RICHARDSON ET AL

Duro Super Glue material to 2.3 t~m for Zap CA material. 3. Prince J, Donovan T. The esthetic metal-ceramic margin: comparison
of techniques. J PROSTHET DENT 1983;50:185-92.
The least acceptable visually accessible marginal opening 4. Jarvis RH. The collarless ceramo-metal restoration--a presentation of
for gold inlays has been computed to be 39 #m. 6 Therefore three techniques. Oral Health 1984;74:23-5.
2.3 t~m or less seems to be a reasonable film thickness for 5. Fukui H, Lacy AM, Jendresen M. Effectiveness of hardening films of die
stone. J PROSTHETDENT 1980;44:57-63.
die coating agents. 6. Christensen G. Marginal fit of gold inlay castings. J PROSTHET DENT
1966;16:297-305.
REFERENCES
Reprint requests to:
1. Toogood GD, Archibald JF. Technique for establishing porcelain mar- DR. DAVIDW. RICHARDSON
gins. J PROSTHETDENT 1978;40:464-6. SCHOOLOF DENTISTRY
2. Vryonis P. A simplified approach to the complete porcelain margin. J MEDICAL COLLEGEOF GEORGIA
PROSTHET DENT 1979;42:592-3. AUGUSTA,GA 30912

Variables affecting the spectral transmittance of light

through porcelain v e n e e r samples
K. L. O ' K e e f e , D D S , a P. L. P e a s e , O D , P h D , b a n d H. K. H e r r i n , D D S c
University of Texas Health Science Center, Dental Branch, and University of Houston, College of
Optometry, Houston, Texas

The spectral t r a n s m i t t a n c e of porcelain l a m i n a t e v e n e e r s w a s m e a s u r e d at three

different t h i c k n e s s e s (0.50, 0.75, and 1 ram) and three different opacities {25%, 75%,
and 100%). The results indicated that the t h i c k n e s s of the porcelain Veneer w a s the
primary factor affecting light t r a n s m i s s i o n and not the opacity. The m e a s u r e d
Values of t r a n s m i t t a n c e w e r e then used to e s t i m a t e the setting time for light-cured
luting a g e n t s of a porcelain veneer. (J PROSTHET DENT 1991;66:434-8.)

P o r c e l a i n laminate veneers are becoming increas-
ingly popular for the esthetics of anterior teeth. Their
strength, 1"~ wear resistance, ~ stain resistance, 5 and ease of
placement 6 make porcelain laminates a viable alternative
when one is selecting a tooth veneer. These restorations are
mechanically bonded to the tooth with an enamel acid
etching technique and one of the new low-viscosity com-
posite resin luting agents. 7 T h e dentist has an expansive
selection of luting composite resins; some are light cured
while other, newer luting composite resins are dual cured
with either chemical or visible light polymerization, s While
polymerization of light-cured composite resins continues
for some time after irradiation, a certain minimal cure is
required. Therefore it is i m p o r t a n t to ensure t h a t adequate
light energy reaches the luting agents to complete the
polymerization, because early failure of the bond to enamel
has been a t t r i b u t e d to incomplete curing of the luting
agent. 9
Porcelain veneers can be made in various thicknesses and
opacities selected by the dentist to disguise the discolora-
tion of the tooth. These two variables, either individually
or in combination, can affect the light energy reaching the
composite resin luting agent, and it has also been shown
t h a t light intensity affects the hardness and setting time of
composite resins. 1°, i1
This study determined the effect of veneer thickness and
opacity on the light energy t r a n s m i t t e d through veneers.
The d a t a from this study, in conjunction with the estab-
lished setting times for light-cured resins, can be used to
estimate the light exposure time for curing resins of porce-
lain veneers with different thicknesses and opacities.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

aAssistant Professor, Department of Occlusion and Fixed Prosth-
odontics, University of Texas Health Science Center. Dental
Branch.
bAssociate Professor. University of Houston, College of Optome-
try.
CAssociate Professor, Department of Operative Dentistry, Univer-
sity of Texas Health Science Center, Dental Branch.
10/1/28259
Nine groups of veneer samples were made consisting of
three thicknesses (1, 0.75, and 0.50 mm) and three opaci-
ties {100%, 75%, and 25% ), and each group contained five
specimens, for a total of 45 samples. Five 1 m m samples
were made with a 100 % opacity, five with 75 % opacity, and
five with 25 % opacity; similarly, there were five samples of

434 OCTOBER 1991 VOLUME 66 NUMBER 4

SPECTRAL TRANSMITTANCE OF LIGHT

I •

SPECTRORADIOMETER
SAMPLE

STAGE [

HEAT GLASS I

• SOURCE

F i g . 1. Schematic illustration of apparatus for measuring spectral transmission.

Table I. Mean percent transmittance (_+ SEM) at 460, 470, and 480 nm for samples with thicknesses of I m m (A), 0.75
mm (B), and 0.50 m m (C): Percent transmittance is given for three opacities: 100%, 75%, and 25%
% T r a n s m i t t a n c e [ M e a n (± SEM)]

Opacity No. 460 nm 470 nm 480 nm

A 1ram
100% 5 1.49 (_+0.03) 1.63 (-+0.03) 1.76 (-+0.03)
75% 5 1.14 (-+0.06) 1.28 (-+0.06) 1.39 (_+0.06)
25% 5 1.50 (-+0.11) 1.63 (-+0.11) 1.75 (-+0.11)
B 0.75 mm
100% 5 1.96 (_+0.08) 2.10 (_+0.07) 2.21 (-+0.07)
75% 5 2.05 (_+0.09) 2.21 (-+0.10) 2.31 (_+0.09)
25 % 5 2.26 ( _+0.08) 2.40 ( -+0.07) 2.52 ( -+0.07)
C 0.50 mm
100% 5 2.87 (_+0.09) 3.02 (-+0.09) 3.08 (-+0.09)
75% 5 2.75 (_+0.14) 2.87 (-+0.13) 2.95 (-+0.14)
25% 5 3.03 (-+0.13) 3.16 (_+0.12) 3.19 (-+0.12)

the 0.75 m m and 0.50 m m thickness prepared with opaci-
ties of 100%, 75%, and 25%. All of the samples were the
same shade, Vita B2 (Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Sackingen,
Germany), and were made according to the porcelain man-
ufacturer's (Ceramco II veneer porcelain kit, Ceramco Inc.,
Johnson and Johnson, East Windsor, N. J.) specifications
for mixing, handling, and glazing. The three thicknesses of
0.5, 0.75, and 1 m m are representative of the thickness of
clinical porcelain veneers and were prepared with a ma-
chined metal mold to ensure uniformity of the thickness
and diameter. The three opacities were mixed according to
the manufacturer's instructions for three levels of opacity
t h a t are selected by the dentist depending on specific tooth
discoloration.
Measurements of spectral transmittance were recorded
at 10 nm intervals, from 430 nm to 600 nm, with a Pritch-
ard spectroradiometer (Model No. 1980 B, Photo Research,
Chatsworth, Calif.) having a half bandwidth of 10 nm.
These wavelengths were chosen because the effective
wavelengths for curing composite resins were within this
range. The a p p a r a t u s for measuring the transmittance is
illustrated in Fig. 1. A 150 W heat-filtered tungsten halo-
gen lamp (GE 77, General Electric Co., Cleveland, Ohio)
was used to irradiate the samples t h a t were centered on a
6.3 m m diameter aperture located on a horizontal stage
above the light source. Light passing through the aperture
irradiated a diffusely reflecting surface oriented at 45 de-
grees to both the axis of illumination and the axis of mea-
surement. Radiance (Lx) on this surface was measured with
the sample (L'x) in the light p a t h and with the sample (L"x)
out of the light path. The ratio of these two radiances is the
transmittance of the sample at each wavelength: L ' x /
L"~ = transmittance.
Three measures of transmittance were determined at

THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY 435

 O'KEEFE,PEASE,ANDHERRIN

1.0 n~n Thick (a) S P E C U L A R T R A N SMYvr A N CE

3.6
o 25%
3.2

2 . 8
2.4
LJ
20 SAMPLE
1.6
12
08
Wav~,en~ (b) DIFFUSETRANSMTI'TANCE
O. 75 mm Thick

4°I .~,~
3.6 * 75%
26% SOURCE~ ,
32

2.B

~ 2.4 DETECTOR
20 Fig. 3. Distinction between specular and diffuse trans-
1.6 mittance. Measurement of specular transmittance is ac-
complished (a) when transmitted rays (RT) reach the de-
tector but scattered rays (Rs) do not, while measurement
of diffuse transmittance is (b) accomplished when all Rs
Wavelength
and RT reach the detector after integration.
0 . 5 0 mm Thick

essentially parallel. Table I summarizes the results for the

wavelengths 460 nm through 480 nm. Analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was computed to assess significant differences in
mean transmittance at three wavelengths: 460,470, and 480
nm. The results of ANOVA are shown in Table II, and of
~ 2.0~ the three variables in the table, thickness is clearly the
1.6 main factor determining transmittance. The ANOVA iden-
1.2 tiffed significant differences (p < 0.05) in mean transmit-
tance between the samples of each thickness (1, 0.75, and
0.8 --
460 4.80 500 520 540 560 580 600 0.50 ram). For the i mm thick samples, there were small but
Wavele~h
significant differences between the samples with 100 % and
Fig. 2. Mean percent transmittance for I mm thick sam- 75% opacities, 75% and 25% opacities, but not between
ples for three opacities (top panel), same for 0.75 mm the samples having opacities of 100% and 25%. The only
thick samples (middle panel), and same for 0.50 mm significant difference in the mean transmittance for the
thick samples ( b o t t o m panel). [% 100% opacity; +, 75% 0.75 mm thick samples was between the samples having
opacity; 0, 25 % opacity. opacities of 100% and 25%. There was no significant dif-
ference in transmittance for the three opacities at the 0.5
mm thickness. This analysis (ANOVA) confirmed what is
each wavelength at intervals of I0 nm (430 to 600 nm) and apparent in Fig. 2: there were greater variations in trans-
the mean was used to calculate the spectral transmittance mittance for different thicknesses than there were for the
of the 45 samples. The repeatability of the measurements same thickness but varying opacities.
was assessed for one sample at one wavelength. The stan-
dard deviation of 10 measures of transmittance was DISCUSSION
+ 0.03 %. The thickness, opacity, and shade of composite resin
materials can reduce the available light energy to polymer-
RESULTS ize light-cured resin systems32' 13 The effect of thickness
The mean spectral transmittance for the five samples in and opacity of a porcelain veneer on transmitted light en-
each group is presented in Fig. 2. All of the samples, ergy were evaluated in this study. The thickness of the ve-
regardless of the thickness and opacity, are characterized neers had a substantial effect on the light energy passing
by having continuous spectral transmission curves that are through the veneers, as shown in Table II, while the

436 OCTOBER1991 VOLUME66 NUMBER4

SPECTRAL TRANSMITTANCE OF LIGHT

T a b l e II. Analysis of variance results

Source of variation DF SS MS F p Value

Thickness (A) 2 49.54 24.77 583.91 <0.001

Opacity (B) 2 1.74 0.87 20.51 <0.001
Wavelength (C) 2 1.25 0.62 14.69 <0.001
Ax B 4 0.81 0.20 4.77 <0.01
AXC 4 0.03 0.00 0.15
BxC 4 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ax B x C 8 0.00 0.00 0.01
Error 108 4.58 0.04
Total 134 57.95
DF, Degrees of freedom; MS, mean square; SS, sum of squares.

T a b l e III. Predicted setting time for samples based upon mean percent transmittance (470 to 480 nm) and d a t a of
Strang et al.16: Mean and s t a n d a r d deviation of thickness of five samples of each nominal thickness are shown
Mean
Actual % transmittance Setting timer
Opacity No. thickness* ( 4 7 0 - 4 8 0 nm) (Sec)

1 mm
100% 5 1.20 +_ 0.06 1.695 49
75% 5 1.19 _+ 0.10 1.335 51
25% 5 1,15 _+ 0.08 1.690 49
0.75 mm
100% 5 0.74 _+ 0.06 2.155 47
75% 5 0.73 _+ 0.05 2.260 46
25% 5 0.72 _+ 0.04 2.460 46
0.50 mm
100% 5 0.38 + 0.07 3.050 43
75% 5 0.45 _+ 0.06 2.910 44
25% 5 0.52 _+ 0.05 3.175 43

*Mean -+ s t a n d a r d deviation.
tRelative to 22-second m i n i m u m time with Heliomat/Helioseal light-curing unit.

different opacities of the samples displayed smaller signif-
icant differences, b u t also some inconsistencies, as can be
seen in Fig. 2. It was expected t h a t the percentage of trans-
mission of the samples would increase with decreasing
opacity, evident for the 0.75 m m thick samples. However,
the three opacities in the I m m thick samples and the 0.5
m m thick samples did not reflect this tendency. Various
reasons could explain the inconsistencies. F o r each opacity
formulation, several bottles of different shades of porcelain
m u s t be combined. There could have been a human error
in the mixing of these formulas. There could also be prob-
lems with the manufacturer's recommendations for the
three different opacity formulas. Other problems could be
inconsistency in the firing cycle of the samples, although
any such problems remained undetected during this inves-
tigation. Also, variances in opacity m a y be more directly
related to transmittance if transmittance was measured
differently.
There are two forms of t r a n s m i t t a n c e - - s p e c u l a r and
d i f f u s e - - a n d each depends upon the method of measure-
ment. The distinction between these two forms of trans-
mittance is t h a t the measurement of diffuse transmittance
includes all the light passing through the material plus all
the light scattered in a forward direction. Specular trans-
mittance excludes the proportion of scattered light t h a t
does not reach the detector (Fig. 3). In this study, the de-
tector had an acceptance angle of 30 degrees so the trans-
mittance of the sample included the specular component
and the diffuse component or scattered rays within an an-
gle of 30 degrees with respect to the sample. Opacity m a y
relate more closely to diffuse transmittance, b u t this hypo-
thesis has not been confirmed. Although the transmittance
was surprisingly not always inversely related to opacity, the
difference in percentage of transmittance for the three
opacities of each thickness was never greater than 0.40% at
each wavelength. Clinically, the difference is insignificant.
Others have reported similar results. Strang et al} 4 dis-
covered t h a t thickness affects transmittance more than
shade or opacity. Chan and Boyer 15 recently reported sim-
ilar findings and established a formula to predict the
required exposure time of composite resins under porcelain
of varying shades and thicknesses.
T h e results of this study can be used to adjust the time
for curing composite resins under a porcelain veneer.
Strang et a1.16 investigated the relationship between setting
time and distance from a Heliomat/Helioseal curing lamp
(Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein). Intensity,* for a point
source, is related by the inverse square of the distance (in-

THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY

 O'KEEFE, PEASE, AND HERRIN

100 100
a (3

60 60
g g

30 30 F-
.~
g
09 if)

10 i i
0.01 0,10 0
Relative Intensity

Fig, 4. Relationship between setting time and relative intensity. 0, Data calculated from
Strang et al. 16 relative to a 22-second minimum curing time with the Heliomat/Helioseal
light curing unit. Predicted setting times for different samples measured in this study in-
clude: (a), mean predicted setting time of 1 m m thick samples, (b), mean predicted setting
time of 0.75 m m thick samples; and (c) mean predicted setting time of 0.5 mm thick sam-
ples.

tensity = 1 distance2), so it is possible to use their data in REFERENCES

determining how the setting time is affected by intensity
(Fig. 4). The setting times for the samples were determined
by calculating the mean transmittance of each sample
group over the bandwidth 470 to 480 rim, which is the ef-
fective wavelength band to cure composite resins. The es-
timated setting time is available in Fig. 4. Relative to a
maximum light intensity of one, the light intensity would
be reduced so it is equal to the transmittance of the sam-
ple. The analysis revealed that, with respect to a 22-second
curing time without a porcelain veneer, the setting time of
the resin for the 0.5 m m veneer should be increased to 43
seconds, to 46 seconds for the 0.75 mm veneer, and to 49
seconds for the 1 m m veneer (Table III). These times are
based on one resin/curing light system, but the results of
this study can be used for any light source and composite
resin if the relationship between setting time and intensity
over the effective wavelength range is known. A similar in-
crease in setting time occurred for the Chameleon/Visilux
2 (Chameleon Dental Products, Kansas City, Kans.) resin
light curing system. 14
SUMMARY
This study determined that the thickness of a porcelain
veneer affects the intensity of the light source to a greater
extent than opacity. The percentage of transmittance val-
ues was plotted on an intensity versus setting time graph
to estimate setting times of a composite resin luting agent
beneath a porcelain veneer sample. These estimates sug-
gested that a porcelain veneer, regardless of thickness or
opacity, approximately doubled the setting time of the
composite resin exposed to maximum light intensity.
We thank Mr. Edward Puente for his invaluable statistical and
computer graphics work on this project.
*The term intensity is used here to specify that which is more
precisely defined in radiometric terms as irradiance (flux/unit
area).
1. Simonsen RJ, Calamia JR. Tensile bond strength of etched porcelain
[Abstract[. J Dent Res 1983;62:297.
2. Highton R, Caputo AA, Matayas ASD. A photoelastic study of
stresses on porcelain laminate preparations. J PROSTHRTDENT 1987;
58:5%61.
3. Quinn F, McConnell RJ. Porcelain laminates: a review. Br Dent J
1986;161:61-5.
4. Calamia JR. Etched porcelain veneers: the current state of the art.
Quintessence Int 1985;1:5-12.
5. McConell RJ, Boksman L, Jones G. Esthetic restoration of a primary
canine in the adult dentiticn by means of an etched porcelain veneer.
Report of a case. Quintessence Int 1987;18:12L4.
6. Covey DA, Oliveira FC, Denehy GE. Selecting an esthetic veneering
technique. Quintessence Int 1987;18:247-52.
7. Newburg R, Pameijer CH. Composite resins bonded to porcelain with
saline solution. J Am Dent Assoc 1978;96:288-91.
8. Christensen GJ. Tooth colored inlays and onlays. J Am Dent Assoc
1988;Special issue:12E-7E.
9. Leung RL, Fan PL, Johnston WM. Post-irradiation polymerization
of visible light-activated composite resin. J Dent Res 1983;62:363-
5.
10. Killian RJ. The application of photochemistry to dental materials.
Chemtech 1980;11:678-80.
11. Killian RJ. Visible light cured composite: dependence of cure on light
intensity [Abstract]. J Dent Res 1979;58:243.
12. Mosely H, Strang R, Stephen KW. An assessment of visible-light poly-
merizing sources. J Oral Rehabil 1986;13:215-24.
13. Kanea JIII. The effect of thickness and shade on the polymerization of
light-activated posterior composite resins. Quintessence Int 1986;
17:809-11.
14. Strang R, McCrosson J, Muirhead GM, Richardson SA. The setting of
visible-light-cured resins beneath etched porcelain veneers. Br Dent J
1987;163:149-51.
15. Chan KC;Boyer DB. Curing light-activated composite cement through
porcelain. J Dent Res t989;68:476-80.
16. Strang R, Cummings A, Stephen KW. Laboratory studies of visible-
light cured fissure sealants: setting times and depth of polymerization.
J Oral Rehab 1986;13:305-10.
Reprint requests $o:
DR. K. L. O'KEEFE
DENTAL BRANCH
UNIVERSITYOF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCECENTER
6516 JOHN FREEMANAVE.
P.O. BOX 20068
HOUSTON,TX 77225

438 OCTOBER 1991 VOLUME6 6 NUMBER 4