不同印模材料取模的三维精度比较

发布时间：2018-05-31 15:37

本文选题：印模材料 + 三维精度　；参考：《暨南大学学报(自然科学与医学版)》2017年03期

【摘要】：目的:应用激光三维扫描仪结合Geomagic Qualify软件分析不同印模材料取模的三维精度.方法:以下颌全牙列水晶模型为标准模型,聚醚橡胶、加成型、缩合型硅橡胶和Neocolloid藻酸盐分为4组印模材,各组分别制取标准模型的印模5个,灌注超硬石膏模型,3shape扫描仪扫描标准模型和超硬石膏模型后,用Geomagic qualify进行最佳拟合对齐和3D分析,对所得均方根误差值(RMS)进行统计分析,观察三维彩色偏差图分布的规律.结果:4种印模材料翻制的超硬石膏模型与标准模型的RMS,各组均有统计学差异(P0.05).多重比较显示任两组均有统计学差异(P0.05),结合4组的均值和拟合后的三维彩色偏差图,得出聚醚橡胶组模型三维精度高于加成型硅橡胶组,加成型硅橡胶组高于缩合型硅橡胶组,缩合型硅橡胶组高于Neocolloid藻酸盐组.结论:应用激光三维扫描仪结合杰魔检测(Geomagic Qualify)软件能用于测定不同印模材料的三维精度,直观准确得出4种印模材的三维精度依次为聚醚橡胶大于加成型硅橡胶大于缩合型硅橡胶大于Neocolloid藻酸盐.
[Abstract]:Objective: to analyze the 3D accuracy of different impression materials by using laser 3D scanner and Geomagic Qualify software. After scanning standard model and superanhydrite model by perfusion superanhydrite model / shape scanner, the best fitting alignment and 3D analysis were carried out with Geomagic qualify. The root mean square error (RMS) was statistically analyzed, and the distribution rule of 3D color deviation map was observed. Results the RMSs of the superanhydrite model and the standard model of 4 kinds of impression materials were significantly different in each group (P 0.05). The condensed silicone rubber group was higher than Neocolloid alginate group. Conclusion: the 3D laser scanner combined with Geomagic Qualifysoftware can be used to determine the 3D accuracy of different impression materials. The results show that the three dimensional accuracy of the four impression materials is that polyether rubber is greater than additive silicone rubber than condensed silicone rubber is larger than Neocolloid alginate.
【作者单位】：锦州医科大学附属第二医院修复科;
【基金】：辽宁省科学技术计划项目(2013022012)
【分类号】：R783.1

【相似文献】