Affiliations: [a] Department of Neurology, The First Hospital of JiLin University, 71 XinMin Street, ChangChun 130021, China | [b] Department of Stomatology, JiLin Province Hospital, 1183 GongNong Road, ChangChun 130021, China | [c] Department of Stomatology, 461 Outpatient Department, 208 Military Hospital, 108 ZiYou Road, ChangChun 130021, China | [d] Department of Stomatology, The First Hospital of JiLin University, 71 XinMin Street, ChangChun 130021, China
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author: CongXiao Zhang, DDS, PhD, Department of Stomatology, The First Hospital of JiLin University, 71 XinMin Street, ChangChun, JiLin Province 130021, China. Tel.: (+86)43188782993; Fax: (+86)43188782995; E-mails: 807612550@qq.com, zhangcongxiao2014@163.com.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the abilities of the DCB and the NTP test for measuring adherence of an adhesive joint between a resin and a metal interface. METHODS:Two-hundred stainless steel metal beams (diam. 50×5×2 mm) were cast and treated by the following methods: (1) sandblasting with aluminum oxide, followed by treatment with (2) the Rocatec system or (3) the Alloy primer. Superbond and Panavia F 2.0 were used as adhesives. The fracture energy (G1C) and fracture toughness (K1C) of two adhesives were compared by two-way analysis of variance. RESULTS:With the DCB test, Superbond was more effective than Panavia, regardless of the surface treatment and conditions of crack propagation. The overall effectiveness of the treatments was in the following order: sandblasting + Rocatec > sandblasting alone > sandblasting + Alloy primer. The adherence energy in an aqueous medium was lower than that in air. With the NTP test, similar performances were obtained with three surface treatments. However, the potential of Rocatec seemed slightly higher. CONCLUSIONS:The DCB and NTP tests provide independent measures of the inherent value of an adhesive. Rocatec appeared to provide greater resistance of the bonded joints in an aqueous environment.
