Skip to main content

Abstract

A surface may be defined as the boundary that separates an object from the surrounding medium (ANSI/ASME B46.1, 1985; ISO 4287, 1996). Topography, as used in this book, refers to the description of the surface (and is used interchangeably with microtopography1 because of the small size of the areas used in the assessment). The science of surface topography analysis is primarily concerned with describing a surface in terms of its features. Then the knowledge gained about the geometry of the surface is used to control the surface production process and / or to predict the performance of the component in its functional environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Not everyone agrees with the validity of this classification. Some researchers, for example, Scott (1986) have called for a radical re-think of this classification and indeed of the measurement approach.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Waviness tends to be more functionally significant in some applications and hence the designed surface condition would be waviness, with roughness being a secondary undesired component.

    Google Scholar 

  3. For this reason, O’Connor (1990) suggested that a detailed examination of waviness pattern during component manufacture can give an indication of process malfunction or deterioration.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Surfaces can also be classified into isotropic (uniform in character) or anisotropic (possessing lay or directionality).

    Google Scholar 

  5. The ability to resolve a surface into smaller and smaller (or larger and larger) scales has caused many workers, mainly beginning with Mandelbrot (1977) and Sayles and Thomas (1978) to suggest that fractal characterization might offer the best method of describing engineering surfaces.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Nicolau was a General in the French army and was unable to complete work on his prototype due to the outbreak of the second world war in 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  7. This is a limited classification only. See Chapter 3 for a more comprehensive treatment of techniques.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Even more confusing is the fact that some of the parameters used the same symbol but were defined in completely different manners in different standards; e.g. Rz is defined differently in DIN 4768 and ISO 4287/1 (see Dong, Mainsah and Stout, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  9. M is the number of data points in the x direction, N is the number of data points in the y direction.

    Google Scholar 

  10. M system is the measurement system based on mean line references — for a detailed description of the M- and E-systems, see Shunmugam (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  11. This is the basis of the E system for measuring roughness of waviness.

    Google Scholar 

  12. The 10-point height parameter as defined by ISO emphasizes the extreme values in the whole assessment (i.e. the five highest and lowest in the whole surface) whilst that in DIN (usually known as the maximum depth parameter) is calculated using the highest and lowest values from 5 different sampling lengths. In the same measurement, ISO R z tends to be larger than DIN z .

    Google Scholar 

  13. For a more comprehensive treatment of surface parameters, the reader is referred to Whitehouse, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  14. We here use the common, but not universal, notation as a way of emphasizing that the spectra must decay with frequency (i.e. the slope is necessarily negative).

    Google Scholar 

  15. The usual symbol for topothesy is now A and is used in other sections of this book.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Strictly, the point corresponding to that at which the slope of the power spectrum changed.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mainsah, E., Stout, K.J., Thomas, T.R. (2001). Surface measurement and characterization. In: Mainsah, E., Greenwood, J.A., Chetwynd, D.G. (eds) Metrology and Properties of Engineering Surfaces. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3369-3_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3369-3_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-4732-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-3369-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics