Reddy E Srinivas, Patil Narendra P, Guttal Satyabodh S, Jagadish H G
Sri Sai Dental College, Department of Prosthodontics, Vikarabad, Andra Pradesh, India.
J Prosthodont. 2007 Jul-Aug;16(4):263-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00187.x. Epub 2007 Apr 23.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of finishing and polishing agents on surface roughness of cast commercially pure titanium using scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis.
A standardized square steel die measuring 10 x 10 mm with a thickness of 2 mm was machine cut. An impression of this die was used to create wax patterns for casting. Sixty specimens were cast in commercially pure titanium. These were divided into three groups (A, B, and C) of 20 specimens each. Group A specimens were polished with black, brown, and green rubber discs followed by green polishing compound with buff. Group B specimens were polished with black, brown, and green rubber cones, buffed with yellow polishing cake designed for gold alloy. Group C specimens were polished with silicium carbide cones and buffed with orange polishing cake. Surface roughness of the test specimens was measured in microns with a perthometer. Data were analyzed with ANOVA and Tukey's honest significant difference (HSD) multiple comparison tests among the different groups. Qualitative analysis was done by SEM photomicrographs.
Surface roughness values R(a) for Groups A, B, and C were 0.68 microm, 0.78 microm, and 0.27 microm, respectively. SEM photomicrographs and the statistical analysis revealed that the finishing and polishing were better with Group C test specimens with lower surface roughness values compared with groups A and B. Tests showed that Group C was statistically smoother (p< or = 0.01).
Within the limitations of this study, surface roughness was less on cast CpTi specimens that were finished and polished from the cutters designed specifically for titanium.
本研究旨在通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)分析评估精整和抛光剂对铸造工业纯钛表面粗糙度的影响。
机械切割一个尺寸为10×10mm、厚度为2mm的标准化方形钢模。用该模具的印模制作铸造蜡型。用工业纯钛铸造60个试样。将它们分为三组(A组、B组和C组),每组20个试样。A组试样先用黑色、棕色和绿色橡胶盘抛光,然后用绿色抛光膏和抛光轮抛光。B组试样先用黑色、棕色和绿色橡胶锥抛光,再用专为金合金设计的黄色抛光饼抛光。C组试样先用碳化硅锥抛光,再用橙色抛光饼抛光。用表面粗糙度仪以微米为单位测量试样的表面粗糙度。数据采用方差分析和Tukey诚实显著差异(HSD)多重比较检验在不同组间进行分析。通过SEM显微照片进行定性分析。
A组、B组和C组的表面粗糙度值R(a)分别为0.68微米、0.78微米和0.27微米。SEM显微照片和统计分析表明,与A组和B组相比,C组试样的精整和抛光效果更好,表面粗糙度值更低。测试表明C组在统计学上更光滑(p≤0.01)。
在本研究的局限性范围内,用专门为钛设计的刀具对铸造的工业纯钛试样进行精整和抛光后,其表面粗糙度较小。