Relationships between 3D roughness parameters and visuotactile perception of surfaces of maritime pinewood and MDF

Abstract

The objective measurement and subjective estimation of the surface quality by the consumers are important issues for furniture production and marketing. The objective of the present study is to find suitable (objective) roughness parameters that are linked to human sensation. Maritime pinewood and medium-density fiberboard (MDF) made from the same species are in focus. The roughness was measured by means of a 3D confocal profilometer and 13 independent 3D roughness parameters were computed. The quality of surfaces was modified through sanding, whereas the grit size of sand papers ranged between P60 and P320. The applied pressure and sanding time were controlled. The subjective estimation of the surface aspects was performed by several individuals through sensorial analysis. Biplots of several roughness parameters versus tactile rank revealed in the case of MDF a significant correlation to arithmetical average roughness S a and valley material component S r2 . For pinewood, the parameters arithmetical average roughness S a and texture aspect ratio S tr correlated best to tactile rank.

Cost, sustainability and surface roughness quality – A comprehensive analysis of products made with personal 3D printers

“…So far the research hypothesis is that the stimulus on the fingers can be compared with a vibration of a given frequency [18]. Any stimulus below the finger discriminative capacity is not detectable [21]. Therefore, the profiles detected by the profilometer must be filtered according to the human discriminative capacity for vibrotactile frequencies.…”

“…According to Hollins et al [19] the scanning velocity of the fingers is on average 90 mms -1 and to Ye et al [20], the vibration is perceptible by fingers through vasoconstriction with a frequency greater than 63 Hz. Meanwhile, the discriminative capacity of human fingers equals the ratio of the scanning velocity and the frequency [21]. Therefore, the roughness profiles were filtered by Gaussian high-pass filter with a cutoff length 3 of 800 μm (0.03") and evaluation length was chosen to be five times the sampling length 4 [27].…”

“…Their definitions are listed in Table 7. The same parameters were used in studies [21] and [30]. Measurement of the symmetry of the surface deviations about the mean reference plane.…”

Wood machining with a focus on French research in the last 50 years

“…The last method, although widespread today, is progressively being replaced by no-contact methods (laser perthometer, confocal scanning, etc.) that are able to prevent alteration of the surface during measurement (Ramananantoandro et al 2005). Surface roughness criteria for homogeneous materials such as steel are not very relevant for wood.…”

“…Moreover, it is still difficult to separate the influence of the wood structure itself and that of the machining operation, although for some authors, valley depth parameters seem particularly well suited to characterising the features of wood anatomy (Cool 2011;Khazaeian 2006). Many studies have focused on the relationship between roughness parameters and consumer visual tactile perception (Fujiwara et al 2005;Ramananantoandro 2005;Ramananantoandro et al 2013), both on medium-density fibreboard (MDF) and sanded solid wood. Some roughness parameters linked to peak and valley configuration (SRk or SRpk in the ISO standard for surface roughness analysis) show significant correlation with perception (Fig.…”