The effect of silane applied to glass ceramics on surface structure and bonding strength at different temperatures.
The effect of silane applied to glass ceramics on surface structure and bonding strength at different temperatures.
复制标题
硅烷在不同温度下应用于玻璃陶瓷对表面结构和粘结强度的影响。
DOI：
10.4047/jap.2016.8.2.75
复制
发表时间：
2016-04
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Eraslan O
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yavuz T;Eraslan O
评价不同表面处理对不同陶瓷表面结构和剪切结合强度的影响。288个试件（二硅酸锂、白晶石增强和玻璃渗透氧化锆）首先根据使用的树脂水泥分为两组，然后根据给定的表面处理分为四组：G1（氢氟酸+硅烷）、G2（单独硅烷-不热处理）、G3（单独硅烷- 60℃热处理干燥）、G4（单独硅烷- 100℃热处理干燥）。两种不同的粘接系统应用于所有组的陶瓷盘。SBS（单位MPa）由每个粘结区域的失效载荷（单位N/mm2）计算得到。随后，每组各制备一个样品，对分离后的树脂-陶瓷界面进行SEM评价。在二硅酸锂陶瓷和白晶石增强陶瓷中，G1组的SBS值显著高于其他组，在玻璃浸润氧化锆中，G4和G1组的SBS值显著高于G2和G3组。三向方差分析显示，SBS值受树脂水泥类型的显著影响（P< 0.001）。FIN陶瓷在陶瓷表面的内聚失败率高于其他陶瓷组。AFM图像显示，除HF处理组外，表面处理组的形貌相似。与HF酸蚀刻相比，热处理不足以获得高SBS值。陶瓷的表面形貌受表面处理的影响。
To evaluate the effect of various surface treatments on the surface structure and shear bond strength (SBS) of different ceramics. 288 specimens (lithium-disilicate, leucite-reinforced, and glass infiltrated zirconia) were first divided into two groups according to the resin cement used, and were later divided into four groups according to the given surface treatments: G1 (hydrofluoric acid (HF)+silane), G2 (silane alone-no heat-treatment), G3 (silane alone-then dried with 60℃ heat-treatment), and G4 (silane alone-then dried with 100℃ heat-treatment). Two different adhesive luting systems were applied onto the ceramic discs in all groups. SBS (in MPa) was calculated from the failure load per bonded area (in N/mm2). Subsequently, one specimen from each group was prepared for SEM evaluation of the separated-resin–ceramic interface. SBS values of G1 were significantly higher than those of the other groups in the lithium disilicate ceramic and leucite reinforced ceramic, and the SBS values of G4 and G1 were significantly higher than those of G2 and G3 in glass infiltrated zirconia. The three-way ANOVA revealed that the SBS values were significantly affected by the type of resin cement (P<.001). FIN ceramics had the highest rate of cohesive failure on the ceramic surfaces than other ceramic groups. AFM images showed that the surface treatment groups exhibited similar topographies, except the group treated with HF. The heat treatment was not sufficient to achieve high SBS values as compared with HF acid etching. The surface topography of ceramics was affected by surface treatments.