http://jba.sagepub.

com/
Journal of Biomaterials Applications
http://jba.sagepub.com/content/16/2/149
The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1106/BGNY-V5DA-VMWB-TC2W
2001 16: 149 J Biomater Appl
Filiz Keyf and Glay Uzun
Strength, Deflection and Modulus of Elasticity of a Provisional Fixed Partial Denture Resin
The Effects of Glass Fiber Reinforcement at Different Concentrations on the Transverse

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at: Journal of Biomaterials Applications Additional services and information for

http://jba.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://jba.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:

http://jba.sagepub.com/content/16/2/149.refs.html Citations:

What is This?

- Oct 1, 2001 Version of Record >>

at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from
The Effects of Glass Fiber
Reinforcement at Different
Concentrations on the Transverse
Strength, Deflection and Modulus
of Elasticity of a Provisional
Fixed Partial Denture Resin
FI

LI

Z KEYF*
Associate Professor Doctor, Department of Prosthodontics,
School of Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Shhye 06100, Ankara, Turkey
GU

LAY UZUN
Assistant Professor Doctor, School of Dental Technology,
Hacettepe University, Shhye 06100, Ankara, Turkey
ABSTRACT: This study focused on some mechanical properties such as the
transverse strength, maximal deflection and modulus of elasticity of a resin
reinforced with untreated, chopped form glass fibers at different concentrations.
A Teflon mould was used to prepare four groups of specimens. The specimens
were prepared with different concentrations of the glass fiber to the mass of the
powder/liquid mix (0.5, 1, 1.5%), and a mix without fiber was used as the control
group. All the specimens were subjected to transverse testing with a cross-head
speed of 5 mm/min. The load to fracture for each specimen with the maximum
deflection at the point of loading in a three-point load test was recorded. The
transverse strength of 0.5% fiber concentration was 54.45 MPa. The lowest
value was 49.67 MPa for the 1% fiber concentration. The highest mean strength
was for the specimens reinforced with 0.5% glass fiber. This mean was higher
than for the mean of the control without fiber specimens. The specimens
demonstrated an insignificant decrease in the transverse strength and the
maximum deflection when the fiber concentration was increased. The inclusion
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
JOURNAL OF BIOMATERIALS APPLICATIONS Volume 16 October 2001 149
0885-3282/01/02 014908 $10.00/0 DOI: 10.1106/BGNY-V5DA-VMWB-TC2W
2001 Sage Publications
at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from
of 1% glass fiber reduced the transverse strength, although the result was not
statistically significant.
KEY WORDS: glass fiber reinforcement, concentration, provisional fixed
partial denture resin.
INTRODUCTION
D
ifferent types of fibers have been added to polymer materials to
improve their mechanical properties. Acrylic resins have been
successfully reinforced with glass, carbon, and aramid fibers. There are
also a number of studies on the use of fibers in dentistry. In
periodontics, glass fibers have been tested as additives to BIS-GMA
resin for temporary splints to immobilize teeth [1]. In orthodontics,
aramid fibers have been found useful in reinforcing orthodontic
appliances [2]. In prosthodontics, fibers have been used to improve the
fracture resistance or modulus of elasticity of polymer materials [38].
Glass fibers have been studied as a means of strengthening
polymethyl methacrylate materials [5,7,8] and carbon fibers have been
used to reinforce prosthodontic restorations [3,9,10]. Aramid fibers have
also been found to enhance the fracture resistance of an acrylic resin
denture base material [11]. In recent years, there has been considerable
interest in polyethylene fibers even though this type of fiber is not
commonly used in dentistry [1214].
If fibers are used to strengthen a polymer material, optimal adhesion
between fibers and polymer matrix is essential. To improve adhesion,
the surface of the fibers can be silane-treated [15] or plasma-treated
[16].
The quantity of fibers and their behavior in a polymer matrix also
have an effect on the mechanical properties of fiberpolymer combina-
tions [10,17].
This study investigated the effects on the transverse strength,
maximal deflection and modulus of elasticity of specimens with different
concentrations of chopped form fibers in a resin material used for
provisional fixed partial denture.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A commercially available autopolymerizing acrylic resin used for
the construction of provisional fixed partial dentures was used.
This material is composed of polyethyl methacrylate powder and
n-butylmethacrylate liquid (Dentalon Plus, Heraeus Kulzer GmbH,
150 FI

LI

Z KEYF AND GU

LAY UZUN
at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Wehrheim, Germany). The manufacturers suggested powder-to-liquid
ratio of 2.0 g1.0 mL was used. The resin was hand-mixed for 40 s and
poured into a Teflon mould to form bar-shaped specimens of
60 10 4 mm. Glass fiber (Z.19.101) (Construcciones Aeronaticas
Socieded Anonima, Madrid, Spain) was used. Four groups were prepared
with different concentrations of glass fiber to mass of the powder/liquid
mix (0.5, 1, and 1.5%). Group A (0.5%) and Group B (1%) consisted of
seven specimens, and Group C (1.5%) and Group D (without fiber)
consisted of six specimens. Untreated chopped form glass fiber was cut
into 3 mm length. A desired mass of glass fiber was first mixed
thoroughly with a predetermined volume of monomer before the
required mass of powder was added to the mix. The powder/liquid mix
was placed in the mould. The mould was placed in a hydraulic press
(Rucker PHI, Birmingham, U.K) and a slow closing pressure was
applied to allow excess dough to extrude. A pressure of 20 psi (140 kPa)
was applied during the 5-minute polymerization time.
After processing, the specimens were removed from the mould, and
their dimensions were measured with a micrometer. Differences in
dimensions were eliminated by grinding with wet silicon carbide paper
until predetermined dimensions were reached. The control group had no
fiber reinforcement. All the specimens were prepared according to the
same procedure throughout the test programme.
Each group was subjected to transverse strength testing under three-
point loading, using a cross-head speed of 5 mm/min, with a screw-
driven universal testing machine (Lloyd Lr. 30 K materials testing
machines, Lloyd Instruments Ltd, Farnham, U.K.). A transverse-testing
jig, which consisted of two parallel stainless steel rods that supported
the specimen, was used to apply the load centrally. The transverse
strength (S) was calculated with the following formula [18]:
S 3LP=2WT
2

where P is the fracture load, L is the distance between the supports

(50 mm), W is the specimen width (10 mm), and T is the specimen
thickness (4 mm). For the modulus of elasticity determination, the
machine was calibrated so that the maximum deflection observed in
the specimen at the point of fracture could be determined automatically
by the testing machine.
After data collection, the mean values and standard deviations were
calculated with the SPSS statistical software program (SPSS Inc.,
Chicago, III). The KruskalWallis analysis of variance was used to
compare the groups.
The Effects of Fiber Reinforcement 151
at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from
The surfaces of the cross-sections of test specimens were studied using
a scanning electron microscope (SEM) (Jeol, JEM 1200 EX, Tokyo,
Japan) at 80 kV and micrographs were taken at a magnification of 600
to make a visual analysis (Figure 1). The cross sections of the test
specimens were made with a micromotor (KaVo EWL K10, Germany)
after the fracture resistance measurement.
RESULTS
The mean values and the standard deviations of the transverse
strength, the maximal deflection and modulus of elasticity are presented
in Table 1.
The KruskalWallis analysis of variance was used to determine the
effect of fiber concentration on the transverse strength.
The results revealed that 0.5% fiber concentration enhanced the
transverse strength value of the test specimens. When the concentration
of fiber was increased, the transverse strength values decreased. But the
difference was not statistically significant (
2
2.525, p 0.471).
For the maximum deflection, the difference between the four groups
was not statistically significant (
2
4.636, p 0.200) and the
Figure 1. SEM micrograph of cross-section of 1% fiber addition-reinforced test specimen
(original magnification 600).
152 FI

LI

Z KEYF AND GU

LAY UZUN
at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from
differences between all groups was not statistically significant for the
modulus of elasticity (
2
3.982, p 0.263)
For the transverse strength, the highest value was 54.45 MPa for 0.5%
fiber concentration. The lowest value was 49.67 MPa for 1% fiber
concentration. The control group (without fibers) had 52.82 MPa.
DISCUSSION
Acrylic resin denture materials can be strengthened by incorporation
of different fibers. Glass, carbon, polyethylene and aramid fibers had
a significant strengthening effect when the amount of fibers was high
enough and the technique was properly applied [317].
According to Vallittu et al. [10] longitudinal form fibers spread out
laterally in the mould. This problem does not arise during the use of
chopped form fibers. Because of this, chopped form fibers were preferred
in this study.
The fibers were dipped in monomer before mixing to increase fiber
resin adhesion.
Vallittu et al. [10] found that an increase in the amount of the fibers
in the acrylic resin polymer matrix enhanced the fracture load of the
test specimens.
Gutteridge [14] found that increasing the fiber concentration
decreased the effect on the transverse strength. This finding was in
agreement with the findings of the present study.
Stipho [5] demonstrated that low concentrations of glass fiber in the
polymethyl methacrylate resin enhanced some of the mechanical
properties of the acrylic resin such as the transverse strength. These
findings were in agreement with the present study. No significant
Table 1. The transverse strength, maximal deflection and modulus of elasticity
for glass fiber reinforcement and un-reinforcement specimens for the
different concentrations tested.
Type Number
Transverse
Strength (MPa)
Maximal
Deflection (mm)
Modulus of
Elasticity (MPa)
Std.
Mean
Std.
Error
Std.
Mean
Std.
Error
Std.
Mean
Std.
Error
0.5% fiber addition 7 54.4543 2.9595 3.9200 0.5027 1797.4286 17.5362
1% fiber addition 7 48.1329 1.8190 2.7129 0.1528 1890.5714 60.6131
1.5% fiber addition 6 49.6700 1.7197 3.0233 0.1288 1873.8333 57.8915
Without fiber 6 52.8250 3.6421 3.9917 0.7003 1797.0000 68.5483
The Effects of Fiber Reinforcement 153
at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from
mechanical advantages were found by the incorporation of higher than
5% glass fiber contents.
This study has demonstrated that the addition of 0.5, 1 and 1.5% of
fibers have an effect on the transverse strength of specimens. At 0.5%
level, specimens were stronger than the control group and specimens
containing 1 and 1.5% fiber. The strength of the resin was reduced at 1%
level of addition.
Williamson et al. [4] found that polyethylene fibers slightly increased
the transverse strength of acrylic resin at a loading of 0.5% by mass.
However, the addition of higher amounts of fibers resulted in decreased
strength that was not statistically different from both 0% or 0.5%
groups and fiber loading did not significantly affect the deflection and
the modulus of elasticity of the resin. These findings are in agreement
with those of the present study.
The transverse strength of the specimens containing 1% fibers was
lower than the control, but there was no statistically significant
difference between the control group and the specimens containing 1%
fiber. The maximum deflection values were related to the transverse
strength.
The 0.5% fiber concentration specimens and those without fibers had
the same modulus of elasticity (1797 GPa). The results revealed only
a small difference between the means, and statistical differences were
not found.
The addition of fibers could readily be used routinely, affording
a preventive approach to the problem of denture fracture. The fibers
incorporated in the acrylic resin material enhanced the transverse
strength, but with a higher concentration of fibers, a decrease in strength
was found. SEM examination revealed well-impregnated glass fiber with
polymer matrix (Figure 1). The use of higher concentration of fibers as a
strengthener may cause formationof voids inside the fiber-matrix system.
Further studies should also consider additional factors such as the
resinfiber interfacial characteristics and the effect of fiber surface
treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions were drawn concerning the three-point
bending test of autopolymerizing acrylic resin reinforced with and
without glass fibers:
1. There were statistically insignificant differences between groups.
The specimens prepared with 0.5% fiber concentration exhibited
154 FI

LI

Z KEYF AND GU

LAY UZUN
at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from
the highest transverse strength value, whereas specimens prepared
with 1.5% fiber concentration exhibited the lowest.
2. An indication that the specimens with 1% and 1.5% were slightly
more brittle than 0.5% and the control.
3. The resin with 0.5% fiber concentration showed a higher deflection
value than did the resin with 1 and 1.5% fiber concentrations. The
specimens containing 1% fiber concentration were weaker than those
in the control group.
4. The modulus of elasticity of 0.5% fiber concentration was found to be
identical with the specimens without fiber.
5. The fiber incorporated in the acrylic resin material enhanced the
transverse strength, but the decreased strength was found with
higher concentration of fiber.
REFERENCES
1. Friskopp, J. and Blomlof, L. (1984). Intermediate fiberglass splints.
J. Prosthet. Dent., 51: 334337.
2. Mullarky, R.H. (1985). Aramid fiber reinforcement of acrylic appliances.
J. Clin. Orthod., 19: 655658.
3. Larson, W.R., Dixon, D.L., Aquilino, S.A. and Clancy, J.M.S. (1991). The
effect of carbon graphite fiber reinforcement on the strength of provisional
crown and fixed partial denture resins. J. Prosthet. Dent., 66: 816820.
4. Williamson, D.L., Boyer, D.B., Aquilino, S.A. and Leary, J.M. (1994). Effect
of polyethylene fiber reinforcement on the strength of denture base resins
polymerized by microwave energy. J. Prosthet. Dent., 72: 635638.
5. Stipho, H.D. (1998). Repair of acrylic resin denture base reinforced with
glass fiber. J. Prosthet. Dent., 80: 546550.
6. Uzun, G., Hersek, N. and Tinc er, T. (1999). Effect of five woven fiber
reinforcements on the impact and transverse strength of a denture base
resin. J. Prosthet. Dent., 81: 616620.
7. Vallittu, P.K. (1999). Flexural properties of acrylic resin polymers reinforced
with unidirectional and woven glass fibers. J. Prosthet. Dent., 81: 318326.
8. Keyf, F. and Uzun, G. (2000). The effect of glass fibre-reinforcement on the
transverse strength, deflection and modulus of elasticity of repaired acrylic
resins. Int. Dent. J., 50: 9397.
9. Bjork, N., Ekstrand, K. and Ruyter, I.E. (1986). Implant-fixed, dental
bridges from carbon/graphite fibre reinforced poly(methyl methacrylate).
Biomaterials, 7: 7375.
10. Vallittu, P.K., Lassila, V.P. and Lappalainen, R. (1994). Acrylic resin-fiber
composite part I: The effect of fiber concentration on fracture resistance.
J. Prosthet. Dent., 71: 607612.
11. Berrong, J.M., Weed, R.W. and Young, J.M. (1990). Fracture resistance
of Kevlar-reinforced poly(methyl methacrylate) resin preliminary study.
Int. J. Prosthodont., 3: 391395.
The Effects of Fiber Reinforcement 155
at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from
12. Gutteridge, D.L. (1988). The effect of including ultra-high-modulus
polyethylene fibre on the impact strength of acrylic resin. Br. Dent. J.,
164: 177180.
13. Dixon, D.L. and Breeding, L.C. (1992). The transverse strengths of three
denture base resins reinforced with polyethylene fibers. J. Prosthet. Dent.,
67: 417419.
14. Gutteridge, D.L. (1992). Reinforcement of poly(methyl methacrylate) with
ultra-high-modulus polyethylene fibre. J. Prosthet. Dent., 20: 5054.
15. Solnit, G.S. (1991). The effect of methyl methacrylate reinforcement with
silane-treated and untreated glass fibers. J. Prosthet. Dent., 66: 310314.
16. Ramos, V. Jr., Runyan, D.A. and Christensen, L.C. (1996). Effect of plasma-
treated polyethylene fiber on the fracture strength of polymethyl metha-
crylate. J. Prosthet. Dent., 76: 9496.
17. Uzun, G. and Keyf, F. (2001). The effect of woven, chopped and longitudinal
glass fibers reinforcement on the transverse strength of a repair resin.
J. Biomater. Appl., 15: 351358.
18. Philips, R.W. (1991). Skinners Science of Dental Materials, 9th Edn.
Philadelphia: WB Saunders, p. 39.
156 FI

LI

Z KEYF AND GU

LAY UZUN
at The University of Melbourne Libraries on January 12, 2014 jba.sagepub.com Downloaded from