Standardizing Zirconium Marginal Gap

[Glenn Kennedy]

Scot,

For the record you never owned or took a DWX-50 apart. You owned an MDX-40 which was designed to make plastic prototype parts, not dental restorations.

I enjoy reading your posts about the mills you prefer to own and I admire your tenacity in setting up and configuring those tools. I know the elegant design of the DWX-50 confounds and frustrates you. But I also know it intrigues you.

With hundreds of satisfied customers creating 10's of thousands of high quality restorations the DWX-50 stands solid on it's reputation as a very easy to use, high quality, cost effective mill. Roland DWX-50 users are are up and running in hours not weeks and are seeing a return on investment in months not years.

-Glenn

 

[DMC]

The Roland is very nice.

 

[Glenn Kennedy]

The Roland is very nice.

Thank you Scot.

 

[Car 54]

Back to this subject. With the advances in mills and scanner accuracy what ballpark of micron accuracy is the "average"? I know it can depend on materials, techniques, ovens etc, but are we close to 10-20 micron gap at the margin for lab milled and sintered zirconia?

 

[user name]

I dont know what the numbers are, but my 'standard' has always been to do my best. Theres nothing Ive ever produced out of any material that comes close to what Im putting out now as far as fits.

 

[Brent Harvey]

I cant speak from experience, but from what i am told by many different labs is, that with the correct strategies and shrinkage rate you should have your margin within 15-20 microns.

 

[Car 54]

Are we getting close to what a sealed waxed pressed emax margin is? My friends Dr's notices the difference between his Sironia milled emax blue block, and his pressed (sealed margins) emax, and are requesting the pressed. He was thinking of getting the Ivoclar Multi press oven, but I suggested he consider that the trend is heading towards the improvements they're making with the translucent zirconias, and maybe consider that alternative instead?

 

[Car 54]

I dont know what the numbers are, but my 'standard' has always been to do my best. Theres nothing Ive ever produced out of any material that comes close to what Im putting out now as far as fits.

I'm glad your new scanner is already giving you some excellent results, and that it was worth the switch.

 

[charles007]

Bob, are your fits/margins any better with the Stein

 

[user name]

Bob, are your fits/margins any better with the Stein

They were pretty darn nice when I was using 3Shape, but the difference is in the density of the scan data. With 3shape, no matter how sharp you trim an edge for a margin, the pics would show it being rounded. The triangles were just too big to capture the minutia of detail, so getting a 'proper' and accurate read on the margin could be thrown off with just a tilt of the insertion angle. Now...yes. Worth every penny.

 

[Car 54]

They were pretty darn nice when I was using 3Shape, but the difference is in the density of the scan data. With 3shape, no matter how sharp you trim an edge for a margin, the pics would show it being rounded. The triangles were just too big to capture the minutia of detail, so getting a 'proper' and accurate read on the margin could be thrown off with just a tilt of the insertion angle. Now...yes. Worth every penny.

I thought maybe it was just me Is that normal with all 3Shape scanners? Does anybody know way around it, to get the sharper margin edge/detail?

 

[user name]

I thought maybe it was just me Is that normal with all 3Shape scanners? Does anybody know way around it, to get the sharper margin edge/detail?

Its an easy fix. Call 1-800-243-2000. Tell them You want what User Name got.

 

[Car 54]

I know that number, without even wondering or looking it up

Could I still use my Mini mill with their software? It's Exocad based correct (open stl),but maybe just with some of their proprietary settings?

 

[pjd cdt]

I know that number, without even wondering or looking it up

Could I still use my Mini mill with their software? It's Exocad based correct (open stl),but maybe just with some of their proprietary settings?

Exo and mini user here no problems

 

[Car 54]

Do you know if it's the same with Jensen's scanner, is it totally Exocad, or a hybrid, or doesn't that matter? What scanner do you have? Will Exocad be able to create a Wieland Zenocam3.2 cam file for the mill?

 

[CoolHandLuke]

They were pretty darn nice when I was using 3Shape, but the difference is in the density of the scan data. With 3shape, no matter how sharp you trim an edge for a margin, the pics would show it being rounded. The triangles were just too big to capture the minutia of detail, so getting a 'proper' and accurate read on the margin could be thrown off with just a tilt of the insertion angle. Now...yes. Worth every penny.

if you are scanning as STL yes. i can see and understand that, but STL pointcloud density being uniform wouldn't cause rounding. it would cause open holes, and that's exactly what i see with my scans. open holes. but never fear there is a way of compensating. its called don't trim margins sharp. trim them so the margin has no undercut, problem solved.