The transverse strength of aluminous porcelain was compared with that of feldspathic porcelain and the effect of surface roughness and environmental moisture on these strengths was determined. Aluminous porcelain was superior to feldspathic porcelain in transverse strength and the transverse strength of both types of porcelain was affected adversely by environmental moisture.
McLean, J.W. , and Hughes, T.H.: The Reinforcement of Dental Porcelain with Ceramic Oxides, Br Dent J119: 251-272, 1965.
3.
Binns, D.B.: Some Physical Properties of Two-Phase Crystal-Glass Solids, in Stewart, G.H., (ed) : Science of Ceramics , 1st ed, New York: Academic Press , 1962, pp 315-334.
4.
Hasselman, D.P.H. , and Fulrath, R.M.: Proposed Fracture Theory of a Dispersion Strengthened Glass Matrix, Am Ceram Soc J49:68-72, 1966.
5.
Mould, R.E.: The Strength and Static Fatigue of Glass, Glasstechnic Berichte (Eng)32K: 18-28, 1959.
6.
Bascom, W.D. : Water at the Interface, J Adhesion , 2: 161-183, 1970.
7.
Wiederhoen, S. : Effects of Environment on the Fracture of Glass , in Westwood, A.R.C. and Stoloff. (eds) : Environment-Sensitive Mechanical Behavior, New York: Gordon and Beach , 1966, pp 293-315.
