4.6 Article

Corrosion resistance measurements of dental alloys, are they correlated?

Journal

DENTAL MATERIALS
Volume 23, Issue 6, Pages 679-687

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.008

Keywords

corrosion behaviour; polarisation resistance; elemental release; correlation coefficient

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives. The aim was to assess in vitro the resistance to corrosion of eight commercial dental alloys by two quantitative methods, electrochemical and immersion tests, then to statistically test the hypothesis of possible correlation between the polarization resistance (Rp) and the elemental release. Methods. Two quantitative methods; electrochemical and immersion test, were used. From the first, after recording the OCP during 24 h immersion in acidified artificial saliva (pH 2.3), Rp was obtained using the linear polarization in anodic path and applying the Mansfeld's method. From the static immersion test, using the same test solution, the elemental release from was analysed and determined using the ICP-AES. Thereafter, the two measurements were used to plot the regression line and to determine the correlation coefficient. The significance of the correlation was tested using F-test at a confidence interval of 0.99. Results.: The resistance to corrosion results obtained from the two methods were ranked and compared; an inverse relation between them was evident. Then, the obtained coefficient of correlation (R-2) was 0.886. With the F-test at 0.99 confidence interval, the hypothesis was accepted as the calculated F was about 44 against critical F = 13.7. Conclusion. The correlation between the two measurements, RP and mass loss, was proved statistically significant. This result may provide a new approach to predict the corrosion behaviour of dental alloys by firstly using the easier methods. (C) 2006 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All fights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available