Rough surface characterization and comparison of scatter measurements and models

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Stover
Keyword(s):  
Rough Surface ◽  
Surface Characterization

Reduced Rough-Surface Parametrization for Use With the Discrete-Element Model

2009 ◽  
Vol 131 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen T. McClain ◽  
Jason M. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Heat Transfer ◽  
Rough Surface ◽  
Surface Characterization ◽  
Rough Surfaces ◽  
Roughness Element ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Element Model ◽  
Discrete Element ◽  
Diameter Distribution ◽  
Discrete Element Model

The discrete-element model for flows over rough surfaces was recently modified to predict drag and heat transfer for flow over randomly rough surfaces. However, the current form of the discrete-element model requires a blockage fraction and a roughness-element diameter distribution as a function of height to predict the drag and heat transfer of flow over a randomly rough surface. The requirement for a roughness-element diameter distribution at each height from the reference elevation has hindered the usefulness of the discrete-element model and inhibited its incorporation into a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver. To incorporate the discrete-element model into a CFD solver and to enable the discrete-element model to become a more useful engineering tool, the randomly rough surface characterization must be simplified. Methods for determining characteristic diameters for drag and heat transfer using complete three-dimensional surface measurements are presented. Drag and heat transfer predictions made using the model simplifications are compared to predictions made using the complete surface characterization and to experimental measurements for two randomly rough surfaces. Methods to use statistical surface information, as opposed to the complete three-dimensional surface measurements, to evaluate the characteristic dimensions of the roughness are also explored.

Reduced Rough-Surface Parameterization for Use With the Discrete-Element Model

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen T. McClain ◽  
Jason M. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Heat Transfer ◽  
Rough Surface ◽  
Surface Characterization ◽  
Rough Surfaces ◽  
Roughness Element ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Element Model ◽  
Discrete Element ◽  
Diameter Distribution ◽  
Discrete Element Model

The discrete-element model for flows over rough surfaces was recently modified to predict drag and heat transfer for flow over randomly-rough surfaces. However, the current form of the discrete-element model requires a blockage fraction and a roughness-element diameter distribution as a function of height to predict the drag and heat transfer of flow over a randomly-rough surface. The requirement for a roughness element-diameter distribution at each height from the reference elevation has hindered the usefulness of the discrete-element model and inhibited its incorporation into a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver. To incorporate the discrete-element model into a CFD solver and to enable the discrete-element model to become a more useful engineering tool, the randomly-rough surface characterization must be simplified. Methods for determining characteristic diameters for drag and heat transfer using complete three-dimensional surface measurements are presented. Drag and heat transfer predictions made using the model simplifications are compared to predictions made using the complete surface characterization and to experimental measurements for two randomly-rough surfaces. Methods to use statistical surface information, as opposed to the complete three-dimensional surface measurements, to evaluate the characteristic dimensions of the roughness are also explored.

Theoretical Approach to Rough Surface Characterization for Silica Materials

2019 ◽  
Vol 123 (47) ◽  
pp. 28707-28714
Author(s):  
Timur Aslyamov ◽  
Aleksey Khlyupin ◽  
Vera Pletneva ◽  
Iskander Akhatov
Keyword(s):  
Rough Surface ◽  
Theoretical Approach ◽  
Surface Characterization ◽  
Silica Materials

scholarly journals Simplified micrometric surface characterization of different implant surfaces available on the Brazilian market

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Luiz Carlos do Carmo Filho ◽  
Ana Paula Pinto Martins ◽  
Amália Machado Bielemann ◽  
Anna Paula da Rosa Possebon ◽  
Fernanda Faot
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Chemical Composition ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Rough Surface ◽  
Surface Characterization ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Treatment Techniques ◽  
Surface Contaminants ◽  
Cervical Portion

Aim: This study characterized the implant surfaces available on the Brazilian market in terms of topography, chemical composition, and roughness. Methods: The following brands were selected according to their surfaces: Kopp (Ko), Signo Vinces (Sv), Neodent (Ne), Osseotite (Os) NanoTite (Nt), SIN (Si), Titanium Fix (Tf), conventional Straumann (Str), Active SLA (SLA). The morphological analysis and the alloy impurities and implant surface contaminants were analyzed by SEM-EDS. Surface roughness parameters and 3-D reconstructions were obtained by laser microscopy (20x). Two distinct areas were evaluated: i) the cervical portion (no surface treatment), and ii) the middle third (treated surface). Results: The characterization of the implant surfaces by SEM showed morphological differences between the thread geometries and surface morphology at 800x and 2000x magnification. The EDS elemental analysis showed a predominance of titanium (Ti) for all implants. The SLA surface showed only peaks of Ti while other implants brands showed traces of impurities and contaminants including Al, C, PR, F, Mg, Na, Ni, O, P, and SR. The implant surface roughness in the cervical portion did not exceed Ra 0.5–1.0 μm, constituting a minimally rough surface and obtaining acceptable standards for this region. Only Nt, Str, and SLA presented Ra above 2 μm in the middle third area showing a rough surface favorable for osseointegration. Conclusion: This study concluded that there is no established standard for morphology, chemical composition and implant surface roughness that allows a safe comparison between the available dental implant surfaces. National implant brands generally contain more impurities and surface contaminants than their international counterparts and were consequently more sensitive to the surface treatment techniques.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document