美国/全球:+1-949-461-9292
欧洲。+39-011-3052-794
联系我们

类别。轮廓测量法 | 纹理和颗粒

 

stent coating adhesion testing failure analysis drug eluting stent coating

Stent Coating Adhesion and Delamination Analysis Using Nano Scratch Testing

Application Note | Stent Coating Adhesion Testing

Stent Coating Adhesion and Delamination Analysis Using Nano Scratch Testing

Quantifying Coating Failure and Adhesion Performance on Drug-Eluting Stents

stent coating adhesion testing nano scratch delamination critical load

Research & Experimental Testing

李端杰,博士

Visual Design & Editorial

安德鲁-肖尔

简介

Blood is carried through arteries from the heart to the rest of the body. Any weakening or blockage of these vessels can pose significant health risks and may become life-threatening. A stent is a small mesh tube inserted into the lumen of a blood vessel to treat narrowed or weakened arteries. Stent implantation is now a widely used procedure to support the arterial wall and restore blood flowᶦ.

Metal stent mesh geometry illustrating the structural complexity of vascular implant design.

Why coating adhesion matters in drug-eluting stents

Drug-eluting stents represent a major advancement in stent technology. They incorporate a biodegradable, biocompatible polymer coating that enables controlled drug release at the arterial site, helping to inhibit intimal thickening and reduce the risk of restenosisᶦᶦ.

A critical concern in these systems is the delamination of the polymer coating from the metallic stent substrate. This coating carries the drug-eluting layer, and its adhesion directly impacts device performance and reliability.

To improve coating adhesion, stents are often designed with complex geometries. In this study, the polymer coating is located at the bottom of grooves within the stent mesh. This configuration presents a significant challenge for adhesion measurement.

A reliable method is required to quantitatively evaluate the interfacial strength between the polymer coating and the metal substrate. The small diameter of the stent mesh, comparable to a human hair, combined with its three-dimensional geometry, requires:

  • ultrafine X-Y positioning accuracy
  • precise control of applied load
  • accurate depth measurement during testing

Measurement Method

Nano scratch testing is performed using the 纳诺维亚 PB1000 机械测试仪, in Nano Scratch Mode, to evaluate the cohesive and adhesive strength of the polymer coating on the metal mesh of stent samples.

Controlled scratch measurements are carried out on stent geometries with dimensions comparable to a human hair, enabling precise evaluation of coating adhesion on complex stent structures.

NANOVEA PB1000 Advanced

机械测试仪

测试条件

1. Regular Stent Samples

The stent is fixed on the sample stage, with a support wire inserted inside the stent tube to ensure stability during nano scratch testing. The NANOVEA Mechanical Tester is used to perform nano scratch measurements using the parameters summarized in Table 1, to evaluate the cohesive and adhesive strength of the polymer coating on the metal substrate.

ParameterValue
Load type渐进的
Initial load0.05 mN
Final load300 and 100 mN
Sliding speed0.5 mm/min
Sliding distance0.5 mm
Indenter geometry锥形
Indenter material (tip)钻石
压头尖端半径20 µm
温度24°C (room)

表1: Test parameters for nano scratch measurements on regular stent samples

2. Grooved Stent Samples

The SEM image in Fig. 1 shows the cross-section of the stent sample. The stent features a groove with a depth of approximately 30 µm. The polymer coating, with a thickness of 10.8 µm, is located at the bottom of the groove.

Standard 60° conical diamond tips are not sharp enough to reach the bottom of the groove without contacting the sidewalls. Therefore, a sharper 40° conical diamond tip is used in this study (Fig. 2).

Nano scratch measurements are performed using the parameters summarized in Table 2.

Parameter Value
Load type 渐进的
Initial load 0.1 mN
Final load 300 mN
装载率 300 mN/min
Scratch length 0.25 mm
Scratch speed 0.25 mm/min
Indenter geometry 40° cone
Indenter material (tip) 钻石
压头尖端半径 5 µm

Table 2: Test parameters for nano scratch measurements on grooved stent samples

stent groove cross section polymer coating thickness adhesion analysis nano scratch testing

Fig. 1: SEM cross-section of a grooved stent showing polymer coating located at the bottom of the groove, highlighting the challenge of coating adhesion measurement in recessed geometries.

nano scratch diamond tip 40 degree stent groove coating adhesion testing schematic

Fig. 2: Schematic of a 40° conical diamond tip designed for nano scratch testing inside stent grooves, enabling accurate adhesion measurement without sidewall interference.

结果和讨论

The stent mesh has a diameter of approximately 100 μm, comparable to a human hair. Precise positioning is therefore critical to ensure the scratch test is performed at the center of the stent mesh. The NANOVEA Mechanical Tester provides X–Y positioning accuracy down to 0.25 μm, enabling accurate test placement under the integrated optical microscope.

1. Regular Stent Samples

Nano scratch testing is performed with a progressively increasing load up to 300 mN. The full scratch track on the stent is shown in Fig. 3a, while failure behavior at different stages is presented in Fig. 3b and 3c.

Two critical loads are identified:

  • Lc1: the load at which the first visible damage appears on the coating
  • Lc2: the load at which the coating is fully removed and the substrate is exposed

The evolution of coefficient of friction (COF) and penetration depth is shown in Fig. 4, providing insight into the progression of coating failure during the test.

The first signs of coating damage appear at Lc1 ≈ 14.5 mN. As the applied load increases, the diamond tip progressively penetrates the polymer coating, resulting in a wider and deeper scratch track. During this phase, the COF increases from approximately 0.05 to 0.7.

At Lc2 ≈ 78.1 mN, the coating is fully delaminated from the metal substrate. Beyond this point, as the load continues to increase, both COF and penetration depth remain relatively stable due to the mechanical support of the underlying metal substrate.

nano scratch track stent coating progressive load adhesion testing

(a) Full Scratch Track

(b) Lc1 ≈ 14.5 mN

stent coating delamination lc2 nano scratch 78.1 mN adhesion testing

(c) Lc2 ≈ 78.1 mN

Fig. 3: Nano scratch track on a stent coating under progressively increasing load, showing (a) full scratch path, (b) initial coating failure at Lc1 ≈ 14.5 mN, and (c) complete coating delamination at Lc2 ≈ 78.1 mN.

nano scratch testing stent coating coefficient of friction depth progression adhesion failure

Fig. 4: Evolution of coefficient of friction (COF) and penetration depth during nano scratch testing of a stent coating under progressively increasing load, showing the progression of coating failure and transition to substrate support.

Failures during nano scratch testing up to a maximum load of 300 mN occur at critical loads below 100 mN. To enable a more quantitative comparison of coating performance, additional tests are performed with a maximum load of 100 mN on two stent samples, referred to as Sample 1 and Sample 2.

Fig. 5 compares the scratch tracks of Sample 1 and Sample 2 after nano scratch testing. Sample 1 exhibits the first sign of coating damage at a critical load of Lc1 ≈ 13.2 mN, while Sample 2 shows initial failure at a higher load of Lc1 ≈ 21.1 mN.

Coating delamination occurs at 62.5 mN for Sample 1. In contrast, the coating on Sample 2 remains intact throughout the test, continuing to protect the metal substrate under the same loading conditions.

This behavior is further reflected in the evolution of coefficient of friction (COF) and penetration depth, as shown in Fig. 6. When the diamond tip penetrates through the coating and contacts the metal substrate in Sample 1, the COF reaches a peak while the penetration depth decreases due to the increased stiffness of the underlying substrate.

stent coating sample 1 early failure nano scratch track delamination adhesion testing

(a) Sample 1 – Early Coating Failure

stent coating sample 2 high adhesion nano scratch track minimal damage testing

(b) Sample 2 – Improved Coating Integrity

Fig. 5: Comparison of nano scratch tracks for two stent coatings, showing (a) early coating failure and delamination in Sample 1, and (b) improved coating integrity in Sample 2 under the same loading conditions.

nano scratch testing stent coating COF depth comparison sample 1 sample 2 adhesion performance

Fig. 6: Comparison of coefficient of friction (COF) and penetration depth for Sample 1 and Sample 2 during nano scratch testing, showing earlier substrate contact and higher friction response in Sample 1, indicating weaker coating adhesion.

2. Grooved Stent Samples

As shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 7, the grooved stent mesh has a diameter of approximately 90 μm, comparable to a human hair. The groove has a width of ~50 μm and a depth of 30 μm. This geometry presents a significant challenge for nano scratch testing, particularly for evaluating coating adhesion at the bottom of the groove.

Precise positioning is critical to locate the scratch test within the groove. The nano scratch test is performed with a progressively increasing load up to 300 mN. The full scratch tracks of grooved stent Samples 3 and 4 are compared in Fig. 7.

The critical load Lc is defined as the load at which the coating fails and the substrate becomes exposed. The evolution of normal load and penetration depth, shown in Fig. 8, provides further insight into the progression of coating failure during testing.

As the applied load increases, the diamond tip progressively penetrates the polymer coating, resulting in a deeper scratch track. When the critical load Lc is reached, the coating delaminates from the metal substrate.

Sample 3 exhibits coating failure at Lc ≈ 126 mN, while Sample 4 fails at a higher load of Lc ≈ 173 mN. This difference indicates stronger adhesion of the coating in Sample 4.

The measured critical loads enable quantitative comparison of coating adhesion performance. Under the same testing conditions, the coating on Sample 4 demonstrates higher resistance to delamination, making it the better-performing candidate in this study.

stent groove coating failure sample 3 nano scratch 126 mN adhesion testing

(c) Sample 3 – Coating Failure in Groove (Lc ≈ 126 mN)

stent groove coating adhesion sample 4 nano scratch 173 mN minimal failure testing

(d) Sample 4 – Higher Adhesion in Groove (Lc ≈ 173 mN)

Fig. 7: Nano scratch tracks inside stent grooves for Samples 3 and 4, showing (c) coating failure at Lc ≈ 126 mN in Sample 3 and (d) higher adhesion with delayed failure at Lc ≈ 173 mN in Sample 4.

(a) Sample 3 – Earlier Coating Failure (Lc ≈ 126 mN)

(b) Sample 4 – Delayed Failure and Higher Adhesion (Lc ≈ 173 mN)

Fig. 8: Evolution of normal load and penetration depth during nano scratch testing inside stent grooves for Samples 3 and 4, showing earlier coating failure in Sample 3 and delayed failure at higher load in Sample 4. The vertical green line indicates the critical load (Lc) where coating delamination occurs.

总结

This study demonstrates the ability of the NANOVEA Mechanical Tester to quantitatively evaluate the cohesive and adhesive strength of polymer coatings on both regular and grooved stent geometries using nano scratch testing.

The recessed geometry of the stent grooves, approximately 50 μm wide and 30 μm deep, presents a significant challenge for coating adhesion measurement. The high X–Y positioning accuracy of 0.25 μm enables precise placement of the scratch test within these confined regions, allowing direct evaluation of coating performance where failure is most critical.

By applying a controlled, progressively increasing load, critical loads associated with coating failure can be identified and compared across samples. This approach enables reliable differentiation of coating adhesion performance and interfacial integrity, even on small, complex stent structures.

参考文献

[I] http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/stents
[II] http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1405-99402006000300008

Frequently Asked Questions About Stent Coating Adhesion Testing

What is stent coating adhesion testing?

Stent coating adhesion testing evaluates how strongly a polymer coating is bonded to the metal substrate of a stent. Techniques such as nano scratch testing quantify the load at which coating damage and delamination occur, providing measurable indicators of adhesion strength.

What is critical load (Lc) in nano scratch testing?

Critical load (Lc) is the applied load at which a coating fails during a scratch test.

  • Lc1 corresponds to the first visible damage in the coating
  • Lc2 indicates complete coating removal and exposure of the substrate

These values are used to quantify and compare coating adhesion performance.

Why is coating adhesion important in drug-eluting stents?

Coating adhesion directly affects the reliability of drug-eluting stents. Poor adhesion can lead to coating delamination, which may compromise controlled drug release and increase the risk of device failure.

How do you measure coating adhesion inside stent grooves?

Measuring adhesion inside stent grooves requires high positioning accuracy and appropriate indenter geometry. Nano scratch testing with sharp diamond tips allows access to recessed coating regions, enabling direct evaluation of adhesion within complex stent geometries.

What does coefficient of friction (COF) indicate in scratch testing?

The coefficient of friction (COF) reflects changes in surface interaction during the scratch test. A sudden increase in COF often indicates coating failure and contact between the indenter and the underlying metal substrate.

How can nano scratch testing compare different coating formulations?

Nano scratch testing enables direct comparison of coatings by measuring critical loads under controlled conditions. Higher critical loads indicate stronger adhesion and improved resistance to delamination, allowing selection of better-performing coating systems.

Dentist holding dental model for tooth surface roughness analysis and 3D reconstruction

Dental Surface Roughness Measurement & 3D Tooth Topography

Application Note | Dental Surface Characterization

Dental Surface Roughness Measurement and Full 3D Tooth Topography

Surface Roughness Analysis Using Non-Contact Optical Profilometry

Dental surface roughness measurement and 3D molar reconstruction using optical profilometry

编写者

Walter Alabiso, PhD; Davide Morrone, MPhys; Andrew Shore, MA

简介

The ability to accurately characterize tooth surfaces, including micro-roughness and 3D surface topography at the nanometer scale, enables advanced research and applications in orthodontics and dental materials science. Non-contact optical profilometry provides a precise method for measuring dental surface roughness and analyzing tooth surface morphology without damaging delicate structures. These measurements support the development of composite dental materials that replicate the natural surface roughness of enamel, as well as the design and fabrication of patient-specific dental casts and restorative components.

Low surface roughness plays a primary role in limiting bacterial adhesion and plaque formation, thereby reducing the risk of cavities. An increase in average roughness (Ra) above 2 µm leads to a steep increase in biofilm formation in vivo.¹ An Ra of 0.2 µm is considered the threshold value below which no further reduction in bacterial adhesion can be expected.²

Reconstruction of the tooth’s 3D surface topography enables the fabrication of dental casts, which are essential for accurate diagnosis, treatment planning, and the fabrication of dental appliances.

Non-Contact Optical Profilometry for Dental Surface Analysis

The present study illustrates the potential of NANOVEA’s high-precision non-contact optical profilometers for dental surface roughness measurement and 3D tooth topography analysis. Chromatic Light technology offers significant advantages over classical touch probe techniques. It acquires data points from deep crevices and complex geometries without introducing measurement errors or artifacts caused by local plastic deformation and without requiring extensive data manipulation.

Compared to focus variation systems, single-point optical sensing provides superior lateral and height accuracy, with X/Y resolution below 0.5 µm, maximum vertical resolution of 1.9 nm, and the ability to measure surface angles up to 87°. The technique is effective on transparent, opaque, specular, diffusive, polished, and rough dental surfaces, making it well suited for comprehensive dental surface characterization.

Measurement Method

在这个应用中, NANOVEA JR25 Non-Contact Optical Profiler was used to analyze the surface roughness and 3D surface topography of an adult human molar previously affected by tooth decay. The side of the tooth was scanned using a PS2–MG140 single-point optical sensor to measure surface roughness parameters over a defined region of interest and along multiple line profiles.

The crown of the tooth was then scanned and reconstructed using a PS5–MG35 single-point optical sensor, which is suited for larger-area acquisition and full 3D tooth topography measurement.


NANOVEA JR25 Portable
光学轮廓仪

Surface Measurement Using NANOVEA Optical Profilometer

Surface roughness measurements were performed on the lateral side of the molar crown, followed by full 3D reconstruction of the crown surface. Separate single-point optical sensors were used to optimize measurement accuracy for both localized roughness analysis and large-area surface topography acquisition.

PS2 – MG140

Surface roughness analysis by area and parallel line profiles on the side of the tooth’s crown.

PS5 – MG35

Full 3D surface reconstruction of the tooth’s crown.

测量参数

The following measurement parameters were used for localized surface roughness analysis and full 3D surface reconstruction of the molar crown using NANOVEA single-point optical sensors.

ParameterRoughness Analysis (Area)Roughness Analysis (Profiles)Full 3D Reconstruction
Optical PenPS2-MG140PS2-MG140PS5-MG35
Z-Range [µm]30030010000
X-Distance [mm]2.003.007.50
X-Step Size [µm]1.701.7010.00
Y-Distance [mm]2.001.007.00
Y-Step Size [µm]1.70100.0010.00
Average (Avg)111
Measurement TypeDirectDirectDirect
Acquisition ModeSingle FrequencySingle FrequencyDouble Frequency
Acquisition Rate [Hz]200200100–400
Light Intensity [%]100100100

Optical Profilometry Results

Surface Roughness Analysis (Area)

The PS2 single-point optical sensor was used to investigate fine surface features on the side of the tooth. The image below shows a false-color 2D surface map of the scanned region obtained by non-contact optical profilometry.

False-color 2D height map of scanned tooth surface region

A least-squares degree-8 polynomial form removal was applied to isolate the surface roughness component. The roughness filters S-Gaussian 2.5 µm and L-Gaussian 0.8 mm were then applied according to ISO 25178. The resulting filtered surface and corresponding roughness parameters are presented below.

ISO 25178 – Roughness (S-L)
S-filter (λs): Gaussian, 2.5 µm
F: [Workflow] Form removed (LS-poly 8)
L-filter (λc): Gaussian, 0.8 mm
Height Parameters
规模2.433µm均方根高度
スクリート-0.102 倾斜度
价格3.715 峰度
ǞǞǞ18.861µm最大峰高
ǞǞǞ16.553µmMaximum pit depth
35.414µm最大高度
1.888µm算术平均身高

The average surface roughness Sa is 1.888 µm, while the peak-to-valley height Sz reaches 35.414 µm.

A 3D surface rendering of the filtered area is shown below for visualization.

3D rendering of ISO 25178 filtered tooth surface roughness

Roughness Analysis (Profiles)

Surface roughness profiles were measured using a series of 11 parallel line scans along the X direction on the side of the tooth. The false-color 2D surface map of the raw scan is shown below.

False-color 2D raw scan of tooth surface for line roughness profiles

The surface form was removed using a least-squares 8-degree polynomial prior to applying the metrological filters, leaving the residual surface shown below.

A statistical analysis of the measured surface roughness profiles reveals the following line roughness parameters.

Overlay of multiple tooth surface roughness profiles for statistical analysis

ISO 4287 – Roughness (S-L)
F:
S-filter (λs): Gaussian, 2.5 µm
L-filter (λc): Gaussian, 0.8 mm
Evaluation length: All λc (3)
Amplitude Parameters – Roughness Profile
  DescriptionMeanStd devMinMax
RpµmMaximum peak height of the roughness profile5.6830.7614.3156.610
RvµmMaximum valley depth of the roughness profile6.2421.0094.7018.438
RzµmMaximum height of roughness profile11.9251.6769.12315.048
RaµmArithmetic mean deviation of the roughness profile2.0630.2971.7102.629
RqµmRoot-mean-square (RMS) deviation of the roughness profile2.5230.3612.0573.175

ISO 4287 – Roughness (S-L)
F:
S-filter (λs): Gaussian, 2.5 µm
L-filter (λc): Gaussian, 0.8 mm
Evaluation length: All λc (3)
Amplitude Parameters – Roughness Profile
Rpµm
Maximum peak height of the roughness profile
Mean5.683
Std dev0.761
Min4.315
Max6.610
Rvµm
Maximum valley depth of the roughness profile
Mean6.242
Std dev1.009
Min4.701
Max8.438
Rzµm
Maximum height of roughness profile
Mean11.925
Std dev1.676
Min9.123
Max15.048
Raµm
Arithmetic mean deviation of the roughness profile
Mean2.063
Std dev0.297
Min1.710
Max2.629
Rqµm
Root-mean-square (RMS) deviation of the roughness profile
Mean2.523
Std dev0.361
Min2.057
Max3.175

The value of Ra is consistent with the Sa value extracted from the surface area measurement.

Different metrological filters can be applied to distinguish between macroscopic waviness and microscopic surface roughness. For example, a coarser filter cut-off, such as the 8 mm cut-off used with the Robust Gaussian order-2 filter, produces a smoother waviness profile (red) that is less sensitive to sharp local variations and follows the original surface profile more loosely.

Comparison of waviness and roughness profiles on tooth surface using coarse filter

Alternatively, a finer cut-off (e.g., 0.08 mm) enables the analysis of micro-roughness by removing the waviness component that follows the original profile at a larger scale, leaving the finer surface roughness features of the tooth visible.

The microroughness analysis obtained using a 0.08 mm L-Gaussian filter is presented below.

Final microroughness profile of tooth surface after filtering

ISO 4287 – Roughness (S-L)
F:
S-filter (λs): Gaussian, 2.5 µm
L-filter (λc): Gaussian, 0.08 mm
Evaluation length: All λc (37)
Amplitude Parameters – Roughness Profile
  DescriptionMeanStd devMinMax
RpµmMaximum peak height of the roughness profile1.5820.1221.3421.748
RvµmMaximum valley depth of the roughness profile1.4660.1191.2541.661
RzµmMaximum height of roughness profile3.0490.1962.8203.409
RaµmArithmetic mean deviation of the roughness profile0.4950.0470.4230.597
RqµmRoot-mean-square (RMS) deviation of the roughness profile0.6430.0560.5620.762

ISO 4287 – Roughness (S-L)
F:
S-filter (λs): Gaussian, 2.5 µm
L-filter (λc): Gaussian, 0.8 mm
Evaluation length: All λc (3)
Amplitude Parameters – Roughness Profile
Rpµm
Maximum peak height of the roughness profile
Mean5.683
Std dev0.761
Min4.315
Max6.610
Rvµm
Maximum valley depth of the roughness profile
Mean6.242
Std dev1.009
Min4.701
Max8.438
Rzµm
Maximum height of roughness profile
Mean11.925
Std dev1.676
Min9.123
Max15.048
Raµm
Arithmetic mean deviation of the roughness profile
Mean2.063
Std dev0.297
Min1.710
Max2.629
Rqµm
Root-mean-square (RMS) deviation of the roughness profile
Mean2.523
Std dev0.361
Min2.057
Max3.175

Full 3D Tooth Surface Topography Reconstruction

The extended Z-scan range of the PS5 optical sensor enables high-fidelity scanning of the entire tooth crown surface. The resulting 3D surface topography is shown below.

False-color surface topography map of full tooth crown measured with optical profilometer

2D VIEW: 2D surface map of the tooth crown measured with optical profilometry

3D surface reconstruction of molar crown from optical profilometer scan

3D VIEW: High-fidelity 3D rendering of the molar crown surface obtained with optical profilometry

总结

In this application, the NANOVEA JR25 Non-Contact Optical Profiler was used to measure the surface roughness and 3D surface topography of an adult human molar.

Both the area scan and the line profile analysis revealed a roughness Rq of approximately 2.5 µm and an Ra of about 1.9–2.0 µm. These values are consistent with results reported in the literature.³ The use of a narrower L-Gaussian filter with an 80 µm cut-off enabled further investigation of micro-roughness, revealing an Rq of 0.643 µm and an Ra of 0.495 µm.

The full 3D surface topography of the molar crown was reconstructed with high fidelity. The high measurement resolution allows detection of fine surface features and crevices. The resulting surface data can be easily processed and exported as STL files, enabling the design and fabrication of customized dental devices and restorative components.

参考文献

[1] Shin, B.W., et al. Surface Roughness of Prefabricated Pediatric Zirconia Crowns Following Simulated Toothbrushing. Pediatric Dentistry 44.5 (2022): 363–367.
[2] Bollen, C.M.L., Paul Lambrechts, and Marc Quirynen. Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: A review of the literature. Dental Materials 13.4 (1997): 258–269.
[3] Suputtamongkol, K., et al. Surface roughness resulting from wear of lithia-disilicate-based posterior crowns. Wear 269.3–4 (2010): 317–322.

Frequently Asked Questions About Dental Surface Roughness Measurement

What is dental surface roughness measurement?

Dental surface roughness measurement quantifies the microscopic texture of tooth surfaces using parameters such as Ra, Rq, and Sa. Optical profilometers measure these features without contacting the surface, allowing accurate analysis of enamel, restorative materials, and dental crowns.

Why use optical profilometry to measure tooth roughness?

Optical profilometry provides non-contact surface measurement with nanometer-scale vertical resolution. It captures 2D surface maps and full 3D surface topography of dental structures without damaging soft or polished surfaces.

What roughness parameters are used for dental surface analysis?

Common roughness parameters include Ra (arithmetic mean roughness), Rq (root mean square roughness), Sa (areal roughness), and Sz (maximum surface height). These parameters help evaluate enamel wear, plaque adhesion risk, and the performance of restorative materials.

Why is surface roughness important in dentistry?

Surface roughness affects plaque retention, wear resistance, and the long-term performance of dental restorations. Controlling micro-roughness can reduce bacterial adhesion and improve the durability of dental materials.

Need Reliable Surface Roughness Measurement for Dental Materials?

喷丸表面分析

喷丸表面分析

使用 3D 非接触式轮廓仪

编写者

CRAIG LEISING

简介

喷丸是用球形金属、玻璃或陶瓷珠(通常称为“喷丸”)轰击基材的过程,其作用力旨在诱导表面塑性。分析喷丸前后的特征为增强过程理解和控制提供了重要的见解。射击留下的凹痕的表面粗糙度和覆盖面积是特别值得注意的方面。

3D 非接触式轮廓仪对于喷丸表面分析的重要性

与传统上用于喷丸表面分析的传统接触式轮廓仪不同,3D 非接触式测量可提供完整的 3D 图像,从而更全面地了解覆盖区域和表面形貌。如果没有 3D 功能,检查将仅依赖 2D 信息,这不足以表征表面。了解 3D 中的形貌、覆盖区域和粗糙度是控制或改进喷丸过程的最佳方法。纳诺维娅的 3D 非接触式轮廓仪 利用具有独特功能的色光技术来测量机加工和喷丸表面上的陡峭角度。此外,当其他技术由于探头接触、表面变化、角度或反射率而无法提供可靠数据时,NANOVEA 轮廓仪可以成功。

测量目标

在此应用中,NANOVEA ST400 非接触式轮廓仪用于测量原材料和两个不同喷丸表面,以进行比较审查。 3D 表面扫描后可以自动计算出无数的表面参数。在这里,我们将检查 3D 表面并选择感兴趣的区域进行进一步分析,包括量化和研究粗糙度、凹坑和表面积。

NANOVEA ST400 标准
光学 3D 轮廓仪

例子

喷丸处理表面检测

结果

钢表面

喷丸处理表面粗糙度
喷丸处理表面特性分析

ISO 25178 3D 粗糙度参数

SA 0.399微米 平均粗糙度
规模 0.516微米 均方根粗糙度
5.686微米 最大峰谷值
ǞǞǞ 2.976微米 最大峰值高度
ǞǞǞ 2.711微米 最大凹坑深度
价格 3.9344 峰度
スクリート -0.0113 倾斜度
萨尔 0.0028毫米 自相关长度
斯特 0.0613 纹理纵横比
斯达尔 26.539 平方毫米 表面积
斯沃克 0.589微米 减少谷深
 

结果

喷丸表面 1

喷丸处理表面轮廓
喷丸处理表面轮廓测量

表面覆盖率 98.105%

喷丸处理表面研究

ISO 25178 3D 粗糙度参数

4.102微米 平均粗糙度
规模 5.153微米 均方根粗糙度
44.975微米 最大峰谷值
ǞǞǞ 24.332微米 最大峰值高度
ǞǞǞ 20.644微米 最大凹坑深度
价格 3.0187 峰度
スクリート 0.0625 倾斜度
萨尔 0.0976毫米 自相关长度
斯特 0.9278 纹理纵横比
斯达尔 29.451 平方毫米 表面积
斯沃克 5.008微米 减少谷深

结果

喷丸表面 2

喷丸处理表面测试
喷丸处理表面分析

表面覆盖率 97.366%

喷丸处理表面计量学

ISO 25178 3D 粗糙度参数

4.330微米 平均粗糙度
规模 5.455微米 均方根粗糙度
54.013微米 最大峰谷值
ǞǞǞ 25.908微米 最大峰值高度
ǞǞǞ 28.105微米 最大凹坑深度
价格 3.0642 峰度
スクリート 0.1108 倾斜度
萨尔 0.1034毫米 自相关长度
斯特 0.9733 纹理纵横比
斯达尔 29.623 平方毫米 表面积
斯沃克 5.167微米 减少谷深

结论

在此喷丸表面分析应用中,我们演示了 NANOVEA ST400 3D 非接触式轮廓仪如何精确表征喷丸表面的形貌和纳米细节。显然,与原材料相比,表面 1 和表面 2 对此处报告的所有参数都有显着影响。对图像进行简单的目视检查即可发现表面之间的差异。通过观察覆盖区域和列出的参数进一步证实了这一点。与表面 2 相比,表面 1 表现出较低的平均粗糙度 (Sa)、较浅的凹痕 (Sv) 和较小的表面积 (Sdar),但覆盖面积稍高。

通过这些 3D 表面测量,可以轻松识别感兴趣的区域并进行全面的测量,包括粗糙度、光洁度、纹理、形状、形貌、平整度、翘曲、平面度、体积、台阶高度等。可以快速选择二维横截面进行详细分析。该信息允许利用全套表面测量资源对喷丸表面进行全面调查。可以使用集成的 AFM 模块进一步检查感兴趣的特定区域。 NANOVEA 3D 轮廓仪的速度高达 200 毫米/秒。它们可以在尺寸、速度、扫描功能方面进行定制,甚至可以符合 1 级洁净室标准。还提供索引传送带和内联或在线使用集成等选项。

特别感谢IMF的Hayden先生提供本文所示样品。工业金属表面处理有限公司 | indmetfin.com

涂料表面形态

涂料表面形态

自动实时进化监测
使用纳诺维三维轮廓仪

涂料表面形态

编写者

李端杰,博士

简介

涂料的保护和装饰特性在汽车、船舶、军事和建筑等多个行业中发挥着重要作用。为了获得理想的性能,如防腐蚀、防紫外线和耐磨性,涂料配方和结构需要经过仔细分析、修改和优化。

三维非接触式轮廓仪对干燥涂料表面形态分析的重要性

油漆通常以液态形式涂刷,并经历一个干燥过程,包括溶剂的蒸发和液态油漆转变为固态漆膜。在干燥过程中,油漆表面会逐渐改变形状和质地。通过使用添加剂来改变涂料的表面张力和流动特性,可以形成不同的表面效果和质感。但是,如果涂料配方不当或表面处理不当,可能会出现不理想的涂料表面失效现象。

在干燥期间对涂料表面形态进行准确的原位监测可以直接了解干燥机理。此外,表面形态的实时演化在各种应用(例如 3D 打印)中是非常有用的信息。纳诺维娅 3D 非接触式轮廓仪 在不接触样品的情况下测量材料的油漆表面形态,避免滑动触笔等接触技术可能导致的任何形状改变。

测量目标

在这一应用中,配备了高速线光学传感器的 NANOVEA ST500 非接触式轮廓仪用于监测涂料在 1 小时干燥期内的表面形态。我们展示了 NANOVEA 非接触式轮廓仪对形状不断变化的材料进行自动实时三维轮廓测量的能力。

NANOVEA ST500 大面积
光学 3D 轮廓仪

结果与讨论

将涂料涂抹在金属板表面,然后立即使用配备高速线传感器的 NANOVEA ST500 非接触式轮廓仪对干燥涂料的原位形态演变进行自动测量。宏编程可在特定时间间隔内自动测量和记录三维表面形态:0、5、10、20、30、40、50 和 60 分钟。与手动测试或重复扫描相比,这种自动扫描程序可使用户通过依次运行设定程序来自动执行扫描任务,大大减少了工作量、时间和可能出现的用户错误。事实证明,这种自动化对涉及不同时间间隔多次扫描的长期测量极为有用。

如图 1 所示,光学线条传感器会产生一条由 192 个点组成的亮线。这 192 个光点同时扫描样品表面,大大提高了扫描速度。这可确保快速完成每次三维扫描,避免在每次扫描过程中发生重大表面变化。

采用三维轮廓仪进行涂料涂层分析

图1: 光学线传感器扫描正在干燥的涂料表面。

图 2、图 3 和图 4 分别显示了代表性时间的假色视图、三维视图和干燥油漆形貌的二维剖面图。图像中的假色有助于检测不易辨认的特征。不同的颜色代表样品表面不同区域的高度变化。三维视图为用户提供了从不同角度观察油漆表面的理想工具。在测试的前 30 分钟,油漆表面的假色逐渐从暖色调变为冷色调,表明在此期间高度随时间逐渐降低。这一过程会减慢,正如在 30 分钟和 60 分钟时比较油漆的颜色变化轻微所显示的那样。

样品的平均高度和粗糙度 Sa 值与涂料干燥时间的函数关系如图 5 所示。 表 1 列出了干燥 0、30 和 60 分钟后涂料的完整粗糙度分析。可以看出,在干燥时间的前 30 分钟内,油漆表面的平均高度从 471 微米迅速下降到 329 微米。溶剂汽化的同时,表面纹理也随之形成,导致粗糙度 Sa 值从 7.19 微米增加到 22.6 微米。此后,涂料干燥过程减慢,导致样品高度和 Sa 值逐渐下降,在 60 分钟时分别降至 317 微米和 19.6 微米。

这项研究强调了 NANOVEA 3D 非接触式轮廓仪在实时监测干燥涂料的 3D 表面变化方面的能力,为了解涂料干燥过程提供了宝贵的资料。通过在不接触样品的情况下测量表面形态,轮廓仪避免了滑动测针等接触式技术可能对未干涂料造成的形状改变。这种非接触式方法可确保对干燥涂料表面形态进行准确可靠的分析。

涂料表面形态
涂料涂层形态

图2: 不同时间干燥涂料表面形态的变化。

涂层表面特性表征
涂层表面轮廓
涂层表面分析

图3: 不同干燥时间涂料表面演变的三维视图。

涂层表面轮廓测量

图4: 不同干燥时间后油漆样品的二维剖面图。

涂层表面研究

图5: 样品平均高度和粗糙度值 Sa 随涂料干燥时间的变化情况。

ISO 25178 - 表面纹理参数

干燥时间(分钟) 0 5 10 20 30 40 50 60
平方米(微米) 7.91 9.4 10.8 20.9 22.6 20.6 19.9 19.6
价格 26.3 19.8 14.6 11.9 10.5 9.87 9.83 9.82
Sp (µm) 97.4 105 108 116 125 118 114 112
Sv (µm) 127 70.2 116 164 168 138 130 128
Sz (µm) 224 175 224 280 294 256 244 241
Sa (µm) 4.4 5.44 6.42 12.2 13.3 12.2 11.9 11.8

Sq - 均方根高度 | Sku - 峰度 | Sp - 最大峰高 | Sv - 最大基坑高度 | Sz - 最大高度 | Sv - 算术平均身高

表1: 不同干燥时间的涂料粗糙度。

结论

在这一应用中,我们展示了 NANOVEA ST500 3D 非接触式轮廓仪在监测干燥过程中涂料表面形态演变方面的能力。高速光学线传感器可产生一条由 192 个光点组成的线,同时扫描样品表面,从而在确保无与伦比的精确度的同时提高了研究的时间效率。

采集软件的宏功能可对三维表面形态进行编程自动测量,特别适用于在特定目标时间间隔内进行多次扫描的长期测量。它大大减少了时间、精力和用户出错的可能性。在涂料干燥的过程中,表面形态的渐进变化会被持续监测和实时记录,为了解涂料的干燥机理提供有价值的信息。

此处显示的数据仅代表分析软件中可用计算的一小部分。NANOVEA 轮廓仪几乎能够测量任何表面,无论是透明表面、暗表面、反射表面还是不透明表面。

使用三维轮廓仪分析断裂样品

裂缝分析

使用三维轮廓仪测量

编写者

CRAIG LEISING

简介

断口分析是对断裂表面特征的研究,历史上一直通过显微镜或 SEM 进行研究。根据特征的大小,选择显微镜(宏观特征)或SEM(纳米和微观特征)进行表面分析。两者最终都可以识别断裂机制类型。尽管有效,但显微镜具有明显的局限性,并且在大多数情况下,除了原子级分析之外,SEM 对于断裂表面测量来说是不切实际的,并且缺乏更广泛的使用能力。随着光学测量技术的进步,NANOVEA 3D 非接触式轮廓仪 现在被认为是首选仪器,能够通过宏观尺度 2D 和 3D 表面测量提供纳米级测量

3D非接触式轮廓仪在断裂检测中的重要性

与SEM不同,3D非接触式轮廓仪几乎可以测量任何表面和样品尺寸,只需最少的样品准备,同时提供优于SEM的垂直/水平尺寸。使用轮廓仪,从纳米到宏观范围的特征都可以在一次测量中捕捉到,而样品反射率的影响为零。可以轻松地测量任何材料:透明的、不透明的、镜面的、扩散的、抛光的、粗糙的等等。三维非接触式轮廓仪提供了广泛和用户友好的能力,以SEM的一小部分成本,最大限度地提高表面断裂研究。

测量目标

在这个应用中,NANOVEA ST400被用来测量一个钢铁样品的断裂表面。在这项研究中,我们将展示表面的三维区域、二维轮廓提取和表面方向图。

NANOVEA

ST400

结果

顶部表面

三维表面纹理方向

同向性51.26%
第一方向123.2º
第二方向116.3º
第三方向0.1725º

表面积、体积、粗糙度和许多其他方面都可以从这个提取中自动计算。

二维轮廓提取

结果

侧面

三维表面纹理方向

同向性15.55%
第一方向0.1617º
第二方向110.5º
第三方向171.5º

表面积、体积、粗糙度和许多其他方面都可以从这个提取中自动计算。

二维轮廓提取

结论

在这个应用中,我们展示了NANOVEA ST400 3D非接触式轮廓仪是如何精确表征断裂表面的全部地形(纳米、微观和宏观特征)的。从三维区域中,可以清楚地识别出表面,并且可以快速提取子区域或剖面/横截面,并通过无尽的表面计算列表进行分析。亚纳米级的表面特征可以通过集成的AFM模块进一步分析。

此外,NANOVEA还在其Profilometer阵容中加入了一个便携式版本,这对于不可移动的裂缝表面现场研究来说尤其重要。有了这些广泛的表面测量能力,使用一台仪器进行断裂表面分析从未如此简单和方便。

三维轮廓仪测量玻璃纤维表面拓扑结构

玻璃纤维表面地形图

使用三维轮廓仪测量

编写者

CRAIG LEISING

简介

玻璃纤维是一种由极细的玻璃纤维制成的材料。它被用作许多聚合物产品的增强剂;由此产生的复合材料,正确地称为纤维增强聚合物(FRP)或玻璃增强塑料(GRP),在流行的用法中被称为 "玻璃纤维"。

表面计量检测对质量控制的重要性

尽管玻璃纤维加固有许多用途,但在大多数应用中,尽可能地提高强度是至关重要的。玻璃纤维复合材料是目前强度与重量比最高的材料之一,在某些情况下,其强度比钢铁还要高。除了高强度外,拥有尽可能小的暴露表面面积也很重要。大面积的玻璃纤维表面会使结构更容易受到化学侵蚀,并可能导致材料膨胀。因此,表面检查对于质量控制生产至关重要。

测量目标

在这个应用中,NANOVEA ST400被用来测量玻璃纤维复合材料表面的粗糙度和平整度。通过量化这些表面特征,有可能创造或优化一个更强大、更持久的玻璃纤维复合材料。

NANOVEA

ST400

测量参数

探测仪 1毫米
购置率300赫兹
平均数1
测量表面5 mm x 2 mm
阶梯尺寸5 µm x 5 µm
扫瞄模式恒定速度

探头规格

测量 范围1毫米
Z决议 25纳米
准确度200纳米
侧向分辨率 2 μm

结果

错误的颜色视图

三维表面平整度

三维表面粗糙度

15.716 μm算术平均高度
规模19.905 μm均方根高度
ǞǞǞ116.74 μm最大峰值高度
ǞǞǞ136.09 μm最大基坑高度
252.83 μm最大高度
スクリート0.556倾斜度
3.654峰度

结论

如结果所示,NANOVEA ST400 Optical 分析器 能够精确测量玻璃纤维复合材料表面的粗糙度和平整度。可以测量多批纤维复合材料和/或给定时间段的数据,以提供有关不同玻璃纤维制造工艺及其随时间变化的反应的重要信息。因此,ST400 是加强玻璃纤维复合材料质量控制过程的可行选择。

摩擦仪试验机测量聚合物皮带的磨损和摩擦

聚酯带

使用三坐标测量仪的磨损和破损情况

编写者

李端杰,博士

简介

皮带传动装置在两个或多个旋转轴之间传递动力和跟踪相对运动。作为一种简单和廉价的解决方案,维护工作最少,皮带传动被广泛用于各种应用,如电锯、锯木厂、脱粒机、筒仓鼓风机和输送机。皮带传动装置可以保护机械免于过载,也可以阻尼和隔离振动。

磨损评估的重要性 对皮带传动的重要性

摩擦和磨损对于皮带驱动的机器中的皮带来说是不可避免的。足够的摩擦确保有效的动力传输而不打滑,但过度的摩擦可能会迅速磨损皮带。不同类型的磨损,如疲劳、磨损和摩擦,都发生在皮带传动操作中。为了延长皮带的使用寿命,减少皮带维修和更换的成本和时间,可靠地评估皮带的磨损性能对于提高皮带寿命、生产效率和应用性能是可取的。准确测量皮带的摩擦系数和磨损率,有利于研发和皮带生产的质量控制。

测量目标

在这项研究中,我们模拟和比较了具有不同表面纹理的皮带的磨损行为,以展示其能力。 NANOVEA T2000摩擦磨损仪以受控和监测的方式模拟皮带的磨损过程。

NANOVEA

T2000

测试程序

两条具有不同表面粗糙度和纹理的皮带的摩擦系数,COF和耐磨性是通过以下方法评估的 NANOVEA 高负载 摩擦仪 使用线性往复磨损模块。使用钢 440 球(直径 10 毫米)作为计数器材料。使用集成的方法检查表面粗糙度和磨损轨迹 3D 非接触式轮廓仪。磨损率, K使用公式评估 K=Vl(Fxs),其中 V 是磨损的体积。 F 是法向载荷和 s 是滑动距离。

 

请注意,本研究中使用了光滑的钢440球的对应物作为例子,任何具有不同形状和表面处理的固体材料都可以使用定制的夹具来模拟实际应用情况。

结果与讨论

纹理带和光滑带的表面粗糙度Ra分别为33.5和8.7um,根据用显微镜分析的表面轮廓。 NANOVEA 三维非接触式光学剖面仪。分别在10N和100N的条件下测量了两条被测皮带的COF和磨损率,以比较皮带在不同载荷下的磨损行为。

图1 显示了磨损测试期间皮带的COF的演变。具有不同纹理的带子表现出明显不同的磨损行为。有趣的是,在COF逐渐增加的磨合期之后,在使用10N和100N载荷进行的测试中,纹理带的COF达到较低的~0.5。相比之下,在10N载荷下测试的光滑带在COF稳定后表现出明显较高的~1.4的COF,并在测试的其余部分保持在该值以上。在100N载荷下测试的平滑带迅速被钢制440球磨损,并形成一个大的磨损轨迹。因此,测试在220转时被停止。

图1: 不同载荷下皮带的COF的演变。

NANOVEA三维非接触式轮廓仪提供了一个分析磨损痕迹的详细形态的工具,为从根本上理解磨损机制提供了更多的见解。

表1: 磨损轨迹分析的结果。

图2:  两条皮带的三维视图
在100N的测试之后。

如表1所示,三维磨损轨迹剖面可直接和准确地确定先进分析软件计算的磨损轨迹体积。在220转的磨损试验中,平滑带的磨损轨迹更大更深,体积为75.7 mm3,而纹理带在600转的磨损试验后,磨损体积为14.0 mm3。光滑带对钢球的摩擦力明显增大,导致磨损率比有纹路的皮带高15倍。

 

纹理带和光滑带之间如此巨大的COF差异,可能与带子和钢球之间的接触面积大小有关,这也导致了它们不同的磨损性能。图3显示了两种带子在光学显微镜下的磨损痕迹。磨损轨迹检查与COF演变的观察结果一致。纹理带保持着约0.5的低COF,在10N的负载下进行磨损试验后,没有表现出磨损的迹象。光滑带在10N时显示出一个小的磨损轨迹。

图3:  光学显微镜下的磨损痕迹。

结论

在这项研究中,我们展示了NANOVEA T2000摩擦仪在以良好的控制和定量方式评估皮带的摩擦系数和磨损率方面的能力。在皮带的使用性能中,表面纹理对皮带的摩擦和耐磨性起着关键作用。有纹理的皮带表现出稳定的摩擦系数约为0.5,并拥有较长的使用寿命,从而减少了工具维修或更换的时间和成本。相比之下,光滑皮带对钢球的过度摩擦会迅速磨损皮带。此外,皮带上的负载是影响其使用寿命的一个重要因素。过载会产生非常大的摩擦,导致皮带加速磨损。

NANOVEA T2000摩擦仪采用符合ISO和ASTM标准的旋转和线性模式,提供精确和可重复的磨损和摩擦测试,并在一个预集成的系统中提供可选的高温磨损、润滑和摩擦腐蚀模块。 NANOVEA的 无与伦比的产品系列是确定薄或厚、软或硬的涂层、薄膜和基材的全部摩擦学特性的理想解决方案。

三维轮廓仪测量化石微观结构

化石的微观结构

使用三维轮廓仪测量

编写者

李端杰,博士

简介

化石是埋在古代海洋、湖泊和河流下的沉积物中的植物、动物和其他生物的痕迹的保存遗迹。软体组织通常在死后腐烂,但硬壳、骨骼和牙齿会成为化石。原有的贝壳和骨骼发生矿物替换时,微观结构的表面特征往往被保留下来,这为了解天气的演变和化石的形成机制提供了启示。

3D非接触式轮廓仪在化石检查中的重要性

化石的 3D 剖面使我们能够从更近的角度观察化石样本的详细表面特征。 NANOVEA 轮廓仪的高分辨率和精确度可能是肉眼无法辨别的。轮廓仪的分析软件提供了适用于这些独特表面的广泛研究。与接触式探针等其他技术不同,NANOVEA 3D 非接触式轮廓仪 无需接触样品即可测量表面特征。这样可以保留某些精致化石样本的真实表面特征。此外,便携式Jr25轮廓仪可以对化石遗址进行3D测量,极大地方便了化石挖掘后的分析和保护。

测量目标

在这项研究中,NANOVEA Jr25轮廓仪被用来测量两个有代表性的化石样品的表面。对每个化石的整个表面进行了扫描和分析,以确定其表面特征,包括粗糙度、轮廓和纹理方向。

NANOVEA

小25

腕足类化石

本报告介绍的第一个化石样本是腕足类化石,它来自于一种海洋动物,其上下表面有坚硬的 "瓣"(壳)。它们首次出现在距今5.5亿年前的寒武纪时期。

扫描的三维视图见图1,假彩色视图见图2。 

图1: 腕足类化石样本的三维视图。

图2: 腕足类化石样本的假彩图。

然后将整体形态从表面移除,以研究腕足动物化石的局部表面形态和轮廓,如图3所示。现在可以在腕足动物化石样品上观察到一个奇特的分歧槽纹理。

图3: 去除表格后的假彩色视图和轮廓线视图。

从纹理区域提取线状剖面图,以显示图4中化石表面的横断面图。步高研究测量了表面特征的精确尺寸。凹槽拥有平均宽度约0.38毫米和深度约0.25毫米。

图4: 纹理表面的线条轮廓和阶梯高度研究。

板蓝根茎化石

第二块化石样本是一块甲壳虫茎部化石。甲壳虫首次出现在中寒武纪的海洋中,大约比恐龙早3亿年。 

 

扫描的三维视图见图5,假彩色视图见图6。 

图5: 腕足类化石样本的三维视图。

图7分析了Crinoid茎化石的表面纹理各向异性和粗糙度。 

 该化石在接近90°的角度有一个优先的纹理方向,导致69%的纹理各向同性。

图6: 虚假的彩色视图 缩骨动物茎 采样。

 

图7: 碎石类干化石的表面纹理各向异性和粗糙度。

图8显示了沿Crinoid茎化石的轴向的二维剖面。 

表面纹理的山峰大小相当均匀。

图8: 碎石类干化石的二维剖面分析。

结论

在这个应用中,我们使用NANOVEA Jr25便携式非接触式轮廓仪全面研究了腕足类和腕足类茎化石的三维表面特征。我们展示了该仪器可以精确描述化石样品的三维形态。然后进一步分析了样品有趣的表面特征和纹理。腕足类样品拥有分歧的沟槽纹理,而腕足类茎部化石则显示出优先的纹理各向同性。详细而精确的三维表面扫描被证明是古生物学家和地质学家研究生命进化和化石形成的理想工具。

这里显示的数据只代表了分析软件中的一部分计算结果。NANOVEA轮廓仪几乎可以测量任何领域的表面,包括半导体、微电子、太阳能、光纤、汽车、航空航天、冶金、加工、涂层、制药、生物医学、环境和许多其他领域。

使用三维轮廓仪测量皮革表面

加工过的皮革

使用三维轮廓仪测量皮革表面

编写者

CRAIG LEISING

简介

一旦皮革的鞣制过程完成,皮革的表面就可以进行若干加工处理,以获得不同的外观和触感。这些机械加工可以包括拉伸、磨光、砂光、压花、涂层等。根据皮革的最终用途,有些可能需要更精确、可控和可重复的加工。

轮廓测量检查的重要性 对研发和质量控制的重要性

由于目视检测方法差异大且不可靠,能够准确量化微米和纳米尺度特征的工具可以改进皮革涂饰工艺。从量化的角度了解皮革的表面光洁度,可以改进数据驱动的表面加工选择,从而获得最佳的光洁度效果。NANOVEA 3D 非接触式 轮廓仪 NANOVEA 轮廓仪利用色度共焦技术测量皮革成品表面,具有市场上最高的重复性和准确性。由于探头接触、表面变化、角度、吸收或反射等原因,其他技术无法提供可靠的数据,而 NANOVEA 轮廓仪却能做到这一点。

测量目标

在这个应用中,NANOVEA ST400被用来测量和比较两个不同的但紧密加工的皮革样品的表面粗糙度。有几个表面参数是由表面轮廓自动计算出来的。

在这里,我们将重点关注表面粗糙度、窝点深度、窝点间距和窝点直径进行比较评估。

NANOVEA

ST400

结果:样本1

ISO 25178

高度参数

其他3D参数

结果:样本2

ISO 25178

高度参数

其他3D参数

深度比较

每个样品的深度分布。
观察到大量的深凹陷在
示例1.

俯视比较

窝点之间的间距 示例1 略小
示例2,但两者的分布相似

 平均直径比较

凹陷的平均直径分布相似。
示例1 显示平均直径略小。

结论

在这项应用中,我们展示了NANOVEA ST400三维轮廓仪如何精确地描述加工皮革的表面光洁度。在这项研究中,拥有测量表面粗糙度、窝点深度、窝点间距和窝点直径的能力,使我们能够量化两个样品的光洁度和质量之间的差异,这些差异通过目视检查可能并不明显。

总的来说,SAMPLE 1和SAMPLE 2之间的3D扫描的外观没有明显区别。然而,在统计分析中,这两个样品之间有明显的区别。与SAMPLE 2相比,SAMPLE 1含有更多直径较小、深度较大、窝点与窝点之间间距较小的窝点。

请注意,还可以进行更多的研究。特别感兴趣的领域可以通过集成AFM或显微镜模块进一步分析。NANOVEA 3D轮廓仪的速度范围从20毫米/秒到1米/秒,用于实验室或研究,以满足高速检测的需要;可以定制尺寸、速度、扫描能力、符合1级洁净室标准、索引传送带或用于在线或在线集成。

使用便携式三维轮廓仪的有机表面拓扑图

有机表面的地形

使用便携式三维轮廓仪

编写者

CRAIG LEISING

简介

大自然已经成为改进表面结构发展的重要灵感源泉。对自然界中发现的表面结构的了解导致了基于壁虎脚的粘附性研究,基于海参结构变化的耐药性研究,以及基于树叶的排斥性研究,等等。这些表面有许多潜在的应用,从生物医学到服装和汽车。要想取得这些表面上的突破,必须发展制造技术,使表面特征能够被模仿和复制。这一过程需要识别和控制。

便携式三维非接触式光学轮廓仪对有机表面的重要性

NANOVEA Jr25 便携式产品采用 Chromatic Light 技术 光学轮廓仪 具有测量几乎任何材料的卓越能力。这包括在自然界广泛的表面特征中发现的独特且陡峭的角度、反射和吸收表面。 3D 非接触式测量提供完整的 3D 图像,以便更全面地了解表面特征。如果没有 3D 功能,自然表面的识别将仅依赖于 2D 信息或显微镜成像,而这无法提供足够的信息来正确模拟所研究的表面。了解全面的表面特征,包括纹理、形状、尺寸等,对于成功制造至关重要。

在现场轻松获得实验室质量的结果的能力,为新的研究机会打开了大门。

测量目标

在这个应用中, NANOVEA Jr25是用来测量叶片的表面。有一个无穷无尽的表面参数列表,可以在三维表面扫描后自动计算。

在这里,我们将审查三维表面并选择
要进一步分析的感兴趣的领域,包括
量化和调查表面粗糙度、通道和地形情况

NANOVEA

JR25

测试条件

皱纹深度

沟壑的平均密度。16.471 cm/cm2
沟壑平均深度:97.428 μm
沟壑最大深度: 359.769 μm

结论

在这个应用中,我们已经展示了如何 NANOVEA Jr25便携式三维非接触式光学轮廓仪可以在现场精确地描述叶子表面的地形和纳米级的细节。从这些三维表面测量结果中,可以迅速确定感兴趣的区域,然后用无尽的研究清单进行分析(尺寸,粗糙度完成的纹理,形状形式地形,平整度翘曲度平面度,体积面积,阶梯高度 和其他)。可以很容易地选择一个二维截面来分析进一步的细节。有了这些信息,就可以用一套完整的表面测量资源对有机表面进行广泛调查。特别感兴趣的领域可以通过桌面模型上的集成AFM模块进一步分析。

NANOVEA 还提供用于现场研究的便携式高速轮廓仪和各种基于实验室的系统,并提供实验室服务。