Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 23, 2025

Impact of Fabrication Techniques and Polishing Procedures on Surface Roughness of Denture Base Resins
Published on: January 17, 2025
Flexural Properties and Hardness of CAD-CAM Denture Base Materials
Shaimaa M Fouda1, Mohammed M Gad1, Reem Abualsaud1
1Department of Substitutive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
Purpose:
To compare flexural strength, elastic modulus, and surface hardness of computer aided design and computer aided manufacturing CAD-CAM milled, 3D-printed, and heat-polymerized denture base resins.
Materials And Methods:
A total of 120 specimens were fabricated from heat-polymerized acrylic resin (HP), milled resin (Avadent and IvoCad), and 3D-printed resin (ASIGA, FormLabs, and NextDent). The specimens were divided into 6 groups according to the type of denture base material (n = 20/material) (10/flexural properties and 10/hardness). Flexural strength and elastic modulus of the specimens were evaluated by 3-point bending test and surface hardness by Vickers hardness test. To test flexural properties, the specimens were fabricated according to ISO 20795-1:2013 standards (64 × 10 × 3.3 ± 0.2 mm). The dimensions for hardness test were 15 × 10 × 2.5 ± 0.2 mm. Scanning electron microscope was used to evaluate the surface morphology of the fractured specimens. The means and standard deviations were calculated, followed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc test (α = 0.05).
Results:
Milled resins showed significantly higher values for flexural strength, elastic modulus, and surface hardness, followed by HP and then 3D-printed resins (p < 0.001). Within milled groups, flexural strength of AvaDent was significantly higher than IvoCad (p < 0.001), while elastic modulus and hardness didn't show significant difference. Within 3D-printed resins, ASIGA showed the highest flexural strength and elastic modulus, insignificantly with FormLabs (p = 0.595) and significantly with NextDent (p = 0.008). ASIGA also showed significantly the highest hardness among the 3D-printed groups. No significant difference was found between FormLabs and NextDent in flexural strength (p = 0.357), elastic modulus (p = 1.00), or surface hardness (p = 0.987).
Conclusion:
CAD-CAM milled resins had greater flexural properties and hardness compared to heat-polymerized acrylic resin and 3D-printed resins. Although 3D-printed samples showed the lowest values of tested properties, the flexural strength and modulus were above clinically acceptable values.
More Related Videos
07:42Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
06:16Author Spotlight: Establishing an Accurate Microhardness Testing Protocol for Craniofacial Tissues
Published on: April 26, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Strength of Cement
For compressive strength tests, ASTM C 109-05 standards prescribe a cement-sand mix ratio of 1:2.75 and a water/cement ratio of 0.485 for making 2-inch cubes. These cubes are mixed, cast, and cured in saturated lime water at 23°C until testing. Flexural strength testing, outlined in...
Structure of Cadherins
Mortar Properties
Bending of Members Made of Several Materials
Hooke's Law determines stress in each material, stating that stress is proportional to strain but varies due to each...