Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 31, 2025

Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Flexural strengths, failure load, and hardness of glass-ceramics for dental applications
1Associate Professor, Department of Substitutive Dental Sciences, Taibah University, Madina, Saudi Arabia; Fullbright Scholar, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala.
Statement Of Problem:
Glass-ceramics are often selected for use in dental restorations based upon advertised flexural strengths obtained from standardized tests on prefabricated specimens (bars and disks); these may not accurately reflect their performance in dental applications.
Purpose:
The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine and compare 4-point flexural strength, biaxial flexural strength, hardness, and crown failure loads for 3 commercially available glass-ceramics.
Material And Methods:
Specimens were pressed and prepared from 3 brands of glass-ceramics: Celtra (CEL), IPS e.max (EMA), and Lisi (LIS). Rectangular bars, circular disks, and fully contoured crowns were created (n=15 specimens per glass-ceramic, 45 specimens per geometry, totaling 135 specimens). Disks were tested for biaxial flexural strength by using a piston-on-3-ball (POB) test, while bars were tested for 4-point flexural strength by using 4-point bending (4PB) and Vickers hardness (VH) tests. Crown failure loads were assessed in "crunch-the-crown" (CTC) tests. The results were analyzed by using general linear modeling, the Pearson correlation coefficient, and Weibull analysis.
Results:
The general linear modeling revealed significant differences (P<.05) in the failure load for crown specimens (EMA>LIS>CEL), the 4-point flexural strength (EMA>LIS>CEL), and the biaxial flexural strength (EMA>LIS=CEL). The disk specimens had higher flexural strengths than the bar specimens for CEL and EMA materials. LIS had a higher Weibull modulus than EMA and CEL for bar and crown specimens. CEL had a higher Weibull modulus than LIS and EMA for disk specimens. There was no correlation among the VH (R2=0.86 and P=.24), biaxial flexural strength (R2=0.84 and P=.26), and crown failure load. However, there was a high correlation between the failure load (crown specimens) and 4-point flexural strength (bar specimens) (R2=0.99 and P=.03).
Conclusions:
The 4-point flexural strength correlated significantly with crown failure load.
Related Concept Videos
Stress-Strain Diagram - Brittle Materials
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...
Fatigue
Fiber Reinforced Concrete
Yield Criteria for Ductile Materials under Plane Stress
The Maximum Shearing Stress Criterion, also known as...

