18 J. Dent.

1986; 14: 18-22 Printed in Great Britain

The use of nylon as a denture-base

material
G. D. Stafford and R. Huggett
University of Wales College of Medicine, Dental School, Cardiff

A R. MacGregor and J. Graham

University of Glasgow Dental School

ABSTRACT
This paper compares some of the properties of a nylon 12 denture base material with some
conventional denture base materials and a commercial nylon 12 with 50 per cent glass
spheres w/w. The flexural and impact strength were measured and properties of surface
hardness, compressive creep, fracture toughness, glass transition temperature, water
absorption and dimensional accuracy measured and discussed
The tests indicated that the strength of the nylon 12 was considerably greater than that of
the other polymers tested and thus this material is particularly useful in cases where
dentures show unexplained repeated fracture, and in cases of proven allergy. The
flexibility may be a disadvantage, although patients do not feel this is so. The addition of
glass spheres stiffens the nylon.

INTRODUCTION MATERIALS
The early work upon the use of nylon as a denture-base The materials examined in this study are listed in Table I.
polymer was carried out in the 1950s (Matthews and Flexiplast is a nylon 12 marketed as a denture-base
Smith, 1955; Watt, 1955; Hallett and Farrell, 1956; material. Tests confirm that it is an almost pure nylon
Roberts, 1956; Munns, 1962). These studies utilized 66 12.It thus ha9 the configuration:
and 6 10 nylon, and whilst reporting the mechanical
advantages of this polymer, they highlighted various
disadvantages. These features included the tendency of
the material to deteriorate in base colour, to stain, show (I- g-(C,,.,) ”
high water absorption, and to develop a roughness of the
surface after a few weeks’ wear. These problems were not and has small amounts of colourant and possibly
encouraging, and it was not until 1971 when work on plasticizer. Grilamid LKN-5H is nylon 12 with 50 per
nylon 12 was completed (Hargreaves, 197 1) that the cent glass spheres w/w. These spheres have an average
subject was revived when the problems of water size of - 0.25 pm diameter and are coated to improve
absorption were overcome by using nylon 12 instead of adhesion. Flexiplast and Grilamid were injection moulded
nylon 6 and Hargreaves ( 197 1) stiffened the polymer by at 250°C into a modified dental flask containing a stone
using short glass fibres as reinforcement Further work mould that was preheated to 80°C. The investment was a
upon nylon 12 was reported by MacGregor et al. in
1984.
A nylon, suitably stiffened could be extremely useful
Tab/e /: Materials examined in this study
in the treatment of those patients for whom acrylic
prostheses are not suitable. This would include Material Manufacturers
patients who demonstrate repeated fracture of dentures
and those that show tissue reactions of a proven allergic Flexiplast Polyapress, GMBH, Freiburg,
FR Germany
nature. Grilamid LKN-5 H Grilon (UK) Ltd. Stafford, UK
This paper discusses the use of a nylon 12 denture Trevalon Dentsply Ltd, De Trey Division,
base material, a commercial nylon reinforced with glass Weybridge, Surrey, UK
beads, and three conventional acrylic denture-base Trevalon HI Dentsply Ltd. Gloucester, UK
polymers. De Treys SOS Dentsply Ltd, Gloucester, UK
 Stafford et al.: Nylon as a denturebase material 19

Tab/e Il. Flexural bend test results (n = 10). Specimens saturated and tested in water at 37”C, rate of loading 0.083 mm/s

Mean Modulus Modulus

Deflection deflection of of
(mm) at break elasticity rupture
Material 15-35 N+ 15-50 N* lmm) (MW (MPa)

Flexiplast - - 617 -
Grilamid LKN-5 H 4.73 T 10.36t 1543 -
Trevalon 1.85 4.03 10.12 2376 66,64
Trevalon HI 2.05 4.25 8.98 2345 67.20
De Treys SOS 1.99 $ 10.09 2398 48.0
*These loads are those soeclfied In soecification test IS0 1567-I 978(E).
tAt maximum load where specimen bid not break.
$Readmg at 50 N not obtained.

Tab/e IV: Surface hardness tests (n = 10). Specimens

Tab/e /I/. Hounsfield impact tests (n = 8). Specimens saturated until equilibrated in water at 37°C. tested in air at
saturated until equilibrated in water at 37°C. tested in air at 23°C
23°C
Coefficient
Impact energy Coefficient indentation of
(Jx lo-“) of variation (mm X IO-?) variation
Material Mean s.d. % Material Mean s. d. %
Flexiplast 1267 199 16 Flexiplast 387 5.3 1.4
Grilamid LKN-5 H 1130 73 Grilamid LKN-5 H 299 7.7 2.6
Trevalon 350 79 273 Trevalon 295 4.8 1.6
Trevalon HI 811 104 13 Trevalon HI 279 1.9 0.7
De Treys SOS 485 65 14 De Treys SOS 293 4.0 1.4

Tab/e V. Compressive creep tests (n = 10). Specimens

saturated until equilibrated in water at 37% tested in air at
23°C
Indentation Indentation
at 5 s at 180s
(mm X 10-4) (mm X 1O-4) Creep
Material Mean S.d Mean sd %

Flexiplast 371 419 5 12

Grilamid LKN-5H 295 : 308 8 4
Trevalon 282 4 323 4 15
Trevalon HI 269 2 309 3 15
De Treys SOS 278 4 327 7 18

dental stone mixed with water at a powder ratio of0.30. A

separating solution of sodium alginate was used The
mould was fed by a single ingate sprue with an air escape
l,-- ~-. .-~..--_--_,
on the opposite side. The injection moulding pressure was
L .~ --...-~----L
0.6 MPa, and the flasks were bench cooled before Fig. 7. Diagram of master die demonstrating reference
points.
deflasking
Trevalon is a standard heat-cured dough-moulded
denture base and Trevalon HI, also dough-moulded, is a De Treys SOS is an autopolymerizing dough-moulded
microdispersed rubber-phase polymer formed probably in denture-base material. The dough is packed into a warm
a similar way to that described in US Patent 3 427 2 14. In mould (- 30°C) and the flask closed in a dental press.
that patent methyl methacrylate and butadiene-styrene The flask remains in the press for 15 min to allow a
are copolymerized in an emulsion with a second coating of complete cure to take place.
methyl methacrylate added to cover the bead Trevalon
and Trevalon HI were processed using conventional METHODS AND RESULTS
dental techniques with a curing time of 14 h at 70°C and a Various tests were selected as being of importance in
final hour at 100°C. understanding the behaviour of denture-base polymers.
20 J. Dent. 1986; 14: No. 1

Table I//. Compact tension fracture toughness (n = 10). Specrmens saturated In

water at 37°C. tested in air at 23°C. rate of loading 0.01 7 mm/s

Stress intensity factor Strain energy release rate

K,C (MN/m3’2) G,C (J/m>)
Material Mean s. d c. v. /%) Mean s. 0: C.V. (%)

Flexiplast* 5.43 Not brittle -208 866 Not brittle

Grilamid LKN-5 H 4.61 0.33 7.2 11857 1571 13.3
Trevalon 1.28 0.07 5.5 611 41 6.7
Trevalon HI 2.90 0.08 2.8 4150 450 10.8
De Treys SOS 1.22 0.06 4.9 Unstable crack propagation
*Thts material is not brtttle and this test does not apply.
cu. Coefficient of variatton.

Tab/e V//1 Glass transition temperature (n = 10). Specimens

saturated in water at 37°C. rate of heating 1 O”C/min

Coefficient
of
T,I”CJ variation
Material Mean s. a: (%/

Flexiplast* 177.4 3.0 1.7

Grilamid LKN-5 H* 1 75.0 1.8 1 ,o
Trevalon 123.9 2.7 2.2
Trevalon HI 125.0 2.0 1.6
De Trey SOS 95.0 3.0 3.2

*This IS a melting point rather than a Tg

Tab/e V//L Water absorption test (n = 5)

Percentage water uptake Diffusion

coefficient
Material 1 day 1 week 1 month (1 o-8cn?S)

Flexiplast 0.71 1.36 1.37 2.03

Grilamid LKN-5 H 0.28 0.69 0.80 0.69
Trevalon 1.31 2.36 2.49 1 .o
Trevalon HI I.36 2,46 2.54 I.28
De Treys SOS 1.37 2.32 2.36 1.62

All specimens were saturated before testing by immersion Fracture toughness

in water. Compact tension specimens were used to determine the
fracture toughness of the materials. The specimen
Flexural strength properties geometry was based on British Standard Specification BS
Specimens were produced and tested by the technique 5447( 1977) with some adaptations. A detailed descrip
described by Stafford and Handley (1975). The results tion has been published by Hill et al. ( 1983). The results
are shown in Table II. are shown in Table VI

Impact strength properties Glass transition temperature

Tests were completed using the Plastics Impact
(Monsanto Ltd, Swindon, Wiltshire, UK.). The
the test are given in the manufacturer’s
publication No. 201-28-13 (E)M-E-1( 1 li74)
results are given in Table III.
Surface hardness and compressive
Specimens were made and *tested by the techniques
described by Stafford and Huggett (1974, 1978). The
results are given in Tables II and V.
Machine
The glass transition temperature ( Tg) was determined by a
details of thermomechanical analyser. The apparatus was a
technical
Stanton-Redcroft Therrnomechanical Analyser( Stanton-
and the
Redcroft, Copper Mill Lane, London, UK), and the tests
were conducted using a l-mm* probe under a 25-g load
with a heating rate of 10’Cimin. Round specimens of
creep 5.0 mm diameter and 7.0 mm long were used. A detailed
description of the testing procedure has been presented
elsewhere ( Huggett et al., 1984). The results are shown in
Table VII.
 Stafford et al.: Nylon as a denture-base materral 21

Table /X. Drmensronal contraction (%) of specimen denture bases at 24 h and 28 d (n = 5)

Flexiplast G:i;id L KW5 H Trevalon Trevalon HI De Treys SOS
Dimension 24 h 28 d 28 d 24 h 28 d 24 h 28 d 24 h 28 d

Y to z 0.56 0.65 0.41 0.29 0.75 0.64 0.15 0.10 0.04 0.22*
(XY + XZ)/2 0.97 1.1 7 0.46 0.40 0.37 0.27 0.18 0.15 0.1 7 0.06
* Expanston.

Water absorption potential of this are obvious. The only polymers that have
approached these latter possibilities are polycarbonates
Specimens were prepared as described by Stafford and
(Stafford and Smith. 1967) and nylons. Flexiplast is a
Huggett ( 1973) and the water uptake measured and the
recent commercially available nylon polymer.
diffusion coefficients calculated using the method of
The flexural bend test results ( Tab/c In show that
Braden ( 1964). The results are shown in Tub/e VIII.
Flexiplast is a very flexible polymer. The modulus of
elasticity of 617 MPa is such that it is icry difftcult to
Dimensional accuracy
measure deflections as it deforms beyond the capability of
The dimensional accuracy of the materials was measured the transverse bend test jig even at loads of 15 N. The
using the method of Goodkind and Schulte (1970). An material did not fracture. Filling of nylon 12 by the
illustration of the die used is shown in Fig I. The results addition of glass beads (Grilamid) stiffened the polymer
are given in Table IX. 2’5 trmes when compared with the pure nylon 12. The
other polymers tested were very similar to each other.
DISCUSSION although De Trey SOS deformed so much in the 15-50 N
test that it was not possible to record the deflection.
Historically the search for higher strength polymer
The impact test ( Toblc III) showed the very superior
denture-base materials has taken researchers through
properties of the nylons when compared with conven-
many avenues. In every case the advantages of some
tional denture-base polymers. The Trevalon HI showed
improvement in properties must be examined alongside
the superior properties of the microdispersed rubber-
any complication of the well-established and straight-
phased polymers. Flexiplast had the softest surface of all
forward methods of production in the laboratory utilizing
the polymers tested (Table Iv) with the others all being
the dough-moulding and polymerizing routines. These
very similar. The addition of the glass spheres (in
routines require basic and simple equipment and can be
Grilamid) not only stiffens the nylon 12, but also hardens
completed very easily.
The fracture of the denture arises usually out of the it. The creep properties( Table v) of the polymers were all
very similar, with the Grilamid showing the least creep.
mouth, and is a high strain rate fracture due to the denture
The hardness and the creep properties are satisfactory
being dropped on the floor, or bent and fractured in
from the clinical point of view.
cleaning. Only rarely does a complete denture break in the
The fracture toughness tests ( Table VZ) showed that the
mouth. The advent of modern rubber dispersed phased
materials had a different pattern of behaviour. Trevalon
acrylates suitable for processing in dental flasks and
and Trevalon HI can be tested by this system, but De Trey
careful consideration by dentists and technicians about
SOS demonstrated unstable crack propagation. This was
denture design has reduced fractures considerably.
probably due to the high residual monomer content of this
The causes of complete denture fracture are more often
material acting as a plasticizer. The behaviour of
related todesign faults than polymerdeficiency. Maxillary
dentures fracture for a variety of reasons: (i) excessively
thin sections: (ii) marked frenal notches, especially
anteriorly: (iii) old dentures on ridges that have continued
to resorb: (iv) open-faced (gum-fitted) dentures; (v) where
the presence of natural teeth in the opposing jaw presents
occlusal problems. Mandibular dentures with thin sections
are prone to fracture. and this may be exaggerated by the
anatomical situation or by modification of a denture such
as when a soft lining is placed.
Thus, with sensible designs involving dentures of the
correct size and form together with the use of the correct
polymer, the likelihood of fractures is greatly reduced.
The search for yet higher strength polymers continues.
not only because it would be very useful to have the
‘unbreakable’ denture, but also because it would then
Fig. 2. A scanning electron mlcrograph showing the
become possible to construct skeletally designed polymer fractured surface of a glass bead-filled Gnlamid specimen
partial dentures. The cost implications and design (original magnification X 1 84).
22 J. Dent. 1986; 14: No. 1
Flexiplast and Grilamid were difficult to i&erpret These
materials are so ductile that they do not behave, at room
temperature, in any way like a brittle material. Flexiplast
tears in a rubbery way and the Grilamid also fractures by
tearing although the beads may fracture (Fig 2). The
nylons melt rather quickly, but the glass transition
temperature ( Tg) of all the materials (Table VU) were
satisfactory from the clinical point of view. The water-
uptake properties were satisfactory with the Grilamid
taking up only a small amount of water ( Table VIII). The
dimensional contraction of the Trevalon HI was the least
but the contractions of all the materials in the simulated
molar to molar dimension (Y to Z) are less than 1 per cent,
and this cannot be expected to have any clinical
relevance.
In the dimensional accuracy tests it can be seen that all
the bases shrink on curing( Table Zx). With the exception
of Flexiplast it is shown that all the bases expanded after
saturation in water for 28 d This expansion was not
enough to compensate for the previous contraction and all
the bases, except De Treys SOS, when saturated were
smaller than the cast on which they had been processed
The De Treys SOS was larger than the cast. The
aggregate of the dimensional changes for each material
shows that De Treys SOS displayed the least change, and
Flexiplast the most However, the contractions of all the
materials in the simulated molar to molar dimension
(Y-Z) are less than 1 per cent This cannot be expected to
have any clinical relevance.
These tests indicate that the strength of the nylon 12 is
considerably greater than that of the other polymers
examined. The material has considerable potential as a
higher strength denture-base polymer, and also for those
patients with a proven allergy to poly(methy1
methacrylate). The flexibility of the nylon may be
regarded as a disadvantage where partial denture construc-
tion is concerned, although patients frequently comment
on the increased comfort of nylon denture bases compared
with rigid alloy (Watt and MacGregor, 1984). The
addition of the glass spheres to the commercial nylon
added stiffness to the polymer, and so there may be
advantages in examining the role of different fillers for this
purpose. Generally, there is a requirement for denture
bases to be stiff, but there is no information upon what the
ideal stiffness should be. Further, it will be appreciated
that thin flat highly flexible materials can be made very
rigid by the design of the structure. In an atrophic
mandible there is a greater bulk of denture base than in a
less resorbed mandible, and so there is unlikely to be
significant flexion of the denture.
Clinically there has been concern that flexible dentures
hasten bone loss, but resorptive changes in the mandible
are much more likely to be due to inadequate features in
design and construction such as underextended bases and
Correspondence should be addressedto: Dr G. D. Stafford, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Dental School, University of Wales,
College of Medicine, Cardiff, CF4 4XY.
poor occlusion, together with careless maintenance of the
dentures.
More extensive clinical trials are now under way with
Flexiplast and Grilamid to assess in more detail the
significance of the physical properties of nylon 12
discussed briefly in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Dr John Camduff, Department
of Chemistry, University of Glasgow and Mr G. P. Swann
and Mr N. Jones, Department of Applied Physical
Sciences, Coventry (Lanchester) Polytechnic for assis-
tance in the analysis of materials.
REFERENCES
Braden M. (1964) The absorption of water by acrylic resin
and other materials. J. Prosthet. Dent. 14, 307-3 16.
Goodkind R J. and Schuite R C. (1970) Dimensional
accuracy of pour acrylic resin and conventional processing
of cold curing acrylic resin bases. J. Prosther. Dent. 24,
662-668.
Hallett G. E. M. and Farrell J. H. (1956) Nylon denture
base. Dent Pratt. Dent. Rec. 6, 239-240.
Hargreaves A. S. ( 197 1) Nylon as a denture base material.
Dent. Pratt Dent. Rec. 22, 122-128.
Hill R G., Bates J. F. and Lewis T. T. (1983) Fracture
toughness of acrylic denture bases. Biomaterials, 4,
112-120.
Hugget R, Brooks S. C. and Bates J. F. (1984) The use of
thermomechanical analysis in the measurement of the glass
transition temperature of acrylic resin denture base
polymers. Lab. Pratt 33, 11, 76-78.
MacGregor A. R, Graham J., Stafford G. D. et al. (1984)
Recent experiences with denture polymers. J. Dent 12,
146-157.
Matthews E. and Smith D. C. (1955) Nylon as a denture
base material. Br. Dent .I. 98, 231-237.
Munns D. (1962) Nylon as a denture base material. Dent.
Pratt. Dent Rec. 13, 142-146.
Roberts G. H. (1956) Nylon in orthodontics; an experiment.
Br. Dent J. 100, 113-l 15.
Stafford G. D. and Handley R W. (1975) Transverse bend
testing of denture base polymers. J. Dent. 3, 25 l-255.
Stafford G. D. and Huggett R (1973) Sorption of water by
some denture base polymers. IRCS (Dent. Oral BioI.)
9, 32-42-l.
Stafford G. D. and Hugged R (1974) Creep behaviour of
some denture base polymers. IRCS (Dent Oral BioL) 2,
1146.
Stafford G. D. and Huggett R (1978) Creep and hardness
testing of some denture base polymers. J. Prosthet Dent.
39,682-687.
Stafford G. D. and Smith D. C. (1967) Polycarbonates. A
preliminary report on the use of polycarbonates as a
denture base material. Dent. Pratt Dent. Rec. 17,
217-223.
Watt D. M. (1955) Clinical assessment of nylon as a
partial denture base material. Br. Dent J 98, 238-244.
Watt D. M. and MacGregor A. R (1984) Designing Partial
Dentures, 1 st ed Bristol, Wright, p. 123.