Fractal Fract. 2025 , 9 , 123
10of 14
Table4. Results of FD analysis of printing paper samples.
RMAD , μ m
MIU
FMAD
FD
Sample
Mean
COV 9.5% 5.1% 5.8% 5.7% 5.6% 6.8% 6.4% 9.2% 7.6% 3.6% 6.9% 6.6%
Mean 0.187 0.230 0.249 0.162 0.179 0.119 0.279 0.272 0.218 0.144 0.203 0.250
COV
Mean
COV 9.9% 17.0%
Mean
COV 3.6% 3.3% 3.5% 4.6% 4.3% 4.9% 5.6% 3.4% 2.8% 5.5% 5.3% 3.7%
P&W1 P&W2 P&W3 P&W4 P&W5 P&W6 P&W7 P&W8 P&W9 P&W10 P&W11 P&W12
0.32 0.50 0.45 0.30 0.44 0.30 0.53 0.49 0.51 0.51 0.42 0.35
21.9% 0.029 21.4% 0.039 25.2% 0.036 18.8% 0.027 21.4% 0.038 15.8% 0.025 20.4% 0.043 16.0% 0.037 21.9% 0.036
1.27 1.13 1.13 1.16 1.21 1.23 1.19 1.18 1.18 1.14 1.19 1.25
9.7%
13.9% 11.6% 12.4% 16.1% 13.5% 10.5%
9.0%
0.034
8.2% 9.2%
19.3% 0.037 17.3% 0.031
15.1%
Figure11. Comparison of FD with RMAD.
Figure 12 illustrates the relationship between FD and surface friction. The results indicate a weak correlation between the two parameters, suggesting that FD and surface friction exhibit independent characteristics. This highlights the distinct nature of FD as a parameter that captures surface complexity, which is not directly related to conventional frictional properties.
Figure12. Comparison of FD with MIU ( a ) and FD with FMAD ( b ).
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker