期刊文献+

3D打印和铸造钴铬合金耐蚀性及力学稳定性比较 被引量:9

Comparison of the corrosion resistance and the mechanical stability after corrosion of 3D printingand cast cobalt-chromium alloy
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的研究3D打印和铸造钴铬合金的耐蚀性及腐蚀对其力学稳定性的影响。方法采用3D打印技术中选择性激光熔融技术(SLM)和传统铸造技术共制作钴铬合金试件72个,根据是否腐蚀采用随机数字法随机平均分为12组(每组6个),各组用于不同的测试及进入腐蚀。采用静态浸泡腐蚀法对试件进行腐蚀实验,激光扫描共聚焦显微镜(CLSM)检测试件表面粗糙度(Ra)及表面形貌,显微硬度计测量显微维氏硬度(VHN),万能测试机测试拉伸强度(TS)及弯曲强度(BS)。工艺和腐蚀对Ra、VHN、TS、BS等值的影响采用双因素析因方差分析进行分析(α=0.05),Bonferroni法进行组间两两比较。结果工艺和腐蚀对Ra和BS无交互效应(F_(Ra)=2.989,P_(Ra)=0.099;F_(BS)=0.480,P_(BS)=0.496)。两因素对Co-Cr合金的Ra值的主效应均有统计学意义(F_(工艺)=6.262,P_(工艺)=0.021;F_(腐蚀)=6.581,P_(腐蚀)=0.018),3D组的Ra值[(0.084±0.026)μm]低于铸造组[(0.111±0.024)μm],对照组的Ra值[(0.084±0.025)μm]低于腐蚀组[(0.111±0.025)μm]。两因素对Co-Cr合金的BS值的主效应均有统计学意义(F_(工艺)=6.753,P_(工艺)=0.013;F_(腐蚀)=7.384,P_(腐蚀)=0.017),3D组的BS值[(1651±242)MPa]高于铸造组[(1371±252)MPa],对照组的BS值[(1645±183)MPa]高于腐蚀组[(1377±310)MPa]。两因素对VHN和TS有交互效应(F_(VHN)=5.018,P_(VHN)=0.037;F_(TS)=5.903,P_(TS)=0.025)。Bonferroni法组间两两比较结果显示,3D对照组VHN值和TS值[VHN_(3D)=(469±4)HV,TS_(3D)=(1010±46)MPa]与铸造对照组[VHN_(铸造)=(418±4)HV,TS_(铸造)=(827±25)MPa]比较,差异有统计学意义(PVHN<0.001,PTS<0.001);3D腐蚀组VHN值及TS值[VHN_(3D)=(418±3)HV,TS_(3D)=(985±30)MPa]与铸造腐蚀组[VHN_(铸造)=(375±5)HV,TS_(铸造)=(728±45)MPa]比较,差异有统计学意义(PVHN<0.001,PTS<0.001);3D对照组VHN值与3D腐蚀组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.001),3D对照组TS值与3D腐蚀组比较差异无统计学意义(P=1.000);铸造对照组VHN值及TS值与铸造腐蚀组差异有统计学意义(P_(VHN)<0.001,P_(TS)=0.001)。结论 3D打印钴铬合金较铸造钴铬合金耐蚀性更优;前者TS、BS的稳定性均大于后者,两者的VHN稳定性相当。 Objective To compare the corrosion resistance and the mechanical stability after corrosion of 3D printing and cast cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) alloy. Methods The Co-Cr alloys were fabricated by the selective laser melting(SLM)technique and casting technique with suitable parameters, seventy-two specimens were prepared and divided into 12 groups(n=6)by random number method. Static immersion test was used to evaluate corrosion resistance and the effect of the corrosion on the mechanical stability of the alloys. Surface roughness (Ra),vickers hardness (VHN),tensile strength (TS) and bending strength (BS) of the samples were analyzed separately by confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM),vicker microhardness tester,universal testing machine. The results were analyzed by 2 × 2 factorial design analysis of variance(α=0.05),the pairwise comparison was performed with Bonferroni method. Results Manufacturing methods and corrosion had no interaction effects on Ra and BS (FRa=2.989,PRa=0.099;FBS=0.480,PBS=0.496). The two factors′main effects on Ra had significant differences (Fmethod=6.262,Pmethod=0.021;Fcor osion=6.581,Pcor osion=0.018). The Ra of 3D group was lower than that of cast group[Ra3D=(0.084 ± 0.026)μm,Racast=(0.111 ± 0.024)μm]. The Ra of contrast group was lower than that of corrosion group[Racontrast=(0.084 ± 0.025)μm,Racor osion=(0.111 ± 0.025)μm]. The two factors′main effects on BS had significant differences(Fmethod=6.753,Pmethod=0.013;Fcor osion=7.384,Pcor osion=0.017). The BS of 3D group was higher than that of cast group[BS3D=(1651 ± 242)MPa,BScast=(1371 ± 252) MPa]. The BS of contrast group was higher than that of corrosion group[BScontrast=(1645 ± 183)MPa, BScor osion=(1377 ± 310)MPa]. Manufacturing methods and corrosion had interaction effects on VHN and TS (FVHN=5.018,PVHN=0.037;FTS=5.903,PTS=0.025). The results of the pairwise comparison of Bonferroni method suggested significant differences on VHN and TS(PVHN〈0.001,PTS〈0.001)were found between the 3D contrast group [VHN3D=(469 ± 4) HV,TS3D=(1010 ± 46) MPa] and the cast contrast group [VHNcast=(418 ± 4)HV,TScast=(827 ± 25)MPa],significant differences on VHN and TS(PVHN〈0.001, PTS〈0.001)were observed between the 3D corrosion group[VHN3D=(418 ± 3)HV,TS3D=(985 ± 30)MPa] and the cast corrosion group[VHNcast=(375 ± 5)HV,TScast=(728 ± 45)MPa]. Significant differences on VHN(P〈0.001)were found between the 3D contrast group and the 3D corrosion group. No significant differences on TS (P=1.000) were found between the 3D contrast group and the 3D corrosion group. Significant differences on VHN and TS(PVHN〈0.001,PTS〈0.001)were observed between the cast contrast group and the cast corrosion group. Conclusions The 3D printing Co-Cr alloy has better corrosion resistance than that of the cast Co-Cr alloy. The 3D printing Co-Cr alloy has better stability of the TS and BS than that of the cast Co-Cr alloy. Both kinds of alloys have equal stability of VHN.
出处 《中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版)》 CAS 2016年第5期327-332,共6页 Chinese Journal of Stomatological Research(Electronic Edition)
关键词 3D打印 选择性激光熔融 钴铬合金 耐蚀性 力学稳定性 3D printing Selective laser melting Cobalt-chromium alloy Corrosion resistance Mechanical stability
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献30

  • 1Mr6zov6 M, KlouSkova A. Leucite porcelain fused to metals for dental restoration [ J ]. Ceram-Silik, 2009,53 (3) : 225-230.
  • 2Kovalev AI, Vainshtein DL, Mishina VP, et al. Selective laser sintering of steel powders to obtain products based on SAPR- models [J]. Metallurgist, 2000,44(4) :206-209.
  • 3Katsoulis J, Mericsk-Stern R, Rotkina L, et al. Precision of fit of implant - supported screw - retained 10 - unit computer - aided - designed and computer- aided- manufactured frameworks made from zirconium dioxide and titanium: an in vitro study [J~. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2014,25(2) : 165-174.
  • 4Hong JT, Shin SY. A comparative study on the bond strength of porcelain to the millingable Pd-Ag alloy [J]. J Adv Prosthodont, 2014,6(5) :372-378.
  • 5Iseri U, Ozkurt Z, Kazazoglu E. Shear bond strengths of veneering porcelain to cast, machined and laser-sintered titanium ~J]. Dent Mater J, 2011,30 (3) : 274-280.
  • 6Zhang CC, Ye JT, Zhang YP, et al. Effect of titanium preoxidation on wrought pure titanium to ceramic bond strength [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2013,109(2) : 106-112.
  • 7ISO 9693 (E). Metal-Ceramic Dental Restorative Systems IS]. 2nd ed. Switzerland: International Organization for Standardiza- tion, 1999.
  • 8Oliveira de Vasconcellos LG, Silva LH, Reis de Vasconcellos LM, et al. Effect of airborne-particle abrasion and mechanico- thermal cycling on the flexural strength of glass ceramic fused to gold or cobalt-chromium alloy [J]. J Prosthodont, 2011, 20(7) : 553-560.
  • 9Ringle RD, Macker JR Jr, Fairhurst CW. An X-ray spectrometric technique for measuring porcelain-metal adherence [J]. J Dent Res, 1983,62(8) :933-936.
  • 10Lombardo GH, Nishioka RS, Souza RO, et al. Influence of surface treatment on the shear bond strength of ceramics fused to cobalt-chromium [ J ]. J Prosthodont, 2009,19 (2) : 103-111.

共引文献10

同被引文献52

引证文献9

二级引证文献31

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部