Three-dimensional scanning electron microscopy used as a profilometer for the surface characterization of polyethylene-coated paperboard
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract In food packaging, low-density polyethylene (PE) coating is applied to paperboards to act as a functional barrier and to provide the smoothness required to enhance printability. These characteristics are related to the material’s surface roughness, the parameter monitored during the manufacturing process. Measurement of surface roughness using optical profilometry has gained importance in the paper industry. The optical instruments used to measure surface roughness are limited spatially by the relationship with the light wavelength at which they operate. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) is an alternative for overcoming the spatial resolution limitation, and the use of stereo-photogrammetry on SEM images can be seen as an alternative profilometry technique to measure surface roughness. In this investigation, the surface topography of industrially manufactured high-quality PE-coated paperboard was studied, comparing the SEM stereo-photogrammetry technique with a reference profilometry method, i. e., chromatic confocal microscopy (CCM). We found close agreement between the calculated surface roughness and the results of the techniques used and compared them according to the new ISO 25178 Geometric Product Specifications. We concluded that SEM stereo-photogrammetry provides comparable accurate alternative profilometry method for characterizing the surface roughness of PE-coated paperboard in the micrometer scale.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Surface Roughness and Optical Measurements · Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection · Material Properties and Processing
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Electronic Design Department , 6311 Mid Sweden University , Holmagatan 10 , Sundsvall , Sweden
Department of Design , 6311 Mid Sweden University , Örnsköldsvik , Sweden
Department of Industrial Engineering (DIIn) , University of Salerno , Fisciano , SA , Italy
References (18)
Show source-provided references
1. Alam, A., Thim, J., Manuilskiy, A., O’Nils, M., Westerlind, C., Lindgren, J., Liden, J. (2011) Investigation of the surface topographical differences between the Cross Direction and the Machine Direction for newspaper and paperboard. Nord. Pulp Pap. Res. J. 26(4):468–475.10.3183/npprj-2011-26-04-p468-475 ↗
2. Béland, M.-C., Bennett, J.M. (2000) Effect of local microroughness on the gloss uniformity of printed paper surfaces. Appl. Opt. 39(16):2719.10.1364/AO.39.002719 ↗
3. Blateyron, F. (2011) Chromatic Confocal Microscopy. In: Optical Measurement of Surface Topography. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. pp. 71–106.10.1007/978-3-642-12012-1_5 ↗
4. Chinga, G., Johnsen, P.O., Dougherty, R., Berli, E.L., Walter, J. (2007) Quantification of the 3D microstructure of SC surfaces. J. Microsc. 227(3):254–265.10.1111/j.1365-2818.2007.01809.x ↗
5. Dahlström, C., Uesaka, T. (2009) New insights into coating uniformity and base sheet structures. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48(23):10472–10478.10.1021/ie900819c ↗
6. Duparré, A., Ferre-Borrull, J., Gliech, S., Notni, G., Steinert, J., Bennett, J.M. (2002) Surface characterization techniques for determining the root-mean-square roughness and power spectral densities of optical components. Appl. Opt. 41(1):154.10.1364/AO.41.000154 ↗
7. Enomae, T., Onabe, F. (1997) Characteristics of Parker Print-Surf roughness as compared with Bekk smoothness. J. Fiber Sci. Technol. 53(3):86–95.10.2115/fiber.53.86 ↗
8. Enomae, T., Onabe, F., Usuda, M. (1993) Application of new profilometry using topographic scanning electron microscope to paper surface topography. Tappi J. 76(1):85–90.
9. Glon, F., Flys, O., Lööf, P.J., Rosén, B.G. (2014) 3D SEM for surface topography quantification – A case study on dental surfaces. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 483(1):012026.10.1088/1742-6596/483/1/012026 ↗
10. Hawkes, P.W., Reimer, L. Scanning Electron Microscopy: Physics of Image Formation and Microanalysis. Springer Series in Optical Sciences. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013.
11. Howell, P.G. (1978) The derivation of working formulae for SEM photogrammetry at low instrumental magnifications. Scanning 1(4):230–232.10.1002/sca.4950010403 ↗
12. ISO 25178-3 (2012) Geometrical product specifications (GPS) – Surface texture: Areal Part 3: Specification operators. International Standards Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
13. Jordan, H.J., Wegner, M., Tiziani, H. (1998) Highly accurate non-contact characterization of engineering surfaces using confocal microscopy. Meas. Sci. Technol. 9(7):1142–1151.10.1088/0957-0233/9/7/023 ↗
14. Leach, R., Haitjema, H. (2010) Bandwidth characteristics and comparisons of surface texture measuring instruments. Meas. Sci. Technol. 21(3):032001.10.1088/0957-0233/21/3/032001 ↗
15. Marinello, F., Bariani, P., Savio, E., Horsewell, A., De Chiffre, L. (2008) Critical factors in SEM 3D stereo microscopy. Meas. Sci. Technol. 19(6):065705.10.1088/0957-0233/19/6/065705 ↗
16. Mettänen, M., Hirn, U. (2015) A comparison of five optical surface topography measurement methods. Tappi J. 14(1):27–38.10.32964/10.32964/TJ14.1.27 ↗
17. Pouchou, J.L., Boivin, D., Beauchêne, P., Le Besnerais, G., Vignon, F. (2002) 3D reconstruction of rough surfaces by SEM stereo imaging. Mikrochim. Acta 139(1-4):135–144.10.1007/s006040200052 ↗
18. Vernhes, P., Bloch, J.F., Mercier, C., Blayo, A., Pineaux, B. (2008) Statistical analysis of paper surface microstructure: A multi-scale approach. Appl. Surf. Sci. 254(22):7431–7437.10.1016/j.apsusc.2008.06.023 ↗