No abstract available.
Dental Porcelain*

This study was designed to compare the smoothness by glazing method with that by polishing method after 48 specimens of Ceramco II block, one of porcelain materials used for PFM, were baked according to the manufacturer's directions. The specimens were roughened with new green stone at 15,000rpm for 30 seconds and sandblasted with 25microliteraluminum oxide for 15 seconds. They were divided into 4 groups at random, and 4 groups were prepared as follows : Group I : specimens were autoglazed and overpolished with polishing system. Group II specimens were polished with only polishing system. Group IIIspecimens were glazed after adding glazing liquid, vitachrom "L"-fluid (vita zahnfabrik co. Germany) to the rough surface Group v : specimens were just autoglazed Using the surface roughness tester, Ra, Rmax, and Rz were estimated 5 times per specimen, and recording process of mean value was repeated 3 times. The results were as follows : 1. The Ra of group I and group IIwas lower than group IIIand group IV (p<001). 2. There was lower value of Rz in group I and group II than group III and group IV (p<001). 3. The Rmax of group I(overpolished with polishing system after autoglazing) and group II(polished with only polishing system) was lower than group III(glazed after adding glazing liquid) and group IV (autoglazed) (p<001). 4. There was not a statistically significant difference between group I and II and between group III and IV (p>001). 5. The roughness was increase in order of group I,II,III,IV in SEM
Dental Porcelain*

The purpose, of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface treatment of porcelain on tensile bond strength. To accomplish this purpose, this study was carried out with 120 samples which were divided into 12 groups with each 10 samples, and the first group was not surface treated, groups 2 through 5 underwent single surface treatment, and groups 6 through 12 underwent compound surface treatment. The results were as follows: 1. In statistic, all the single surface-treated groups showed higher tensile bond strength than the non surface-treated group and the sandblasted group showed the highest tensile bond strength as 10.34+/-2.50MPa. 2. All the compound surface-treated groups showed no noticeable difference in the tensile bond strength(9-11.5MPa). 3. In statistic, no significant difference was found between the sandblasted group and the compound surface-treated groups. 4. There was no fracture of porcelain while testing in this study. Above study demonstrated that compound surface treatment or sandblasing, if used single surface treatment, should be employed to guarantee successful clinical application.
Dental Porcelain*

No abstract available.
Dental Alloys* ; Dental Porcelain*

No abstract available.
Dental Enamel* ; Dental Porcelain*

The purpose of this study is to develope new dental color-space system. Twelve kinds of dental composites and one kind of dental porcelain were used in this study. Disk samples (15 mm in diameter, 4 mm in thickness) of used materials were made and sample's CIE L*a*b* value was measured by Spectrocolorimeter (MiniScan XE plus, Model 4000S, diffuse/8degrees viewing mode, 14.3 mm Port diameters, Hunter Lab. USA). The range of measured color distribution was analyzed. All the data were applied in the form of T### which is expression unit in CNU Cons Dental Color Chart. The value of L* lies between 80.40 and 52.70. The value of a* are between 10.60 and 3.60 and b* are between 28.40 and 2.21. The average value of L* is 67.40, and median value is 67.30. The value of a* are 2.89 and 2.91 respectively. And for the b*, 14.30 and 13.90 were obtained. The data were converted to T### that is the unit count system in CNU-Cons Dental Color Chart. The value of L* is converted in the first digit of the numbering system. Each unit is 2.0 measured values. The second digit is the value of a* and is converted new number by 1.0 measured value. For the third digit b* is replaced and it is 2.0 measured unit apart. T555 was set to the value of L* ranging from 66.0 to 68.0, value of a* ranging from 3 to 4 and b* value ranging from 14 to 16.
Dental Materials* ; Dental Porcelain

Porcelain is considered to be one of the materials of choice for restoration where esthetics is of concern. But porcelain surface without final glazing treatment may induce undesirable results such as inflammatory respones on adjacent soft tissues due to plaque accumulation and increased wear of opposing teeth. Therefore, rough porcelain surface must be smoothened by final glazing treatment or chairside polishing procedure. The purpose of this study was to compare the surface roughness among self-glazed, overglazed and polished porcelain with various polishing kit, and to detect which phase of polishing is optimal in clinic. Specimens were fabricated with Vita VMK porcelain. The surface treatment of each group was performed as follows. Group 1 : overglazing treatment Group 2 : self-glazing treatment Group 3 : polishing with the Truluster Polishing System for Porcelain(Brasseler, U.S.A.) Group 4 : polishing with the Exa Cerapol Adjustment kit (Edenta dental products, Switzerland) followed by finishing with diamond-filled polishing paste Group 5 : polishing with the Shofu Porcelain Adjustment kit (Shofu inc., Japan) followed by finishing with diamond-filled polishing paste. At each polishing steps, the measurement of Ra and Rq values were performed, and the surface was examined by scanning electron microscope. The results were as follows: 1. Overglazing treatment brought smoother surface than self-glazing treatment. 2. Polishing systems without porcelain polishing paste did not make better result than self-glazing treatment. 3. Polishing system with porcelain polishing paste made similar result to overglazing treatment. 4. Applying diamond-filled polishing paste after using polishing system which has porcelain polishing paste produced surface as smooth as overglazing treatment does.
Dental Porcelain* ; Esthetics ; Tooth

No abstract available.
Alloys* ; Dental Porcelain*

No abstract available.
Crowns* ; Dental Porcelain*

No abstract available.
Composite Resins* ; Dental Porcelain*