Impact of filler size and distribution on roughness and wear of composite resin after simulated toothbrushing

Objectives: Nanofilled composite resins are claimed to provide superior mechanical properties compared with microhybrid resins. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare nanofilled with microhybrid composite resins. The null hypothesis was that the size and the distribution of fillers do not influence the mechanical properties of surface roughness and wear after simulated toothbrushing test. Material and methods: Ten rectangular specimens (15 mm x 5 mm x 4 mm) of Filtek Z250 (FZ2), Admira (A), TPH3 (T), Esthet-X (EX), Estelite Sigma (ES), Concept Advanced (C), Grandio (G) and Filtek Z350 (F) were prepared according to manufacturer's instructions. Half of each top surface was protected with nail polish as control surface (not brushed) while the other half was assessed with five random readings using a roughness tester (Ra). Following, the specimens were abraded by simulated toothbrushing with soft toothbrushes and slurry comprised of 2: 1 water and dentifrice (w/w). 100,000 strokes were performed and the brushed surfaces were re-analyzed. Nail polish layers were removed from the specimens so that the roughness (Ra) and the wear could be assessed with three random readings (mu m). Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's multiple-comparison test (alpha = 0.05). Results: Overall outcomes indicated that composite resins showed a significant increase in roughness after simulated toothbrushing, except for Grandio, which presented a smoother surface. Generally, wear of nanofilled resins was significantly lower compared with microhybrid resins. Conclusions: As restorative materials suffer alterations under mechanical challenges, such as toothbrushing, the use of nanofilled materials seem to be more resistant than microhybrid composite resins, being less prone to be rougher and worn.

Wear and corrosion resistance of pack chromised carbon steel

Pack chromising treatment is an environmentally friendly alternative to hard chromium to form wear and corrosion resistant surface layers. In this work, samples of AISI 1060 steel were pack chromised for 6 and 9 h at 1000 and 1050 degrees C using different activator concentrations. Wear tests were performed in dry conditions and corrosion tests in natural sea water for the pack chromised samples and hard chromium. Pack chromising yielded the formation of layers with high chromium concentrations, high hardness and wear resistance. Increasing activator concentration causes no significant change on the morphology and thickness of the layers. The layers produced at 1050 degrees C yielded only a (Cr,Fe)(2)N1-x phase, and those obtained at 1000 degrees C are composed of a carbide mixture with (Cr,Fe)(2)N1-x. The sample treated at 1050 degrees C for 9 h resulted in an optimum condition by means of better wear resistance and corrosion properties, which were close to that exhibited by the hard chrome, indicating that pack chromising is a promising alternative.