CORROSION ENGINEERING SECTION
Development of an Artificial Saliva Solution
for Studying the Corrosion Behavior
of Dental Alloys
G.S. Duff,* and E. Quezada Castillo**
ABSTRACT
The corrosion behavior of dental alloys often is evaluated in
artificial saliva solutions. In the literature, it was found that
several solutions have been used, but no information indicat-
ing whether they really behave as natural saliva does, or
whether they can be compared with each other, was men-
tioned. In the present work, the corrosion behavior of copper-
aluminum dental alloys in 17 different solutions cited in the
literature was evaluated and the results were compared with
those obtained with natural whole saliva. It was observed
that none of the solutions tested simulatefrom the electro-
chemical point of viewthe behavior of natural saliva. Tak-
ing one of the artificial saliva solutions tested as a starting
point, and after analyzing the effect on the corrosion behav-
ior of the copper-aluminum dental alloy of several ions pre-
sented in saliva, a new artificial saliva solution was devel-
oped. Four different dental alloys tested in this new artificial
saliva solution showed an electrochemical behavior similar to
that obtained in natural saliva.
KEY WORDS: aluminum-bronze, artificial saliva, dental
alloys, polarization curves
INTRODUCTION
One of the primary requisites of any metal or alloy
that is to be used in the mouth is that it must not
Submitted for publication December 2002; in revised form,
November 2003.
Corresponding author. E-mail: duffo@cnea.gov.ar.
* Comisin Nacional de Energa Atmica, Depto. Materiales, Av.
Gral. Paz 1499 (1650) San Martn, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
National Council of Scientific and Technological Research
(CONICET), Argentina.
** Universidad Nacional de Trujillo, Depto. de Fsica, Trujillo, Per.
0010-9312/04/000097/$5.00+$0.50/0
594 2004, NACE International
produce corrosion products that could be harmful to
the body. Some metallic elements that are completely
safe in the elemental state can form hazardous or
even toxic ions or compounds.1
It is important to note that the oral environment
is very conducive to the formation of corrosion prod-
ucts. The mouth is moist and continually subjected
to fluctuations in temperature. The food and liquids
ingested have wide ranges of pH. Acids are liberated
during breakdown of foodstuffs. This food debris
often adheres tenaciously to the metallic restoration
providing a localized condition that is extremely con-
ducive to an accelerated reaction between the oral
media and the metal or alloy.
The most important fluid in the oral environment
is natural saliva. It is obvious that tests involving
dental material should be done in that media. How-
ever, the unstable nature of natural saliva makes it
inadequate for standardized in vitro studies. Then, it
is necessary to synthesize an artificial saliva that re-
acts in a similar way to that of natural saliva.2 How-
ever, due to the particular characteristics of human
saliva (mixture of fluids secreted by several salivary
glands, being a system with numerous constituents
and variable according to the time of day, diet, etc.),
it is almost impossible a duplication of its properties.
From the pioneer work of Souder and Sweeney,
in 1931, no fewer than 60 formulae for artificial
saliva have been reported in literature. A complete
review of the information available was made by
Leung and Darvell in 1997,3 and more recently by
Gal, et al.4 The artificial saliva reported has been
used for several specific studies (corrosion of dental
CORROSIONJUNE 2004

materials, hydroxyapatite nucleation, tarnishing of
dental alloys, cultural studies of dental plaque, etc.),
and the composition of the artificial saliva used is
related to the type of studies they were used in. For
example, the study of dental plaque requires the in-
clusion of some organic component to simulate the
viscosity of natural saliva, but for corrosion studies,
it is very frequently the use of organic compound-free
artificial saliva. In this last case, in spite of the fact
that various formulae are cited, information indicat-
ing whether they really behave as natural saliva
does, or whether they can be compared with each
other, is lacking.
As it was mentioned by Gal, et al.,4 detailed ex-
amination of the different formulations showed that,
in some cases, they were arbitrary compilations of
substances which were more or less similar to an as-
sumed composition of human saliva; and sometimes
complete solutions of the designed products could
not be obtained.
The purpose of this study was to analyze the
properties of several artificial salivas previously re-
ported in the dental literature, only as regarding
their influence on the corrosion behavior of charac-
teristic dental alloys. The results were compared with
those obtained with natural saliva. The formulae
studied in the present work are those that do not
contain either proteins or other organic compounds
(except urea and/or organic acids to adjust the pH).
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
Seventeen solutions freshly prepared before each
test and whole natural saliva were studied. The
chemical compositions of these solutions (prepared
with analytical grade reagent) as well as the biblio-
graphic sources are shown in Table 1.
Whole natural saliva was collected from 50 stu-
dents (25 males and 25 females) of the Medicine Fac-
ulty, University of Buenos Aires. Volunteers were in
good health, with good oral hygiene, and were caries-
free. None of them was receiving any medication. The
experimental procedure was explained to each volun-
teer. Students were advised not to smoke, eat, or
drink (except water) for 1 h prior to the saliva collec-
tion. Saliva collection was made either in the morn-
ing (starting at 10:00 a.m.) or afternoon (starting at
3:00 p.m.) depending on the preference. After rinsing
their mouth thoroughly with water, the acquisition
of stimulated saliva was achieved by asking the
students to chew a piece of sugarless gum (Estee
sugarless spearmint gum). Approximately 10 mL of
stimulated human saliva was collected individually in
graduated containers. To avoid loss of carbon dioxide
(CO2), the collection was performed under cover of
paraffin oil (Fisher Scientific, Catalog number
Trade name.
CORROSIONVol. 60, No. 6
CORROSION ENGINEERING SECTION
41508-0060). Immediately after collection, all 50
samples were poured into a large flask, mixed up to-
gether, and kept in an icebox under cover of paraffin
oil. Afterward, the final solution was transported to
the corrosion laboratory and stored for a few hours
at 5C.
Besides artificial and natural salivas, nine 1%
solutions containing only one of the components of
several artificial saliva compositions were used.
These solutions were: 0.171 M sodium chloride
(NaCl); 0.090 M calcium chloride (CaCl2); 0.103 M
potassium thiocyanate (KCNS); 0.111 M lactic acid
(C3H6O3), 0.119 M sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3);
0.070 M sodium phosphate dibasic (Na2HPO4);
0.083 M sodium phosphate monobasic (NaH2PO4);
0.167 M urea (CO[HN2]2) and 0.128 M sodium sulfide
(Na2S). It should be noted that sulfide is not a natu-
ral component of saliva. However, it was studied in
the present work due to the fact that it was included
in several artificial saliva compositions to study, for
instance, tarnish film formation,39 then its relevance
is only historical (and it is probably irrelevant to the
normal oral condition). All solutions were prepared
with analytical grade reagents and high-purity water
(18 M -cm) (Milli-Ro 10 Plus and Milli-Q Plus).
The material used for testing the various formu-
las was an experimental copper-aluminum alloy for
dental use (Macrodent S.A.). The composition of this
alloy was (by weight): 81% Cu, 9% Al, 5% Fe, and
5% Ni. The chemical composition was selected, tak-
ing into account that, for aluminum-bronzes it was
found that, in general, corrosion resistance of this
alloys increase with increases in aluminum content
up to about 10%.40 Besides, the addition of Fe and Ni
enhances the mechanical properties of the alloy. This
alloy is similar in composition to other commercial
copper-aluminum dental alloys frequently used for
cast restoratives in Latin-American countries. Alumi-
num bronze has had an early introduction into den-
tistry and has renewed interest because of their
similarity in appearance to the yellow-gold alloys, be-
cause of the volatility of the gold price41 and for eco-
nomic consideration. This alloy was selected for the
present work because, as it was determined in a pre-
vious publication,42 copper-aluminum alloys have
several critical electrochemical properties (corrosion
potential, passive current density, breakdown poten-
tial, etc.) that can be useful to compare their behav-
ior in natural and artificial saliva solutions. The
material was taken from a plate. It was annealed for
1 h at 800C in an argon atmosphere, and the speci-
mens (1.0 cm by 1.5 cm by 0.1 cm) were successively
polished with silicon carbide (SiC) papers (up to
#600) and then with diamond paste (up to 1 m).
Then, the specimens were spot soldered to a copper
wire and mounted into a glass tube by an epoxy resin
(Resin Caucho TII RTV, Hardener TII). Specimens
were painted with a lacquer (Plastik 70) to leave a
595
CORROSION ENGINEERING SECTION

TABLE 1
Chemical Composition and Identification Code of the Solutions
Solution Reference Composition (g/L) pH Identification Code

Modified 5-11 NaCl 0.400 5/5.5 FM I

Fusayamas KCl 0.400 (+)
solution CaCl22H2O 0.795
NaH2PO4H2O 0.690
Na2S9H2O 0.005
Urea 1.000

12 NaCl 0.400 FM II
KCl 0.400
CaCl22H2O 0.795
NaH2PO4H2O 0.690
KSCN 0.300
Urea 1.000

Orthanas 13 NaCl 0.850 6.7 O

solution KCl 1.200 (++)
CaCl22H2O 0.200
MgCl26H2O 0.050
K2HPO4 0.350

Tomasis 14 NaCl 0.674 7.4 T

solution KCl 0.960
CaCl22H2O 0.117
MgCl26H2O 0.0405
K2HPO4 0.091

Jenkinss 15-16 NaCl 0.850 6 J

solution KCl 1.200 (+++)
CaCl22H2O 0.150
MgCl26H2O 0.050
K2HPO4 0.350
KSCN 0.100
NaF 0.010
H2O2 0.300
Sorbic acid 0.05

Modified 17-18 NaCl 0.700 6.7 CM

Carters KCl 1.200 (++)
solution Na2HPO4 0.260
K2HPO4 0.200
NaHCO3 1.500
KSCN 0.330
Urea 0.130

Modified 19-20 KCl 1.500 6.7/6.8 TZM I

Tani-Zuchis NaH2PO4H2O 0.500
solution NaHCO3 1.500
KSCN 0.500
Lactic acid 0.900

21 KCl 1.470 2 TZM II

NaH2PO4H2O 0.190 (++)
NaHCO3 1.250
KSCN 0.520

Darvells 22 NaCl 1.500 6.8 D

solution NaH2PO4 0.560 (+++)
NH4Cl 0.220
NaOH 0.016
NaHCO3 0.600
NaSCN 0.200
Na3 citrate2H2O 0.022
Lactic acid 0.070
Urea 0.800
Uric acid 0.060

596 CORROSIONJUNE 2004

 CORROSION ENGINEERING SECTION

TABLE 1 (continued)
Chemical Composition and Identification Code of the Solutions
Solution Reference Composition (g/L) pH Identification Code

Guthrows 23-24 NaCl 3.600 G

solution KCl 0.500
Na2HPO4 0.600
Mg2P2O7 0.0016
CaCO3 0.600
S 0.0016
Urea 1.000

Canivets 25 NaCl 0.860 C

solution Na2HPO4 1.000
KSCN 0.072
CaCl2 0.913

Ericssons 26 NaCl 0.584 6.7 E

solution Na2HPO4 0.340
KH2PO4 0.340
KHCO3 1.500
MgCl2 0.014
CaCl2 0.166
Citric acid 0.029

Hanks 27-28 NaCl 8.000 H

solution KCl 0.400
Na2HPO4 0.600
NaHCO3 0.350
CaCl2 0.140
KH2PO4 0.060
MgCl26H2O 0.100
MgSO47H2O 0.060

Ringers 29-31 NaCl 9.000 R

solution CaCl2 0.240
KCl 0.430
NaHCO3 0.200

NaCl + 32-34 NaCl 5.844 2.3 AL

lactic acid Lactic acid 9.008

NaCl 35-38 NaCl 10.000 7 NaCl

Note: (+) pH adjusted with NaH2PO4; (++) pH adjusted with lactic acid; (+++) pH adjusted with H3PO4.

measured surface area for exposure (Figure 1). This

method has proved to be satisfactory because solder
contamination was avoided by spot-soldering far
away from the exposed area for the corrosion test;
the masking material is inert and crevice corrosion is
absent at the masked edges after the experiments.
Prior to the tests, the samples were degreased with
boiling analytical grade (>99.5%) ethyl acetate FIGURE 1. Schematic drawing of the specimens mounting.
(Sintorgan) and dried with hot air. The etched micro-
structure of the material (FeCl3-HCl solution) showed
predominantly -phase (Cu-rich solid solution) and The anodic polarization curves were potentiody-
precipitation of Fe-rich and Ni-rich phases (-phase). namically measured starting from the open-circuit
A conventional three-electrode glass cell (80 cm3 potential at a scanning rate of 0.083 mV s1. To
capacity) with a thermostating jacket was used for eliminate the cathodic current contribution due to
the polarization curves. The experiments were carried oxygen reduction, the solutions were previously de-
out at 37C by circulating thermostatized water aerated with nitrogen, pre-purified according to the
(Thermomix 1441 thermostat) through the jacket of Gilroy and Mayne method.43 After a 1-h deaeration
the electrochemical cell. period, the specimens were introduced into the po-

CORROSIONVol. 60, No. 6 597

CORROSION ENGINEERING SECTION
FIGURE 2. Polarization curves of a copper-aluminum dental alloy in
natural saliva, modified Fusayamas solution (FM I), Orthanas
solution (O), Tomasis solution (T), Jenkinss solution (J), and
1% NaCl solution (NaCl). In these cases, breakdown potential is
lower than that obtained in natural saliva.
FIGURE 3. Polarization curves of a copper-aluminum dental alloy in
natural saliva, Ringers solution (R), Hanks solution (H), Canivets
solution (C), Ericssons solution (E), Guthrows solution (G), and NaCl
+ lactic acid solution (AL). In these cases, breakdown potential is
lower than that obtained in natural saliva.
larization cell. After another 1-h deaeration period
(to reach a constant corrosion potential), the anodic
polarization curves were drawn. These measure-
ments were carried out with a PARC 173 potentio-
stat plus a PARC 175 potential scanner with a
Houston X-Y recorder (EG&G Princeton Applied
Research). A saturated calomel electrode (SCE) was
used as a reference electrode and the counter elec-
trode was a platinum wire. Before each test, refer-
ence electrodes were checked against a standard
SCE that was used only for this purpose. The polar-
ization curves were drawn at least in triplicate using
three independent samples and fresh solution in
each test. For the sake of simplicity, only one repre-
sentative polarization curve for each system is
shown.
598
To draw the polarization curves in natural saliva,
the saliva was transferred rapidly from the bottom of
the paraffin oil-covered glass container to the electro-
chemical glass cell in a glass syringe without con-
tacting the atmosphere. After the specimen was
introduced into the cell, the solution was covered
carefully by a thin layer of paraffin oil. After 1 h ex-
posure time, to reach a constant corrosion potential,
the anodic polarization of the specimen was drawn.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The polarization curve of a copper-aluminum
dental alloy in natural saliva is shown in Figure 2.
It can be observed that the corrosion potential is
about 0.4 VSCE, and from this potential the current
density showed an increase up to 1 106 A cm2,
followed by a passive region of 0.4 V length, and then
an abrupt current density increase was observed at
0.3 VSCE. This potential is the breakdown potential
due to a selective dissolution of aluminum from the
alloy, leading to a dealloying process, as was reported
earlier.42
The polarization curves in artificial saliva solu-
tions can be separated into two groups: those in
which the breakdown potential is lower than that in
natural saliva, and those in which it is higher.
Figures 2 and 3 show the polarization curves in
those solutions in which the breakdown potential is
lower than that obtained in natural saliva. In these
cases, the corrosion potential lay between 0.44 VSCE
(in NaCl plus lactic acid [C3H6O3] solution) and
0.19 VSCE (in Guthrows solution). The shape of the
polarization curves was the same in all the solutions
tested (except in 1% NaCl solution): from the corro-
sion potential an increase in current density was ob-
served, followed by a passive region, in which the
current density depends on the solution tested, and
finally an abrupt increase in current density due to
the dealloying of the copper-aluminum dental alloy.
On the other hand, in 1% NaCl solution, only a sharp
increase in current density from the rest potential is
observed, and no passive region was obtained.
Figure 4 shows the polarization curves in those
solutions in which the breakdown potential is higher
than those measured in natural saliva. The corrosion
potentials are close to the corrosion potential ob-
tained in natural saliva. Again, the shape of the po-
larization curves are the same in all cases, with a
passive current density and a breakdown potential
depending on the solution studied.
As it can be observed in Figures 2 through 4, the
polarization curves of the copper-aluminum dental
alloys in various artificial saliva solutions are quali-
tatively different from those obtained in natural sa-
liva. However, an attempt was made to analyze the
results on a statistical basis. To this purpose, some
electrochemical properties were selected to make the
CORROSIONJUNE 2004
 CORROSION ENGINEERING SECTION

comparison. Table 2 shows the average value and the

standard deviation of the corrosion potential (Ecorr),
passive current density (ipass), and breakdown poten-
tial (Eb) for the copper-aluminum dental alloy in
natural and artificial saliva solutions. It is shown
that, except for data marked (x), no overlapping was
found between the values measured in natural saliva
and those measured in various artificial saliva solu-
tions. It can be concluded that none of the artificial
saliva solutions tested in the present work simulate
the electrochemical behavior of the copper-aluminum
dental alloy in natural saliva.
Owing to this fact, it was decided to develop a
new artificial saliva solution, which best simulates
the behavior of the natural saliva from the electro- FIGURE 4. Polarization curves of a copper-aluminum dental alloy in
chemical point of view. The following step was to natural saliva, modified Fusayamas solution (FM II), modified Carters
analyze the effect of several compounds on the corro- solution (CM), modified Tani-Zucchis solutions (TZM I and TZM II),
sion behavior of the copper-aluminum dental alloy. and Darvells solution (D). In these cases, breakdown potential is
To this purpose, only those components of the natu- higher than that obtained in natural saliva.
ral saliva that could be demonstrated to have an
effect on the corrosion process was selected (the in-
clusion of Na2S was explained above). Taking into account the results obtained, and
Figure 5 shows the polarization curves in solu- taking the Ericssons solution26 as a starting point
tions of those compounds that do not yield a passive (the selection of the Ericssons solution was due be-
region (NaCl, CaCl2, and Na2S solutions) or produce a cause of the similaritiesfrom a qualitative point of
weak (or little) passive region (KCNS and lactic acid viewwith its behavior compared to natural saliva),
solutions). On the other hand, Figure 6 shows the it was observed that:
polarization curves of those compounds that yield a By increasing the KH2PO4 concentration, the
passive region. They are NaHCO3, Na2HPO4, NaH2PO4, current density in the active region decreases
and urea. The effect of the alkaline cation (Na+ and and the passive region is widened.
K+) on the shape of the anodic polarization curve of By increasing the Na2HPO4 concentration, the
copper-aluminum alloy was studied in 0.1 M Cl, passive current density increases and the
H2PO4, and HPO2 4 solutions, and no significant differ- length of the passive region decreases.
ences between them were found, but this effect de- By increasing the KSCN concentration, the
serves systematic investigations in the future. current density increases abruptly at lower

TABLE 2
Average Values and Standard Deviation of the Corrosion Potentials (Ecorr), Passive Current Densities (ipass),
and Breakdown Potentials (Eb) for a Cu-Al Dental Alloy in Natural Saliva and Artificial Saliva Solutions(A)

Solution Ecorr (VSCE) Ipass (Acm2) Eb (VSCE)

Natural saliva 0.390 0.010 6 107 1 107 0.310 0.020

FM I 0.240 0.007 0.025 0.010
O 0.275 0.006 1 106 0.8 106 0.025 0.010
T 0.275 0.006 7 107 2 107 0.025 0.008
J 0.330 0.007 1.6 106 0.2 106 0.100 0.012
NaCl 0.325 0.005
R 0.305 0.006 0.075 0.008
H 0.350 0.012 8 107 2 107 0.025 0.010
C 0.360 0.008 2.5 106 2.0 106 0.100 0.010
E 0.300 0.005 5 107 1 107 (x) 0.161 0.010
G 0.255 0.006
AL 0.440 0.010 6.0 106 1.5 106 0.074 0.011
FM II 0.315 0.005 2.5 106 1.2 106 0.750 0.015
CM 0.355 0.004 1.5 106 1.0 106 0.760 0.005
TZM I 0.380 0.006 (x) 2.2 106 1.2 106 0.880 0.009
TZM II 0.330 0.004 1.5 106 0.9 106
D 0.391 0.008 (x) 2.1 106 0.8 106 0.610 0.010
(A)
The codes of the artificial saliva solutions are the same shown in Table 1; n = 3.

CORROSIONVol. 60, No. 6 599

CORROSION ENGINEERING SECTION
FIGURE 5. Polarization curves of a copper-aluminum dental alloy in
1% KCNS solution, 1% NaCl solution, 1% Ca2Cl solution, 1% lactic
acid solution, and 1% Na2S solution.
FIGURE 6. Polarization curves of a copper-aluminum dental alloy in
1% NaHCO3 solution, 1% Na2HPO4 solution, 1% NaH2PO4 solution,
and 1% urea solution.
overpotential, the current density is higher at
the passivation potential, and the passive re-
gion increases.
The HCO3 ion decreases the current density in
the active region and increases both the passi-
vation potential and the length of the passive
region.
The Cl ion decreases the length of the passive
region and increases the current density in the
active region.
By decreasing the solutions pH (by adding cit-
ric [C6H8O7] or lactic acid), the formation of pre-
cipitated compounds (i.e., calcium phosphate
[Ca3(PO4)2]) is inhibited up to at least 8 days.
Taking into account all the observations men-
tioned above, a new artificial saliva solution was de-
veloped, the chemical composition of which is shown
in Table 3. In this solution, all components dissolve
completely. It is suggested to add NaHCO3 just before
tests to avoid loss of CO2 and changes in solution pH.
600
TABLE 3
Chemical Composition of the Artificial
Saliva Solution Proposed (pH = 6.5)
Reagents Concentration (g/L)
NaCl 0.600
KCl 0.720
CaCl22H2O 0.220
KH2PO4 0.680
Na2HPO412H2O 0.856
KSCN 0.060
KHCO3 1.500
Citric acid 0.030
As was mentioned by Darvell22 and Bardow, et al.,44
bicarbonate is the major buffering system of saliva,
and is readily lost on standing when exposed to the
air because of the high vapor pressure or CO2 over
solution at values normally encountered for human
saliva (especially at 37C). This loss is the principal
(if not the sole) cause of the rise in pH that is ob-
served on short-term standing.
On the other hand, contrary to certain artificial
saliva formulations, the proposed saliva did not con-
tain sulfide in its composition. Besides, a recent
standard no longer suggested incorporating sulfide
ions in artificial saliva formulation.45
The polarization curves of four dental alloys in
the new artificial saliva solution are shown in Figures
7 and 8:
a copper-aluminum dental alloy
an AISI 304 stainless steel wire (Dental Morelli
Ltd.) for orthodontic appliances (16.9% Cr,
8.0% Ni, 0.4% Mo)
a cobalt-chromium dental alloy (Macrodent
S.A.) for the porcelain-baked-to-metal tech-
nique (66.4% Co, 26.0% Cr, 1.4% Fe, 0.8% Ni,
0.5% Mo, 4.5% Si)
a low-copper amalgam (Degussa-Hls Corpora-
tion) (50.8% Hg, 35.3% Ag, 12.0% Sn, 1.5% Cu)
It can be observed that the electrochemical behavior
in the proposed solution of several dental alloys with
quite different chemical compositions is similar to
that obtained in natural saliva. The corresponding
values of the electrochemical properties measured
are shown in Table 4. It can be observed that, con-
trary to what was observed in other artificial saliva
solutions (Table 2), in the present case a Student-t
test showed no significant differences (p < 0.05) in
the values of the electrochemical parameters mea-
sured in natural saliva and in the artificial saliva
proposed in the present work. Then, it is concluded
that this solution can be recommended to evaluate
the corrosion behavior of metallic dental materials,
no matter its chemical composition. It also was de-
termined that this new artificial saliva solution can
be stored at 5C during at least 8 days without modi-
fication of its properties.
CORROSIONJUNE 2004
 CORROSION ENGINEERING SECTION

CONCLUSIONS
None of the artificial salivas tested in the present
work gave a corrosion pattern closely similar to the
one obtained with the natural saliva. A new artificial
saliva solution was proposed, only to evaluate the
corrosion behavior of dental alloys. Four different
dental alloys tested in this new artificial saliva solu-
tion showed an electrochemical behavior similar to
that obtained in natural saliva. As a consequence, we
propose the use of this new artificial saliva solution
as a medium for further corrosion studies in dental
research.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS FIGURE 7. Polarization curves of a copper-aluminum dental alloy

and an AISI 304 stainless steel wire for orthodontic appliances in
The financial support of the Consejo Nacional de natural saliva and in the artificial saliva solution proposed in the
Investigaciones Cientficas y Tcnicas (Argentina) is present work.
acknowledged. E.Q.C. acknowledges L. Hasselgren,
head of the International Science Program of Uppsala
University (Sweden), for his support to the Research
Group of Metal Physics in the National University of
Trujillo (Per).

REFERENCES

1. R.W. Phillips, Skinners Science of Dental Materials, 9th ed.

(Philadelphia, PA: WB. Saunders Co., 1991), p. 291.
2. E. Quezada Castillo, Determination of the Corrosion Suscepti-
bility of Dental Alloys (Ms.Sci. Thesis, Instituto de Tecnologa,
UNSAM, Argentina, 1996) (in Spanish).
3. V.W.-H. Leung, B.W. Darvell, J. Dent. 25, 6 (1997): p. 475.
4. J.Y. Gal, Y. Fovet, M. Adib-Yadzi, Talanta 53 (2001): p. 1,103.
5. T. Fusayama, T. Katayori, S. Nomoto, J. Dent. Res. 42 (1963):
p. 1,183.
6. J.M. Meyer, J.N. Nally, Influence of Artificial Salivas on the
Corrosion of Dental Alloys, 11th Annual Congress IADR (Brus-
sels: CED, 1974).
7. J.M. Meyer, J.N. Nally, J. Dent. Res. 54 (1975): p. 678. FIGURE 8. Polarization curves of a cobalt-chromium dental alloy for
8. J.M. Meyer, Corros. Sci. 17 (1977): p. 971. the porcelain-baked-to-metal technique and a low-copper dental
9. R.I. Holland, J. Dent. Res. 88 (1980): p. 269.
10. R.I. Holland, Scand. J. Dent. Res. 19 (1991): p. 75.
amalgam in natural saliva and in the artificial saliva solution proposed
11. R.I. Holland, Dent. Mater. 8 (1992): p. 241. in the present work.
12. A.W.J. Muller, F.J.M.J. Maessen, C.L. Davidson, Dent. Mater. 6
(1990): p. 63.
13. P.R. Mezger, M.A. Vant Hoff, M.M. Vrijhoef, E.J. Gravenmades,
E.H. Greener, J. Oral Rehabil. 16 (1989): p. 589. 16. H.J. Mueller, J. Electrochem. Soc. 134 (1987): p. 575.
14. J.A. Di Girolamo, Study of a Copper-Aluminum Alloy Behavior 17. T.K. Ross, D.A. Carter, D.C. Smith, Corros. Sci. 7 (1967): p.
Against an Artificial Corrosion, With and Without Stresses 373.
(Ph.D. Thesis, Facultade de Odontologa, Universidade de Sao 18. S.M. de De Micheli, O. Riesgo, Rev. dOdonto Stomat. 7 (1978):
Pablo, Brasil, 1992) (in Spanish). p. 349.
15. G.N. Jenkins, Physiology and Biochemistry of the Mouth (ed. 19. M. Marek, The Corrosion of Dental Materials, in Treatise on
Oxford and London: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1983), Materials Science and Technology, vol. 23, ed. J.C. Scully (Lon-
p. 301 (in Spanish). don, U.K.: Academic Press, 1983), p. 331.

TABLE 4
Average Values of the Corrosion Potentials (Ecorr), Passive Current Densities (ipass), and Breakdown Potentials (Eb)
for Several Dental Alloys in Natural Saliva (NS) and in the New Proposed Artificial Saliva Solution (AS)

Ecorr (NS) Ecorr (AS) ipass (NS) ipass (AS) Eb (NS) Eb (AS)
Alloy (VSCE) (VSCE) (Acm2) (Acm2) (VSCE) (VSCE)

Cu-Al 0.390 0.010 0.360 0.015 6 107 1 107 5 107 1 107 0.310 0.020 0.260 0.025
AISI 304 0.450 0.008 0.400 0.010 1 107 2 108 1 107 3 108 0.525 0.018 0.500 0.024
Co-Cr 0.412 0.017 0.385 0.020 1 107 1 108 1 107 2 108
Low-Cu
Amalgam 0.500 0.020 0.505 0.025 1 106 2 107 9 107 3 107 0.140 0.012 0.145 0.015

CORROSIONVol. 60, No. 6 601

CORROSION ENGINEERING SECTION
20. V. Goehlich, M. Marek, Dent. Mater. 6 (1990): p. 103.
21. E. Angelini, P. Bianco, S. Mascellani, F. Zucchi, J. Mater. Sci.,
Mater. Medicine 4 (1993): p. 142.
22. B.W. Darvell, J. Oral Rehabil. 5 (1978): p. 41.
23. C.E. Guthrow, L.B. Johnson, K.R. Lawless, J. Dent. Res. 46
(1967): p. 1,372.
24. E.J. Sutow, D.W. Jones, G.C. Hall, C.G. Owen, J. Dent. Res. 70
(1991): p. 1,082.
25. J. Brugirard, Study of the Electrochemical Behavior of Dental
Metals and Alloys, ed. J. Prlat (Paris V, France: 1970), p. 84.
26. K. Arvidson, Scand. J. Dent. Res. 93 (1985): p. 467.
27. D.C. Mears, Int. Met. Rev. 22 (1977): p. 119.
28. A. Fraker, Corrosion Test and Standard: Applications and In-
terpretation, ed. R. Baboian (West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM
International Manual Series, 1995), p. 705.
29. H.S. Dobbs, J.L.M. Robertson, ASTM STP 796, Titanium Alloys
in Surgical Implants (West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM Interna-
tional Manual Series, 1995), p. 227.
30. E.J. Sutow, D.W. Jones, E.L. Milne, J. Dent. Res. 64 (1985): p.
842.
31. E. Angelini, M. Pezzoli, F. Rosalbino, F. Zuchi, J. Dent. 19
(1991): p. 56.
32. J. Geis-Gerstorfer, J. Dent. 22 (1994): p. 247.
602
33. J. Geis-Gerstorfer, K. Pssler, Dent. Mater. 97 (1993) p: 177.
34. J. Geis-Gerstorfer, H. Weber, Dent. Mater. 3 (1987): p. 289.
35. N.K. Sarkar, W. Redmond, B. Schwaninger, A.J. Goldberg,
J. Oral Rehabil. 10 (1983): p. 121.
36. N.K. Sarkar, R.A. Fuys, Jr., J.W. Stanford, J. Dent. Res. 58
(1979): p. 568.
37. P.P. Corso, R.M. German, H. Simmons, J. Dent. Res. 64 (1985):
p. 854.
38. P.P. Corso, R.M. German, H. Simmons, J. Dent. Res. 64 (1985):
p. 848.
39. L. Niemi, R.I. Holland, J. Dent. Res. 63, 7 (1984): p. 1,014.
40. H. Leidheiser, Jr., The Corrosion of Copper, Tin, and Their
Alloys (New York, NY: J. Wiley and Sons, 1971), p. 70.
41. H. Mueller, Tarnish and Corrosion of Dental Alloys, in ASM
Handbook, Corrosion, vol. 13 (Materials Park, OH: ASM Inter-
national, 1996), p. 1,353.
42. O. Riesgo, G.L. Bianchi, G.S. Duff, Rev. Metal. 28 (1992): p.
306.
43. D. Gilroy, J.E.O. Mayne, J. Appl. Chem. 12 (1962): p. 382.
44. A. Bardow, D. Moe, B. Nyvad, B. Nauntofte, Archs. Oral Biol. 45
(2000): p. 1.
45. Y. Fovet, J.Y. Gal, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Serie IIC, Chimie 3
(2000): p. 379.
CORROSIONJUNE 2004