Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 6, 2025

Shrinkage of Dental Composite in Simulated Cavity Measured with Digital Image Correlation
Published on: July 21, 2014
Influence of Practitioner-Related Placement Variables on the Compressive Properties of Bulk-Fill Composite Resins-An
Tamar Brosh1, Moshe Davidovitch2, Avi Berg3
1The Department of Oral Biology, The Maurice and Gabriela Goldschleger School of Dental Medicine, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 6997801, Israel.
Abstract:
Aims: To determine if restoration location and/or execution behavior force parameters have an influence on the mechanical properties of bulk-fill composite dental restorations. Methods: Pressure transducers were placed within each quadrant of dental mannequin jaws. Cylindrical molds were placed above the transducers and filled with two bulk-fill composite materials, Filtek and Tetric, by four experienced dentists. Each dentist prepared five specimens per quadrant and material. The total placement time, mean force, number of peak forces (above 25 N), and mean peak(s) force during placement were measured. Then, the stiffness and maximal compressive strength of the specimens were determined while loading the specimens up to failure using a universal loading machine. Results: Placement time was affected by jaw (p < 0.004) and side (p < 0.029), with the shortest time demonstrated for the left side of the mandible. Force exerted during restoration placement was not normally distributed without differences in location (jaw) or material. A higher application force was found on the right side (p < 0.01). The number of peak forces was affected by side (p < 0.03), with less peaks on the left side. No significant differences were found in compressive strength when correlated to restoration location, participant, or material (p = 0.431). The stiffness values of Filtek (3729 ± 228 N/mm) were found to be 15% higher than Tetric (3248 ± 227 N/mm) (p < 0.005). No correlations were found between the compressive strength or stiffness and the amount of force applied during placement. Conclusions: The individual restoration material placement parameters did influence practitioner performance; however, these differences did not affect the mechanical properties of the final restoration.
More Related Videos
05:30Roughness Impact of Piezoelectric Dental Scaler on Two Distinct Flowable Composite Filling Materials
Published on: January 10, 2025
07:42Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 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...
Porosity in Cement Paste
The balance of water to cement in the mix is...