At the very beginning of the porcelain brush technique there was only the standard Aquarell brush for artists. Then there were continuous individual adaptations for the dental sector, which did not really re-interprete the brush as a dental instrument.

lay:art style – The first brush specifically designed for the dental sector

The aim of our development was to create a genuinely new dental brush from scratch, which if possible perfectly fulfilled all of the requirements for optimal building up of porcelain. To do this I had to familiarize myself with brush manufacturing technology to find out how one brush is more suitable than another and how I can influence these properties during development. Simple Advertising claims were no longer sufficient, as from now on there are clear parameters on which the quality of a dental brush can be measured.

1. Every dental technician has his/her unique style of working

Firstly, I had to find out which requirements are stipulated by the majority of dental technicians and determined: all demand that they are able to continue using their special technique without compromise! An example: All have the same aim, i.e. consistently moistened brush with a perfect tip. Each technician, however, has developed her/his own, unbelievably quick routine, a completely individual and intuitive pattern of movements: brush in glass of water, then shake, wipe on the foam or cloth, hit against the edge of the bench, taper to a point in the mouth etc.

The requirements for a dental brush are very special.

The requirements for a dental brush are very special.

If a brush does not behave as it should, the whole process falters, the rhythm is lost and this costs time and nerves. Other sub-processes differ greatly depending on the technician, e.g. method of building up, way of holding the brush and the type of mixing palette. It is impossible that one single brush could incorporate all of these differences.

Finding 1: I had to develop not one but several versions of a brush, so that each technician receives an instrument that optimally supports his/her special routine.

2.We place the highest requirements on the brush tip

These must be fine and at the same time stable. The tip must also have a very high tension force and in particular a very high service life, be easily shaped (taper) and not
flare out. All of these characteristics however, are contradictory.

Finding 2: The traditional fabrication technique is the reason for this conflict. I therefore had to discard this tradition and develop a completely new concept to make these contrasts compatible. I was successful..

3. The most complex requirement was the moisture concept

The different, individual techniques as described in 1. have the biggest effect here. There are two major requirements when talking about moisture within the brush tip:

  • Storage (the amount of water)
  • Transportation (the flow from and to the brush)

We now therefore differentiate between a large and small water reservoir and between quick and slow water transportation. Why? The reason is again the individual technique. Depending on whether I shake the brush lightly or strongly, taper in the mouth or rotate it over dry or moist foam etc., I influence the moisture behavior and therefore the consistency of the porcelain. In addition, do you pick up a lot or little porcelain, do you apply longer or point wise on the tooth, do you have a self-moistening mixing palette or regulate the moistness in the brush etc? As you can see many variations are possible. With regard to the porcelain it could also be generally stated: if the porcelain we pick up is very moist and of a very loose consistency, then the brush should absorb a little moisture, so that the porcelain is placed quicker and more controlled on the brush. If the porcelain is more dry and stiff (set) more moisture is required when picking up the porcelain, to make it looser and easier to pick up. Dental technicians who pick up large amounts of porcelain generally prefer greater moisture release than those who rather pick up small amounts.

Finding 3: In my investigation I was able to confirm Finding 1, as the versions of the brush must differ in their moisture handling. I was able to condense the large number of types of applications into 8 special moisture and shape concepts.

For the development of the lay:art style dental brush, this led to the following goals:

1. Invent a new brush manufacturing concept, which will meet the different and greater demands of the brush tip.

2. Design 8 brush shapes, which have clear differences but the tip is always the same.

In my next blog article I will show you how we considered these goals in the development of our lay:art style brushes.
Find out more at www.lay-art.de

Please like & share:

Cim Özyurt is dental technician and Product Manager at Renfert GmbH. Part of his field of work is the product range brushes & mixing trays where he is ...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


− one = 5

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>