Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 12, 2026
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Influence of anti-aliasing and pixel offset slicing parameters on dimensional accuracy and surface characteristics of
KeunBaDa Son1, Ji-Min Lee2, Kyoung-Jun Jang3
1Research Professor, Advanced Dental Device Development Institute, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
Statement Of Problem:
Software-controlled slicing parameters such as anti-aliasing and pixel offset have been widely implemented in digital light processing (DLP) 3-dimensional (3D) printers, but their effects on the fit accuracy and surface quality of additively manufactured zirconia crowns remain insufficiently characterized.
Purpose:
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effects of anti-aliasing level and pixel offset on the marginal and internal adaptation, surface trueness, and surface roughness of monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated by DLP 3D printing.
Material And Methods:
A prepared maxillary right first molar in a typodont model was digitized and used to design a monolithic zirconia crown with standardized computer-aided design (CAD) parameters (relief for luting agent 50 µm, marginal gap 0 µm). Crowns were fabricated from a zirconia suspension using a DLP printer under 9 slicing conditions combining 3 anti-aliasing levels (high, medium, zero) and 3 pixel offsets (+1, 0, -1 pixel). In total, 135 crowns were produced (n=15 per group) and sintered according to the manufacturer's protocol. Marginal, axial, and occlusal gaps were quantified as the root mean square deviation (RMSD) between the seated crown and the preparation scan. Surface trueness was calculated as the RMSD between the scanned crown and the CAD model, and surface roughness (Ra, Rz, Rq) at the marginal and cusp regions was measured using a confocal laser scanning microscope. Data were analyzed using 1- and 2-way analysis of variance, multivariate analysis of variance, and multiple linear regression (α=.05).
Results:
Marginal gaps ranged from 89.7 to 96.1 µm across all anti-aliasing and pixel offset conditions, with no significant differences among groups (P>.05). Internal adaptation was significantly influenced by both parameters: medium anti-aliasing and a +1 pixel offset yielded the smallest axial gaps, whereas a -1 pixel offset yielded the smallest occlusal gaps (P<.001). Surface trueness was greatest with high anti-aliasing and a -1 pixel offset and lowest with zero anti-aliasing and a +1 pixel offset (P<.001). Surface roughness in both marginal and cusp regions decreased significantly with increasing anti-aliasing level (P<.001), whereas pixel offset did not produce significant differences in roughness parameters (P>.05).
Conclusions:
All slicing parameter combinations produced marginal gaps below 100 µm. A high anti-aliasing level combined with a -1 pixel offset provided the most favorable balance among internal adaptation, surface trueness, and surface roughness within clinically acceptable limits.
