Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards

12Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Up to this moment, there is no guideline regarding the materials to produce mouthguards. The most used is Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA). Studies indicate that laminating EVA sheets with rigid components could increase the protection capacities of the mouthguards. On the other hand, other studies suggest that only replacement of the material within its structure can increase energy absorption. Therefore, this work aims to evaluate the impact response of four different foils when compared to a 4 mm thickness EVA sheet. Five different materials were subjected to impact tests with energies of 1.72 J, 2.85 J and 4.40 J. In this context was considered the following materials: EVA foils (G1), EVA foils with an EVA foam core (G2), EVA foils with an acetate core (G3), Foils of Erkoloc-pro (G4) and Foils of Ortho IBT resin (G5). Comparisons between the materials were made by qualitative analysis of the average energy-time and load-displacement curves, as well as by comparison of the peak load, maximum displacement, contact time and absorbed energy using the Kruskal-Wallis test. It was possible to conclude that statistically significant differences were found in the energy absorbed (p=0.001). Laminated foils with a soft core (G2) are a good option to produce mouthguards, while EVA foils with an acetate core (G3) and foils of Ortho IBT resin (G5) were declared unsuitable.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Moreira, M., Ramos, J. C., Messias, A., Neto, M. A., Amaro, A., & Reis, P. N. B. (2021). Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards. Frattura Ed Integrita Strutturale, 15(57), 63–69. https://doi.org/10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free