| SDJ |
| Editorial Board |
| Advisory Board |
| Information for authors |
| Submit manuscript |
| Subscribe to SDJ |
| Search SDJ |
| About SDJ |
| SDJ Current Issue |
| Journal Archives |
| 2010-22 |
| 22-1 |
ISSN (Print) 1013-9052
EISSN 1658-3558
The Saudi Dental Journal,
P.O. Box 52500,
Riyadh 11563,
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
P.O. Box 52500,
Riyadh 11563,
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
| Tel. |
966-1-467-7328 |
| Fax. |
933-1-467-7308 / 966-1-467-7534 |
| Email |
saudidj@ksu.edu.sa |
|
Mechanical properties of flowable composites
Nadia M. Taher, BDS, Msc
The aim of this study was to evaluate the mechanical properties (compressive strength, flexural strength, and surface hardness) of five currently available flowable composites (Revolution, Aeltteflo, Composan LCM flow, Permaflo, and UltraSeal XT plus). Z-100 composite resin was used as a positive control. Five specimens of each material were prepared and stored in distilled water for 24 hours at 37°C. Compressive and flexural strength were tested on an Instron machine, A Vickers Indenter (VH) was used to measure surface hardness. The statistical analysis (ANOVA and Tukey's Post hoc test) showed significant differences among the flowable composite materials and the positive control group for both compressive strength and surface hardness, but there was no significant difference noted regarding flexural strength for all tested materials. It was concluded that one of the five composites (Pemaflo) showed better results than the other tested flowable composite materials regarding compressive strength and surface hardness. Based upon the conditions of this study, the mechanical properties of flowable composites are inferior to the hybrid composite mechanical properties, ciinlcal studies are needed to confirm these in vitro results.
Saudi Dental Journal 2001;13(1):20-24.
|