Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 92, Issue 1 , Pages 35-38, July 2004

Alterations of surface hardness with gypsum die hardeners

  • Paul E. Harris, DDS

      Affiliations

    • Private Practice, Logan, Utah USA
  • ,
  • Scott Hoyer, DDS

      Affiliations

    • Oral Surgery Resident USA
  • ,
  • Terry J. Lindquist, DDS, MS

      Affiliations

    • Associate Professor, Prosthodontic Department USA
  • ,
  • Clark M. Stanford, DDS, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Centennial Fund Professor, Director of Clinical Research, Dental Clinical Research Center (Dows Institute for Dental Research) and Department of Prosthodontics, University of Iowa USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to: Dr Clark M. Stanford University of Iowa/College of Dentistry N447 Dental Science Building Iowa City, IA 52242 Fax: (319) 335-8895

University of Iowa, College of Dentistry, Iowa City, Iowa

Abstract 

Statement of problem

Die stones require abrasion resistance, dimensional stability with time, and high surface wettability material properties.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare the surface microhardness (Knoop) of 4 contemporary gypsum materials with and without surface die hardener.

Material and methods

Materials used were a Type III stone (Microstone) and 3 die stones (Die-Keen, Silky-Rock, and ResinRock). Die hardener was cyanoacrylate (Permabond 910) or Clear Coat. Specimens of stone were hand mixed with distilled room temperature water and vacuum spatulated according to manufacturer's directions. Five cylinders (15 × 15 mm) per group were poured, using vibration, into phenolic ring molds positioned on top of a glass slide. The face of each specimen was polished with 2400-grit Al2O sandpaper. One face of each of 5 specimens/material was coated with cyanoacrylate; 5 specimens/material were coated with Clear Coat, air thinned and dried; and 5 specimens/material had no treatment (control). Knoop hardness (kg/mm2) readings were made on each face (5 readings/time point) 3, 12, and 24 hours after pouring. An ANOVA procedure with post hoc Tukey tests were performed (α=.05).

Results

Microhardness did not vary between 3 and 24 hours for any material (P>.05). Microstone had significantly lower surface hardness (P<.0001) than the die stones. Specimens coated with die hardener had lower hardness values (P<.001 in all cases)

Conclusions

The 3 types of die stones evaluated in this study did not differ significantly in surface microhardness. Under these conditions, die hardener coatings reduced the surface hardness of the gypsum material.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 15.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0022-3913(04)00204-5

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.04.002

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 92, Issue 1 , Pages 35-38, July 2004