Home Subscription Services
 
   

 
The International Journal of Prosthodontics
IJP Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Accepted Manuscripts
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitter
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: IJP
The International Journal of Prosthodontics

Edited by George A. Zarb, BChD, DDS, MS, MS, FRCD(C)

ISSN 0893-2174

Publication:
July/August 2002
Volume 15 , Issue 4

Back
Share Abstract:

Mechanical Properties of In-Ceram Alumina and In-Ceram Zirconia

Massimiliano Guazzato, BDSa, Mohammad Albakry, BScb, Michael Vincent Swain, BSc, PhDc, Jim Ironside, BDS, MDSd

Pages: 339–346
PMID: 12170847

Purpose: This study compared the mechanical properties of In-Ceram Zirconia and In- Ceram Alumina. Materials and Methods: Ninety-four disks and six bars were prepared with the slip-casting technique. The disks were used to assess biaxial flexural strength (piston on three ball), Weibull modulus, hardness, and fracture toughness with two methods: indentation fracture and indentation strength. The bars were used to measure elastic moduli (Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio). X-ray diffraction analysis of the specimens was carried out upon every step of the specimen preparation and of the fractured surfaces. Results: Mean biaxial flexure strengths of In-Ceram Alumina and In- Ceram Zirconia were 600 MPa (SD 60) and 620 MPa (SD 61), respectively. Mean fracture toughness measured according to indentation strength was 3.2 MPa · m1/2 (SD 0.34) for In- Ceram Alumina and 4.0 MPa · m1/2 (SD 0.43) for In-Ceram Zirconia. Mean fracture toughnesses of In-Ceram Alumina and In-Ceram Zirconia measured according to indentation fracture were 2.7 MPa · m1/2 (SD 0.34) and 3.0 MPa · m1/2 (SD 0.48), respectively. X-ray diffraction analysis showed that little phase transformation from tetragonal to monoclinic occurred when the specimens were fractured, supporting the existence of a modest difference of fracture toughness between the two ceramics. Conclusion: No statistically significant difference was found in strength. In-Ceram Zirconia was tougher (P < .01) than In-Ceram Alumina when tested according to indentation strength. However, no significant difference was found in the fracture toughness when tested with the indentation fracture technique. Int J Prosthodont 2002;15:339–346.

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  © 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog