Shape and size of microfine aggregates: X-ray microcomputed tomography vs. laser diffraction

Scattering matrices of martian dust analogs at 488nm and 647nm

“…Those differences could be responsible for the discrepancies in the retrieved effective radii and variances from both methods. We refer to Erdogan et al (2007), for a systematic study of the effect of particle irregularity on the retrieved size distributions of diffraction based commercial counters. In this article and in the Amsterdam-Granada Light Scattering Database, http://www.iaa.…”

Defining shape measures for 3D star-shaped particles: Sphericity, roundness, and dimensions

“…2 These seven were selected because of their widely differing mineralogy and size ranges, so we expect the results of this study to be generally applicable to many types of particles commonly encountered in engineering applications. The size ranges reported in the table, which can be defined in many ways for random-shape particles [24], were defined by measurement with ASTM standard sieves.…”

Shape Comparison between 0.4–2.0 and 20–60 μm Cement Particles

“…Details about the CT sample preparation are given in Erdo-g˘an et al 9 . The cement from the largest size range, number 7, was mixed with epoxy, after having first been sieved to remove particles o20 mm in size, as determined by the sieve opening.…”

“…Particle size techniques like laser diffraction interpret each size class as spherical particles. While it is known that nonspherical shape can bias the sizes found with this technique, 9 one cannot, at this point, get quantitative information about shape from this technique. [10][11][12][13] A recent study 14 has investigated particle shape differences between different cements that were ground similarly in a ball mill.…”