Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jul 16;16(7):e64658.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.64658. eCollection 2024 Jul.

Experimental and Finite Element Analysis of Compressive Strength and Diametral Tensile Strength of Luting Cement: An In Vitro Study

Sazan S Saleem  1 , Sazgar M Sabir  1 , Kareem A Abdulla  2
Affiliations

Experimental and Finite Element Analysis of Compressive Strength and Diametral Tensile Strength of Luting Cement: An In Vitro Study

Sazan S Saleem et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Background Strength parameters greatly influence the selection of luting agents. This study compared the compressive and diametral tensile strengths (DTS) of three luting cements. Materials and methods Three luting cements, conventional glass ionomer (CGI), resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI), and resin cement (RC), were tested for compressive strength and DTS. Forty-two standardized specimens were prepared, measuring 4 mm by 6 mm for compressive tests and 6 mm by 3 mm for diametral tensile tests. The luting materials were prepared according to the manufacturers' instructions. Result Experimental mean compressive and diametral strengths and standard errors were calculated for each luting agent (n = 10). Analysis of variance was computed (p < 0.05), and multiple comparison tests were performed. RC showed significantly higher compressive strengths and DTS among the three tested luting cements, while the CGI showed the least. The results obtained by finite element analysis (FEA) for both tests closely matched the experimental results. Conclusion In this study, it was concluded that the mean compressive strength and DTS values of all three luting cements were significantly different. The resin luting cement exhibited the highest compressive strength and DTS, while the CGI exhibited the least.

Keywords: compressive strength; diametral tensile strength; finite element analysis; glass ionomer cement; luting cement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Human subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve human participants or tissue. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. A schematic diagram showing sample grouping.
Image credits: Saleem SS et al.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Specimens stored in test tube.
CGI: Conventional glass ionomer; RMGI: Resin-modified glass ionomer; RC: Resin cement.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Universal testing machine (ETE TERCO MT 3037).
Image credits: Saleem SS et al.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Specimen under loading for compressive strength.
Image credits: Saleem SS et al.
Figure 5
Figure 5. Specimen under loading for diametral tensile strength (DTS).
Image credits: Saleem SS et al.
Figure 6
Figure 6. Compression test by FEA using ANSYS of three kinds of luting cement.
FEA: Finite Element Analysis; ANSYS: Analysis System.
Figure 7
Figure 7. Bar chart for the DTS by FEA using ANSYS for three types of luting cement.
FEA: Finite element analysis; ANSYS: Analysis system; DTS: Diametral tensile strength; CGI: Conventional glass ionomer; RMGI: Resin-modified glass ionomer; RC: Resin cement.
Figure 8
Figure 8. Relation between stress from DTS and load, analysed by FEA using ANSYS.
FEA: Finite element analysis; ANSYS: Analysis system; DTS: Diametral tensile strength; CGI: Conventional glass ionomer; RMGI: Resin-modified glass ionomer; RC: Resin cement.
Figure 9
Figure 9. FEA of a CGI sample showing 1.64 MPa at a load of 110 N, conducted using ANSYS software.
FEA: Finite element analysis; ANSYS: Analysis system; DTS: Diametral tensile strength; CGI: Conventional glass ionomer.
Figure 10
Figure 10. FEA of an RC sample showing 9.24 MPa at a load of 620 N, conducted using ANSYS software.
FEA: Finite element analysis; ANSYS: Analysis system; RC: Resin cement.
Figure 11
Figure 11. FEA of an RMGI sample showing 9.45 MPa at a load of 240 N, conducted using ANSYS software.
FEA: Finite element analysis; ANSYS: Analysis system; RMGI: Resin-modified glass ionomer.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Effect on physical and mechanical properties of conventional glass ionomer lutting cements by incorporation of all-ceramic additive: an in vitro study. Saran R, Upadhya NP, Ginjupalli K, Amalan A, Rao B, Kumar S. Int J Dent. 2020;2020:8896225. - PMC - PubMed
    1. The effect of temperature on compressive and tensile strength of commonly used lutting cements: an in vitro study. Patil SG, Sajjan MS, Patil R. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4377143/#:~:text=Results%3A... J Int Oral Health. 2015;7:13–19. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Effect of thermocycling on the compressive strength of selected luting cements. Al-Khadim AH, Abdullah H, Al-Ani ST. IIUM Med J Malaysia. 2018;17:13–19.
    1. A review of glass-ionomer cements for clinical dentistry. Sidhu SK, Nicholson JW. J Funct Biomater. 2016;7:16. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dental luting cements: an updated comprehensive review. Heboyan A, Vardanyan A, Karobari MI, et al. Molecules. 2023;28:1619. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources