Abstract:

Objective: To analyze the influence of forming direction on the surface characteristics, elastic modulus, bending strength and fracture toughness of printed parts and the relationship between forming direction and force direction, and to provide scientific basis and guidance for the clinical application of oral denture base resin materials. Methods: The 3D printing technology was used to print denture base resin samples. The shape and size of the samples referred to the current standard for testing conventional denture base materials. The samples used for physical performance testing were cylindrical (with a diameter of 15 mm and a thickness of 1 mm) and printed at different angles along the Z axis (0°, 45°, 90°). Scanning electron microscope was used to observe the microscopic topography of the different samples. The color stability of different samples was observed by color stabilizer. The surface roughness of the samples was analyzed by using surface roughness tester. The Vickers hardness was measured to analyze the hardness of the samples. The samples used for mechanical performance testing were rectangular (elastic modulus and bending strength: A length of 64 mm, a width of 10 mm, and a height of 3.3 mm; fracture toughness: A length of 39 mm, a width of 8 mm, and a height of 4 mm), divided into two groups: W group and H group. The W group was printed from the bottom up along the Z axis with the length × width as the bottom surface parallel to the X, Y axis plane, while the H group printed from the bottom up along the Z axis with the length × height as the bottom surface parallel to the X, Y axis plane. The forming angles of both groups were equally divided into 0°, 45°, and 90°. The elastic modulus, bending strength and fracture toughness of different samples were studied through universal mechanical testing machine. SPSS 22.0 software was used for statistical analysis. Results: The microscopic topography and roughness of different samples were closely related to the printing direction, with significant differences between the 0°, 45°, and 90° specimens. The 0° specimens had the smoothest surface (roughness < 1 μm). The surface of the 45° specimen was the roughest (roughness>3 μm). The microhardness of the 0° sample was the best [(196.13±0.20) MPa], with a significant difference compared with the 90° sample [(186.62±4.81) MPa, P < 0.05]. The mechanical properties of different samples were also closely related to the printing direction. The elastic modulus, bending strength, and fracture toughness of the 45° samples in the W group were the highest compared with the other groups. The results of elastic modulus showed that in the H group, the 45° specimens had the highest elastic mo-dulus, which was significantly different from the 0° and 90° specimens (P < 0.05). The elastic modulus of 0° and 45° specimens in the W group were higher than those in 90° specimens (P < 0.05). The bending strength results showed that there was no significant difference between the specimens from dif-ferent angles in the H group. The bending strength of the 90° specimens in the W group was the smallest, and there was a significant difference between 90° and the 0° and 45° specimens (P < 0.05); And the bendind strength of the 0° and 45° specimens in the W group was significantly higher than that of the 0° and 45° specimens in the H group (P < 0.05). The fracture toughness results showed that the fracture toughness of the H group specimens was lower than 1.9 MPa m^1/2, which was specified in the denture base standard. The 45° samples in the W group were the highest, with significant differences compared with the 0° and 90° samples (P < 0.05). And the 90° samples of the W group specimens were lower than 1.9 MPa m^1/2. And the fracture toughness of the 45° specimen in the W group was significantly higher than that of all the specimens in the H group (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The 0° samples had relatively better physical properties. The 45° samples had the best mechanical properties. But the fracture toughness of specimens (H group and 90° samples of W group) did not yet meet clinical requirements. That indicated that the characteristics of the 3D printing denture base resin were affected by the printing direction. Only when the performance of the printed samples in all directions met the minimum requirements of the standard, they could be used in clinical practice.

Key words: 3D printing, Denture base resin, Physical properties, Mechanical properties