Comparison of a Nanofiber-Reinforced Composite with Different Types of Composite Resins

Comparison of a Nanofiber-Reinforced Composite with Different Types of Composite Resins

The aim of this study was a comprehensive evaluation and comparison of the physical and mechanical properties of a newly developed nano-sized hydroxyapatite fiber-reinforced composite with other fiber-reinforced and particle-filled composites. Commercially available eight composite resins (3 fiber-r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Polymers Vol. 15; no. 17; p. 3628
Main Authors: Özduman, Zümrüt Ceren, Oglakci, Burcu, Halacoglu Bagis, Derya Merve, Aydogan Temel, Binnur, Eliguzeloglu Dalkilic, Evrim
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Basel MDPI AG 01-09-2023
MDPI
Subjects:
Analysis
Comparative analysis
Composite materials
Correlation
Diameters
Diamond pyramid hardness
Elasticity
Fiber composites
Fiber reinforced polymers
Fibrous composites
Flexural strength
Fourier transforms
Glass fibers
Hydroxyapatite
Infrared analysis
Infrared spectra
Light emitting diodes
Mechanical properties
Modulus of rupture in bending
Nanoparticles
Near infrared radiation
Particulate composites
Physical properties
Polymerization
Resins
Skeletal composites
Variance analysis
Viscosity
Turkey
United States > US
Japan
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The aim of this study was a comprehensive evaluation and comparison of the physical and mechanical properties of a newly developed nano-sized hydroxyapatite fiber-reinforced composite with other fiber-reinforced and particle-filled composites. Commercially available eight composite resins (3 fiber-reinforced and 5 particle-filled) were used: Fiber-reinforced composites: (1) NovaPro Fill (Nanova): newly developed nano-sized hydroxyapatite fiber-reinforced composite (nHAFC-NF); (2) Alert (Pentron): micrometer-scale glass fiber-reinforced composite (µmGFC-AL); (3) Ever X Posterior (GC Corp): millimeter-scale glass fiber-reinforced composite (mmGFC-EX); Particle-filled composites: (4) SDR Plus (Dentsply) low-viscosity bulk-fill (LVBF-SDR); (5) Estelite Bulk Fill (Tokuyama Corp.) low-viscosity bulk-fill (LVBF-EBF); (6) Filtek Bulk Fill Flow (3M ESPE) low-viscosity bulk-fill (LVBF-FBFF); (7) Filtek Bulk Fill (3M ESPE) high-viscosity bulk-fill (HVBF-FBF); and (8) Filtek Z250 (3M ESPE): microhybrid composite (µH-FZ). For Vickers microhardness, cylindrical-shaped specimens (diameter: 4 mm, height: 2 mm) were fabricated (n = 10). For the three-point bending test, bar-shaped (2 × 2 × 25 mm) specimens were fabricated (n = 10). Flexural strength and modulus elasticity were calculated. AcuVol, a video image device, was used for volumetric polymerization shrinkage (VPS) evaluations (n = 6). The polymerization degree of conversion (DC) was measured on the top and bottom surfaces with Fourier Transform Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR; n = 5). The data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA, Tukey HSD, Welsch ANOVA, and Games–Howell tests (p < 0.05). Pearson coefficient correlation was used to determine the linear correlation. Group µH-FZ displayed the highest microhardness, flexural strength, and modulus elasticity, while Group HVBF-FBF exhibited significantly lower VPS than other composites. When comparing the fiber-reinforced composites, Group mmGFC-EX showed significantly higher microhardness, flexural strength, modulus elasticity, and lower VPS than Group nHAFC-NF but similar DC. A strong correlation was determined between microhardness, VPS and inorganic filler by wt% and vol% (r = 0.572–0.877). Fiber type and length could affect the physical and mechanical properties of fibers containing composite resins.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:2073-4360
2073-4360
DOI:10.3390/polym15173628