Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
In this work the room-temperature photopolymerization of Bis-GMA, Bis-EMA, urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA) and
triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA) induced by camphoroquinone/N;N-dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate, as photoinitiator system, was followed by FT-IR. The results obtained were then tted by a non-linear least square method to a rational
function, which permitted the accurate calculation of the limiting degree of conversion. The latter was found to increase in the order
Bis-GMAoBis-EMAoUDMAoTEGDMA. This trend is discussed in connection with the chemical structure of dimethacrylates.
The photopolymerization of mixtures of Bis-GMA/TEGDMA, Bis-GMA/UDMA and Bis-GMA/Bis-EMA showed a good linear
relationship of degree of conversion with the mole fraction of Bis-GMA and in the case of the rst pair also with the Tg of the initial
monomer mixture. r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Dental materials; Composites; Copolymers; Dimethacrylates; Degree of conversion; Glass transition temperature; Bis-GMA; Bis-EMA;
UDMA; TEGDMA
1. Introduction
The polymerization of dimethacrylates produces
densely crosslinked networks, resins, which nd wide
applications in dentistry such as dental composites, pit
and ssure sealants, dentine bonding agents and cements
[13], dental adhesives [4] dentures and elastomeric
impression materials [5].
Dental composites are used for the restoration of
teeth and consist of two principal components, an
organic matrix and inorganic ller. The organic matrix
is formed by free radical polymerization of dimethacrylates, which are non-toxic and capable of rapid
polymerization in the presence of oxygen and water,
because the restorations are polymerized in situ in a
tooth cavity. This matrix when used unlled for the
restoration of teeth shows a poor wear resistance. This
can be improved by the inclusion of particulate llers,
which are harder than the polymeric matrix. An
ambitious goal would be to match the remarkable
properties of dental enamel, which contains more than
95 vol% of hydroxyapatite crystallites tightly packed
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +30-3199-7825; fax: +30-3199-7769.
E-mail address: siderid@chem.auth.gr (I. Sideridou).
0142-9612/02/$ - see front matter r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 4 2 - 9 6 1 2 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 3 0 8 - 8
1820
CH3
CH2 = C
C=CH2
C=O
CH3
OCH2 CHCH 2 O
OH
C=O
OCH2 CHCH2 O
OH
CH3
Bis-GMA
2,2-bis-[4-(2-hydroxy-3-methacryloyloxyprop-1-oxy)phenyl]propane]
or
Bisphenol A glycol dimethacrylate
CH3
CH3
C=CH2
CH2=C
C=O
C=O
OCH2CH2OCH2CH2OCH2CH2O
TEGDMA
Triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate
CH3
CH3
CH2=C
C=O
C=CH2
C=O
CH3 CH3
OCH2CH2OCNHCH2CHCH2CCH2CH2NHCOCH2CH2O
CH3
O
O
UDMA
1,6-bis-(methacryloyloxy-2-ethoxycarbonylamino)-2,4,4-trimethylhexane
or
Urethane dimethacrylate
CH3
CH3
C=CH2
C=O
CH2=C
C=O
CH3
O(CH2CH2O)n
(OCH2CH2) nO
CH3
Bis-EMA
Bisphenol A ethoxylated dimethacrylate
(4 ethylene oxide groups/bisphenol A group)
1821
G
T
U
E
GT (1)
GT (2)
GU (1)
GU (2)
GE (1)
GE (2)
GTUE (1)
GTUE (2)
GUE
a
b
TEGDMA
UDMA
Bis-EMA
100
100
100
100
35.8a
56.6b
35.8
56.6
35.8
56.6
56.6
56.6
56.6
64.2a
43.4b
64.2
43.4
23.4
13.4
10
15
21.7
64.2
43.4
10
15
21.7
2. Experimental procedures
2.1. Materials
The dimethacrylates used were Bis-GMA (Polysciences Europe GmbH), Bis-EMA (Aldrich Chem.
Co.), UDMA (Ivoclar AG) and TEGDMA (Aldrich
Chem. Co.). They were used as received without further
purication. Nine mixtures of these monomers were
prepared, the composition of which is shown in Table 1.
In the commercial dental composites based on mixtures
of Bis-GMA and TEGDMA, they are used in a ratio
varied between 50 : 50 and 70 : 30 by weight, in order to
obtain viscosities of 12 Pa, suitable for the incorporation of the appropriate amounts of inorganic llers [15].
These weight ratios correspond to molar ratios
35.8 : 64.2 and 56.6 : 43.4 and these molar ratios were
used in the preparation of all mixtures studied, in order
to keep the concentration of double bonds constant. To
make the samples light cured, 2 mol% of camphoroquinone (CQ) (Polysciences) used as photosensitizer, and
2 mol% of N,N-dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate
(DMAEMA) (Riedel-de Haen) used as reducing agent,
was added to each sample. This photoinitiator system is
the most common one used in the current photoactivated polymer-based dental materials. All samples
1822
Table 2
Coecients of the rational functions (Equation 1) used for the determination of the limiting degree of conversion of the neat dimethacrylates and
their mixtures
Sample
a1 1014
a2
a3
b1
b2
b3 102
Sy;x a
R2
Bis-GMA
TEGDMA
UDMA
Bis-EMA
GT (1)
GT (2)
GU (1)
GU (2)
GE (1)
GE (2)
GTUE (1)
GTUE (2)
GUE
9.51
5.19
1.29
51.1
16.9
12.3
37.5
36.4
10.3
2.74
12.6
2.85
14.6
22.67
0.4038
1.311
13.08
44.26
43.42
75.78
70.23
2.349
1.822
46.13
8.135
42.98
0.96027
0.77943
2.4564
2.5250
1.6691
1.5398
0.45165
0.93958
3.6127
1.6321
2.6871
4.4730
3.4067
2.10
3.48
0.259
19.0
3.60
2.47
8.28
8.01
2.65
0.671
2.58
0.592
3.17
0.9507
0.1458
0.1954
0.4636
0.9399
0.9852
1.566
1.613
0.7571
0.3892
1.421
0.8062
1.740
2.4633
1.0299
3.5318
4.7465
2.7397
2.8068
7.9046
1.8579
7.9542
3.8539
5.6415
9.9568
7.6584
0.2019
4.0581
0.1259
0.6985
0.3654
0.2611
0.2575
0.9306
0.2200
0.2322
0.1038
0.2894
0.1093
0.9999
0.9907
1.0000
0.9995
0.9999
0.9999
0.9999
0.9986
0.9999
0.9999
1.0000
0.9998
1.0000
a
b
104 cm2 mol1) [16]. The unit was used without the light
guide, at a distance of 6 mm from the sample. The curing
light and heat (infrared) intensity at the position of the
sample measured by a Hilux curing light meter, was 200
and 0 mW cm2 correspondingly.
The amount of double vinyl bonds remaining in the
sample exposed to irradiation is shown by the intensity
of the peak at 1637 cm1 referring to the C C
stretching of the vinyl group and 816 cm1 which refers
to the C C twisting. Both have been used in the study
of polymerization of acrylates and methacrylates [17].
We have chosen the 1637 cm1 absorption, because it is
stronger than the absorption at 816 cm1 and then will
provide less experimental deviation. The degree of
conversion was directly related to the decrease of
1637 cm1 absorption on the FT-IR spectra as follows:
Degree of conversion
A0 At
100;
A0
a1 a2 x a3 x2
:
b1 b2 x b3 x2
1823
MW
Viscosity (Pa)
Bis-GMA
TEGDMA
UDMA
Bis-EMA
510.6
286.3
470.0
540
3.90
6.99
4.25
3.70
1200a,b
0.011b
23.1a/7.054c
0.9
1.5497
1.460
1.485d
1.5320
1824
Table 4
Dependence of limiting degree of conversion on Tg for neat dimethacrylate monomers
Monomer
Tg (1C) of monomer
Tg (1C) of polymer
Bis-GMA
TEGDMA
UDMA
Bis-EMA
39.0
75.7
69.6
52.2
7.7
83.4
35.3
46.1
67
65
68
68
80
70
60
50
40
30
Bis.GMA
20
TEGDMA
UDMA
Bis.EMA
10
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
1825
3.0
Bis-GMA
2.5
UDMA
2.0
vitrification
1.5
TEGDMA
1.0
Bis-EMA
gelation
0.5
0.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1826
(65681C), which is 42451C above the curing temperature. This result is in accordance with the general
observation that typically: Tg Tcure 202401C [35].
In Table 5 the results obtained from the study of
photo-polymerization of mixtures of the four dimethacrylates are presented, the composition of which are
shown in Table 1. The values of limiting degree of
conversion of mixtures, calculated on the basis of Eq. (1)
as in the case of neat monomers, showed a good linear
relationship between the conversion and the mole
fraction of Bis-GMA in the mixture (Fig. 3).
As far as the rate behavior during the polymerization
of mixtures is concerned, the mixtures of Bis-GMA/
UDMA and Bis-GMA/Bis-EMA showed an intermediate behavior between those of the corresponding neat
monomers. Especially the mixtures of Bis-GMA/BisEMA with 35.8 and 56.6 mol% content of Bis-GMA,
correspondingly showed a maximum rate 2.8 and 3.3 s1
after 2.5 and 1 s, when 5.6 and 2.9% of the double bonds
had been reacted. These results show an approximate
additive eect of the mixture components on the
polymerization rate. On the contrary, the mixtures of
Bis-GMA/TEGDMA showed a maximum rate from the
onset of the polymerization and a generally higher
initial polymerization reactivity than that of neat BisGMA. This result show a synergistic eect of components of this mixture on the polymerization rate, which
may be most probably be due to the better plasticizing
eect of TEGDMA on Bis-GMA than UDMA and BisEMA.
In Table 5 the Tg values of the monomer
mixtures experimentally determined by a DSC and
the theoretically values calculated from the Fox
equation are shown. It is observed that in all mixtures
the experimental value is lower than the calculated
value and this dierence is higher in the case of BisGMA/TEGDMA mixtures. Bis-GMA as has already
been mentioned has a structure of a quasi-network
formed by strong hydrogen bonding. In the mixtures
Table 5
Limiting degree of conversion of mixtures of Bis-GMA with various dimethacrylates
Monomer mixture
GT (1)
GT (2)
GU (1)
GU (2)
GE (1)
GE (2)
GTUE (1)
GTUE (2)
GUE
a
b
60.9
54.9
57.1
50.6
45.4
42.3
47.6 (51.8)b
44.9 (50.4)b
44.5 (48.5)b
Exp.
Fox
Exp.
Foxa
61.1
47.0
29.4
24.6
36.4
30.4
51.8
36.1
25.6
19.8
34.1
26.4
75
76
73
73
67
68
66.0
66.4
67.6
67.4
67.6
67.4
1827
80
80
2
Bis-GMA/TEGDMA R = 0.997
Bis-GMA/UDMA R2= 0.995
2
R = 0.982
70
70
60
50
40
60
50
40
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
-80
-60
-40
-20
Monomer Tg ( C)
Fig. 3. Limiting degree of conversion of various mixtures of BisGMA, versus mole fraction of Bis-GMA.
1828
4. Conclusions
The room-temperature photopolymerization of the
most widely used dimethacrylates in dentistry was
studied by FT-IR. The results obtained were then tted
by a non-linear least square method to a rational
function, which permitted the accurate calculation of the
limiting degree of conversion. The latter was found to
increase in the order:
Bis-GMAoBis-EMAoUDMAoTEGDMA:
This trend is connected with the mobility of the
polymerizing system, which depends on Tg of the
formed network and mainly on the Tg of the unreacted
monomer. Especially in the case of UDMA, the degree
of conversion is higher than that expected, most
probably due to chain transfer reactions caused by the
aNHa groups, which increase the mobility of radical
sites on the network. These chain-transfer reactions may
also be responsible for the high polymerization reactivity of UDMA.
The nal degree of conversion is not aected by the
polymerization reactivity of monomers. The maximum
rate of polymerization of UDMA and Bis-GMA was
higher than that of TEGDMA and Bis-EMA.
The limiting degree of conversion of mixtures of BisGMA with the other dimethacrylates showed a good
linear relationship with the mole fraction of Bis-GMA
and in the case of Bis-GMA/TEGDMA mixture, also
with the Tg of the initial monomer mixture.
TEGDMA was found to have a better plasticizing eect on Bis-GMA than UDMA and Bis-EMA,
which is responsible for the synergistic eect on the
polymerization rate observed in the mixture Bis-GMA/
TEGDMA.
References
[1] Craig RG, editor. Restorative dental materials, 10th ed. St. Louis,
Missouri: C.V. Mosby Company, 1997.
[2] Linden LA. Photo curing of polymeric dental materials, plastic
composite resins. In: Fouassier JP, Rabek JE, editors. Radiation
curing in polymer science and technology, vol. IV. Essex: Elsevier
Ltd, 1993. p. 387466.
[3] Linden LA. Dental polymers. In: Salamone CJ, editor. Polymeric
materials encyclopedia, vol. 3D-E. New York: CRC Press, 1996.
p. 1839.
[4] Silikas N, Watts DC. Rheology of urethane dimethacrylate and
dilute formulations. Dent Mater 1999;15:25761.
[5] Cook WD. Kinetics and properties of a photopolymerized
dimethacrylate oligomer. J Appl Polym Sci 1991;42:220922.
[6] Kalachandra S, Taylor DF, McGrath JE, Sankarapandian M,
Shobha HK. StructureFproperty relationships in dental composites based on polydimethacrylates. Polym Prepr 1997;38:945.
[7] Bogdal D, Pielichowski J, Boron A. Application of diol
dimethacrylates in dental composites and their inuence on
polymerization shrinkage. J Appl Polym Sci 1997;66:23337.
[8] Sankarapandian M, Shobba HK, Kalachandra S, Mc Grath JE,
Taylor DF. Characterization of some aromatic dimethacrylates
for dental composite applications. J Mater Sci: Mater Med
1997;8:4658.
[9] Labella R, Braden M, Clarke RL, Davy KWM. THFMA in
dental monomer systems. Biomaterials 1996;17:4316.
[10] Wang G, Culbertson BM, Xie D, Seghi RR. Eect of uorinated
triethylene glycol dimethacrylate on the properties of unlled,
light cured dental resins. J Macromol Sci Pure Appl Chem
1999;36:23752.
[11] Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Inuence of UEDMA, Bis-GMA and
TEGDMA on selected mechanical properties of experimental
resin composites. Dent Mater 1998;14:516.
[12] Hansel C, Leyhausen G, Mai U, Geurtsen W. Eect of various
components extracts on the growth of Streptococcus sobrinus.
J Dent Res 1998;77(1):607.
[13] Tanaka K, Taira M, Shintani H, Wakasa K, Yamaki M. Residual
monomers (TEGDMA and Bis-GMA) of a set visible-light-cured
dental composite resin when immersed in water. J Oral Rehab
1991;18:35362.
[14] Selli E, Bellobono IR. Photopolymerization of multifunctional
monomers: kinetic aspects. In: Fouassier JP, Rabek JE, editors.
Radiation curing in polymer science and technology, vol III.
Essex: Elsevier Ltd, 1993. p. 132.
[15] Kalachandra S, Taylor DF, DePorter CD, McGrath JE.
Polymeric materials for composite matrices in biological environments. Polymer 1993;34:77882.
[16] Cook WD. Photopolymerization kinetics of dimethacrylates using
the camphoroquinone/amine initiator system. Polymer
1992;33:6009.
[17] Decker C. Kinetic analysis and performance of UV-curable
coatings. In: Pappas SP, editor. Radiation curing, science and
technology. New York: Plenum Press, 1992. p. 13579.
[18] Heatley F, Pratsitsilp Y, McHugh N, Watts DC, Derlin H.
Determination of extent reaction in dimethacrylate-based dental
composites using solid-state 13C m.a.s.n.m.r spectroscopy and
comparison with FT-IR spectroscopy. Polymer 1995;36:185967.
[19] Chambers S, Guthrie J, Otterburn MS, Woods J. Factors
aecting residual unsaturation and curing rates in photocured
crosslinked compositions. Polym commun 1986;27:20911.
[20] Cook WD. Thermal aspects of the kinetics of dimethacrylate
photopolymerization. Polymer 1992;33:215261.
[21] Davy KWM, Kalachandra S, Pandain MS, Braden M. Relationship between composite matrix molecular structure and properties. Biomaterials 1998;19:200714.
[22] Silikas N, Watts DC. Rheology of urethane dimethacrylate and
dilute formulations. Dent Mater 1999;15:25761.
[23] Kalachandra S, Kusy RP. Comparison of water sorption by
methacrylate and dimethacrylate monomers and their corresponding polymers. Polymer 1991;32:242834.
[24] Sankarapandian M, Shobha HK, Kalachandra S, Taylor DF,
Shultz AR, McGrath JE. Synthesis of new dental composite
matrix dimethacrylates. Polym Prepr 1997;38:923.
1829