해 영향을 미치지 않았다.

• Current Optics and Photonics
• /
• 제2권3호
• /
• pp.286-290
• /
• 2018

We investigated the dependence of the retardation dispersion on the polarization direction of ultraviolet (UV) light during the photopolymerization of self-organized smectic reactive mesogen (RM) molecules. RM retarder film that was photopolymerized with UV light linearly polarized parallel to the layer plane showed negative dispersion (ND) of retardation for a wide range of UV polymerization temperatures. On the other hand, film that was photopolymerized with unpolarized UV light showed negative dispersion in a narrow range of UV polymerization temperatures. With a certain UV polymerization temperature, the dispersion of retardation was converted from positive to negative, depending on the UV polarization.