MECHANICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF 3D-PRINTED VENEER MATERIALS

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the mechanical and physical properties of two 3D-printed dental veneer material, Rodin Envision and SprintRay OnX Tough 2. The primary focus was on determining minimum printable thickness, flexural strength, fracture toughness, wear resistance, translucency, color stability, surface roughness, gloss retention, and filler content by weight. Materials and Methods: Two resin-based materials were analyzed: Rodin Envision (Pac-Dent, USA) and OnX Tough 2 (SprintRay, USA), fabricated using Asiga Max and Sprintray P95 printers, respectively. Specimens were designed and tested following ISO standards. Minimum printable thicknesses tested were 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4-, and 0.5-mm. Evaluations included three-point flexural strength, fracture toughness, wear resistance (extrapolated to 1 million cycles), translucency, and surface roughness pre- and post-immersion. Color stability was assessed using three staining solutions: coffee, tea, and 0.1 ppm toluidine blue. Gloss retention was measured before and after thermocycling, and filler content was determined using ash burnout. Microstructural analysis was conducted using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS). Results: Rodin Envision demonstrated significantly superior performance in print precision, mechanical strength, wear resistance, and gloss retention. It achieved accurate prints at 0.2 mm and higher, and exhibited higher flexural strength (155.3 MPa vs. 128.2 MPa) and modulus (5.72 GPa vs. 4.16 GPa). Envision also outperformed OnX Tough 2 in fracture toughness, translucency, and gloss retention. However, OnX Tough 2 showed better color stability in tea and retained lower surface roughness after staining. Filler content analysis revealed higher inorganic loading in Envision (51.73%) compared to OnX Tough 2 (35.3%). Conclusion: Rodin Envision presents superior mechanical and physical properties across most tested domains, making it a more suitable candidate for high-performance esthetic dental restorations. OnX Tough 2 may be preferred in clinical scenarios prioritizing color stability and flexibility. These findings underscore the importance of material selection in optimizing the performance of 3D-printed veneers.