Evaluation of Tear Strength of Two Types of Iralgin and its Comparison with Similar Alginate Impression Material
Journal of Dental School,
Vol. 34 No. 1 (2016),
27 February 2016
,
Page 28-33
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v34i1.24686
Abstract
Objectives: Among the various impression materials, for alginate tear strength is probably more important than the compressive strength. The tear strength is important when an impression involves a mechanical undercut and/or lacks bulk strength to resist tearing. This study evaluated tear strength of Iralgin and compared it with tear strength of Alginoplast.
Methods: In this invitro experimental study A mold was made with 100mm×20mm×1mm dimensions and a longitudinal prominence in 0.3 mm depth. Twenty–seven specimens (9 Super Iralgin, 9 Pocket Iralgin, and 9 Alginoplast) were selected non–randomizedly. Each specimen prepared corresponding to manufacturer and injected into the mold. And the mold was placed under press. After removing the mold from press, every specimen formed as a trouser-shaped specimen. The specimen was pulled in tensile machine with 50 mm/min speed. The data of specimens in different groups were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, and Levene's tests.
Results: Mean of tear strength in first specimen (Super Iralgin), second specimen (Pocket Iralgin), and third specimen (Alginoplast) were 640±38 grf/cm², 500 ±20grf/cm², and 1100±27 grf/cm² respectively. According to ANOVA test, the mean of tear strength was not equal in three specimens (p<0.01). According to LSD Multiple Comparison, the first and second specimens were same in tear strength, whereas the third specimen was different from the two former (p<0.05 and p<0.01).
Conclusion: Super Iralgin and pocket Iralgin were the same in tear strength. Alginoplast was significantly higher than super and pocket Iralgin in tear strength.
- Dental
- Impressions
- Materials
- Standards
- Tensile strength
How to Cite
References
Kitamura A, Kawai Y. Basic investigation of the laminated alginate impression technique: Setting time, permanent deformation, elastic deformation, consistency, and tensile bond strength tests. J Prosthodont Res. 2015 Jan; 59(1):49-54.
Kenneth JA. Anusavice CS, H. Ralph Rawls. Phillip's science of dental materials. 12th Ed. Elsevier; 2013 Spe; Chap 8:151-81.
Noort RV. Introduction to Dental Materials. 4th Ed: Mosby Ltd.; 2013 Mar;Chap 2.7:137.153.
Phoenix RD, Cagna DR, DeFreest CF. Stewart’s Clinical Removable Partial Prosthodontics. fourth ed: Quintessence Publishing Company 2008; Chap 5:119-58.
Cook WD, Liem F, Russo P, Scheiner M, Simkiss G, Woodruff P. Tear and rupture of elastomeric dental impression materials. Biomaterials. 1984 Sep;5(5):275-80.
Sneed WD, Miller R, Olson J. Tear strength of ten elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthetic Dent. 1983 Apr;49(4):511-3.
Vrijhoef MM, Lourens FL, Leydekkersgovers GF. A modified technique to determine the tear energy of impression materials. J Oral Rehabil. 1986 Jun;13(4):325-8.
Webber RL, Ryge G. The determination of tear energy of extensible materials of dental interest. J Biomed Mater Res. 1968 Sep;2(3):281-96.
Ronald L. Sakaguchi JMP. Craig's restorative dental materials. 13th Ed. Elsevier 2012; Chap 12:277-325.
Cohen BI, Pagnillo MK, Musikant BL, Deutsch AS. Tear Strength of Four Irreversible Hydrocolloid Impression Materials. J Prosthodont. 1998 Jun;7(2):111-3.
G. Zarb JAH, S. E. Eckert, R. F. Jacob. prosthodontic treatment for edentulous patients, complete dentures and implant-supported prostheses. 13th Ed. Mosby 2013; Chap 7: 125-30.
Revised ANSI/ADA Specification No.18-1992. Approved June 2,1992. Effective June 2,1993.
- Abstract Viewed: 463 times
- PDF Downloaded: 437 times