Evaluation of surface roughness as a function of multiple blasting processing variables

Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013 Feb;24(2):238-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02392.x. Epub 2011 Dec 20.

Abstract

Objectives: This study evaluated the effect of implant surface blasting variables, such as blasting media size, velocity, and surface coverage and their two- and three-way interaction in surface roughness parameters.

Material and methods: Machined, grade IV titanium-alloy implants (n = 180) had their surfaces treated by a combination of 36 different blasting protocols according to the following variables: aluminum oxide blasting media particle size (50, 100, and 150 μm); velocity (75, 100, 125, and 150 m/s), and surface coverage (5, 15, 25 g/in.(2) ) (n = 5 per blasting protocol). A single 0.46 inch nozzle of the blaster was pointed at the threaded area and spaced 0.050 inches away. Surface topography (n = 5 measurements per implant) was assessed by scanning electron microscopy. Roughness parameters Sa, Sq, Sdr, and Sds were evaluated by optical interferometry. A GLM statistical model evaluated the effects of blasting variables on the surface parameters, and their two- and three-way interaction (P < 0.05). Statistical inferences for Sa and Sq were performed after a log(10) transformation to correct for data skewness.

Results: Prior to the log(10) transformation, Sa and Sq values for all processing groups ranged from ~0.5 to ~2.6 μm and from ~0.75 to 4 μm, respectively. Statistical inferences showed that Sa, Sq, and Sdr values were significantly dependent on blasting media, velocity, and surface coverage (all P < 0.001). Media × velocity, media × coverage, and media × velocity × coverage also significantly affected Sa, Sq, and Sdr values (P < 0.002). The highest levels were obtained with 100 μm blasting media, coverage for 5 g/in.(2) , and velocity of 100 m/s. No significant differences were observed for Sds (P > 0.15).

Conclusions: The blasting variables produced different surface topography features and knowledge of their interaction could be used to tailor a desired implant surface configuration.

MeSH terms

  • Aluminum Oxide
  • Dental Alloys
  • Dental Etching / methods*
  • Dental Implants*
  • Dental Prosthesis Design
  • Microscopy, Electron, Scanning
  • Surface Properties
  • Titanium

Substances

  • Dental Alloys
  • Dental Implants
  • Titanium
  • Aluminum Oxide