Premium
Observation and comparison of polished composite surfaces with the aid of SEM and profilometer.
Author(s) -
LAMBRECHTS P.,
HERLE G.
Publication year - 1982
Publication title -
journal of oral rehabilitation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.991
H-Index - 93
eISSN - 1365-2842
pISSN - 0305-182X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1982.tb01010.x
Subject(s) - profilometer , materials science , composite material , polishing , composite number , surface roughness , abrasive , surface finish
Summary After cleaning with an abrasive toothpaste, fourteen polished composites were examined in vitro SEM and profilometrically. It was shown that the smooth surface composites kept a remarkable smoothness. The classic composites coarsened profilometrically eight times under these testing conditions, and the glass‐ionomers fourteen times. SEM pictures pointed out that the organic matrix was the weakest link for classic composites as well as for glass‐ionomer cements. The glass‐ionomers were the roughest group because of the large grain size, numerous cracks and porosities. The porosities hampered the roughness measurements in all materials and contributed to a large extent to the roughness of the products.