The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

29 protocols using vision64

1

Surface Roughness Measurement Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Surface roughness was assessed employing a high-resolution non-contact optical profiler (Contour GT-K 3D Optical Microscope, Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA) in a three-dimensional manner. The samples were scanned at three distinct areas, and the arithmetical mean of the roughness profile (Ra) was obtained [29 (link)]. For the analysis and graphical representation, the Vision 64 software (Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA) was utilized, and the average roughness value was calculated based on three areas for each sample [29 (link)]. The measurements were done at the baseline and after the pH-cycling was completed.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Surface Modification and Characterization of Titanium

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The surface roughness of the control and NTAPP-treated groups was measured using an optical profilometer (Contour GT, Bruker, Tuscon, AZ, USA). The average of surface roughness (Ra and Sa values, μm) was confirmed using Vision64 software (Bruker, Tuscon, AZ, USA). Surface chemical composition of the control and NTAPP-treated groups was confirmed using X-ray photoelectron spectra (XPS; K-alpha, Thermo VG Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). A monochromatic Al Kα source was operated as the X-ray source (Al Kα line: 1486.6 Ev). The binding energy was referenced and calibrated to the C1s peak at 284.8 Ev. Detailed scans were taken for the C1s, O1s, N1s, and Ti2p regions. The contact angle and surface tension of the control and experimental groups were assessed using electro optics (Phoenix-300, SEO, Seoul, Korea). Specifically, 10 μL distilled polar (water) and non-polar (ethylene glycol, Sigma-Aldrich. St. Louis, MO, USA) liquid was dropped on the center of titanium specimens and left at room temperature. After 10 s, an image of the contact angle was measured and surface energy was calculated using Image XP (ver.5.9, SEO, Suwon, Korea) according to the Owens-Wendt method.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

3D Surface Analysis of Cellulose-Reinforced Foams

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Non-invasive 3D surface measurements of cellulose-reinforced AESO foams were examined by Bruker’s 3D optical microscope system (Bruker Nano GmbH, Berlin, Germany). Bruker Vision64 software provided a functional and streamlined graphical user interface, as well as comprehensive data collection and analysis.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Quantifying Wear Scar Dimensions via Interferometry

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
NPLEX white light interferometer (Bruker, USA) was used to obtain 3D images of the worn samples after the in situ tests in order to quantify the wear scar width and depth. The collected interference pattern was analyzed using Vision64 software (Bruker, USA). The wear was then quantified by measuring the width and depth of the wear scar at different locations. All the reported wear measurements in this work are based on the disc because of its lower hardness than the ball countersurface and thus its higher susceptibility to wear. As the presence of any tribofilm on the surface can affect the refractive index and thus the interference pattern, the wear measurements were performed after rinsing the tribological surfaces in heptane and then removing the tribofilm using a droplet of 0.05 M Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) solution in distilled water placed on the wear scar for at least 60 s.31,32 (link)
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Optical Surface Roughness Measurement

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A Bruker Contour GTK (Bruker Nano GmbH, Berlin, Germany) optical noncontact surface profiling system (Figure 6) was used to measure the surface roughness. This system utilizes noncontact scanning white-light interferometry for 3D surface configuration. The average roughness value (Ra) of each specimen was calculated. Three tracings were performed on each specimen at three different locations (2 mm from each other along a predetermined line across the specimen). The mean of these values was taken as the surface roughness value. The data were processed using the Vision 64 software (Bruker Nano GmbH, Berlin, Germany) accompanying the Bruker Contour GT-K system [30 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Surface Topography Analysis of Porcelain

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A sample from each type of porcelain in glazed or polished surface was scanned after KH immersion and thermocycling. The surface topography of six samples was represented graphically via white light interferometry (Contour GT-K1, Bruker Nano GmbH, Berlin, Germany) under 50× magnification with back scan and length parameters of 20 µm in VSI/VXI mode to obtain a 3D rendering of the sample surfaces. Vision 64 software (Bruker Nano GmbH, Berlin, Germany), which is part of the GT-K1 system, was used to copy the surface topography parameters.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Characterization of Implant Surface Topography

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Prior to the surface observation, sample surfaces were sputtered-coated with a 20 nm thick gold-palladium. The surface morphology was characterized by using a scanning electron microscope with an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy instrument (SEM-EDS, MIRA4 LMH, TESCAN, Brno, Czech Republic) at an acceleration voltage of 15 kV. The surface roughness was determined by an optical profiler (Bruker Countor GT K 3D, Billerica, MA, USA). Four specimens per group were measured with vertical scanning interferometry with a 1× magnification lens, a field of view of 0.4 × 0.4 mm, and a scan speed of ×1. According to the manufacturer’s instructions, the ‘VXI’ mode was used to reduce the noise level in the flat area. Moreover, the tested areas were 3D reconstructed for visualizing the surface topographies. According to ISO 25178: 2012 [45 ], the height, spatial, and hybrid surface texture parameters were chosen to describe the characteristics of the implant topographies. Based on the surface scales of the craniomaxillofacial implants, the arithmetical mean height (Sa), root mean square height (Sq), texture aspect ratio (Str), and developed interfacial area ratio (Sdr) were selected, as previously reported [46 ]. All parameters were determined and analyzed using the Vision 64 software (Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Surface Roughness Analysis of Specimens

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The surface roughness analysis of the specimens was implemented according to ISO 25178 (non-contact type), which is related to the analysis of 3D areal surface textures. The measurements were performed prior to and after the treatments using a Vertical Scanning Interference (VSI) microscope (Contour GTI 3D, Bruker Corp, MA, USA). One image was obtained (magnification ×20) from each specimen at the four quadrants of each specimen’s surface, corresponding to a surface of 0.317 × 0.238 mm2. Vision64™ software (Bruker Corp, MA, USA) was used to acquire the data and compute the arithmetical mean height of the surface (Sa) and the maximum average between highest peaks and highest valleys of the surface (Sz) of each image. The values of the four images of each specimen were averaged and the mean values were calculated.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Characterization of PEM Films

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Dry film thickness was measured by using a Dektak XT (Bruker Corporation) profilometer. Three samples (PLL/HA)24 films deposited on silicon were scratched to create a physical step and three measurements per sample were acquired with the software Vision 64® (v 5.4, Bruker Corporation, USA). Scans of 30 s over a length of 1000 μm were performed with a stylus of 12.5 μm in radius and a force set to 1 mg. Thus, dry film thickness is an average value of 9 measurements.
The air dried PEM films coated on PLGA planar substrates were imaged by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) using a FEI-Quanta 250 SEM-FEG in high vacuum at 15 keV using the Everhart-Thornley detector.
The amounts of BMP-2 initially loaded into the PEM films and subsequently released after several washes with the Hepes-NaCl buffer were determined as previously described (1) by fluorescence spectrometry (TECAN Infinite 1000, Austria) using 5% of carboxyfluorescein labeled BMP-2 (BMP-2CF) as a tracer. Knowing the total surface of the PLGA (see part 2.1), the total surface area of the PEM films was roughly estimated to be 2.6 cm2, with the internal and external sides of the PLGA tubes being coated by the film. This value was used to convert the initial and final surface-adsorbed amounts, ΓI and ΓR (μg/cm2), respectively, to absolute amounts (μg).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Characterization of Fabricated Lens Array

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The surface roughness of the fabricated single lens array with a small physical aperture and a radius of curvature in a sub-µm range is crucial. Although the surface roughness must be below less than 1 nm for high quality X-ray mirrors, the surface roughness required for refractive lens is below 100 nm31 . We measured the roughness of the side wall of the fabricated nickel structures with an optical three-dimensional surface profiler (ContourGT, Brucker, USA) using the vertical scanning interferometry (VSI) mode with a green luminous source. The measured area was 130 µm × 170 µm, the average roughness (Ra) of the surface was evaluated to be 36 nm ± 5 nm using Vision-64 (Bruker) surface analysis software.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!