Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards
Up to this moment, there is no guideline regarding the materials to produce mouthguards. The most used is Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA). Studies indicate that laminating EVA sheets with rigid components could increase the protection capacities of the mouthguards whereas other studies suggest that on...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Gruppo Italiano Frattura
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/42fc86ef9a25447ca5d33584b9d701ce |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| id |
oai:doaj.org-article:42fc86ef9a25447ca5d33584b9d701ce |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:42fc86ef9a25447ca5d33584b9d701ce2021-11-26T10:56:29ZImpact response of different materials for sports mouthguards1971-8993https://doaj.org/article/42fc86ef9a25447ca5d33584b9d701ce2021-06-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.fracturae.com/index.php/fis/article/view/3068https://doaj.org/toc/1971-8993 Up to this moment, there is no guideline regarding the materials to produce mouthguards. The most used is Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA). Studies indicate that laminating EVA sheets with rigid components could increase the protection capacities of the mouthguards whereas other studies suggest that only replacement of the material within it structure can increase energy absorption. The aim of this work is to evaluate the impact response of four different foils when compared to a 4 mm thickness EVA sheet. Five groups of different materials were subjected to impact tests with energies of 1.72 J, 2.85 J and 4.40 J. In this context was considered the following materials: EVA foils (G1), EVA foils with an EVA foam core (G2), EVA foils with an acetate core (G3), Foils of Erkoloc-pro (G4) and Foils of Ortho IBT resin (G5). Comparisons between the materials were made by qualitative analysis of the average energy-time and load-displacement curves, as well as by comparison of the peak load, maximum displacement, contact time and absorbed energy using the Kruskal-Wallis test. It was possible to conclude that statistically significant differences were found in the energy absorbed (p=0.001). Laminated foils with a soft core (G2) are a good option to produce mouthguards, while EVA foils with an acetate core (G3) and foils of Ortho IBT resin (G5) were declared unsuitable. Maria MoreiraJoão Carlos RamosAna MessiasMaria Augusta NetoAna Paula AmaroPaulo NB ReisGruppo Italiano FratturaarticleMouthguardImpact responseThermoforming foilMechanical testingMechanical engineering and machineryTJ1-1570Structural engineering (General)TA630-695ENFrattura ed Integrità Strutturale, Vol 15, Iss 57 (2021) |
| institution |
DOAJ |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
EN |
| topic |
Mouthguard Impact response Thermoforming foil Mechanical testing Mechanical engineering and machinery TJ1-1570 Structural engineering (General) TA630-695 |
| spellingShingle |
Mouthguard Impact response Thermoforming foil Mechanical testing Mechanical engineering and machinery TJ1-1570 Structural engineering (General) TA630-695 Maria Moreira João Carlos Ramos Ana Messias Maria Augusta Neto Ana Paula Amaro Paulo NB Reis Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards |
| description |
Up to this moment, there is no guideline regarding the materials to produce mouthguards. The most used is Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA). Studies indicate that laminating EVA sheets with rigid components could increase the protection capacities of the mouthguards whereas other studies suggest that only replacement of the material within it structure can increase energy absorption. The aim of this work is to evaluate the impact response of four different foils when compared to a 4 mm thickness EVA sheet. Five groups of different materials were subjected to impact tests with energies of 1.72 J, 2.85 J and 4.40 J. In this context was considered the following materials: EVA foils (G1), EVA foils with an EVA foam core (G2), EVA foils with an acetate core (G3), Foils of Erkoloc-pro (G4) and Foils of Ortho IBT resin (G5). Comparisons between the materials were made by qualitative analysis of the average energy-time and load-displacement curves, as well as by comparison of the peak load, maximum displacement, contact time and absorbed energy using the Kruskal-Wallis test. It was possible to conclude that statistically significant differences were found in the energy absorbed (p=0.001). Laminated foils with a soft core (G2) are a good option to produce mouthguards, while EVA foils with an acetate core (G3) and foils of Ortho IBT resin (G5) were declared unsuitable.
|
| format |
article |
| author |
Maria Moreira João Carlos Ramos Ana Messias Maria Augusta Neto Ana Paula Amaro Paulo NB Reis |
| author_facet |
Maria Moreira João Carlos Ramos Ana Messias Maria Augusta Neto Ana Paula Amaro Paulo NB Reis |
| author_sort |
Maria Moreira |
| title |
Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards |
| title_short |
Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards |
| title_full |
Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards |
| title_fullStr |
Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards |
| title_sort |
impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards |
| publisher |
Gruppo Italiano Frattura |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| url |
https://doaj.org/article/42fc86ef9a25447ca5d33584b9d701ce |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT mariamoreira impactresponseofdifferentmaterialsforsportsmouthguards AT joaocarlosramos impactresponseofdifferentmaterialsforsportsmouthguards AT anamessias impactresponseofdifferentmaterialsforsportsmouthguards AT mariaaugustaneto impactresponseofdifferentmaterialsforsportsmouthguards AT anapaulaamaro impactresponseofdifferentmaterialsforsportsmouthguards AT paulonbreis impactresponseofdifferentmaterialsforsportsmouthguards |
| _version_ |
1718409591379722240 |