Effect of plasma treatment on the peel bond strength between maxillofacial silicones and resins

Güngör, Merve Bankoğlu; Nemli, Seçil Karakoca; Inal, Ceyda Başak; Bağkur, Meral; Dilsiz, Nursel

doi:10.4012/dmj.2018-259

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The evaluation of the bond strength between silicone elastomers and titanium magnets may be challenging due to elasticity of silicones and its soft nature. Commonly the 180° direction is used for the peel test [19][20][21]. Some other studies utilized the bond strength test for assessing of silicone bonding capacities with 90° peel design [17].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bonding strength of 3D printed silicone and titanium retention magnets for maxillofacial prosthetics application

Spintzyk

Brinkmeier

Huettig³

et al. 2022

J Prosthodont Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess the bonding between conventional and additively manufactured silicone elastomers and cylindrical retention titanium magnets for anchorage of facial prostheses. Methods: The customized titanium retention magnets were embedded in conventional and additively produced silicone blocks without primer application (n = 20) and with two commercially available primers G611 (n = 20) and A304 (n = 20) applied onto the magnet surface. The pull out test was performed in the universal testing machine using 45° and 90° angulation and the pull out strength was measured for each group. Additionally the SEM images of the pulled out magnets' surface were obtained and the amount of residual silicone onto the magnet surface was quantified. Results: Significantly higher pull out strength values (p < 0.05) were revealed for 90° specimens (0.11 -0.17 ± 0.01 N/mm 2 ) compared to the 45° group (0.03 ± 0.02 N/mm 2 ). The pull out test with primer revealed no significant differences between the G 611 and A 304 primers in the additive group. However, significantly (p < 0,05) higher values were observed for conventional specimens in the A304 group (1.10 ± 0.21 N/mm 2 ) compared to the G611 group (0.59 ± 0.27 N/mm 2 ). Conclusion:The application of both used primers may be an acceptable technical option for the anchorage of retention titanium magnets in silicone facial prostheses, produced additively in a fully digital workflow.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bonding strength of 3D printed silicone and titanium retention magnets for maxillofacial prosthetics application

Spintzyk

Brinkmeier

Huettig³

et al. 2022

J Prosthodont Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As it was discussed by other studies. [17][18][19] For this reason, 180 peel test was used in this study to evaluate the bond strength.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of different surface characterization on bonding strength of maxillofacial silicone elastomer to two different framework materials

Meran

2022

EDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective:The objective of the study was to compare the bonding strength between silicone elastomer and two types of framework materials (acrylic resin and metal chrome cobalt) with different surface characterization. Methods A-2186 silicone elastomer was bonded with A-330-G primer to two group of framework materials (acrylic resin and metal chrome cobalt). Each group was subdivided into 4 different surface characterization (Polished surface as a control, Sandblasted surface by aluminum oxide media 250 micron, Polished surface with retentive holes, Surface with retentive holes and sandblasted by aluminum oxide media 250 micron). The samples were prepared with the dimension of (75x 10x 3 mm). All the test groups were subjected to 1800 peel strength test on Hounsfeild universal testing machine (HT-400). The test was carried out according to the ASTM D-903 specifications. The obtained results were then subjected to statistical analysis using Stat Graph 5.1 and the statistical significance was set at 5% level of significance. Result The result showed no significant difference between polished acrylic and sandblasted acrylic surface. However, a significant improvement in bonding strength was observed when acrylic surface was grooved with retentive holes (with and without sandblast surface characterization). However, a significant effect was seen when the surface of metal chrome cobalt was sandblasted with aluminum oxide media compared to polished metal. Additionally, grooves also improved the bonding strength. Furthermore, superior effects were seen when the grooves where sandblasted. Lastly, Intergroup comparison showed superior bonding strength between metal chrome cobalt and silicone compared to acrylic resin and silicone for all surface characterization. Conclusion Within the limitations of the present study, it can be concluded that: There is no significant difference when acrylic surface was sandblasted. However, retentive holes improved the bonding strength between acrylic and silicone. While sandblast improved the bonding strength between metal and silicone elastomer. Lastly, metal bond better to silicone than acrylic resin for all tested groups.

show abstract

Novel hybrid zirconium-silicone resin as high-temperature adhesive and an insight into the thermal resistance mechanism

Jiang

Yuan²,

Xue³

et al. 2022

Chemical Engineering Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effect of plasma treatment on the peel bond strength between maxillofacial silicones and resins

Cited by 4 publications

References 35 publications

Bonding strength of 3D printed silicone and titanium retention magnets for maxillofacial prosthetics application

Bonding strength of 3D printed silicone and titanium retention magnets for maxillofacial prosthetics application

The effect of different surface characterization on bonding strength of maxillofacial silicone elastomer to two different framework materials

Novel hybrid zirconium-silicone resin as high-temperature adhesive and an insight into the thermal resistance mechanism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About