Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¸ð·¡ºÐ»ç¹ý°ú ºÒÅõ¸í µµÀçÀÇ µµÆ÷¹æ¹ýÀÌ µµÀç¿ëÂøÁÖÁ¶°üÀÇ Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâ

The Influence of Surface Treatment and Opaque Application Methods on the Bond Strength of PFM Restorations

´ëÇÑÄ¡°ú±â°øÇÐȸÁö 2011³â 33±Ç 4È£ p.339 ~ 347
±è¼º¹Î, ÃÖ¼º¹Î, Á¤Àμº,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
±è¼º¹Î ( Kim Sung-Min ) - ºÎ»ê°¡Å縯´ëÇб³ º¸°Ç°úÇдëÇÐ Ä¡±â°øÇаú
ÃÖ¼º¹Î ( Choi Sung-Min ) - ºÎ»ê°¡Å縯´ëÇб³ º¸°Ç°úÇдëÇÐ Ä¡±â°øÇаú
Á¤Àμº ( Chung In-Sung ) - ºÎ»ê°¡Å縯´ëÇб³ º¸°Ç°úÇдëÇÐ Ä¡±â°øÇаú

Abstract


Purpose: This study was investigated the bonding strength of two kinds of Ni-Cr alloy with respect to the condition of surface treatment. Methods: The surface treatment was performed on the two kinds of Ni-Cr alloy (B alloy and R alloy) specimens, which were sandblasted with , , and aluminium oxide and were treated with opaque application (paste and wash opaque). The roughness on the surfaces of the specimens was observed. The metal-ceramic interfaces were analyzed with EPMA in order to ionic diffusion, and the shear test was performed. Results: The BA250 specimen, which has higher surface roughness, showed the highest bonding strength in B specimens. In R specimens, the bonding strength of RA110 specimen was the highest. Conclusion: B specimen formed a mechanical bond between metal-ceramic interfaces; however, in the case of R specimen, a chemical bond was formed between that interfaces. There was no significant statistical difference between the bonding strengths of two types of specimens (p>0.05).

Å°¿öµå

surface treatment; opaque material; bond strength; interface analysis

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI