不同的表面处理方法对选择性激光熔覆钴铬合金与三种水门汀粘结强度的影响实验
发布时间：2019-05-16 13:57
【摘要】：目的:通过体外实验,使用不同表面处理方法处理选择性激光熔覆技术(Selective Laser Melting,SLM)制作的钴铬合金表面,评价不同表面处理后的SLM钴铬合金与临床常用的三种水门汀的粘结强度。方法:1、SLM钴铬合金试块的制作:按照实验需求,使用bego钴铬合金粉末在激光熔覆机中制取10mm×10mm×2mm大小的长方体钴铬合金试块57个。2、SLM钴铬合金试块预处理:流水下,57块SLM钴铬合金试块依次使用400目、600目、800目、1000目的SiC水砂纸在同压力下打磨一百次,冲洗吹干后,随机抽取一个在扫描电镜下放大2000倍观察其表面形貌。再将打磨好的57块SLM钴铬合金试块使用笔式喷砂机喷砂10秒。喷砂完成后,SLM钴铬合金试块在蒸馏水中超声清洗10分钟,并在室温下自然干燥24小时备用。3、SLM钴铬合金标准测试块的制作:将上述处理的SLM钴铬合金试块在模具中使用自凝塑料包埋,暴露处理面,做成直径14mm、厚度4mm的标准测试块。4、实验分组:将57块标准测试块随机分成A、B、C三组,每组19个试块。其中A组不做处理,B组涂硅烷偶联剂,C组使用9.6%氢氟酸酸蚀处理。在A、B、C三组中分别随机抽取一个试块,在扫描电镜下观察。剩余的A、B、C三组共54块试块,各组分别随机分成9个亚组:A1、A2、A3,B1、B2、B3,C1、C2、C3,每个小组6个试块。其中A1、B1、C1三组和玻璃离子水门汀进行粘结,A2、B2、C2三组和树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀进行粘结,A3、B3、C3三组和树脂水门汀进行粘结。各组粘结实验均严格根据厂家说明书操作,并且控制为相同的粘结面积。粘结完成后放入盛有人工唾液的恒温(37°C)水浴箱中24小时。5、实验测定:(1)上述打磨、喷砂、喷砂+硅烷偶联剂、喷砂+酸蚀剂四种表面处理后SLM钴铬合金在2000倍扫描电镜下表面形貌的观察。(2)将试块在万能测试机上进行剪切实验,测出粘结面断裂时的力F,并利用P=F/S算出各组的剪切强度值。使用IBM SPSS Stitastics 19.0分析不同表面处理方式对SLM钴铬合金与三种水门汀粘结强度的影响。(3)观察剪切实验断裂界面的破坏模式。结果:1、表面处理方法和粘结剂的种类两个因素有交互作用;喷砂+硅烷偶联剂的处理方式与树脂的粘结剪切强度最强。2、以表面处理方法作为分析因素:(1)在使用玻璃离子水门汀的条件下,三种表面处理方法所得的剪切强度没有统计学差异(P0.05);(2)在使用树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀的条件下,三种表面处理方法所得的剪切强度没有统计学差异(P0.05);(3)在使用树脂水门汀的条件下,喷砂+硅烷偶联剂的处理方法所得剪切强度大于喷砂的处理方法(P0.05),且喷砂+硅烷偶联剂的表面处理方法所得剪切强度大于喷砂+氢氟酸酸蚀的表面处理方法(P0.05),但喷砂和喷砂+酸蚀这两种表面处理方法所得的剪切强度没有统计学差异(P0.05)。3、以粘结剂作为分析因素:(1)在喷砂的条件下,树脂水门汀的剪切强度大于玻璃离子水门汀的剪切强度(P0.05),且树脂水门汀的剪切强度大于树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀(P0.05),但玻璃离子水门汀和树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀之间没有统计学差异(P0.05);(2)在喷砂+硅烷偶联剂的条件下,树脂水门汀树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀玻璃离子水门汀(P0.05);(3)在喷砂+酸蚀的条件下,树脂水门汀树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀玻璃离子水门汀(P0.05)。4、肉眼观察粘结界面的破坏模式,结果:SLM钴铬合金和玻璃离子水门汀及树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀粘结实验的破坏模式主要为界面破坏,和树脂水门汀的粘结实验的断裂模式主要是混合破坏。结论:选择性激光熔覆钴铬合金在喷砂后使用硅烷偶联剂,并选择树脂水门汀粘结,效果最佳。
[Abstract]:Objective: To evaluate the bonding strength of the surface of the cobalt-chromium alloy prepared by selective laser cladding (SLM) using different surface treatment methods. Method:1. The preparation of the cobalt-chromium alloy test block of the SLM: According to the experimental requirements, the method of using the bgo-cobalt-chromium alloy powder in the laser cladding machine to prepare the 10-mm,10-mm and 2-mm-size rectangular-shaped cobalt-chromium alloy test block with a size of 57.2, the pretreatment of the cobalt-chromium alloy test block of the SLM: Under the running water,57 SLM cobalt-chromium alloy blocks were polished by 400 mesh,600 mesh,800 mesh, and 1000 mesh SiC water sandpaper at the same pressure. After the flushing and blow-drying, one of the 57 SLM cobalt-chromium alloy samples was randomly selected to be amplified by a scanning electron microscope for 2000 times to observe the surface morphology. And then the polished 57-block SLM cobalt-chromium alloy test block is blasted with a pen-type sand blasting machine for 10 seconds. after the sand blasting is finished, the SLM cobalt-chromium alloy test block is ultrasonically cleaned in distilled water for 10 minutes, and is naturally dried at room temperature for 24 hours for standby; and 3, the preparation of the standard test block of the SLM cobalt-chromium alloy standard is that the treated SLM cobalt-chromium alloy test block is embedded in a mould by using a self-setting plastic, and the treatment surface is exposed, A standard test block with a diameter of 14 mm and a thickness of 4 mm is made.4. Experimental grouping: The 57 standard test blocks are randomly divided into three groups of A, B and C, and 19 test blocks in each group. The group A is not treated, and the B group is coated with a silane coupling agent, and the group C uses 9.6% hydrofluoric acid etching treatment. One test block was taken at random in three groups of A, B and C, and observed under the scanning electron microscope. The remaining A, B and C were divided into four groups: A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, C1, C2, and C3, and 6 test blocks for each group. In which, three groups of A1, B1 and C1 and glass ionomer cement are bonded, and the three groups of A2, B2 and C2 and the resin reinforced glass ionomer cement are bonded, and the three groups of A3, B3 and C3 and the resin water menustine are bonded. All groups of bonding experiments were conducted in strict accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and controlled to the same bonding area. After the bonding was completed, it was put into a constant temperature (37 掳 C) water bath with artificial saliva for 24 hours.5. The experiment was carried out: (1) the observation of the surface morphology of the SLM Co-Cr alloy at 2000 times the scanning electron microscope after four surface treatments of the above-mentioned grinding, sand-blasting, sand-blasting + silane coupling agent, sand-blast + acid and the like. (2) The test block was cut out on the universal test machine to measure the force F at the time of fracture of the bonding surface, and the shear strength values of each group were calculated by P = F/ S. The effect of different surface treatment methods on the bonding strength of the SLM-Co-Cr alloy and the three kinds of water-gate was analyzed by using the IBM SPSS (SPSS) 19.0. (3) Observe the failure mode of the fracture interface of the shear test. The results were as follows:1. The surface treatment method and the type of the binder have the interaction; the treatment of the sand-blast + silane coupling agent and the adhesive shear strength of the resin are the most.2. The surface treatment method is used as an analysis factor: (1) under the condition of using the glass ionomer cement, The shear strength of the three surface treatment methods was not statistically different (P0.05); (2) There was no statistical difference in the shear strength of the three surface treatment methods under the condition that the resin reinforced glass ionomer was used (P0.05). (3) the shear strength obtained by the treatment method of the sand-blast + silane coupling agent is higher than that of the sand-blasting (P0.05) under the condition that the resin water is used; And the shear strength obtained by the surface treatment method of the sand-blasting + silane coupling agent is higher than that of the surface treatment method of the sand-blasting + hydrofluoric acid etching (P0.05), but the shear strength obtained by the two surface treatment methods of sandblasting and sandblasting + acid etching is not statistically different (P0.05). (1) Under the condition of sandblasting, the shear strength of the resin water gate is higher than that of the glass ionomer cement (P0.05), and the shear strength of the resin water gate is higher than that of the resin reinforced glass ionomer (P0.05). but there was no statistical difference between the glass ionomer cement and the resin reinforced glass ionomer (P0.05); (2) under the condition of sand-blast + silane coupling agent, the resin-water-menustine resin reinforced glass ionomer cement (P0.05); (3) Under the condition of sand-blast and acid etching, the resin-water-menustine resin reinforced glass ionomer cement (P0.05).4. The failure mode of the bonding interface is observed by the naked eye, and the result is as follows: The failure mode of the bonding experiment of the SLM-Co-Cr alloy and the glass ionomer cement and the resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement is mainly the interface failure, and the fracture mode of the bonding experiment of the resin water gate is mainly mixed and destroyed. Conclusion: The selective laser cladding of the cobalt-chromium alloy uses the silane coupling agent after sandblasting, and the resin water menustine is selected to bond and the effect is the best.
【学位授予单位】：南昌大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：R783.1
本文编号：2478324
[Abstract]:Objective: To evaluate the bonding strength of the surface of the cobalt-chromium alloy prepared by selective laser cladding (SLM) using different surface treatment methods. Method:1. The preparation of the cobalt-chromium alloy test block of the SLM: According to the experimental requirements, the method of using the bgo-cobalt-chromium alloy powder in the laser cladding machine to prepare the 10-mm,10-mm and 2-mm-size rectangular-shaped cobalt-chromium alloy test block with a size of 57.2, the pretreatment of the cobalt-chromium alloy test block of the SLM: Under the running water,57 SLM cobalt-chromium alloy blocks were polished by 400 mesh,600 mesh,800 mesh, and 1000 mesh SiC water sandpaper at the same pressure. After the flushing and blow-drying, one of the 57 SLM cobalt-chromium alloy samples was randomly selected to be amplified by a scanning electron microscope for 2000 times to observe the surface morphology. And then the polished 57-block SLM cobalt-chromium alloy test block is blasted with a pen-type sand blasting machine for 10 seconds. after the sand blasting is finished, the SLM cobalt-chromium alloy test block is ultrasonically cleaned in distilled water for 10 minutes, and is naturally dried at room temperature for 24 hours for standby; and 3, the preparation of the standard test block of the SLM cobalt-chromium alloy standard is that the treated SLM cobalt-chromium alloy test block is embedded in a mould by using a self-setting plastic, and the treatment surface is exposed, A standard test block with a diameter of 14 mm and a thickness of 4 mm is made.4. Experimental grouping: The 57 standard test blocks are randomly divided into three groups of A, B and C, and 19 test blocks in each group. The group A is not treated, and the B group is coated with a silane coupling agent, and the group C uses 9.6% hydrofluoric acid etching treatment. One test block was taken at random in three groups of A, B and C, and observed under the scanning electron microscope. The remaining A, B and C were divided into four groups: A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, C1, C2, and C3, and 6 test blocks for each group. In which, three groups of A1, B1 and C1 and glass ionomer cement are bonded, and the three groups of A2, B2 and C2 and the resin reinforced glass ionomer cement are bonded, and the three groups of A3, B3 and C3 and the resin water menustine are bonded. All groups of bonding experiments were conducted in strict accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and controlled to the same bonding area. After the bonding was completed, it was put into a constant temperature (37 掳 C) water bath with artificial saliva for 24 hours.5. The experiment was carried out: (1) the observation of the surface morphology of the SLM Co-Cr alloy at 2000 times the scanning electron microscope after four surface treatments of the above-mentioned grinding, sand-blasting, sand-blasting + silane coupling agent, sand-blast + acid and the like. (2) The test block was cut out on the universal test machine to measure the force F at the time of fracture of the bonding surface, and the shear strength values of each group were calculated by P = F/ S. The effect of different surface treatment methods on the bonding strength of the SLM-Co-Cr alloy and the three kinds of water-gate was analyzed by using the IBM SPSS (SPSS) 19.0. (3) Observe the failure mode of the fracture interface of the shear test. The results were as follows:1. The surface treatment method and the type of the binder have the interaction; the treatment of the sand-blast + silane coupling agent and the adhesive shear strength of the resin are the most.2. The surface treatment method is used as an analysis factor: (1) under the condition of using the glass ionomer cement, The shear strength of the three surface treatment methods was not statistically different (P0.05); (2) There was no statistical difference in the shear strength of the three surface treatment methods under the condition that the resin reinforced glass ionomer was used (P0.05). (3) the shear strength obtained by the treatment method of the sand-blast + silane coupling agent is higher than that of the sand-blasting (P0.05) under the condition that the resin water is used; And the shear strength obtained by the surface treatment method of the sand-blasting + silane coupling agent is higher than that of the surface treatment method of the sand-blasting + hydrofluoric acid etching (P0.05), but the shear strength obtained by the two surface treatment methods of sandblasting and sandblasting + acid etching is not statistically different (P0.05). (1) Under the condition of sandblasting, the shear strength of the resin water gate is higher than that of the glass ionomer cement (P0.05), and the shear strength of the resin water gate is higher than that of the resin reinforced glass ionomer (P0.05). but there was no statistical difference between the glass ionomer cement and the resin reinforced glass ionomer (P0.05); (2) under the condition of sand-blast + silane coupling agent, the resin-water-menustine resin reinforced glass ionomer cement (P0.05); (3) Under the condition of sand-blast and acid etching, the resin-water-menustine resin reinforced glass ionomer cement (P0.05).4. The failure mode of the bonding interface is observed by the naked eye, and the result is as follows: The failure mode of the bonding experiment of the SLM-Co-Cr alloy and the glass ionomer cement and the resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement is mainly the interface failure, and the fracture mode of the bonding experiment of the resin water gate is mainly mixed and destroyed. Conclusion: The selective laser cladding of the cobalt-chromium alloy uses the silane coupling agent after sandblasting, and the resin water menustine is selected to bond and the effect is the best.
【学位授予单位】：南昌大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：R783.1
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前5条
1 陈锡平;;选择性激光熔积技术制作钴铬合金基底冠的边缘密合度研究[J];口腔材料器械杂志;2016年02期
2 田孝梅;曾丽;魏斌;黄轶锋;;激光熔积钴铬合金的热膨胀系数测定[J];上海口腔医学;2015年06期
3 沈宇;关义青;白松;李刚;;激光熔覆技术的发展现状及展望[J];制造技术与机床;2011年10期
4 陈光霞;曾晓雁;王泽敏;关凯;彭昌吻;;选择性激光熔化快速成型工艺研究[J];机床与液压;2010年01期
5 鲁中良;史玉升;刘锦辉;陈英;黄树槐;;间接选择性激光烧结与选择性激光熔化对比研究[J];铸造技术;2007年11期
相关硕士学位论文 前2条
1 陈艳如;不同粘接剂和基台高度对种植体—冠界面粘接性能的影响[D];兰州大学;2015年
2 杨欣;口腔修复用树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀的合成及性能研究[D];北京化工大学;2011年
，本文编号：2478324
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/yixuelunwen/kouq/2478324.html
最近更新
教材专著
