• Journal of Technologic Dentistry
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.9-15
• /
• 2007

As the development of nanotechnology, the use of composite resins which containing nanofillers becomes popular. The purpose of this study was to test the degree of polymerization of nanofillercontaining composite resins. For the study, three different nanofiller-containing composite resins and two different light-curing units were used. To evaluate the degree of polymerization, the maximum polymerization shrinkage taking place during the light curing, and the microhardness, after the light curing, were measured. As results, two light-curing units exhibited a similar emission spectrum to that of the included photoinitiator, camphorquinone. The only difference between the light-curing units were the width of the emission spectrum. Three different composite resins showed different microhardness values. Among them, Grandio showed the greatest microhardness value. However, there was less microhardness difference on the top and bottom surfaces due to the difference of the light-curing units. The maximum polymerization shrinkage values were also similar in the tested specimens regardless of the difference of the light-curing units. However, Grandio showed the least polymerization shrinkage. According to the manufacturers' data, Grandio showed the highest filler content(vol%).

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.145-152
• /
• 1984

The purpose of this study was to compare combinations of the four visible light irradiating appliances (Translux, Heliomat, Pluraflex HL 150, Omega) and the four visible light activated composite resins (Durafil, Heliosit, Plurafil-super, Silux) to determine the depth of polymerization of each combination. Twenty samples were made with Durafil. Five samples were polymerized for 20 seconds using Translux, five with Heliomat, five with Pluraflex HL 150, five with Omega. Twenty samples were made with Heliosit, twenty with Plurafil-super, and twenty samples with Silux. A 20-second polymerization time was applied with each of 4 visible light irradiating appliances to 5 samples of each material. Eighty samples were treated in a like manner, but polymerization was extended to 40 seconds. Depth of polymerization were measured with caliper. The results were as follows. 1) Of the two time exposures, 40-second exposure provided a significantly greater depth of polymerization than 20-second for each light with each material. 2) Durafill-Translux system showed minimum depth of polymerization, and Plurafil-Pluraflex system showed maximum depth of polymerization. 3) Visible light irradiating appliances were able to harden the resins cured by tire visible lights of other makers' apparatuses. 4) In all circumstances, depth of polymerization was between 3.0-3.8mm.

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.368-382
• /
• 1998

The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the results of argon laser for 5 seconds, argon laser for 10 seconds, and visible light for 40 seconds photo-polymerization in compressive strength, microhardness, curing depth, temperature rising during polymerization, and polymerization shrinkage. Hybrid type composite resin(Z-100) and compomer(Dyract) were used to be compared. The compressive strength was measured by an Instron(1mm/min cross head speed) in 60 specimens and the microhardness of the surface was expressed by Vickers Hardness Number(VHN) in 30 specimens. The curing depth was evaluated comparing the different values of upper and lower VHN according to irradiation time and thickness for the light source polymerization in 60 specimens. The temperature rising during photopolymerization was observed by the temperature change with thermocouple sensitizer beneath 40 specimens at the argon laser for 10 seconds and visible light 40 seconds irradiation. The polymerization shinkage was evaluated by calculating the decrease of % volume by using a dilatometer in 30 specimens. The results were as follows ; 1. In the case of compressive strength, the argon laser polymerization groups were higher than visible light group in Z-100 (p<0.05). In Dyract, the argon laser 5 seconds group did not show a significant difference with the visible light 40 seconds group. The argon laser 10 seconds group showed the markedly low value when compared with other groups (p<0.05) 2. In microhardness, Z-100 was better than Dyract when comparing by VHNs (p<0.05); however, there was not a significant difference between two materials in the visible light 40 seconds group and the argon laser 10 seconds group. 3. In the study of curing depth, Z-100 showed the consistent polymerization in argon laser irradiation because there was no difference in the VHN decrease according to the thickness change. Over the thickness control, the results did not show a significant difference between visible light and argon laser group in Z-100; however, in the case of Dyract, the visible light 40 seconds group was better than the argon laser groups(p<0.05). 4. There was a significant difference between the two materials in temperature rising during polymerization (p<0.05), but not a significant difference between irradiation times, 5. There was not a significant difference between the two materials in polymerization shrink age. The argon laser 5 seconds group was smaller than the other groups (p<0.05). It could be concluded that Z-100 polymerization was recommended to use the argon laser for reduction of the irradiation time while Dyract was recommended to use the visible light polymerization.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.195-201
• /
• 2014

Purpose: This study was designed to compare the amount of polymerization shrinkage of dual-cure resin cements according to different polymerization modes and to determine the effect of light activation on the degree of polymerization. Materials and methods: Four kinds of dual-cure resin cements were investigated: Smartcem 2, Panavia F 2.0, Clearfil SA Luting and Zirconite. Each material was tested in three different polymerization modes: self-polymerization only, immediate light polymerization and 5 minutes-delayed light polymerization. The time-dependent polymerization shrinkage-strain was evaluated for 30 minutes by Bonded-disk method at $37^{\circ}C$. Five recordings of each material with three different modes were taken. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and multiple comparison Scheffe′test (${\alpha}$=.05). Results: All materials, except Panavia F 2.0, exhibited the highest polymerization shrinkage-strain through delayed light-activated polymerization. No significant difference between light activation modes was found with Panavia F 2.0. All materials exhibited more than 90% of polymerization rate in the immediate or delayed light activated group within 10 minutes. Conclusion: As a clinical implication of this study, the application of delayed light activation mode to dual-cure resin cements is advantageous in terms of degree of polymerization.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.135-141
• /
• 2002

Objectives : The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of light intensity variation on the polymerization rate of composite resin using IB system (the experimental equipment designed by Dr. IB Lee) by which real-time volumetric change of composite can be measured. Methods : Three commercial composite resins [Z100(Z1), AeliteFil(AF), SureFil(SF)] were photopolymerized with Variable Intensity Polymerizer unit (Bisco, U.S.A.) under the variable light intensity (75/150/225/300/375/450mW$^2$) during 20 sec. Polymerization shrinkage of samples was detected continuously by IB system during 110 sec and the rate of polymerization shrinkage was obtained by its shrinkage data. Peak time(P.T.) showing the maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage was used to compare the polymerization rate. Results : Peak time decreased with increasing light intensity(p<0.05). Maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage increased with increasing light intensity(p<0.05). Statistical analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between peak time and inverse square root of the light intensity (AF:R=0.965, Zl:R=0.974, SF:R=0.927). Statistical analysis revealed a significant negative correlation between the maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage and peak time(AF:R=-0.933, Zl:R=-0.892, SF:R=-0.883), and a significant positive correlation between the maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage and square root of the light intensity (AF:R=0.988, Zl:R=0.974, SF:R=0.946). Discussion and Conclusions : The polymerization rate of composite resins used in this study was proportional to the square root of light intensity Maximum rate of polymerization shrinkage as well as peak time can be used to compare the polymerization rate. Real-time volume method using IB system can be a simple alternative method to obtain the polymerization rate of composite resins.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.27 no.5
• /
• pp.488-492
• /
• 2002

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of plasma arc curing (PAC) unit for composite and compomer curing. To compare its effectiveness with conventional quartz tungsten halogen (QTH) light curing unit, the polymerization shrinkage rates and amounts of three composites (Z100, Z250, Synergy Duo Shade) and one compomer, that had been light cured by PAC unit or QTH unit, was compared using a custome made linometer. The measurement of polymerization shrinkage was peformed after polymerization with either QTH unit or PAC unit. In case of curing with the PAC unit, the composite was light cured with Apollo 95E for 6s, the power density of which was recorded as 1350 mW/$\textrm{cm}^2$ by Coltolux Light Meter. For light curing with QTH unit, the composite was light cured for 30s with the XL2500, the power density of which was recorded as 800 mW/$\textrm{cm}^2$ by Coltolux Light Meter. The amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was recorded in the computer every 0.5s for 60s. Ten measurements were made for each material. The amount of linear polymerization shrinkage for each material in 10s and 60s which were cured with PAC or QTH unit were compared with t test. The amount of polymerization shrinkage in the tested materials were compared with 1way ANOVA with Duncan's multiple range test. As for the amounts of polymerization shrinkage in 60s, there was no difference between PAC unit and QTH unit in Z250 and Synergy Duo Shade. In Z100 and Dyract AP, it was lower when it was cured with PAC unit than when it was cured with QTH unit (p<0.05). As for the amounts of polymerization shrinkage in 10s, there was no difference between PAC unit and QTH unit in Z100 and Dyract AP. The amounts of polymerization shrinkage was significantly higher when it was cured with PAC unit in Z250 and Synergy Duo Shade (p<0.05). The amounts of polymerization shrinkage in the tested materials when they were cured with QTH unit were Z250 (6.6um) < Z100 (9.3um), Dyract AP (9.7um) < Synergy Duo Shade (11.2um) (p<0.05). The amount of polymerization shrinkage when the materials were cured with PAC unit were Dyract AP (5.6um) < Z100 (8.1um), Z250(7.0um) < Synergy Duo Shade (11.2um) (p<0.05).

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.354-359
• /
• 2003

This study evaluated the effectiveness of the light emitting diode(LED) units for composite curing. To compare its effectiveness with conventional quartz tungsten halogen (QTH) light curing unit. the microhardness of 2mm composite. Z250, which had been light cured by the LEDs (Ultralume LED2, FreeLight, Developing product Dl) or QTH (XL 3000) were compared on the upper and lower surface. One way ANOVA with Tukey and Paired t-test was used at 95% levels of confidence. In addition. the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was compared between composites which were light cured by QTH or LEDs using a custom-made linometer in 10s and 60s of light curing, and the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was compared by one way ANOVA with Tukey. The amount of polymerization shrinkage at 10s was XL3000 > Ultralume 2. 40. 60 > FreeLight, D1 (P<0.05) The amount of polymerization shrinkage at 60s was XL3000 > Ultralume 2, 60> Ultralume 2.40 > FreeLight, D1 (P<0.05) The microhardness on the upper and lower surface was as follows ; (equation omitted) It was concluded that the LEDs produced lower polymerization shrinkage in 10s and 60s compared with QTH unit. In addition. the microhardness of samples which had been cured with LEDs was lower on the lower surfaces than the upper surfaces whereas there was no difference in QTH cured samples.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.33 no.4
• /
• pp.341-351
• /
• 2008

This study investigated the effect of intermittent polymerization on the rate of polymerization shrinkage and cuspal deflection in composite resins. The linear polymerization shrinkage of each composite was measured using the custom-made linometer along with the light shutter specially devised to block the light at the previously determined interval. Samples were divided into 4 groups by light curing method; Group 1) continuous light (60s with light on); Group 2) intermittent light (cycles of 3s with 2s light on & 1s with light off for 90s): Group 3) intermittent light (cycles of 2s with 1s light on & 1s with light off for 120s); Group 4) intermittent light (cycles of 3s with 1s light on & 2s with light off for 180s). The amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was measured and its maximum rate (Rmax) and peak time (PT) in the first 15 seconds were calculated. For the measurement of cuspal deflection of teeth, MOD cavities were prepared in 10 extracted maxillary premolars. Reduction in the intercuspal distance was measured by the custom-made cuspal deflection measuring machine. ANOVA analysis was used for the comparison of the light curing groups and t-test was used to determine significant difference between the composite resins. Pyramid showed the greater amount of polymerization shrinkage than Heliomolar (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the linear polymerization shrinkage among the groups. The Rmax was group 4 < 3, 2 < 1 in Heliomolar and group 3 < 4 < 2, 1 in Pyramid (p < 0.05). Pyramid demonstrated greater cuspal deflection than Heliomolar. The cuspal deflection in Heliomolar was group 4 < 3 < 2, 1 and group 4, 3 < 2, 1 in Pyramid (p < 0.05). It was concluded that the reduced rate of polymerization shrinkage by intermittent polymerization can help to decrease the cuspal deflection.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.36 no.3 s.116
• /
• pp.198-206
• /
• 2006

With the introduction of the xenon plasma arc curing light and the LED curing light as orthodontic curing lights, the polymerizing time of orthodontic composites has clearly decreased. In contrast to various research cases regarding the polymerization time and bond strength of the xenon plasma arc curing light, not enough research exists on the LED curing light, including the appropriate polymerization time. The objective of this research was to compare the bond strength of the plasma curing light and the LED curing light in regards to the polymerization time. The polymerization time needed to achieve an appropriate adhesion strength of the bracket has also been studied. After applying orthodontic brackets using composite resin onto 120 human premolars, the plasma arc curing light and the LED curing light were used for polymerization for 4, 6, and 8 seconds accordingly. This research proved that the LED curing light provided appropriate bond strength for mounting orthodontic brackets even with short seconds of polymerization. The expensive cost and large size of the device limits the use of the plasma arc curing light, whereas the low cost and easy handling of the LED curing light may lead to greater use in orthodontics.

• Current Optics and Photonics
• /
• v.2 no.3
• /
• pp.286-290
• /
• 2018

We investigated the dependence of the retardation dispersion on the polarization direction of ultraviolet (UV) light during the photopolymerization of self-organized smectic reactive mesogen (RM) molecules. RM retarder film that was photopolymerized with UV light linearly polarized parallel to the layer plane showed negative dispersion (ND) of retardation for a wide range of UV polymerization temperatures. On the other hand, film that was photopolymerized with unpolarized UV light showed negative dispersion in a narrow range of UV polymerization temperatures. With a certain UV polymerization temperature, the dispersion of retardation was converted from positive to negative, depending on the UV polarization.