4.6 Article

Tetraoxaspiroalkanes for polymerization stress reduction of Silorane resins

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED POLYMER SCIENCE
卷 108, 期 6, 页码 3738-3747

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/app.27346

关键词

cationic polymerization; dental polymers; stress; mechanical properties; synthesis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study involved the synthesis and characterization of tetraoxaspiroalkane monomers and evaluated their potential to reduce polymerization stress when formulated in a Silorane resin system. The tetraoxaspiroalkane monomers had two main structural features (a) two different types of core ring structures (a 1,5,7,11-tetraoxaspirocyclic ring or a 2,4,8,10-tetraoxaspirocyclic ring) and (b) four different types of ring substituents (normal alkyl, allyloxyalkyl, trimethylsilylalkyl, or oxabicycloalkyl). The resin formulations contained (a) 20 mol % of a 1,5,7,11- or 2,4,8,10-tetraoxaspiroalkyl monomer; (b) a phenylmethylsilane containing two oxabicycloheptyl groups; (c) a cyclotetrasiloxane containing four oxabicycloheptyl groups; and (d) a photocationic initiator system. Three main aspects were studied (a) the photoreactivity of the formulations using PDSC, (b) photopolymerization stress, and (c) mechanical properties (flexural elastic modulus, ultimate strength, and work of fracture) which were measured using an electromagnetic mechanical testing machine. The main findings were (a) formulations containing 2,4,8,10-tetraoxaspiroalkane monomers had measured net enthalpies greater than those containing 1,5,7,11-tetraoxaspiroalkane monomers, and above those calculated for addition of an inert diluent; (b) all formulations containing tetraoxaspiroalkane monomers exhibited photopolymerization stress values that were 40-99% less than the nonaddition control; (c) the formulation containing a 1,5,7,11-tetraoxaspiroalkane monomer with an oxirane functionality had mechanical properties that were not significantly different from the nonaddition control. (C) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据