Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.642448
Title: Evaluation of material surface profiling methods : contact versus non-contact
Author: Jaturunruangsri, Supaporn
ISNI:       0000 0004 5352 078X
Awarding Body: Brunel University
Current Institution: Brunel University
Date of Award: 2015
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
Accurate determination of surface texture is essential for the manufacturing of mechanical components within design specifications in engineering and materials science disciplines. It is also required for any subsequent modifications to physical properties and functional aspects of the object. A number of methods are available to characterize any surface through the measurement of roughness parameters that can then be used to describe surface texture. These methods may be divided into those in that direct contact is made with the surface and those where such contact is not required. This report describes two methods approach for the surface profiling of a quartz glass substrate for step height, and tungsten substrate for roughness measure. A stylus profilometer (contact method) and vertical scanning interferometer, (VSI) or (non-contact optical method) were used for step height and roughness parameter measurements. A comparison was made with nominal values assigned to the studied surface, and conclusions drawn about the relative merits of the two methods. Those merits were found to differ, depending on the parameters under consideration. The stylus method gave better agreement of step height values for dimensions greater than a micron. Both methods showed excellent accuracy at smaller dimensions. Both methods also provided accurate average roughness values, although the VSI data significantly overestimated 35% above the peak-to-valley parameter. Likely sources and nature of such differences are discussed based on the results presented, as well as on the previous comparison studies reported in the literature. Because of such method-specific differences, the multi-technique approach used in this work for accurate surface profiling appears to be a more rational option than reliance upon a single method. Both contact and non-contact approaches have problems with specific roughness parameters, but a hybrid approach offers the possibility of combining the strengths of both methods and eliminating their individual weaknesses.
Supervisor: Yang, Q. Sponsor: Department of Science Service, Thailand
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.642448  DOI: Not available
Keywords: Roughness ; Instrument ; Optical metrology
Share: