The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 95, No 1, 75-79.
© 1977 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Koran, A
Right arrow Articles by Craig, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Koran, A, 3rd
Right arrow Articles by Craig, R.
Journal of the American Dental Association, Vol 95, Issue 1, 75-79
Copyright © 1977 by American Dental Association


Journal Article

Apparent viscosity of materials used for making edentulous impressions



A Koran 3rd, JM Powers, and RG Craig

The viscosity of commercially available impression materials used for making edentulous impressions was determined as a function of time and rotational speed. The impression materials studied showed large differences in viscosity and could be ranked into three groups. The values for one group--Plastogum, Ackerman cement (1:1 powder-to-liquid ratio), and light-bodied Permlastic--ranged from 23,800 cp to 57,200 cp. The viscosity values for a second group--Unilastic, syringe Elasticon, Luralite, and Coe-Flo--ranged from 92,200 cp to 107,000 cp. For a third group--Omniflex, Jeltrate, and Ackerman cement (2:1 powder-to-liquid ratio)--the viscosity values ranged from 239,000 cp to 257,000 cp. Light-bodied Permlastic, Ackerman cement (1:1 powder-to-liquid ratio), Jeltrate, and syringe Elasticon functioned as Newtonian liquids immediately after mixing. All other materials were non-Newtonian in behavior. The viscosity of most impression materials increased dramatically with time; the only exceptions were the zinc oxide-eugenol impression materials.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright©1995-1977 American Dental Association (ADA).
Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without prior written permission of ADA.