THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SURFACE TREATMENT TECHNIQUES ON THE SURFACE ROUGHNESS OF FELDSPATHIC PORCELAIN

Authors : Fidan Alakuş Sabuncuoğlu, Ergül Ertürk

Pages : 1-7

Doi:10.17096/jiufd.30632

View : 20 | Download : 9

Publication Date : 2016-10-03

Article Type : Research Paper

Abstract :Purpose: This in vitro study compared the effect of five different techniques on the surface roughness of feldspathic porcelain. M aterials and Methods: 100 feldspathic porcelain disk samples mounted in acrylic resin blocks were divided into five groups insert ignore into journalissuearticles values(n=20); according to type of surface treatment: I, hydrofluoric acid insert ignore into journalissuearticles values(HFA);; II, Deglazed surface porcelain treated with Neodymium:yttrium- aluminum-garnet insert ignore into journalissuearticles values(Nd:YAG); laser; III, Deglazed porcelain surface treated with Erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet insert ignore into journalissuearticles values(Er:YAG); laser; IV, Glazed porcelain surface treated with Neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet insert ignore into journalissuearticles values(Nd:YAG); laser, V; Glazed porcelain surface treated with Erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet insert ignore into journalissuearticles values(Er:YAG); laser. The surface roughness of porcelain was measured with a noncontact optical profilometer. For each porcelain sample, two readings were taken across the sample, before porcelain surface treatment insert ignore into journalissuearticles values(T1); and after porcelain surface treatment insert ignore into journalissuearticles values(T2);. The roughness parameter analyzed was the average roughness insert ignore into journalissuearticles values(Ra);. Statistical analysis was performed using Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: Mean Ra values for each group were as follows: I, 12.64 + 073; II, 11.91 + 0.74; III, 11.76 + 0.59; IV, 3.82 + 0.65; V, 2.77 + 0.57. For all porcelain groups, the lowest Ra values were observed in Group V. The highest Ra values were observed for Group I, with a significant difference with the other groups. Kolmogorov–Smirnov showed significant differences among groups insert ignore into journalissuearticles values( P < 0.001);. Conclusion: Surface treatment of porcelain with HFA resulted in significantly higher Ra than laser groups. Both Er:YAG laser or Nd:YAG laser on the deglaze porcelain surface can be recommended as viable treatment alternatives to acid etching.
Keywords : Porcelain roughness, optical profilometry, hydrofluoric acid, Er YAG laser, Nd YAG laser, surface treatment