Influence of 3D-Printing system on the mechanical and surface properties of a 3D-Printed denture base resin
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) printing is increasingly used for denture base fabrication, but printer-dependent processing may alter the properties of the same resin. This in vitro study compared Lucitone Digital Print 3D Denture Base resin fabricated with two manufacturer-validated systems: Carbon M2 (continuous liquid interface production) and Asiga MAX UV (digital light processing) (n = 10 per printer per outcome). After standardized cleaning, post-curing, and 7 days of water storage at 37 ± 1 °C, flexural strength, fracture toughness, fracture work, Vickers hardness, and surface roughness were evaluated. Asiga specimens showed significantly higher flexural strength (83.5 ± 2.0 vs. 76.9 ± 1.2 MPa; p < 0.0001), fracture work (1853 ± 330 vs. 1452 ± 295 J/m 2 ; p = 0.010), and Vickers hardness (12.5 ± 0.7 vs. 11.4 ± 0.6 kg/mm 2 ; p = 0.007). Fracture toughness, expressed as Kmax, did not differ significantly between Carbon and Asiga specimens (2.91 ± 0.36 vs. 2.75 ± 0.27 MPa·m^0.5; p = 0.287), nor did surface roughness (1.72 ± 0.24 vs. 2.13 ± 0.84 µm; p = 0.283). Thus, the printer system influenced selected mechanical properties of an identical denture-base resin, highlighting the importance of considering the complete resin–printer–post-processing system when interpreting material performance.
Related
- Upcycling Recycled PET into High-Performance Polyurethane Coating and Engineering Materials: Effect of NCO Index on Mechanical, Stability, and Surface Properties
- Study on the modulation of the properties of 3D printing pork mince and interaction mechanisms with myofibrillar proteins and fatty acids by gelatin.
- Three-dimensional printing of human scala tympani models: surface modification to reduce cochlear implant insertion forces with a physiological lubricant
- Influence of water content and organic matter on the mechanical strength characteristics of municipal sewage sludge
- Effects of Mepiquat Chloride Application Timing and Concentration on Soybean Plant Architecture and Stem Mechanical Properties
BibTeX
@article{alshaibani2026influence,
title = {{Influence of 3D-Printing system on the mechanical and surface properties of a 3D-Printed denture base resin}},
author = {Raghdah M. Alshaibani and Yuwei Fan and Russell Giordano II and Anhar Basunbul and Abdulrahman Almalki},
journal = {Journal of Applied Biomaterials \& Functional Materials},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.1177/22808000261506092},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/22808000261506092},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Influence of 3D-Printing system on the mechanical and surface properties of a 3D-Printed denture base resin
AU - Raghdah M. Alshaibani
AU - Yuwei Fan
AU - Russell Giordano II
AU - Anhar Basunbul
AU - Abdulrahman Almalki
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/07
JO - Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials
DO - 10.1177/22808000261506092
UR - https://doi.org/10.1177/22808000261506092
AB - Three-dimensional (3D) printing is increasingly used for denture base fabrication, but printer-dependent processing may alter the properties of the same resin. This in vitro study compared Lucitone Digital Print 3D Denture Base resin fabricated with two manufacturer-validated systems: Carbon M2 (continuous liquid interface production) and Asiga MAX UV (digital light processing) (n = 10 per printer per outcome). After standardized cleaning, post-curing, and 7 days of water storage at 37 ± 1 °C, flexural strength, fracture toughness, fracture work, Vickers hardness, and surface roughness were evaluated. Asiga specimens showed significantly higher flexural strength (83.5 ± 2.0 vs. 76.9 ± 1.2 MPa; p < 0.0001), fracture work (1853 ± 330 vs. 1452 ± 295 J/m 2 ; p = 0.010), and Vickers hardness (12.5 ± 0.7 vs. 11.4 ± 0.6 kg/mm 2 ; p = 0.007). Fracture toughness, expressed as Kmax, did not differ significantly between Carbon and Asiga specimens (2.91 ± 0.36 vs. 2.75 ± 0.27 MPa·m^0.5; p = 0.287), nor did surface roughness (1.72 ± 0.24 vs. 2.13 ± 0.84 µm; p = 0.283). Thus, the printer system influenced selected mechanical properties of an identical denture-base resin, highlighting the importance of considering the complete resin–printer–post-processing system when interpreting material performance.
SN - 2280-8000
ER -