wwcanoer
Well-Known Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 584
- Reaction score
- 162
Finally, my first anterior case using the E.max system.
I had done the infrequent occlusal onlay using e.max, maybe one a year. I was never very happy with how they pressed out as they took a lot of work to seat, but never put much thought into it-learning curve. A couple of months ago I was talking to a fellow lab person from down the street, and told him about my problems. We came to the conclusion maybe it was the investment I was using, Microstar HS. He advised me to switch to IPS Pressvest speed, as that's what they used in their lab, and felt they got better results than with the Microstar HS.
Waxed everything up, pressed 2 rings with the third in the burnout oven, when I devested my first pressing. Gad's, they looked horrible! By that time, the second ring was cool enough to devest, and the and it looked as bad. I got out the instructions; the liquid -water ratios, mixing time, bench set time, burnout time, the burnout oven temp were all fine. Dig out the e.Max book. Review the program settings, they're fine. Oops, what's this? Fine print. So I put on my reading glasses because my arms aren't long enough anymore, and gosh darn, if it doesn't say: if using the EP 500 oven, use programs 11 through 20. Only. No reason why, but take my word for it they mean it. I was using program number 22 for my e.max pressings.
So, re-waxed and re-press everything, program 18. This time, things definitely look better, no fins and they fit with minor adjustment. I should have taken pictures of the second time around, but was running out of time. But I am curious as to what everybody else's reaction layer looks like, as mine didn't resemble the example in the book.
Moral of the story: sometimes it pays to read the fine print.
Carol
I had done the infrequent occlusal onlay using e.max, maybe one a year. I was never very happy with how they pressed out as they took a lot of work to seat, but never put much thought into it-learning curve. A couple of months ago I was talking to a fellow lab person from down the street, and told him about my problems. We came to the conclusion maybe it was the investment I was using, Microstar HS. He advised me to switch to IPS Pressvest speed, as that's what they used in their lab, and felt they got better results than with the Microstar HS.
Waxed everything up, pressed 2 rings with the third in the burnout oven, when I devested my first pressing. Gad's, they looked horrible! By that time, the second ring was cool enough to devest, and the and it looked as bad. I got out the instructions; the liquid -water ratios, mixing time, bench set time, burnout time, the burnout oven temp were all fine. Dig out the e.Max book. Review the program settings, they're fine. Oops, what's this? Fine print. So I put on my reading glasses because my arms aren't long enough anymore, and gosh darn, if it doesn't say: if using the EP 500 oven, use programs 11 through 20. Only. No reason why, but take my word for it they mean it. I was using program number 22 for my e.max pressings.
So, re-waxed and re-press everything, program 18. This time, things definitely look better, no fins and they fit with minor adjustment. I should have taken pictures of the second time around, but was running out of time. But I am curious as to what everybody else's reaction layer looks like, as mine didn't resemble the example in the book.
Moral of the story: sometimes it pays to read the fine print.
Carol
