Hindawi

BioMed Research International

Volume 2022, Article ID 8353137, 9 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8353137

Research Article
Effect of Printing Layer Thickness and Postprinting Conditions
on the Flexural Strength and Hardness of a 3D-Printed Resin

Abdullah A. Alshamrani ,1,2 Raju Raju,3 and Ayman Ellakwa1

1
Oral Rehabilitation & Dental Biomaterial and Bioengineering, Sydney Dental School, Faculty of Medicine and Health,
The University of Sydney, Australia
2
Department of Dental Health, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
3
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, UNSW, Sydney, Australia

Correspondence should be addressed to Abdullah A. Alshamrani; [email protected]

Received 16 August 2021; Revised 17 January 2022; Accepted 27 January 2022; Published 21 February 2022

Academic Editor: Chuan Ye

Copyright © 2022 Abdullah A. Alshamrani et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work
is properly cited.

Background. Recently, dentists can utilize three-dimensional printing technology in fabricating dental restoration. However, to
date, there is a lack of evidence regarding the effect of printing layer thicknesses and postprinting on the mechanical properties
of the 3D-printed temporary restorations with the additive manufacturing technique. So, this study evaluated the mechanical
properties of a 3D-printed dental resin material with different printing layer thicknesses and postprinting methods. Methods.
210 specimens of a temporary crown material (A2 EVERES TEMPORARY, SISMA, Italy) were 3D-printed with different
printing layer thicknesses (25, 50, and 100 μm). Then, specimens were 3D-printed using DLP technology (EVERES ZERO,
DLP 3D printer, SISMA, Italy) which received seven different treatment conditions after printing: water storage for 24 h or 1
month, light curing or heat curing for 5 or 15 minutes, and control. Flexural properties were evaluated using a three-point
bending test on a universal testing machine (ISO standard 4049). The Vickers hardness test was used to evaluate the
microhardness of the material system. The degree of conversion was measured using an FT-IR ATR spectrophotometer.
Statistical analysis was performed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s honestly significant difference
(HSD) test (p ≤ 0:05). Results. The 100 μm printing layer thickness had the highest flexural strength among the other thickness
groups. As a combined effect printing thickness and postprinting conditions, the 100 μm with the dry storage group has the
highest flexural strength among the tested groups (94.60 MPa). Thus, the group with 100 μm thickness that was heat cured for
5 minutes (HC 5 min 100 μm) has the highest VHN value (VHN = 17:95). Also, the highest mean DC% was reported by 50 μm
layer thickness (42.84%).Conclusions. The thickness of the 100 μm printing layer had the highest flexural strength compared to
the 25 μm and 50 μm groups. Also, the postprinting treatment conditions influenced the flexural strength and hardness of the
3D-printed resin material.

1. Introduction triangulation language) format and then 3D printing by

joining, bonding, or polymerizing small volume elements [4].
Three-dimensional (3D) printing has advanced rapidly in
recent years, expanding its accuracy and reliability and mak- The most popular 3D technologies in the dental field are
ing it highly attractive to the medical field. 3D printing has stereolithography (SLA), digital light projection (DLP),
paved the way for new applications in various areas of health fused deposition modeling (FDM), powder bed fusion
care, including medicine, dentistry, orthopedics, engineered (PBF), laser powder forming, and inkjet printing [5, 6].
tissue models, and medical devices [1–3]. This technology The main differences between these techniques are the mate-
enables the rapid conversion of digital 3D models into phys- rials used and the way the layers are built to create the 3D
ical objects by first producing a digital file in STL (standard object. The two main 3D printing technologies used in
2 BioMed Research International

dental applications are SLA and DLP. First used for 3D sys- and hard tissues for much longer times. Previous studies
tems in 1986, SLA is a photopolymerization process that found that using different postcuring equipment resulted in
builds up solid parts in multilayers on a model-building plat- considerable variations in the final properties of the printed
form using a photosensitive liquid resin bath and an ultravi- devices [20, 26, 27].
olet (UV) light or laser to solidify the material. The layers Therefore, further research is required into the
built by this method are cured and bonded to make a solid manufacturing process and postprinting conditions and its
object. While the process and system of DLP 3D printing effect on mechanical properties of 3D-printed dental mate-
are similar, the photopolymer resin is cured with a digital rials. Understanding how the mechanical properties of the
light projector instead of a laser [7]. DLP 3D printing has printed materials are affected by different parameters can
an advantage over standard SLA as it enables a faster fabri- help improve the quality of dental restoration and its perfor-
cation of the printed layers by printing and curing a single mance at daily practice.
layer across the total build plate in mere seconds. Another The selection of a 3D printing material in the dental field
advantage of DLP over SLA, and over other 3D printing sys- depends on the intended application of the end product. For
tems, is that it consumes less material, thus reducing the cost instance, having good mechanical properties and prolonged
of production. DLP printing is currently being utilized in the biodegradation rates is required for dental restoration due to
dental industry to create models from digital impressions, the occlusal forces during the chewing process. Material
such as surgical guides, castable restorations, splints, and integration with oral tissue is also one of the factors leading
even temporary crowns (TC). Due to the speed and accuracy to the success of a dental restoration [28]. Given the high
offered by DLP printing, its use is likely to grow within success rate and increasing longevity of dental restoration,
dentistry. especially when fabricated using 3D printing, hence, this
Polymer-based materials are widely used to produce study is aimed at evaluating the effect of both printing thick-
dental crowns using additive technology. However, studies ness and postprinting treatment conditions, including water
evaluating the use of 3D-printed materials in dentistry in storage, light curing, and heat curing, on the mechanical
terms of their surface and mechanical properties, including properties, in terms of the flexural strength and hardness,
flexural strength, surface roughness, hardness, and esthetics, of 3D-printed temporary crown (TC) materials. The null
remain limited. Therefore, the manufacturing process and hypotheses tested were that neither (i) the postprinting
the strength and polymerization ratio are areas that require method (water storage, light curing, and heat treatment)
further research. nor (ii) the printing thickness will significantly change the
Various parameters can enhance the reliability of 3D- flexural strength, microhardness. Also, (iii) the postprinting
printed materials for use by clinicians and dental techni- treatment conditions and printing thickness will not signifi-
cians, including accuracy, strength, printing speed, and layer cantly change the degree of conversion of a 3D-printed TC
thickness [8–10], and curing methods [11–13]. Dental struc- resin composite.
tures and restorative materials are vulnerable to the sur-
rounding environment, and the oral environment is 2. Materials and Methods
especially challenging due to chemical and thermal varia-
tions combined with humidity, which can influence the Bar-shaped specimens of light-cured resin materials that
material properties [14–16]. For example, studies have indi- used for provisional restorations were 3D-printed
cated that the mechanical properties of composite-based (25 × 2 × 2 mm) referring to ISO 4049 [29]. Dental resin
resins change due to water storage [17–19]. It was found that (A2 EVERES TEMPORARY, SISMA, Italy) was printed in
the water storage had a negative effect on the flexural prop- a DLP 3D printer (EVERES ZERO, DLP 3D printer, SISMA,
erties of a 3D-printed occlusal device material [9]. Further- Italy). Table 1 presents the composition of the resin material
more, previous studies have found that artificial aging used in the current study. The digital data were exported in
methods and the polymerization procedure can have adverse STL format. First, the STL file of the sample was imported to
effects on the mechanical properties, including fracture DLP 3D printer software to arrange printing sitting. The
resistance and flexural strength, of dental restorations [20, printing angle was 90° from the print area which was deter-
21]. Flexural strength of a resin-based material with respect mined based on the results of accuracy evaluations of the
to the 3D printing direction has been evaluated in previous thickness, width, and length according to the printing orien-
studies which they found a positive correlation between the tation obtained by Tahayeri et al. [8]. The printing support
printing directions [9]. was automatically created at the bottom area of the bar-
Thus, postprocessing treatment such as heat or light cur- shaped sample with 0.5 mm point size, 0.85 density, and
ing in some cases is needed for acrylic-based resin in order 3.0 mm height. The printing orientation was determined to
to cross-link unreacted monomers in order to complete the be 90 degrees for the build platform. After that, this config-
polymerization process after printing, which improves the uration was duplicated 10 times and 10 identical sample
final mechanical properties [22, 23]. The amount of poly- configurations were prepared in the build platform of the
merization is quantified as the degree of conversion (DC). DLP printer (EVERES ZERO, DLP 3D printer, SISMA,
Therefore, the mechanical properties and biocompatibility Italy) to print all samples in the same configuration. This
are significantly improved with higher DC [24, 25]. This configuration was further saved for 3 different layer thick-
parameter would be more critical for 3D-printed dentures, nesses to print the samples in identical configuration, but
temporary crowns, and splints that are in contact with soft by using different layer thicknesses. After the printing
BioMed Research International 3

Table 1: Material compositions of the EVERES TEMPORARY (SISMA, Italy) 3D-printed resin used in this study.

Material Compositions Weight % Lot#

Aliphatic difunctional methacrylate <50% 276-957-5
2,2 ′ -Ethylenedioxydiethyl dimethacrylate <40% —
EVERES TEMPORARY 3D-printed resins
Aliphatic urethane acrylate <20% —
Phosphine oxide <2.5% 278-355-8

process, the specimens were washed out with 90% isopropyl spectrophotometer (Bruker, Pty Ltd., Victoria, Australia)
alcohol for 5 minutes according to the manufacturer’s using a holder attachment. The Fourier transform infrared
instructions and polymerized from all sides for 20 minutes spectroscopy (FT-IR) spectra were analyzed using an acces-
by using ultraviolet light. A total of 210 3D-printed compos- sory of reflectance. The absorbance ratio of the material was
ite resin samples were divided into three main groups with measured under the following conditions: 32 scans, 4 cm−1
different printing layer thicknesses (25 μm, 50 μm, and resolution, and 300 to 4000 cm−1 wavelengths. The percent-
100 μm), at 70 samples each. These three groups were fur- age of unreacted carbon–carbon double bonds (% C═C) was
ther divided into seven subgroups based on their treatment determined from the ratio of the absorbance intensities of
conditions (water storage, extra light curing, and heat cur- aliphatic C═C (peak at 1714 cm−1) to the internal reference
ing). The postprinting conditions were carried out as fol- of aromatic C═C (peak at 1635 cm−1) before and after curing
lows: the water storage group was kept in distilled water in of the specimens. Each specimen was analyzed in triplicate.
Memmert oven (Memmert, Schwabach, Germany) at a tem- The degree of conversion was determined by subtracting
perature of 37°C for 24 hours and one month. The extra the % C═C from 100% according to the following formula:
postcuring process was made using light curing unit (Solidi-
 
lite V, Shofu Dental GmbH, Ratingen, Germany) for 5 and 1 – Rcured
15 minutes. Finally, the heat curing was carried out using DC% = ∗ 100, ð2Þ
Runcured
P510 Porcelain Furnace (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechten-
stein) at 100°C for 5 and 15 minutes. Finally, the flexural
strength (n = 10), degree of conversion (n = 3), and micro- where Runcured represents the ratio between the intensity of
hardness (n = 5) properties were tested for each experimen- aliphatic C═C (peak at 1714 cm−1) and the internal reference
tal group as shown in Figure 1. of aromatic C═C (peak at 1635 cm−1) of the unpolymerized
material and Rcured represents the same ratio after the
2.1. Flexural Strength Test. The three-point bending test was defined photopolymerization time (t = 40 s).
performed using a universal testing machine (ISO standard
4049). The specimens were fixed between two supports 2.4. Statistical Analysis. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s
(20 mm span) and loaded at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/ HSD post hoc tests at α = 0:05 were used to identify signifi-
min until fracture occurred. The flexural strength was calcu- cant differences in terms of flexural strength, hardness, or
lated considering the load at fracture and the specimen’s degree of conversion (dependent variable) according to the
dimensions, which were verified using a digital caliper. The main factors, namely, material thickness and treatment con-
fracture load values were converted to flexural strength (σ) ditions (water storage, extra light curing, or heat treatment)
using the following formula: (independent variables). All data were subjected to Levene’s
test of homogeneity of variance (α = 0:05).
3FL
σ= , ð1Þ 3. Results
2bd2
3.1. Flexural Strength. The mean and standard deviation
where σ is the flexural strength, F is the load at the fracture (SD) of the flexural strength results is presented in Table 2.
point, L is the length of the support span, b is the width of The two-way ANOVA shows statistically significant differ-
the specimen, and d is the thickness of the specimen. ences among the groups (Fð6,189Þ = 23:49, p < 0:001). Spe-
2.2. Vickers Hardness (VH). The Vickers hardness was mea- cifically, they indicate a significant influence of water
sured on the top and bottom surfaces of the specimens using storage, light curing, and heat curing on the flexural strength
a Struers DuraScan 80 (Cleveland, Ohio, USA) automatic of the 3D-printed composite resin material. Also, Tukey’s
hardness testing system equipped with a Vickers diamond HSD post hoc test shows a statistical difference between
(VHN) with a diamond microindenter, wherein the two the test groups. The test result indicates a significant effect
diagonals were measured using a load of 500 gmsf (gram of printing thickness on flexural strength (Fð2,189Þ = 33:37
force) over 5 s. The surface of each specimen was evaluated , p < 0:001). The interaction effect of the two factors is also
five times, and the mean values were calculated for each significant (Fð12,189Þ = 3:31, p < 0:001).
surface. The mean values of the three-point bending test results
range from 64.37 to 91.75 MPa for 25 μm thickness, 77.67
2.3. Degree of Conversion (DC%). To measure the degree of to 94.40 MPa for 50 μm, and 66.09 to 94.60 MPa for
conversion, each specimen was placed into the FT-IR ATR 100 μm. In general, among the treatment condition groups,
4 BioMed Research International

Design and 3D printing of samples

Temporary crown material (A2 Everes Temporary)

Post-Printing Conditions

Control Water Storage Extra light curing Heat curing at 100C

24 H 5 min 5 min

30 day 15 min 15 min

Flexural strength Vickers hardness Degree of conversion

measurement

Figure 1: Flowchart of the overall experimental process of this study, showing the materials used, treatment conditions (water storage, extra
light curing, and heat curing), and experimental types.

Table 2: The means and standard deviations of the Vickers hardness and flexural strength values found for the 3D-printed material.

3D printing thickness
Postprinting 20 50 100
treatment conditions FS VHN FS VHN FS VHN
(mean ± SD)∗ (mean ± SD)∗ (mean ± SD)∗ (mean ± SD)∗ (mean ± SD)∗ (mean ± SD)∗
Dry storage (control) 91.51 (10.05)a 13.23 (0.48)a 94.40 (9.61)a 16.23 (0.22)a 91.51 (10.05)a 9.31 (0.22)a
WS for 24 h 68.38 (9.02)b 10.68 (1.67)a 88.25 (8.83)b 16.63 (0.10)a 68.38 (9.02)b 12.71 (2.97)a
WS for 1 month 64.37 (7.43)b 14.86 (1.85)a 77.67 (9.13)bc 16.38 (0.35)a 64.37 (7.43)b 13.90 (0.45)b
LC 5 min 80.80 (8.72)ab 14.33 (0.08)b 83.76 (10.44)c 16.63 (0.51)b 80.80 (8.72)ab 12.45 (1.41)a
LC 15 min 82.80 (9.09)ab 15.21 (0.12)a 91.02 (4.80)ab 16.20 (1.10)b 82.80 (9.09)ab 12.93 (0.42)ab
HC 5 min 71.32 (4.46)bc 13.46 (0.34)c 83.47 (12.08)bd 17.06 (0.30)c 71.32 (4.46)bc 17.95 (1.09)c
HC 15 min 64.83 (9.07)bd 12.41 (0.35)a 88.86 (8.03)bd 17.66 (0.81)d 64.83 (9.07)bd 14.88 (0.31)ad
∗
FS: flexural strength; VHN: Vickers hardness. Same superscripted lowercase letters indicate groups not statistically significantly different when compared by
Tukey’s multiple comparison post hoc analysis (p > 0:05).

the highest flexural strengths were reported for the dry stor- 3.2. Vickers Hardness (VH). Table 2 shows the mean Vickers
age group (93.52 MPa). Also, comparing the flexural hardness values for the 3D-printed resin for all tested
strength results in terms of the material printing thicknesses, groups. The results of the two-way ANOVA show that the
the 50 μm group has the highest value at 86.77 MPa, effects of printing thickness and treatment conditions are
followed by 79.64 and 74.86 MPa for 100 μm and 25 μm, statistically significant for microhardness (p < 0:05). Regard-
respectively. As an interaction effect between the main fac- less of the printing thickness, the heat curing for 5 minutes
tors (treatment condition and thickness), the 100 μm dry has increased the mean Vickers hardness values for all
storage group has the highest flexural strength among the groups. In terms of the printing thickness, the results show
tested groups, at 94.60 MPa. In contrast, the lowest flexural that the 50 μm group has the highest average Vickers hard-
strength in terms of treatment conditions is for the one- ness (VHN = 16:68). Also, regarding the interaction effect
month water storage group, with a mean value of between the thickness and the treatment conditions, the
72.14 MPa, and in terms of printing thickness, the 25 μm group with 100 μm thickness that was heat cured for 5
group, with 74.86 MPa. minutes (HC 5 min 100 μm) has the highest VHN value
BioMed Research International 5

(VHN = 17:95). All additional light and heat curing proto- Degree of conversion of 3D printed material
⁎
cols significantly affected the 100 μm group, which showed
an increase in Vickers hardness compared to the control ⁎⁎ ⁎ ⁎ ⁎
100
group. For the 50 μm group, the hardness only increased
with 15 minutes of heat curing. The 25 μm thickness group 80
only improved when extra light curing was applied for 5 or
60

DC (%)
15 minutes.
40
3.3. Degree of Conversion (DC%). The results of the degree of
conversion are presented in Figure 2. Also, Figure 3 repre- 20
sents the FT-IR ATR spectra showing the peaks used for cal-
0
culating the DC%. The two-way ANOVA shows no

in

m
in
in

in
LC l

4
statistically significant differences between the tested groups.

ro

S2
5m

m
m

5m

S1
nt

W
15
15
Co

W
The thickness and postprinting conditions had no effect on

C
LC

H
the polymerization ratio between the cured and uncured
polymers of the 3D-printed material. However, the mean Groups
degree of conversion for the 50 μm thickness group 25 mm
(42.84%) is slightly higher than the means of the 25 and 50 mm
100 μm groups, at 31.63% and 34.16%, respectively. 100 mm

Figure 2: Degree of conversion (DC%) for 25, 50, and 100 μm

4. Discussion printing layer thicknesses under different treatment conditions:
Additive technology has received significant interest from control (dry storage), light curing for 5 minutes (LC 5 min), light
curing for 15 minutes (LC 15 min), heat curing for 5 minutes
the dental research community as it can broaden the use of
(HC 5 min), and heat curing for 15 minutes (HC 15 min).
digital applications in dentistry. Dental crowns and bridges
are examples of dental devices that can be produced using
3D printing technology. Therefore, understanding the CAD/CAM, and a conventional PMMA material. The mean
mechanical properties of the dental materials used for fabri- values of their results were 79.54 MPa for additive
cating dental crowns is essential for the evaluation of newer manufacturing, 104.20 MPa for CAD/CAM, and 95.58 MPa
3D printing materials, for verifying the manufacturers’ for the conventional materials [34]. Our flexural strength
claims, and for comparing them with conventional mate- results are also comparable with other studies of a temporary
rials. This will provide a clearer view of which a material is resin-based material, which found flexural strengths ranging
suitable for long-term clinical use. Thus, the aim of this from 60 MPa to 90 MPa [35, 36]. Meanwhile, the lowest flex-
in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of printing layer ural strength found in this study was for the one-month
thickness and different postprinting conditions on the water storage group, which had a mean value of
mechanical properties and degree of conversion of a recently 72.14 MPa. On the other side, our findings show that the
developed DLP 3D printing composite resin material. The dry condition produced the highest flexural strength values.
first and second null hypotheses that the postprinting condi- This difference between the dry and water storage conditions
tions and water storage will significantly change the flexural can be attributed to the water absorption of the temporary
strength, microhardness, of a 3D-printed TC resin compos- dental resin.
ite were rejected. However, the third null hypothesis was A product made by rapid prototyping (RP) technology
accepted, demonstrating that the treatment conditions and is influenced by the fabrication technique used during the
printing thickness have no effect on the degree of conversion printing process, which can cause specimen shrinkage dur-
of this 3D-printed temporary material. ing printing and postcuring, or by the minimal thickness
Numerous factors can alter the mechanical properties of of the layers. In addition, data conversion and manipula-
the printed resin, including build thickness, the degree of tion in the STL format can also result in changes [37].
polymerization, and the addition of reinforcing materials Therefore, it can be assumed that the RP resin group
[30]. Recently, dental research has focused on improving has a lower flexural strength than the CAD/CAM group.
the quality of the printed dental materials, especially dental Our results reveal the low flexural strength of a 3D-
crowns and bridges, to make them suitable for daily clinical printed temporary material compared to the flexural
practice; this includes enhancing their durability and bio- strengths found for CAD/CAM and conventional PMMA
compatibility [31, 32]. resin materials examined in previous studies [9, 34, 38].
The flexural strength and microhardness of provisional Hence, there is a need to improve the mechanical behavior
materials are important, particularly when the patient must of a 3D-printed material to withstand the mechanical
use a temporary restoration for an extended period until stresses at play during the chewing process. This would
the final restoration has been manufactured [33]. Our flex- increase the durability of a 3D-printed material beyond
ural strength findings are similar to those of another study short-term crowns to permanent and multiunit fixed par-
comparing the flexural strength and microhardness of a tial denture (FPD) bridges and crowns. One approach that
printed resin composite [34] using additive manufacturing, has been used to this end is the synthesis of nanoparticle
6 BioMed Research International

Wavenumber (cm–1)
–0.1
4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0
0

aromatic C = C peak at 1635 cm–1 0.1

Absorbance
0.2

0.3

0.4

aliphatic C=C peak at 1714 cm-1 0.5

0.6

3D printed–cured
Uncured

Figure 3: FT-IR spectra showing the absorbance intensities of aliphatic C═C peak at 1714 cm−1 to the internal reference of aromatic C═C
peak at 1635 cm−1 before and after curing of the 3D-printed resin.

fillers in dental resin composites, which has demonstrated required to improve the mechanical properties, although
further improvements in flexural strength [39], tensile the optimal postcuring conditions have not yet been fully
strength, wear resistance [40], and elastic modulus as well determined. In light of this, our study focused on the use
as a reduction in the polymerization shrinkage of the of different curing conditions (extra light or heat curing) to
material [41]. ensure the complete polymerization of the 3D resin material
This in vitro study has evaluated the effect of printing as this has been hypothesized to have an effect on the
layer thickness on the flexural strength using a three-point mechanical properties and degree of conversion of the tested
bending test. The layers were printed vertically and oriented material. While the degree of conversion was not signifi-
perpendicular to the load direction. This orientation has cantly changed after exposure to different treatments and
been proven at another study to have higher flexural curing conditions, this study has shown that the 25 μm
strength comparing to horizontally printed specimens with printing thickness group had a higher degree of conversion
the layers oriented parallel to load direction [9]. When the after being heat-cured for 15 minutes than the control group
layers are parallel to load direction, the junction between with the same thickness. This may be attributed to a reduced
the layers is in the path of load direction which leads to amount of residual monomer due to the extra heat treat-
the delamination between the layers when the tensile stress ment. In general, the increased temperature and extended
is generated during the force application. As a function of polymerization time improve the degree of conversion and
printing layer thickness, the three layer thicknesses that are reduce the release of the monomer [44].
used at the present study were 25, 50, and 100 μm. The The surface hardness of a material is another crucial
higher flexural strength was found at 100 μm. This result mechanical property that can predict the durability of a den-
was in agreement with the study by Tahayeri et al. [8]. They tal material and its clinical behavior, taking into consider-
found that flexural strength was significantly higher for the ation other parameters such as flexural strength and degree
samples 3D printed with 25 and 100 μm layer thickness, in of bond conversion. The surface hardness can be influenced
comparison to the 50 μm layer thickness group. by several other properties, including strength, proportional
Another factor crucial to achieving long-term durability limit, and wear resistance [45]. The hardness measurements
is having most of the monomers convert into a polymer dur- were used in this study to evaluate the various treatment and
ing the polymerization process, thereby obtaining an ade- curing protocols and their effectiveness in terms of polymer-
quate degree of conversion. A low degree of conversion ization. The results show that the extra light curing and heat
results in inferior mechanical properties, leading to the fast curing were effective at increasing the surface hardness at the
degradation of dental restorations [42]. However, DLP 3D printing thicknesses of 25 μm and 100 μm. However, the
printers use a different process that may influence the mate- 50 μm thickness was only positively affected when heat
rial quality and polymerization degree of the final printed cured for 15 minutes. Therefore, it can be highlighted that
restorations. As the printed layers are formed by the photo- the type and time of extra curing can positively improve
polymerization of a liquid monomer via an LED source, the the hardness results of DLP 3D-printed resin, which can be
different layer thicknesses affect the light penetration into attributed to the depth of curing. Some studies have indi-
the liquid monomer, which reduces the degree of conversion cated that the exposure time of curing needs to be consid-
of the dental resin [43]. Thus, a postcuring process is ered to achieve a similar depth of cure and ensure optimal
BioMed Research International 7

performance for resin composite materials, while a correla- 5. Conclusion

tion has been found between increased hardness and
increased degree of conversion [46–48]. Our findings indi- Within the limitations of the current study and based on the
cate that when the degree of conversion increases in some results, the following conclusions can be drawn:
groups, the hardness also increases, which was shown here
for the 50 μm thickness with 15 minutes heat curing. Also, (1) The 100 μm 3D printing layer thickness had the
when the 25 μm group was exposed to extra light curing highest flexural strength compared to the 25 μm
for 15 minutes, the mean Vickers hardness value increased. and 50 μm layer thicknesses. However, all of the
Therefore, postcuring using UV can improve the mechanical groups’ flexural strength results were higher than
properties of a 3D-printed material by exhausting any resid- the 50 MPa minimum permissible flexural strength
ual monomers. of temporary crown materials
Different 3D printing techniques have been used for var- (2) The 50 μm 3D printing layer thickness group has the
ious dental applications, and the research has evaluated the highest average Vickers hardness among other
dimensional accuracy, flexural strength, and wear resistance groups
of some of these [37, 49, 50]. Hazeveld et al. compared the
accuracy of diagnostic casts fabricated using three additive (3) The 3D printing layer thickness and postprinting
manufacturing technologies (DLP, material jetting (MJ), treatment conditions had no effect on the degree of
and PBF), whereby the results showed that DLP is a clini- conversion ratio of the 3D-printed material
cally acceptable method for the fabrication of orthodontic
casts [37]. However, another study evaluating the dimen- Data Availability
sional accuracy of implant replica produced with four differ-
ent techniques (SLA, DLP, MJ, and conventionally processed The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study
stone casts) showed that DLP did not perform significantly are available from the corresponding author on reasonable
better than conventional dental stone for cast duplication request.
[49]. However, using DLP to fabricate interim restorations
has promising outcomes in terms of fracture load and flex- Disclosure
ural strength compared to conventionally processed ones
The study is part of the PhD thesis of AA at the University of
[51]. Overall, different methods can have different outcomes,
Sydney.
and a more profound investigation is required to compare
these in terms of their mechanical properties and biocom-
patibility in order to implement them in routine clinical
Conflicts of Interest
practice. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
The findings of this study must be seen in light of some
of its limitations. Although there are many additive technol- Acknowledgments
ogies in use for dental applications, this study evaluated only
the mechanical properties and degree of conversion of DLP The authors would like to thank SISMA S.p.A. for providing
3D printing. Therefore, only one technique and one type the 3D-printed materials.
of a temporary material were used, which is a limitation of
this study, and the performance of other 3D printing tech- References
nologies remains unexplored. It would be beneficial to focus
on how other dental materials would perform mechanically [1] S. Witkowski, “(CAD-)/CAM in dental technology,” Quintes-
using different 3D techniques, including SLA, FDM, PBF, sence of Dental Technology, vol. 28, pp. 169–184, 2005.
laser powder forming, and inkjet printing [5, 6]. Thus, [2] M. Revilla-León and M. Özcan, “Additive manufacturing tech-
the second part of this study will focus on a different 3D nologies used for processing polymers: current status and
printing method using various dental materials. Another potential application in prosthetic dentistry,” Journal of Pros-
thodontics, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 146–158, 2019.
limitation is the fact that the geometry of the samples used
in this work is not similar to that used in clinical settings. [3] A. Jawahar and G. Maragathavalli, “Applications of 3D print-
ing in dentistry–a review,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
Therefore, the crown-shaped samples need to be fabricated
and Research, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 1670–1675, 2019.
in order to simulate the clinical scenario. Other factors can
[4] A. Konidena, “3D printing: future of dentistry?,” Journal of
also influence the mechanical properties of a 3D material
Indian Academy of Oral Medicine and Radiology, vol. 28,
printed with DLP technology, including printing orienta- no. 2, p. 109, 2016.
tions, water absorption, biocompatibility, long-time sur-
[5] Q. Liu, M. C. Leu, and S. M. Schmitt, “Rapid prototyping in
vival rate, and color stability of a 3D-printed material. dentistry: technology and application,” The International Jour-
Profound understanding of these aspects will ensure a nal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 29, no. 3-4,
printed material with the goal of producing crown and pp. 317–335, 2006.
bridge materials suitable for better long-term clinical per- [6] A. Barazanchi, K. C. Li, B. Al-Amleh, K. Lyons, and J. N. Wad-
formance and increase the reliability and predictability of dell, “Additive technology: update on current materials and
dental treatment processes that involve the use of 3D- applications in dentistry,” Journal of Prosthodontics, vol. 26,
printed crown and bridge materials [8, 31]. no. 2, pp. 156–163, 2017.
8 BioMed Research International

[7] A. Dawood, B. M. Marti, V. Sauret-Jackson, and A. Darwood, [21] C. K. Scotti, M. M. . A. C. Velo, F. A. P. Rizzante, T. R. L. Nas-
“3D printing in dentistry,” British Dental Journal, vol. 219, cimento, R. F. L. Mondelli, and J. F. S. Bombonatti, “Physical
no. 11, p. 521, 2015. and surface properties of a 3D-printed composite resin for a
[8] A. Tahayeri, M. Morgan, A. P. Fugolin et al., “3D printed ver- digital workflow,” The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry,
sus conventionally cured provisional crown and bridge den- vol. 124, no. 5, pp. 614.e1–614.e5, 2020.
tal materials,” Dental Materials, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 192–200, [22] J. Y. H. Fuh, L. Lu, C. C. Tan, Z. X. Shen, and S. Chew, “Pro-
2018. cessing and characterising photo-sensitive polymer in the
[9] N. Alharbi, R. Osman, and D. Wismeijer, “Effects of build rapid prototyping process,” Journal of Materials Processing
direction on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed com- Technology, vol. 89-90, pp. 211–217, 1999.
plete coverage interim dental restorations,” The Journal of [23] C. M. Cheah, A. Y. C. Nee, J. Y. H. Fuh, L. Lu, Y. S. Choo, and
Prosthetic Dentistry, vol. 115, no. 6, pp. 760–767, 2016. T. Miyazawa, “Characteristics of photopolymeric material
[10] J. S. Shim, J.-E. Kim, S. H. Jeong, Y. J. Choi, and J. J. Ryu, used in rapid prototypes Part I. Mechanical properties in the
“Printing accuracy, mechanical properties, surface characteris- green state,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
tics, and microbial adhesion of 3D-printed resins with various vol. 67, no. 1-3, pp. 41–45, 1997.
printing orientations,” The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, [24] F. C. Calheiros, M. Daronch, F. A. Rueggeberg, and R. R.
vol. 124, no. 4, pp. 468–475, 2020. Braga, “Degree of conversion and mechanical properties of a
[11] R. B. Osman, N. Alharbi, and D. Wismeijer, “Build angle: BisGMA: TEGDMA composite as a function of the applied
does it influence the accuracy of 3D-printed dental resto- radiant exposure,” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
rations using digital light-processing technology?,” Interna- Part B: Applied Biomaterials, vol. 84B, no. 2, pp. 503–509,
tional Journal of Prosthodontics, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 182– 2008.
188, 2017. [25] R. L. dos Santos, G. A. de Sampaio, F. G. de Carvalho, M. M.
[12] S. Y. Li, M. Zhou, Y. X. Lai, Y. M. Geng, S. S. Cao, and X. M. Pithon, G. M. Guênes, and P. M. Alves, “Influence of degree
Chen, “Biological evaluation of three-dimensional printed of conversion on the biocompatibility of different composites
co-poly lactic acid/glycolic acid/tri-calcium phosphate scaffold in vivo,” The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, vol. 16, no. 1,
for bone reconstruction,” Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za pp. 15–20, 2014.
Zhi= Zhonghua Kouqiang Yixue Zazhi= Chinese Journal of [26] L. Perea-Lowery, M. Gibreel, P. K. Vallittu, and L. Lassila,
Stomatology, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 661–666, 2016. “Evaluation of the mechanical properties and degree of con-
[13] P. Seelbach, C. Brueckel, and B. Wöstmann, “Accuracy of dig- version of 3D printed splint material,” Journal of the Mechan-
ital and conventional impression techniques and workflow,” ical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, vol. 115, article 104254,
Clinical Oral Investigations, vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 1759–1764, 2021.
2013. [27] M. Reymus, N. Lümkemann, and B. Stawarczyk, “3D-printed
[14] E. Asmussen, “Softening of BISGMA-based polymers by etha- material for temporary restorations: impact of print layer
nol and by organic acids of plaque,” European Journal of Oral thickness and post-curing method on degree of conversion,”
Sciences, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 257–261, 1984. International Journal of Computerized Dentistry, vol. 22,
no. 3, pp. 231–237, 2019.
[15] Y. Hao, X. Huang, X. Zhou et al., “Influence of dental prosthe-
sis and restorative materials interface on oral biofilms,” Inter- [28] T. E. Donovan, “Factors essential for successful all-ceramic
national Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 19, no. 10, restorations,” The Journal of the American Dental Association,
p. 3157, 2018. vol. 139, pp. S14–S18, 2008.
[16] A. Szczesio-Wlodarczyk, J. Sokolowski, J. Kleczewska, and [29] S. International Organization for and S. International Organi-
K. Bociong, “Ageing of dental composites based on methacry- zation, ISO 4049: Dentistry-Polymer-based restorative mate-
late resins—a critical review of the causes and method of rials, ISO, Geneva, 2019.
assessment,” Polymers, vol. 12, no. 4, p. 882, 2020. [30] K. Puebla, K. Arcaute, R. Quintana, and R. B. Wicker, “Effects
[17] F. O. Chaves, N. C. Farias, L. M. Medeiros, R. C. Alonso, V. di of environmental conditions, aging, and build orientations on
Hipólito, and P. H. D'Alpino, “Mechanical properties of com- the mechanical properties of ASTM type I specimens manu-
posites as functions of the syringe storage temperature and factured via stereolithography,” Rapid Prototyping Journal,
energy dose,” Journal of Applied Oral Science, vol. 23, no. 2, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 374–388, 2012.
pp. 120–128, 2015. [31] J. Abduo, K. Lyons, and M. Bennamoun, “Trends in computer-
[18] L. Blumer, F. Schmidli, R. Weiger, and J. Fischer, “A system- aided manufacturing in prosthodontics: a review of the avail-
atic approach to standardize artificial aging of resin com- able streams,” International Journal of Dentistry, vol. 2014,
posite cements,” Dental Materials, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 855– Article ID 783948, 15 pages, 2014.
863, 2015. [32] H. N. Chia and B. M. Wu, “Recent advances in 3D printing of
[19] C. de Lange, J. R. Bausch, and C. L. Davidson, “The influence biomaterials,” Journal of Biological Engineering, vol. 9, no. 1,
of shelf life and storage conditions on some properties of com- p. 4, 2015.
posite resins,” The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, vol. 49, [33] D. R. Haselton, A. M. Diaz-Arnold, and M. A. Vargas, “Flex-
no. 3, pp. 349–355, 1983. ural strength of provisional crown and fixed partial denture
[20] M. Reymus, R. Fabritius, A. Keßler, R. Hickel, D. Edelhoff, and resins,” The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, vol. 87, no. 2,
B. Stawarczyk, “Fracture load of 3D-printed fixed dental pros- pp. 225–228, 2002.
theses compared with milled and conventionally fabricated [34] S. Digholkar, V. N. V. Madhav, and J. Palaskar, “Evaluation of
ones: the impact of resin material, build direction, post-curing, the flexural strength and microhardness of provisional crown
and artificial aging—an in vitro study,” Clinical Oral Investiga- and bridge materials fabricated by different methods,” Journal
tions, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 701–710, 2020. of Indian Prosthodontic Society, vol. 16, no. 4, p. 328, 2016.
BioMed Research International 9

[35] M. Balkenhol, M. C. Mautner, P. Ferger, and B. Wöstmann, [49] M. Revilla-León, Ó. Gonzalez-Martín, J. Pérez López, J. L. Sán-
“Mechanical properties of provisional crown and bridge mate- chez-Rubio, and M. Özcan, “Position accuracy of implant ana-
rials: chemical-curing versus dual-curing systems,” Journal of logs on 3D printed polymer versus conventional dental stone
Dentistry, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 15–20, 2008. casts measured using a coordinate measuring machine,” Jour-
[36] D. Astudillo-Rubio, A. Delgado-Gaete, C. Bellot-Arcís, J. M. nal of Prosthodontics, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 560–567, 2018.
Montiel-Company, A. Pascual-Moscardó, and J. M. Almer- [50] V. Prpic, I. Slacanin, Z. Schauperl, A. Catic, N. Dulcic, and
ich-Silla, “Mechanical properties of provisional dental mate- S. Cimic, “A study of the flexural strength and surface hardness
rials: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” PLoS One, of different materials and technologies for occlusal device fab-
vol. 13, no. 2, article e0193162, 2018. rication,” The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, vol. 121, no. 6,
[37] A. Hazeveld, J. J. R. Huddleston Slater, and Y. Ren, “Accuracy pp. 955–959, 2019.
and reproducibility of dental replica models reconstructed by [51] H. Lorenz, A. Othman, A.-K. Lührs, and C. von See, “Compar-
different rapid prototyping techniques,” American Journal of ison of the shear bond strength of 3D printed temporary brid-
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, vol. 145, no. 1, ges materials, on different types of resin cements and surface
pp. 108–115, 2014. treatment,” Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry,
[38] A. Unkovskiy, P. H.-B. Bui, C. Schille, J. Geis-Gerstorfer, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. e367–e372, 2019.
F. Huettig, and S. Spintzyk, “Objects build orientation, posi-
tioning, and curing influence dimensional accuracy and flex-
ural properties of stereolithographically printed resin,”
Dental Materials, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. e324–e333, 2018.
[39] N. Ilie and R. Hickel, “Investigations on mechanical behaviour
of dental composites,” Clinical Oral Investigations, vol. 13,
no. 4, pp. 427–438, 2009.
[40] S. B. Mitra, D. Wu, and B. N. Holmes, “An application of
nanotechnology in advanced dental materials,” The Journal
of the American Dental Association, vol. 134, no. 10,
pp. 1382–1390, 2003.
[41] A. R. Curtis, W. M. Palin, G. J. P. Fleming, A. C. C. Shortall,
and P. M. Marquis, “The mechanical properties of nanofilled
resin-based composites: characterizing discrete filler particles
and agglomerates using a micromanipulation technique,”
Dental Materials, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 180–187, 2009.
[42] L. F. J. Schneider, C. S. C. Pfeifer, S. Consani, S. A. Prahl, and
J. L. Ferracane, “Influence of photoinitiator type on the rate
of polymerization, degree of conversion, hardness and yellow-
ing of dental resin composites,” Dental Materials, vol. 24, no. 9,
pp. 1169–1177, 2008.
[43] M. El-Nawawy, L. Koraitim, O. Abouelatta, and H. Hegazi,
“Depth of cure and microhardness of nanofilled, packable
and hybrid dental composite resins,” American Journal of Bio-
medical Engineering, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 241–250, 2012.
[44] N. A. Hatim, A. Taqa, and S. Abdul Razzak, “Evaluation of the
effect of temperature and time on the conversion factor of
acrylic resin denture base material,” Al-Rafidain Dental Jour-
nal, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 67–79, 2011.
[45] A. M. Diaz-Arnold, J. T. Dunne, and A. H. Jones, “Microhard-
ness of provisional fixed prosthodontic materials,” The Journal
of Prosthetic Dentistry, vol. 82, no. 5, pp. 525–528, 1999.
[46] C. Besnault, N. Pradelle-Plasse, B. Picard, and P. Colon, “Effect
of a LED versus halogen light cure polymerization on the cur-
ing characteristics of three composite resins,” American Jour-
nal of Dentistry, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 323–328, 2003.
[47] J. L. Ferracane, “Correlation between hardness and degree of
conversion during the setting reaction of unfilled dental
restorative resins,” Dental Materials, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 11–
14, 1985.
[48] L. Fanfoni, M. de Biasi, G. Antollovich, R. di Lenarda, and
D. Angerame, “Evaluation of degree of conversion, rate of
cure, microhardness, depth of cure, and contraction stress of
new nanohybrid composites containing pre-polymerized
spherical filler,” Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Med-
icine, vol. 31, no. 12, pp. 1–11, 2020.