Examines how different zirconium oxide processing methods affect surface properties and phase changes.
How does zirconia processing affect the degree of tetragonal to monoclinic phase transformation (t ⟶ m) and the development and wettability of the surface? One hundred and twenty-four samples made of sintered zirconium were divided into four groups based on the following treatments: grinding, polishing, sandblasting with Al2O3, or sandblasting with SiC. After surface treatment, the samples were subjected to the following tests: X-ray diffraction, microscopic examination, surface roughness measurements, and surface wettability. The highest values are achieved after the grinding process (Ra = 0.63; Rz = 9.29; Rq = 1.28), and the lowest values are found after polishing (Ra = 0.11; Rz = 0.71; Rq = 0.36). All samples, apart from those sandblasted with Al2O3 (Θ = 121.59°), showed wettability with the polar liquid. The best wettability was noted for sandblasted SiC samples (Θ = 41.22°) and the lowest was noted for polished samples (Θ = 80.61°). All samples showed wettability with an apolar liquid (Θ < 90°). A significant transformation (t ⟶ m) was noted in all tested samples: about 14% for ground, 17% for polished, 13.8% for Al2O3 sandblasting, and 13.1% for SiC sandblasting samples. The type of processing method has a significant impact on the selected parameters of roughness, surface wettability, and phase transformations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Śmielak et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: