Open AccessTwo‐ and three‐dimensional profilometer assessments to determine titanium roughness
Author(s) -
Canabarro A.,
Figueiredo F.,
Paciornik S.,
DeDeus G.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
scanning
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.359
H-Index - 47
eISSN - 1932-8745
pISSN - 0161-0457
DOI - 10.1002/sca.20156
Subject(s) - profilometer , surface roughness , surface finish , materials science , titanium , scanning electron microscope , analytical chemistry (journal) , optics , composite material , metallurgy , chemistry , chromatography , physics
In this study, a comparative topography analysis of titanium (Ti) surfaces was performed using two‐ (2D) and three‐dimensional (3D) profilometers. Ti samples were either only sandblasted (SB) using Al 2 O 3 particles or were SB and received an additional chemical treatment using a solution of 4% HF (SLA). Samples with no treatment were used as a control group (C). Therefore, three different surfaces were evaluated: SB, SLA and C. The Ti surface topographies were evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. An Ra roughness measurement was performed on each Ti sample by 2D and 3D profilometers. Surface roughness was also characterized using amplitude, spatial and hybrid 3D parameters. 2D and 3D profilometer analyses produced very close results. Mean Ra values range from 0.19 to 0.25 (C, p <0.05), 0.84 to 0.99 (SLA, p <0.05) and 0.98 to 1 µm (SB, p >0.05). The statistically different Ra values depending on the surface studied may be explained by methodological and technical differences. Also, 3D profilometer seems to be the more appropriate analytical method for measuring the roughness of Ti surfaces because it also describes surface organization. SCANNING 31: 174–179, 2009. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.