An international comparison of surface texture parameters quantification on polymer artefacts using optical instruments

Abstract

The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the repository url above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.For more information, please contact eprints@nottingham.ac.uk CIRP Template v4.0 An international comparison of surface texture parameters quantification on polymer artefacts using optical instruments G. Tosello (2) An international comparison of optical instruments measuring polymer surfaces with arithmetic mean height values in the sub-micrometre range has been carried out. The comparison involved sixteen optical surface texture instruments (focus variation instruments, confocal microscopes and coherent scanning interferometers) from thirteen research laboratories worldwide. Results demonstrated that: (i) agreement among different instruments could be achieved to a limited extent; (ii) standardized guidelines for uncertainty evaluation of areal surface parameters are needed for users; (iii) it is essential that the performance characteristics (and especially the spatial frequency response) of an instrument is understood prior to a measurement.Optical, Surface, Comparison

On the Application of Replica Molding Technology for the Indirect Measurement of Surface and Geometry of Micromilled Components

“…The widths measurements of the micromilled pockets were carried out using a focus variation optical instrument (InfiniteFocus from Alicona Imaging GmbH, Raaba, Austria). This type of microscope is suitable for acquiring three-dimensional micro geometries but not for characterizing roughness of the order of tens of nanometers [ 37 ], which is typical of micromilled samples. Table 5 shows the main characteristics of this instrument.…”

On-machine and in-process surface metrology for precision manufacturing

“…These specification standards, requirements and interpretations mean that the traceability, and the uncertainty estimation, of texture (parameter) measurements can be complex [89] [135]. Even in ideal environmental conditions on dedicated stand-alone measurement equipment, uncertainties of better that 1% are difficult to achieve [89], while a 5-10% uncertainty is already an optimistic estimate for optical profile measurements [226]. Methods and standards to calibrate surface texture measuring instruments are extensively described elsewhere [134].…”

Correlating nano-scale surface replication accuracy and cavity temperature in micro-injection moulding using in-line process control and high-speed thermal imaging

“…In this study, the uncertainty U was calculated following ISO 15530-3 [36], which relies on the use of a calibrated artefact to achieve traceability of measurement. In this study, a calibrated injection moulded roughness standard introduced by Tosello et al [37] and having nominal Ra roughness of 100 nm was used. Three uncertainty contributions were taken into account for both Sq and Sdq measurements: ucal, as the uncertainty of reference AFM measurements on the calibrated artefact [37], up, introduced by the measurement procedure and calculated as standard deviation of 20 repeated measurements on the artefact and uw, associated with material and manufacturing variations of the actual measurand.…”