Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Àý»è ¹× ÀûÃþ °¡°ø ¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î Á¦ÀÛµÈ ÀÛ¾÷ ¸ðÇüÀÇ Á¤È®µµ ºñ±³

Accuracy comparison between subtractive and additive methods in fabricating working model

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úÀç·áÇÐȸÁö 2018³â 45±Ç 1È£ p.89 ~ 96
¼ÛÁرâ, ¹Ú±¤½Ä, ±è¹Î¼ö, ±ÇÅ¿±, È«¹ÎÈ£,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
¼ÛÁرâ ( Song Joon-Ki ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇаú
¹Ú±¤½Ä ( Park Kwang-Sig ) - ´ë±¸º¸°Ç´ëÇб³ Ä¡±â°ø°ú
±è¹Î¼ö ( Kim Min-Su ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇÐÀü¹®´ëÇпø Ä¡ÀÇ°úÇаú
±ÇÅ¿± ( Kwon Tae-Yub ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇÐÀü¹®´ëÇпø Ä¡°ú»ýüÀç·áÇб³½Ç
È«¹ÎÈ£ ( Hong Min-Ho ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇÐÀü¹®´ëÇпø »ýüÀç·á¿¬±¸¼Ò

Abstract

º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â 3Â÷¿ø À籸¼º µðÁöÅÐ ¸ðµ¨À» ±â¹ÝÀ¸·Î Àý»è ¹× ÀûÃþ °¡°øÀ» ÅëÇØ ÀÛ¾÷ ¸ðÇüÀ» Á¦Á¶ÇÏ°í µÎ °¡Áö °¡°ø ¹æ¹ý¿¡ µû¸¥ ¸ðÇüÀÇ Á¤È®µµ¸¦ ºñ±³ Æò°¡ÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. Ç¥ÁØ ¼®°í ¸ðÇü STL (Stereolithography) ÆÄÀÏÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© CAD/CAM Àý»è ¹æ½ÄÀ¸·Î ÃÑ 20°³ÀÇ ¸ðÇüÀ» PMMA (Polymethyl Methacrylate) ºí·ÏÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇؼ­ Á¦ÀÛÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×¸®°í ÀûÃþ °¡°øÀº 3D ÇÁ¸°Å͸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ÀûÃþ µÎ²²°¡ 0.025 mm·Î 20°³ÀÇ ¸ðÇüÀ» Á¦ÀÛÇÏ¿´´Ù. Á¤È®µµ ºÐ¼® ¼ÒÇÁÆ®¿þ¾î (Geomagic Qualify 13)¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© CAD-reference-model (CRM)°ú CAD-test-model (CTM)À» ÁßøÇÏ¿´´Ù. Áßø¹æ¹ýÀº STL ÆÄÀÏÀ» point cloud data·Î º¯È¯ÇÏ¿© surface dateÀÎ CRM°ú CTMÀ» initial alignment ½ÃŲ ÈÄ best-fit superimpositionÀ¸·Î Àç¹è¿­ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÌ °úÁ¤¿¡¼­ Ç¥¸é µ¥ÀÌÅÍ¿Í ¸ðµç point °£ÀÇ °Å¸®¸¦ RMS (Root Mean Square) °ªÀ¸·Î ȯ»êÇÏ¿© ±× Æò±ÕÀ» °è»êÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀûÃþ °¡°ø ¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î Á¦ÀÛµÈ ÀÛ¾÷ ¸ðÇüÀº Àý»è °¡°øÀ¸·Î Á¦ÀÛµÈ ¸ðÇü º¸´Ù ¿ì¼öÇÑ Á¤¹Ðµµ¸¦ °¡Áö´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù(p<0.05). ¶ÇÇÑ, Àý»è °¡°ø¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ ÀÛ¾÷ ¸ðÇü Á¦ÀÛÀº Ä¡¾Æ °î¸é°ú ÇÔ¸ô ºÎÀ§ÀÇ ºÎÁ·ÇÑ ÀçÇö¼ºÀ» °³¼±ÇØ¾ß ÀÓ»óÀûÀ¸·Î Àû¿ë °¡´ÉÇÒ °ÍÀ¸·Î °í·ÁµÈ´Ù.

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the working models fabricated by the subtractive and additive processing methods based on the 3-dimensional reconstruction model. A total of 20 models were fabricated with subtractive processing method from polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) blocks using the stereolithography (STL) file of master gypsum model and another 20 models were fabricated with additive processing method using 3D printer with 0.025 mm of a layer thickness. The CAD-reference-model (CRM) and CAD-test-model (CTM) were superimposed by a software for accuracy analysis (Geomagic Qualify 13), where the STL files were transformed to point cloud data and the surface data (CRM and CTM) were subjected to initial alignment and followed by re-alignmented according to best-fit superimposition. The distances between surface data and all points, in this process, were converted to the root mean square (RMS) and averaged. In the experimental results, It was shown that the accuracy is higher in work model fabricated by additive processing method compared to one fabricated by subtractive one (p<0.05). In addition, it is considered that the working model fabricated by subtractive processing method is to be clinically applicable by improving the improper reproducibility of the tooth surface and depressed area.

Å°¿öµå

Àý»è ¹× ÀûÃþ Á¦Á¶; Ä¡°ú¿ë CAD/CAM; Á¤È®µµ; ÀÛ¾÷ ¸ðÇü
Subtractive and additive manufacturing; Dental CAD/CAM; Accuracy; Working model

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI