Does an incremental filling technique reduce polymerization shrinkage stresses

It is widely accepted that volumetric contraction and solidification during the polymerization process of restorative composites in combination with bonding to the hard tissue result in stress transfer and inward deformation of the cavity walls of the restored tooth. Deformation of the walls decreases the size of the cavity during the filling process. This fact has a profound influence on the assumption-raised and discussed in this paper-that an incremental filling technique reduces the stress effect of composite shrinkage on the tooth. Developing stress fields for different incremental filling techniques are simulated in a numerical analysis. The analysis shows that, in a restoration with a well-established bond to the tooth-as is generally desired-incremental filling techniques increase the deformation of the restored tooth. The increase is caused by the incremental deformation of the preparation, which effectively decreases the total amount of composite needed to fill the cavity. This leads to a higher-stressed tooth-composite structure. The study also shows that the assessment of intercuspal distance measurements as well as simplifications based on generalization of the shrinkage stress state cannot be sufficient to characterize the effect of polymerization shrinkage in a tooth-restoration complex. Incremental filling methods may need to be retained for reasons such as densification, adaptation, thoroughness of cure, and bond formation. However, it is very difficult to prove that incrementalization needs to be retained because of the abatement of shrinkage effects.

Elemental analysis of soil samples for forensic purposes by inductively coupled plasma spectrometry - precision considerations

Major and trace elemental composition provides a powerful basis for forensic comparison of soils, sediments and rocks. However, it is important that the potential 'errors' associated with the procedures are fully understood and quantified, and that standard protocols are applied for sample preparation and analysis. This paper describes such a standard procedure and reports results both for instrumental measurement precision (repeatability) and overall 'method' precision (reproducibility). Results obtained both for certified reference materials and example soils show that the instrumental measurement precision (defined by the coefficient of variation, CV) for most elements is better than 2-3%. When different solutions were prepared from the same sample powder, and from different sub-sample powders prepared from the same parent sample, the CV increased to c. 5-6% for many elements. The largest variation was found in results for certified reference materials generated from 23 instrument runs over an 18 month period (mean CV=c. 11%). Some elements were more variable than others. W was found to be the most variable and the elements V, Cr, Co, Cu, Ni and Pb also showed higher than average variability. SiO2, CaO, Al2O3 and Fe2O3, Rb, Sr, La, Ce, Nd and Sm generally showed lower than average variability, and therefore provided the most reliable basis for inter-sample comparison. It is recommended that, whenever possible, samples relating to the same investigation should be analysed in the same sample run, or at least sequential runs.