TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of surface roughness as a function of multiple blasting processing variables
AU - Valverde, Guilherme B.
AU - Jimbo, Ryo
AU - Teixeira, Hellen S.
AU - Bonfante, Estevam A.
AU - Janal, Malvin N.
AU - Coelho, Paulo G.
PY - 2013/2
Y1 - 2013/2
N2 - Objectives: This study evaluated the effect of implant surface blasting variables, such as blasting media size, velocity, and surface coverage and their two- and three-way interaction in surface roughness parameters. Material and methods: Machined, grade IV titanium-alloy implants (n = 180) had their surfaces treated by a combination of 36 different blasting protocols according to the following variables: aluminum oxide blasting media particle size (50, 100, and 150 μm); velocity (75, 100, 125, and 150 m/s), and surface coverage (5, 15, 25 g/in.2) (n = 5 per blasting protocol). A single 0.46 inch nozzle of the blaster was pointed at the threaded area and spaced 0.050 inches away. Surface topography (n = 5 measurements per implant) was assessed by scanning electron microscopy. Roughness parameters Sa, Sq, Sdr, and Sds were evaluated by optical interferometry. A GLM statistical model evaluated the effects of blasting variables on the surface parameters, and their two- and three-way interaction (P < 0.05). Statistical inferences for Sa and Sq were performed after a log10 transformation to correct for data skewness. Results: Prior to the log10 transformation, Sa and Sq values for all processing groups ranged from ~0.5 to ~2.6 μm and from ~0.75 to 4 μm, respectively. Statistical inferences showed that Sa, Sq, and Sdr values were significantly dependent on blasting media, velocity, and surface coverage (all P < 0.001). Media × velocity, media × coverage, and media × velocity × coverage also significantly affected Sa, Sq, and Sdr values (P < 0.002). The highest levels were obtained with 100 μm blasting media, coverage for 5 g/in.2, and velocity of 100 m/s. No significant differences were observed for Sds (P > 0.15). Conclusions: The blasting variables produced different surface topography features and knowledge of their interaction could be used to tailor a desired implant surface configuration.
AB - Objectives: This study evaluated the effect of implant surface blasting variables, such as blasting media size, velocity, and surface coverage and their two- and three-way interaction in surface roughness parameters. Material and methods: Machined, grade IV titanium-alloy implants (n = 180) had their surfaces treated by a combination of 36 different blasting protocols according to the following variables: aluminum oxide blasting media particle size (50, 100, and 150 μm); velocity (75, 100, 125, and 150 m/s), and surface coverage (5, 15, 25 g/in.2) (n = 5 per blasting protocol). A single 0.46 inch nozzle of the blaster was pointed at the threaded area and spaced 0.050 inches away. Surface topography (n = 5 measurements per implant) was assessed by scanning electron microscopy. Roughness parameters Sa, Sq, Sdr, and Sds were evaluated by optical interferometry. A GLM statistical model evaluated the effects of blasting variables on the surface parameters, and their two- and three-way interaction (P < 0.05). Statistical inferences for Sa and Sq were performed after a log10 transformation to correct for data skewness. Results: Prior to the log10 transformation, Sa and Sq values for all processing groups ranged from ~0.5 to ~2.6 μm and from ~0.75 to 4 μm, respectively. Statistical inferences showed that Sa, Sq, and Sdr values were significantly dependent on blasting media, velocity, and surface coverage (all P < 0.001). Media × velocity, media × coverage, and media × velocity × coverage also significantly affected Sa, Sq, and Sdr values (P < 0.002). The highest levels were obtained with 100 μm blasting media, coverage for 5 g/in.2, and velocity of 100 m/s. No significant differences were observed for Sds (P > 0.15). Conclusions: The blasting variables produced different surface topography features and knowledge of their interaction could be used to tailor a desired implant surface configuration.
KW - Aluminum oxide blasting
KW - Dental implant
KW - Surface roughness
KW - Surface topography
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84872655889&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84872655889&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02392.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02392.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 22188551
AN - SCOPUS:84872655889
SN - 0905-7161
VL - 24
SP - 238
EP - 242
JO - Clinical Oral Implants Research
JF - Clinical Oral Implants Research
IS - 2
ER -