4.4 Article

In vitro oral simulation based on soft contact: The importance of viscoelastic response of the upper jaw substitutes

Journal

JOURNAL OF TEXTURE STUDIES
Volume 54, Issue 1, Pages 54-66

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jtxs.12738

Keywords

food oral tribology; non-Newtonian fluids; soft-soft contact; viscoelasticity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Real oral processing involves squeezing and shearing between two soft surfaces. In focusing on tongue substitutes, the importance of the soft palate surface cannot be overlooked. Therefore, in vitro oral tribology experiments were conducted to explore the effects of viscoelasticity, roughness of upper jaw substitutes, and fluid rheological properties on lubrication properties. Different palate substitutes had a significant impact on the friction curves of pure water, milk, and yogurt.
Real oral processing is the squeezing and shearing between two soft surfaces. The importance of soft palate surface cannot be ignored while focusing on tongue substitutes. Thus the effects of viscoelasticity, roughness of upper jaw substitutes, and fluid rheological properties on lubrication properties were explored by in vitro oral tribology experiments. Different palate substitutes significantly changed the friction curves of pure water, milk, and yogurt. The boundary friction coefficients of pure water and milk are higher under softer or smooth palate substitutes due to stronger viscoelastic responses of friction pairs. Their boundary friction coefficients are lowest at rigid upper jaw substitutes owing to smaller contact angles and deformation. However, the boundary friction coefficient of yogurt is lower owing to its high viscosity, low loss factor, and large particle size under soft friction pairs. In addition, it is highest at rigid palate friction pair because a smaller contact area reduces the entrainment of yogurt, resulting in poor lubricating performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available