摘要
研究比较了表面粗糙度法、ISO11609中附录A的放射性示踪法及附录B的表面轮廓法3种评价牙膏磨损性能的体外实验方法。实验结果表明,对于含有同种类型摩擦剂(二氧化硅或天然碳酸钙)的牙膏试样,表面粗糙度法Ra值的测试结果与放射性示踪法RDA值及表面轮廓法磨损深度的测试结果均具有良好的相关性。同时,与ISO11609中的2种方法相比,表面粗糙度法具有操作简单、刷磨过程压力可控、检测仪器性价比高、数据重复性好、测试结果不易被牙膏配方中磷酸盐等组分干扰等特点。
Three methods for the in -vitro measurement of dentifrice abrasion performance, the radiotraccrmethod （ISOll609/Annex- A）, the surface profile method （ISOll609/Annex- B） and a recentlyintroduced method （the surface roughness method） were examined, investigated and compared. The resultsshowed that in case the dentifrices were composed of same type of abrasive agent, either silica or naturalcalcium carbonate, test results Ra value obtained from surface roughness method, RDA value obtained fromradiotracer method as well as the resuh obtained from surface profile method all display good correlations.Meanwhile, as comparing with the two methods specified in ISO11609, the surface roughness method displaysother advantages such as simple ＇operation, pressure controllable in the brushing and abrasion process, highperformance price ratio, good repeatability et al. Besides, the results of the surface roughness method are morestable and not affected by the interference of the phosphate in the dentifrice formulations.
出处
《日用化学工业》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2016年第3期162-167,共6页
China Surfactant Detergent & Cosmetics
关键词
牙膏
磨损
表面粗糙度法
放射性示踪法
表面轮廓法
dentifrice
abrasivity
surface roughness method
radiotracer method
surface profile method
