Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printers

Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: 2023
Autor(a) principal: Lazaro, Vinícius Ribeiro de Almeida
Orientador(a): Não Informado pela instituição
Banca de defesa: Não Informado pela instituição
Tipo de documento: Dissertação
Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
Idioma: eng
Instituição de defesa: Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP
Programa de Pós-Graduação: Não Informado pela instituição
Departamento: Não Informado pela instituição
País: Não Informado pela instituição
Palavras-chave em Português:
Link de acesso: https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25144/tde-22062023-164757/
Resumo: Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy between two threedimensional (3D) printers: MoonRay S100 (SprintRay, Los Angeles, USA) and Slash Plus (Uniz, San Diego, USA), which use Digital Light Processing (DLP) and Liquid Cristal Display (LCD) for printing 3D models, respectively. Methods: The sample consisted in 25 pairs of digital dental models, which were previously obtained through intraoral scanning performed with the TRIOS3 scanner (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). All models were digitally prepared and printed by the two printers. To evaluate the difference between the printed models, 22 intra-arch dimensional measurements were performed. The method was validated through the Bland-Altman test and intra- and inter-examiner errors through the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). For intergroup comparison, the Anova or Kruskal-wallis tests were performed (p<0.05). Results: The intergroup comparison showed a difference in 2 of the 22 variables evaluated: upper canine width (p 0.025) and lower canine width (p <0.001). The error of the method showed an excellent intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility for all variables with ICC ranging from 0.81 to 1. The Bland-Altman test confirmed the agreement of the method, showing that there was a greater agreement in the perimeter of the mandibular arch, and a lower agreement in the heights of the upper central incisor and upper canine. Conclusion: Adequate accuracy was observed among 3D printers, not obtaining a clinically significant value of difference between printing methods. The Moonray S100 printer has been shown to be more accurate.
id USP_e4c74c12f88a6eac5cb955cb9fb99ee6
oai_identifier_str oai:teses.usp.br:tde-22062023-164757
network_acronym_str USP
network_name_str Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printersComparação da precisão entre duas impressoras 3D3D printingDigital flowFluxo digitalImpressão 3DModelos impressosPrinted modelsIntroduction: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy between two threedimensional (3D) printers: MoonRay S100 (SprintRay, Los Angeles, USA) and Slash Plus (Uniz, San Diego, USA), which use Digital Light Processing (DLP) and Liquid Cristal Display (LCD) for printing 3D models, respectively. Methods: The sample consisted in 25 pairs of digital dental models, which were previously obtained through intraoral scanning performed with the TRIOS3 scanner (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). All models were digitally prepared and printed by the two printers. To evaluate the difference between the printed models, 22 intra-arch dimensional measurements were performed. The method was validated through the Bland-Altman test and intra- and inter-examiner errors through the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). For intergroup comparison, the Anova or Kruskal-wallis tests were performed (p<0.05). Results: The intergroup comparison showed a difference in 2 of the 22 variables evaluated: upper canine width (p 0.025) and lower canine width (p <0.001). The error of the method showed an excellent intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility for all variables with ICC ranging from 0.81 to 1. The Bland-Altman test confirmed the agreement of the method, showing that there was a greater agreement in the perimeter of the mandibular arch, and a lower agreement in the heights of the upper central incisor and upper canine. Conclusion: Adequate accuracy was observed among 3D printers, not obtaining a clinically significant value of difference between printing methods. The Moonray S100 printer has been shown to be more accurate.Introdução: O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar a precisão entre duas impressoras tridimensionais (3D): MoonRay S100 (SprintRay, Los Angeles, Estados Unidos) e Slash Plus (Uniz, San Diego, USA), que utilizam respectivamente, a tecnologia Digital Light Processing (DLP) e Liquid Cristal Display (LCD) para a impressão de modelos 3D. Métodos: A amostra foi composta por 25 pares de modelos dentários digitais, que foram obtidos previamente através do escaneamento intrabucal realizado com o scanner TRIOS3 (3Shape, Copenhagen, Dinamarca). Todos os modelos foram digitalmente preparados e impressos pelas duas impressoras. Para avaliar a diferença entre os modelos impressos, 22 medidas dimensionais intra-arco foram realizadas. O método foi validado através do teste Bland-Altman e os erros intra e interexaminadores através do coeficiente de correlação interclasse (ICC). Para comparação intergrupos os testes Anova ou Kruskal-wallis foram realizados (p<0.05). Resultados: A comparação intergrupos mostrou diferença em 2 das 22 variáveis avaliadas, sendo elas: largura do canino superior (p 0,025) e largura do canino inferior (p <0,001). O erro do método mostrou uma excelente reprodutibilidade intra e inter-examinadores para todas as variáveis com o ICC variando de 0,81 a 1. O Bland-Altman confirmou a concordância do método, mostrando que houve uma maior concordância no perímetro do arco mandibular, e uma menor concordância nas alturas do incisivo central superior e canino superior. Conclusão: Foi observado uma adequada precisão entre as impressoras 3D, não obtendo um valor clinicamente significante de diferença entre os métodos de impressão. A impressora S100 Moonray mostrou ser mais precisa.Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USPHenriques, Jose Fernando CastanhaLazaro, Vinícius Ribeiro de Almeida2023-03-20info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisapplication/pdfhttps://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25144/tde-22062023-164757/reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USPinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPReter o conteúdo por motivos de patente, publicação e/ou direitos autoriais.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesseng2025-03-17T13:58:36Zoai:teses.usp.br:tde-22062023-164757Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttp://www.teses.usp.br/PUBhttp://www.teses.usp.br/cgi-bin/mtd2br.plvirginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.bropendoar:27212025-03-17T13:58:36Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printers
Comparação da precisão entre duas impressoras 3D
title Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printers
spellingShingle Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printers
Lazaro, Vinícius Ribeiro de Almeida
3D printing
Digital flow
Fluxo digital
Impressão 3D
Modelos impressos
Printed models
title_short Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printers
title_full Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printers
title_fullStr Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printers
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printers
title_sort Comparison of accuracy between two 3D printers
author Lazaro, Vinícius Ribeiro de Almeida
author_facet Lazaro, Vinícius Ribeiro de Almeida
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Henriques, Jose Fernando Castanha
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Lazaro, Vinícius Ribeiro de Almeida
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv 3D printing
Digital flow
Fluxo digital
Impressão 3D
Modelos impressos
Printed models
topic 3D printing
Digital flow
Fluxo digital
Impressão 3D
Modelos impressos
Printed models
description Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy between two threedimensional (3D) printers: MoonRay S100 (SprintRay, Los Angeles, USA) and Slash Plus (Uniz, San Diego, USA), which use Digital Light Processing (DLP) and Liquid Cristal Display (LCD) for printing 3D models, respectively. Methods: The sample consisted in 25 pairs of digital dental models, which were previously obtained through intraoral scanning performed with the TRIOS3 scanner (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). All models were digitally prepared and printed by the two printers. To evaluate the difference between the printed models, 22 intra-arch dimensional measurements were performed. The method was validated through the Bland-Altman test and intra- and inter-examiner errors through the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). For intergroup comparison, the Anova or Kruskal-wallis tests were performed (p<0.05). Results: The intergroup comparison showed a difference in 2 of the 22 variables evaluated: upper canine width (p 0.025) and lower canine width (p <0.001). The error of the method showed an excellent intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility for all variables with ICC ranging from 0.81 to 1. The Bland-Altman test confirmed the agreement of the method, showing that there was a greater agreement in the perimeter of the mandibular arch, and a lower agreement in the heights of the upper central incisor and upper canine. Conclusion: Adequate accuracy was observed among 3D printers, not obtaining a clinically significant value of difference between printing methods. The Moonray S100 printer has been shown to be more accurate.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-03-20
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis
format masterThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25144/tde-22062023-164757/
url https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25144/tde-22062023-164757/
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Reter o conteúdo por motivos de patente, publicação e/ou direitos autoriais.
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Reter o conteúdo por motivos de patente, publicação e/ou direitos autoriais.
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv
reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP
collection Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv virginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.br
_version_ 1865492251797356544