Tear strength of ten elastomeric impression materials

Sneed, W D; Miller, Robert C.; Olson, Julia

doi:10.1016/0022-3913(83)90313-x

Cited by 20 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The tear energy for the distinct impression materials are consistent with those reported by Herfort et al (1978) and Sneed, Miller & Olson (1983). The accuracy of the new method seems to be as good as that reported for the conventional method.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Up to now, tear energy has been measured by using a trousers-shaped specimen (Braden, 1963;Webber & Ryge, 1968;Herfort et al, 1978;Sneed, Miller & Olson, 1983). The specimen is extended either at a certain rate or under a particular load.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tear energy of impression materials is thought to be of importance at those places where an impression both lacks bulk and encounters a mechanical undercut such as in the gingival area of a crown preparation. Up to now, tear energy has been measured by using a trousers-shaped specimen (Braden, 1963;Webber & Ryge, 1968;Herfort et al, 1978;Sneed, Miller & Olson, 1983). The specimen is extended either at a certain rate or under a particular load.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A modified technique to determine the tear energy of impression materials

Vrijhoef¹,

Lourens²,

Leydekkers‐Govers³

1986

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A modified method to determine tear energy of impression materials is described. Trousers-shaped specimens were prepared between two platens. They are different from those used before in that a V-shaped line is created so as to guide tear growth, and the thickness gradually increases, then remains constant and, ultimately, decreases instantaneously. The specimens were tested at ten different rates between 0.2 and 50 cm/min. lambda can be computed from the force-time diagram. Six different materials were tested: two condensation silicones, Xantopren regular (Bayer, FRG) and Xantopren light; a polyvinylsiloxane, Reprosil regular (DeTrey, Switzerland); a polysulphide Coeflex regular (Coe, USA); a polyether, Impregum (Espe, FRG); and an alginate, Cavex, Fast Set, Dust Free (Keur & Sneltjes, The Netherlands). Tear strength (in kJ/m2) variations at rates between 0.2 and 50 cm/min are as follows: Xantopren regular, 0.37-0.64; Xantopren light, 0.29-0.46; Coeflex, 1.10-5.29; Reprosil, 0.66-1.07; Impregum, 0.62-1.04; Cavex, 0.22-0.37. These values are consistent with those reported before. It might be concluded that the new test method gives reliable tear energy values.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A modified technique to determine the tear energy of impression materials

Vrijhoef¹,

Lourens²,

Leydekkers‐Govers³

1986

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While there are many studies on tear resistance in the literature,131415 there has not been any standardized method mentioned yet. For this reason, it is hard to evaluate the data obtained from different studies.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical study of alginate impression materials by customized proportioning system

Kurtuluş

Tüfekçi

2016

J Adv Prosthodont

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSEAlginate mixers available in the market do not have the automatic proportioning unit. In this study, an automatic proportioning unit for the alginate mixer and controller software were designed and produced for a new automatic proportioning unit. With this device, it was ensured that proportioning operation could arrange weight-based alginate impression materials.MATERIALS AND METHODSThe variation of coefficient in the tested groups was compared with the manual proportioning. Compression tension and tear tests were conducted to determine the mechanical properties of alginate impression materials. The experimental data were statistically analyzed using one way ANOVA and Tukey test at the 0.05 level of significance.RESULTSNo statistically significant differences in modulus of elastisity (P>0.3), tensional/compresional strength (P>0.3), resilience (P>0.2), strain in failure (P>0.4), and tear energy (P>0.7) of alginate impression materials were seen. However, a decrease in the standard deviation of tested groups was observed when the customized machine was used. To verify the efficiency of the system, powder and powder/water mixing were weighed and significant decrease was observed.CONCLUSIONIt was possible to obtain more mechanically stable alginate impression materials by using the custom-made proportioning unit.

show abstract

“…Impressions are more vulnerable to tearing in thin sections, such as the interproximal areas and subgingival regions [3,5]. One of the common reasons for rejecting an impression is due to tearing while removing from the mouth [3,6]. Tearing causes defects in the impression leading to the construction of a faulty final restoration [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%