Abstract
Abstract
Segmentation of profile features is mainly described in two standards: ISO 4287 for profile elements, used to calculate RSm and Rc, and ISO 12085 for profile motifs, used to calculate R&W parameters. These methods are commonly criticised for their unstability, although they provide valuable results when used in an adequate context [25]. A new profile segmentation based on watersheds is now introduced in ISO 21920-2 and ISO 16610-45, adapted from areal segmentation [ISO 25178-2, [22]. The areal feature parameters, chap. 3 in Characterisation of Areal Surface Texture, Leach Ed. Springer], with the hope to solve most of the existing problems. However, there are very few comparisons between these methods and almost no recommendations for the configuration of the watershed segmentation. This paper discusses the validity of applying segmentation methods on certain profiles and proposes a validity criterion. It then investigates algorithmic differences between the watershed segmentation and the classical Motifs method, compares the results between the two methods, and suggests guidelines and good practices to obtain significant correlations.
Subject
Materials Chemistry,Surfaces, Coatings and Films,Process Chemistry and Technology,Instrumentation
Reference27 articles.
1. GPS—surface texture: profile method;Terms, definitions and surface texture parameters,1997
2. The case of surface texture parameter RSm;Scott;Meas. Sci. Tech.,2006
3. Crossing-the-line-segmentation as a basis for RSm and Rc evaluation;Seewig;Surf. Topog. Metr. Prop.,2020
4. GPS—surface texture: profile method;Flowchart for PSm, RSm, WSm and Pc, Rc, Wc,2020
5. GPS—surface texture: profile method—part 2;Terms, Definitions and Surface Texture Parameters,2020
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献