AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (2.5 MB)
Collect
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Research Article | Open Access

Profilometry and atomic force microscopy for surface characterization

Department of Oral Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, 310 Great King Street, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand
Department of Oral Diagnostic and Surgical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, 310 Great King Street, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand
Show Author Information

Abstract

Aim

This study aims to evaluate and compare the profilometry and atomic force microscopy (AFM) for characterization of biomaterial surfaces.

Method

The clinically commonly used titanium (Ti) was used as the specimen. Each of the specimen was prepared by different grits of sandpapers, including 2000, 1000, 800, 600, 400, 220, 180, and 100 grits. An unpolished Ti plate served as the control. Surface characterization of the Ti specimens was examined using profilometry and AFM.

Results

Both profilometry and AFM were capable of producing two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) topography. The scanning speed of profilometry (12 ± 5 s/image) was faster than that of AFM (250 ± 50 s/image) (p < 0.01). The resolution of AFM was relatively higher than profilometry. AFM produced more precise value, especially at nano-scale. When the Ti surface roughness was less than 0.2 μm, the results of surface roughness measured by profilometry and AFM were similar (mean difference = 0.01 ± 0.03, p = 0.81). When the Ti surface roughness was more than 0.3 μm, the surface roughness measured by profilometry was slightly higher than that by AFM (mean difference = 0.43 ± 0.15, p = 0.04).

Conclusion

Profilometry and AFM are both useful techniques for the characterization of biomaterial surfaces. Profilometry scanned faster than the AFM but produced less detailed surface topography. Both technologies provided similar measurement when the roughness was less than 0.2 μm. When the Ti surface roughness was more than 0.3 μm, the surface roughness measured by profilometry was slightly higher than that by AFM.

Graphical Abstract

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Nano TransMed
Article number: e9130017

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
Mei L, Guan G. Profilometry and atomic force microscopy for surface characterization. Nano TransMed, 2023, 2(1): e9130017. https://doi.org/10.26599/NTM.2023.9130017

5952

Views

821

Downloads

24

Crossref

Received: 10 March 2023
Revised: 20 March 2023
Accepted: 20 March 2023
Published: 30 March 2023
© The Author(s) 2023. Nano TransMed published by Tsinghua University Press.

The articles published in this open access journal are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.