In some embodiments, a health care provider who initiates the production of an orthodontic appliance can customize which one or more agents are included between the layers. For example, the health care provider can select one or more particular therapeutic agents and one or more particular flavoring agents according the particular health care needs and/or desires of a patient. Such an ordering process would not be practical utilizing preformed sheets of laminated material.

Flexural strength testing per ASTM D-790 and flexural modulus testing per ASTM D-790 was performed on flat, 2-layer samples, with each layer being 0.015 inches (0.381 mm) thick. Samples of tables 1.1-1.9 were constructed from layers of PETG and thermoplastic urethane (EASTAR Grade 6763)/ISOPLAST Grade 2530). Samples of tables 2.1-2.9 were constructed from dual layers of the same thermoplastic urethane (ISOPLAST Grade 2530).

To determine a baseline/control values, two testing samples of each type were bonded as shown in Table 1.1 and 2.1. The construction method for the baseline samples (heat lamination) did not employ use of adhesives and prior testing has shown this method to be suitable for construction of orthodontic appliance 10. Two testing samples of both construction types were bonded using isopropyl alcohol, acetone, eugenol, reagent alcohol, nondenatured ethanol, N,N-Dimethylacetamide, n-butyl Acetate, and amyl acetate. The solvents were mist sprayed and allowed to air dry.

Results of the testing are shown in the tables below. For the PETG/ISOPLAST samples, it was found that eugenol, isopropyl alcohol, and n-butyl Acetate provided comparable or greater flexural strength and flexural modulus than the control sample, and accordingly for these materials those solvents can likely be substituted for the baseline construction method for orthodontic appliance 10. It is possible that the remaining solvents can still provide enough strength for orthodontic appliance 10, but more testing is required.

For the ISOPLAST/ISOPLAST samples, it was found that acetone, eugenol, and n-butyl Acetate provided comparable or greater flexural strength and flexural modulus than the control sample, and accordingly for these materials those solvents can likely be substituted for the baseline construction method for orthodontic appliance 10. It is possible that the remaining solvents can still provide enough strength for orthodontic appliance 10, but more testing is required.

TABLE 1.1

PETG/ISOPLAST, Baseline

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
30.8
1508.3

Sample 2
33.2
1766.9

Mean
32
1637.6

TABLE 1.2

PETG/ISOPLAST, Isopropyl Alcohol

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
38.3
1508.3

Sample 2
37.7
1349.7

Mean
38
1429

TABLE 1.3

PETG/ISOPLAST, Acetone

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
21.2
1183.1

Sample 2
25.4
1262.5

Mean
23.3
1222.8

TABLE 1.4

PETG/ISOPLAST, Eugenol

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
40.2
1974.2

Sample 2
41.3
2014.2

Mean
40.75
1994.2

TABLE 1.5

PETG/ISOPLAST, Reagent Alcohol

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
15.9
975.1

Sample 2
14.1
965.2

Mean
15
970.15

TABLE 1.6

PETG/ISOPLAST, Nondenatured Ethyl Alcohol

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
15.8
967.7

Sample 2
15.5
915.6

Mean
15.65
941.65

TABLE 1.7

PETG/ISOPLAST, Amyl acetate

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
15.1
895.3

Sample 2
15.8
984.5

Mean
15.45
939.9

TABLE 1.8

PETG/ISOPLAST, N,N-Dimethylacetamide

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
25.4
1090.2

Sample 2
27.9
1190.2

Mean
26.65
1140.2

TABLE 1.9

PETG/ISOPLAST, n-butyl Acetate

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
29.4
1488.8

Sample 2
31.2
1865.2

Mean
30.3
1677

TABLE 2.1

ISOPLAST/ISOPLAST, Baseline

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
21.9
1257.3

Sample 2
22.3
1422.3

Mean
22.1
1339.8

TABLE 2.2

ISOPLAST/ISOPLAST, Isopropyl Alcohol

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
15.7
887.1

Sample 2
15.9
889.3

Mean
15.8
888.2

TABLE 2.3

ISOPLAST/ISOPLAST, Acetone

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
21.1
1109.6

Sample 2
23.8
1325.2

Mean
22.45
1217.4

TABLE 2.4

ISOPLAST/ISOPLAST, Eugenol

Flexural Strength
Flexural Modulus

(Mpa)
(Mpa)

Sample 1
29.5
1522.3

Sample 2
26.8
1355.9

Mean
28.15
1439.1