• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.57 no.3
• /
• pp.225-231
• /
• 2019

Purpose: This study was undertaken to compare fracture and flexural strength of provisional restorative resins fabricated by additive manufacturing, subtractive manufacturing, and conventional direct technique. Materials and methods: Five types of provisional restorative resin made with different methods were investigated: Stereolithography apparatus (SLA) 3D printer (S3Z), two digital light processing (DLP) 3D printer (D3Z, D3P), milling method (MIL), conventional method (CON). For fracture strength test, premolar shaped specimens were prepared by each method and stored in distilled water at $37^{\circ}C$ for 24 hours. Compressive load was measured using a universal testing machine (UTM). For flexural strength test, rectangular bar specimens ($25{\times}2{\times}2mm$) were prepared by each method according to ISO 10477 and flexural strength was measured by UTM. Results: Fracture strengths of the S3Z, D3Z, and D3P groups fabricated by additive manufacturing were not significantly different from those of MIL and CON groups (P>.05/10=.005). On the other hand, the flexural strengths of S3Z, D3P, and MIL groups were significantly higher than that of CON group (P<.05), but the flexural strength of D3Z group was significantly lower than that of CON group (P<.05). Conclusion: Within the limitation of our study, provisional restorative resins made from additive manufacturing showed clinically comparable fracture and flexural strength as those made by subtractive manufacturing and conventional method.

• Journal of Technologic Dentistry
• /
• v.42 no.1
• /
• pp.9-16
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal and internal fit of lithium disilicate ceramic inlay produced by heat pressing that inlay pattern made by subtractive manufacturing and additive manufacturing method. Methods: A mandibular lower first molar that mesial occlusal cavity (MO cavity) die was prepared. After fabricating an epoxy resin model using a silicone impression material, epoxy resin die was scanned with a dental model scanner to design an MO cavity inlay. The designed STL pile was used to fabricate wax patterns and resin patterns, and then lithium disilicate ceramic inlays were fabricated using hot-press method. For the measurement of the marginal and internal gap of the lithium disilicate, silicone replica method was applied, and gap was measured through an optical microscope (x 80). Data were tested for significant differences using the Mann-Whitney Utest. Results: The marginal fit was 103.56±9.92㎛ in the MIL-IN group and 81.57±9.33㎛ in the SLA-IN group, with a significant difference found between the two groups (p<0.05). The internal fit was 120.99±17.52㎛ in the MIL-IN group and 99.18±6.65㎛ in the SLA-IN group, with a significant difference found between the two groups (p<0.05). Conclusion: It is clinically more appropriate to apply the additive manufacturing than subtractive manufacturing method in producing lithium disilicate inlay using CAD/CAM system.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Manufacturing Technology Engineers
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.334-341
• /
• 2015

This paper summarizes the results of an investigation into the environmental factors that have an indirect impact on parts quality, as well as those process variables and modeling information that have a direct impact. The effects of strength, surface hardness, roughness, and accuracy of shape, that is, qualities that users generally need to know, were evaluated with laminating direction experimentally. The 3D printing methods used in this experiment were fused deposition modeling (FDM), stereolithography apparatus (SLA), selective laser sintering (SLS), 3D printing (3DP) and laminated object manufacturing (LOM). The goal was to achieve a high standard of quality control and product quality by optimizing the fabrication process.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.57 no.2
• /
• pp.110-117
• /
• 2019

Purpose: This study was to evaluate the wear resistance of 3D printed, milled, and conventionally cured provisional resin materials. Materials and methods: Four types of resin materials made with different methods were examined: Stereolithography apparatus (SLA) 3D printed resin (S3P), digital light processing (DLP) 3D printed resin (D3P), milled resin (MIL), conventionally self-cured resin (CON). In the 3D printed resin specimens, the build orientation and layer thickness were set to $0^{\circ}$ and $100{\mu}m$, respectively. The specimens were tested in a 2-axis chewing simulator with the steatite as the antagonist under thermocycling condition (5 kg, 30,000 cycles, 0.8 Hz, $5^{\circ}C/55^{\circ}C$). Wear losses of the specimens were calculated using CAD software and scanning electron microscope (SEM) was used to investigate wear surface of the specimens. Statistical significance was determined using One-way ANOVA and Dunnett T3 analysis (${\alpha}=.05$). Results: Wear losses of the S3P, D3P, and MIL groups significantly smaller than those of the CON group (P < .05). There was no significant difference among S3P, D3P, and MIL group (P > .05). In the SEM observations, in the S3P and D3P groups, vertical cracks were observed in the sliding direction of the antagonist. In the MIL group, there was an overall uniform wear surface, whereas in the CON group, a distinct wear track and numerous bubbles were observed. Conclusion: Within the limits of this study, provisional resin materials made with 3D printing show adequate wear resistance for applications in dentistry.