Page 266 - IJB-10-5
P. 266

International Journal of Bioprinting                                A TPMS framework for complete dentures




            2. Methods                                         level-set approximation equations, a hyperboloid can be
                                                               formed by solving -c ≤ φ(x,y,z) ≤ c. The space surrounded
            2.1. Functionally graded TPMS framework design for   by two surfaces is the solid part of the TPMS porous
            implant-supported fixed complete dentures
                                                               structure as depicted in Figure 1C.
            2.1.1. Sheet-network gyroid structure designs
            The four most common TPMS structures are illustrated
                                                         34
            in  Figure  1A.  According  to  the  study  by  Castro  et  al.,    2.1.2. Gradient porous gyroid structure designs
            sheet-network gyroid structures, compared to other TPMS   The internal structure of a tooth exhibits a hierarchical
            porous  structures, exhibit higher  surface  area,  better   organization, comprising three primary components:
            manufacturability, superior energy absorption, and load-  enamel, dentin, and pulp.  This hierarchical organization
                                                                                   35
            bearing capabilities. These structures have smooth surfaces   results in a gradient variation in the mechanical
            with an average curvature of 0 to effectively reduce local   properties of teeth, from the interior to the exterior
            stress concentration. Consequently, we employed the sheet-  regions. Additionally, density and unit cell size are crucial
            network gyroid lattice as the research object (Figure 1B).  parameters affecting the mechanical properties of TPMS
               The level-set approximation equation is the most   porous structures. They jointly control the wall thickness,
            commonly used method to describe TPMS. The equation   thereby influencing the structures’ elastic modulus and
                                                                                    36
            for gyroid is                                      compressive performance.  Therefore, this study adopted
                                                               a radial gradient variation method based on the gyroid
                      φ  = cos(X) sin(Y) + cos (Y)       (I)   structure (including variations in porosity and cell size
                       G
                                                               gradients) to design a biomimetic framework for IFCDs.
                       sin(Z) + cos(Z) sin(X) = c
                                                               This study combines two design types: (i) relative density
                                                               gradient  variation  and  (ii)  cell  size  gradient  variation.
            where  X =  2πx/t,  Y =  2πy/t, and  Z =  2πz/t refer to the   The former is controlled by parameter c, and the latter is
            periodic changes in the x, y, and z directions, respectively, t   influenced by parameter t.
            is a parameter that determines the size of the unit cell, and
            c indicates the value of the surface offset that governs the   The relative density is a crucial parameter in TPMS-
            internal void morphology of the lattice structures. In the   based porous structures, as it not only determines pore



































            Figure 1. Four kinds of three-periodic minimal surface (TPMS) and the formation principle of the sheet-networks gyroid structures. (A) Four types
            of three-periodic minimal surface (TPMS) structures. (B) The sheet-network gyroid structure. (C) Construction of sheet-network gyroid structures.
            Abbreviation: I-WP, Schoen’s I-graph-wrapped package.


            Volume 10 Issue 5 (2024)                       258                                doi: 10.36922/ijb.3453
   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271