This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles

for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

Designation: D4417 − 21

Standard Test Methods for

Field Measurement of Surface Profile of Blast Cleaned
Steel1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation D4417; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
This standard has been approved for use by agencies of the U.S. Department of Defense.

1. Scope 2. Referenced Documents

1.1 These test methods cover the description of techniques 2.1 ASTM Standards:2
for measuring the profile of abrasive blast cleaned surfaces in D7127 Test Method for Measurement of Surface Roughness
the field, shop, and laboratory. There are other techniques of Abrasive Blast Cleaned Metal Surfaces Using a Por-
suitable for laboratory use not covered by these test methods. table Stylus Instrument
1.2 Method B may also be appropriate to the measurement E177 Practice for Use of the Terms Precision and Bias in
of profile produced by using power tools. ASTM Test Methods
E691 Practice for Conducting an Interlaboratory Study to
NOTE 1—The Method B procedure in this standard was developed for Determine the Precision of a Test Method
use on flat surfaces. Depending on the radius of the surface, the results
could have greater variability with lower values and averages. 2.2 SSPC Standard:3
SSPC-PA 17 Procedure for Determining Conformance to
1.3 SSPC standard SSPC-PA 17 provides additional guid- Steel Profile/Surface Roughness/Peak Count Require-
ance for determining conformance with surface profile require- ments
ments.
2.3 ASME Standard:4
1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the ASME B46.1-2002 Surface Texture, Surface Roughness
standard. The values given in parentheses are for information Waviness and Lay
only.
2.4 ISO Standards:5
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the ISO 4287: 1997 Geometrical Product Specifications
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the (GPS)—Surface Texture: Profile Method—Terms,
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro- Definitions, and Surface Parameters
priate safety, health, and environmental practices and deter-
mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 3. Terminology
1.6 This international standard was developed in accor- 3.1 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom-
2
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
contact ASTM Customer Service at [email protected]. For Annual Book of ASTM
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
the ASTM website.
3
Available from Society for Protective Coatings (SSPC), 800 Trumbull Dr.,
Pittsburgh, PA 15205, http://www.sspc.org.
1 4
These test methods are under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D01 on Available from American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), ASME
Paint and Related Coatings, Materials, and Applications and are the direct International Headquarters, Two Park Ave., New York, NY 10016-5990, http://
responsibility of Subcommittee D01.46 on Industrial Protective Coatings. www.asme.org.
5
Current edition approved Jan. 1, 2021. Published January 2021. Originally Available from International Organization for Standardization (ISO), ISO
approved in 1984. Last previous edition approved in 2020 as D4417 – 20A. DOI: Central Secretariat, BIBC II, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier,
10.1520/D4417-21. Geneva, Switzerland, http://www.iso.org.

Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States

1
 D4417 − 21
3.1.1 deadband, n—that distance above and below the mean 5. Significance and Use
line that a continuous stylus trace line must cross in both 5.1 The height of surface profile has been shown to be a
directions (up and down) to count as a single peak. factor in the performance of various coatings applied to steel.
3.1.2 evaluation length, n—a sequence of five consecutive For this reason, surface profile should be measured prior to
stylus sampling lengths. coating application to ensure conformance of a prepared
3.1.3 H, n—the average of the maximum peak-to-valley surface to profile requirements specified by the manufacturer of
height distances obtained by measuring the thickness of replica a protective coating or the coating job specification.
tape. NOTE 2—The peak count/peak density has been shown to be a factor in
3.1.3.1 Discussion—HL is the thickness measurement ad- the performance of various coatings applied to steel. According to
justed for tape non-linearity. research performed by Roper, Weaver and Brandon6, an increase in peak
count can improve the adhesion of some coatings to the prepared steel, as
3.1.4 Pd (peak density), n—the number of peaks per unit well as provide greater resistance to corrosion undercutting once the
area obtained from burnished replica tape. coating becomes damaged in service.
NOTE 3—Optical microscope methods serve as a referee method for
3.1.5 peak, n—a high point in a surface profile. surface profile measurement methods A and B. Profile depth designations
3.1.6 Rpc (peak count), n—the number of peak/valley pairs, are based on the concept of mean maximum profile (h max); this value is
determined by averaging a given number (usually 20) of the highest peak
per unit of length, extending outside a “deadband” centered on to lowest valley measurements made in the field of view of a standard
the mean line of a stylus trace. measuring microscope. This is done because of evidence that coating
3.1.6.1 Discussion—For the purpose of Rpc, a peak is performance in any one small area is primarily influenced by the highest
defined relative to an upper and lower height threshold. This is surface features in that area and not by the average roughness.7
a single number (peak count threshold) and is the distance from 6. Apparatus
a lower threshold to an upper threshold centered on the mean
line of the profile. 6.1 Method A—A profile comparator consisting of a number
of areas (each approximately one square inch in size), usually
3.1.7 Rt, n—the vertical distance between the highest peak side by side, with a different profile or anchor pattern depth.
and the lowest valley within any given stylus evaluation length. Each area is marked giving the nominal profile depth in mils or
3.1.8 sampling length, n—the nominal distance parallel to micrometres. Typical comparator surfaces are prepared with
the surface within which surface parameters are determined. steel shot, steel grit, or sand or other nonmetallic abrasive,
3.1.9 surface profile, n—the height of the major peaks since the appearance of the profile created by these abrasives
relative to the major valleys. may differ. The comparator areas are used with or without
magnification of 5 to 10 power.
3.1.10 traversing length, n—seven sampling lengths com-
prising the evaluation length and the stylus pre-travel and 6.2 Method B—A depth micrometer fitted with a pointed
post-travel segments. probe. The probe is typically machined at a 60° included angle
with a nominal radius of 50 µm and exerting a minimum force
4. Summary of Test Method of 75 g. The base of the instrument rests on the tops of the
peaks of the surface profile while the spring loaded tip projects
4.1 The methods are: into the valleys.
4.1.1 Method A—The abrasive cleaned surface is compared
to commercial replicas of various surface profile depths pre- 6.3 Method C—A replica tape8 containing a compressible
pared by different blast media and the range determined. The foam attached to a flexible, incompressible plastic substrate of
geometry of the specific abrasive cleaned surface can also be uniform thickness. A burnishing tool, having a spherical
observed. rounded end approximately 8 mm (0.3 in.) in diameter, is used
to impress the foam face of the tape into the surface to be
4.1.2 Method B—The depth of profile relative to the peaks is
measured, to create a reverse replica. The thickness of the
measured using a fine-pointed probe at a number of locations
reverse replica is then measured using a thickness gage
and the average of the maximum peak-to-valley distances (or
specifically designed for use with this replica tape. This
alternatively, the average peak-to-valley distances) is deter-
sequence of steps is illustrated in Fig. 1.
mined.
6.3.1 Thickness gages suitable for use in this application
4.1.3 Method C—A composite plastic tape is impressed into
have plane parallel circular contact surfaces with the top
the blast cleaned surface forming a reverse image of the profile.
contact surface that touches the incompressible polyester side
The average maximum peak-to-valley distance can be mea-
sured using a suitable thickness gage. The average of these
distances can be determined from a group of measurements. 6
The Effect of Peak Count or Surface Roughness on Coating Performance, JPCL
Specially designed optical readers can also determine the peak Vol. 22, No. 6, pp 52-64.
7
John D. Keane, Joseph A. Bruno, Jr., Raymond E. F. Weaver, “Surface Profile
density from the tape replica. for Anti-Corrosion Paints,” Oct. 25, 1976, Steel Structures Painting Council, 4400
4.1.4 Method D—A trace measurement is taken by a por- Fifth Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15213.
8
table stylus surface roughness instrument to obtain maximum The sole source of supply of suitable replica tape, Press-O-Film, known to the
committee at this time is Testex, 8 Fox Lane, Newark, DE 19711. If you are aware
peak-to-valley distance. The average of these distances is
of alternative suppliers, please proved this information to ASTM International
determined from a group of five traces. These devices can also Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
determine peak count information. responsible technical committee,1 which you may attend.

2
 D4417 − 21

1) The tape consists of a compressible foam coated onto an incompressible polyester substrate.
2) In use, the tape is compressed (“burnished”) against the roughened surface to be measured.
3) After burnishing, the foam retains an impression of the surface.
4) Subsequent measurement of the replica’s thickness, minus that of the substrate, yields surface roughness.
FIG. 1 Illustration of Replica Tape Principle of Measurement

having a diameter of 6.3 mm (0.25 in.), a closing force of 100 7.4 Method D:
grams-force 615 g and an accuracy of at least 65 µm (0.2 7.4.1 Precision reproductions of standard surface profiles
mils). such as those used by the manufacturer of the equipment, or
6.3.2 Peak density Pd is extracted from burnished replica described in their operational literature, may be used as
tape with an instrument that counts bright spots on a photo- calibration standards for the apparatus.
graph taken by a digital image sensor (camera).
6.4 Method D—An apparatus consisting of a portable skid- 8. Preparation of Apparatus
ded or non-skidded electronic surface roughness measurement 8.1 Method A:
instrument (“tester”) capable of measuring Rt in compliance 8.1.1 Select the comparator standard appropriate for the
with ISO 4287 and Rpc in compliance with ASME B46.1. The abrasive used for blast cleaning.
apparatus should have a vertical range of at least 300 µm (12
mil) and permit a sampling length of 2.5 mm (0.1 in.) and an 8.2 Method B:
evaluation length of 12.5 mm (0.5 in.) (laboratory experience 8.2.1 Prior to use verify that the gage reads zero by placing
suggests this vertical range is a practical requirement to meet it on a piece of plate float glass. Hold the gage by its base and
the provisions of 6.4.1). press firmly against the glass. Adjust the instrument to zero if
6.4.1 The apparatus should include a stylus with a tip radius necessary.
of 5 µm (0.2 mil), and permit recording of Rt in the range 10 8.3 Method C:
to 150 µm (0.4 to 6 mil) and Rpc up to 180/cm (450/in.). 8.3.1 Confirm that the target profile is within the primary
6.4.2 Surface deviations are sensed by the stylus and con- profile measurement range for replica tape of 20 to 115 µm.
verted to electrical signals within the device. Internal process- Grades (thicknesses) of tape permit measurement outside this
ing converts these signals into standard surface characteriza- range, but these additional grades should only be used to check
tion parameters, which are then displayed or printed. measurements near the ends of the primary range.
7. Calibration and Standardization 8.4 Method D:
8.4.1 Set the apparatus to display the chosen parameters in
7.1 Method A:
accordance with the manufacturers’ instructions.
7.1.1 Comparators require careful handling and if any
8.4.2 The evaluation length should be set to five sampling
surface wear is detected the comparator should be discarded.
lengths. The sampling length and evaluation length should be
7.2 Method B: set to 2.5 mm (0.1 in.) and 12.5 mm (0.5 in.), respectively.
7.2.1 Before use, each instrument’s accuracy shall be veri- 8.4.3 The traversing length of the apparatus should be set to
fied by the user in accordance with the instructions of the include pre-travel and post-travel segments, usually equal to
manufacturer, employing suitable standards and, if necessary, one sampling length at the beginning and one sampling length
any deficiencies found shall be corrected. at the evaluation length. These portions of a traverse are
7.3 Method C: discarded by the instrument in its calculation of surface
7.3.1 Before use, each replica tape micrometer’s accuracy parameters.
shall be verified by the user in accordance with the instructions 8.4.4 The low frequency (“long wavelength” or “cutoff”)
of the manufacturer, employing suitable standards and, if filter should be set to “Gaussian” or “Gaussian 50 %.” In
necessary, any deficiencies found shall be corrected. general, the default setting will be compliant.

3
 D4417 − 21
8.4.5 If the apparatus has a high frequency (“short wave- between the interested parties. Discard any unusually high
length” or “Ls”) filter, it should be set to “off.” instrument readings that cannot be repeated in an area.
8.4.6 The apparatus should be adjusted (if necessary) to a 10.3.2.1 At each location make ten readings and record the
deadband width (C1 = –C2) in the range 0.5 to 2.0 µm (20 to maximum value. Then determine the average for all the
80 µin.). The choice of deadband for profiles as large as those location maximum values and report it as the profile height of
discussed in this standard will have little effect on the mea- the surface.
surements. In general, the default setting will be compliant. 10.3.2.2 An alternate method is to make ten readings at each
8.4.7 The accuracy of the apparatus should be checked location and determine the average. Then determine the aver-
regularly using a calibration block available from the equip- age for all the locations and report it as the profile height of the
ment manufacturer using their written procedure and at their surface.
recommended interval.
NOTE 5—The ‘average of the location maximums’ procedure in 10.3.2.1
has been shown to produce results that correlate well with methods A, C,
9. Preparation of the Sample and D in this standard, based on theory and experimental data. The
alternate ‘average of the averages’ procedure in 10.3.2.2 has been shown
9.1 Use any metal surface that, after blast cleaning, is free of to provide lower results than the other methods in this standard, but
loose surface interference material, dirt, dust, and abrasive reduces the impact of outliers that the operator may fail to discard.
residue.
10.4 Method C:
9.2 Select an area of the surface to be tested that is visibly 10.4.1 Follow manufacturer instructions to obtain the first
free from obvious defects such as scratches, deep marks, or (of two) profile height readings (H) and, optionally, the first (of
other construction or corrosion defects. two) peak density (Pd) readings.
9.3 Using a stiff nylon bristle brush, remove any dust or 10.4.2 The average of two “readings” is a “profile measure-
abrasive particles from the surface in the selected sample ment.” Manufacturer recommendations provide guidance on
evaluation area. whether these two readings should both be obtained with the
same tape grade or two different grades.
10. Procedure 10.5 Method D:
10.1 There are four methods to measure the surface profile 10.5.1 Obtain an initial trace measurement (2 parameters),
of the blast-cleaned steel. then four additional trace measurements taken in the compass
10.1.1 Warning—Avoid touching abrasive blast cleaned directions from the original measurement and about 3 cm (1
steel with an unprotected hand as moisture, oil, salts, or other in.) away for a total of 5 traces, avoiding obvious surface
contaminants, or combinations thereof, from human skin may defects.
transfer to the surface and initiate corrosion. 10.5.2 If the stylus is prevented from making a complete
NOTE 4—SSPC standard SSPC-PA 17 describes a procedure for
trace due to a physical interference, such as a deep scratch on
determining the number of locations to characterize the surface and for the surface, move the apparatus to a close adjacent area away
determining compliance with specified profile range. from the obvious defect and repeat the trace.
10.2 Method A: 10.5.3 Record the 10 parameters resulting from these five
10.2.1 Place the comparator directly on the surface to be traces (2 parameters per trace).
measured and compare the roughness of the prepared surface 10.5.4 Calculate the five measurement average for each of
with the roughness on the comparator segments. This can be the two parameters (Rt and Rpc).
done with the unaided eye, under 5 to 10 power magnification.
When using magnification, the magnifier should be brought 11. Report
into intimate contact with the replica, and the depth of focus 11.1 At a minimum, the report should contain the following
must be sufficient for the standard and surface to be in focus items:
simultaneously. 11.1.1 Type of instrument used including manufacturer,
10.2.2 Select the comparator segment that most closely model number, serial number, and date of calibration.
approximates the roughness of the surface being evaluated or, 11.1.2 Report the number of locations measured, and the
if necessary, the two segments to which it is intermediate. approximate total area covered.
10.2.3 Evaluate the roughness at a sufficient number of 11.1.3 For Method A, for each location, the surface profile is
locations to characterize the surface as specified or agreed upon determined by comparing the abrasive cleaned surface between
between the interested parties. Report the range of results from two replica plates.
all locations as the surface profile. 11.1.4 For Method B, the average of the maximum values at
10.3 Method B: each location, or if the alternate method is used, the average of
10.3.1 To take readings, hold the gage firmly against the 10 readings at each location and a notation that the alternate
prepared substrate. Do not drag the instrument across the method was used.
surface between readings, or the spring-loaded tip may become 11.1.5 For Method C, the average of each pair of replica
rounded leading to false readings. tape readings (H or HL) and, optionally, Pd, at each location.
10.3.2 Measure the profile at a sufficient number of loca- 11.1.6 For Method D, the sampling length, evaluation
tions to characterize the surface, as specified or agreed upon length, and the values of the five trace measurements for each

4
 D4417 − 21
of the parameters measured (Rt and Rpc) and their averages, criteria should be used for judging, at the 95 % confidence
for each location. Note whether a skidded or non-skidded level, the acceptability of results:
instrument is used. 12.2.2.1 Repeatability—Two results, each the mean of four
replicates, obtained by the same operator should be considered
12. Precision and Bias suspect if they differ by more than 54 %.
12.1 Test Method A: 12.2.2.2 Reproducibility—Two results, each the mean of
12.1.1 Applicability—Based on measurements of profiles on four replicates, obtained by operators in different laboratories
surfaces of eight steel panels, each blast cleaned with one of should be considered suspect if they differ by more than 79 %.
eight different abrasives to a white metal degree of cleaning, 12.3 Method C and D:
having known ratings of profile height ranging from 37 µm (1.5 12.3.1 The precision of Test Method C is based on an
mils) to 135 µm (5.4 mils), the correlation coefficient for Test intralaboratory study conducted in 2011. Eleven laboratories
Method A was found to be 0.75 and the coefficient of participated in this study, analyzing materials representing five
determination was found to be 0.54. different property types. Each “test result” reported represents
12.1.2 Precision—In an interlaboratory study of Test an individual determination and the participating labs reported
Method A in which two operators each running two tests on three replicate test results for each material type. Practice E691
separate days in each of six laboratories tested eight surfaces was followed for the design and analysis of the data; the details
with a broad range of profile characteristics and levels, the are given in ASTM Research Report: RR:D01-11779 (Test
intralaboratory coefficient of variation was found to be 20 % Method C) and RR:D01-116910 (Test Method D and Test
with 141 df and the interlaboratory coefficient was found to be Method D7127).Values in Tables 1 and 2 appearing in this
19 % with 40 df, after rejecting three results for one time section are taken from the foregoing reports.
because the range between repeats differed significantly from 12.3.2 The reproducibility standard deviation (SR) docu-
all other ranges. Based on these coefficients, the following mented in Table 1 (Test Method C) and profile reproducibility
criteria should be used for judging, at the 95 % confidence standard deviation (Profile SR), documented in Table 2 (Test
level, the acceptability of results: Method D) for each of five levels of profile, is key to assessing
12.1.2.1 Repeatability—Two results, each the mean of four whether a given measurement is statistically different from
replicates, obtained by the same operator should be considered either an upper or lower profile limit established in advance by
suspect if they differ by more than 56 %. the interested parties.
12.1.2.2 Reproducibility—Two results, each the mean of 12.3.3 The term “reproducibility standard deviation” is used
four replicates, obtained by operators in different laboratories as specified in Practice E177.
should be considered suspect if they differ by more than 54 %. 12.3.4 Similarly, the Peak Count Standard Deviation (PC
12.2 Test Method B: SR), also documented in Table 2, is key to assessing whether a
12.2.1 Applicability—Based on measurements of profiles on given measurement is statistically different from either an
surfaces of eight steel panels, each blast cleaned with one of upper or lower peak count limit established in advance by the
eight different abrasives to a white metal degree of cleaning, interested parties.
having known ratings of profile height ranging from 37 µm (1.5 12.3.5 A measured profile height or peak count that is within
mils) to 135 µm (5.4 mils), the correlation coefficient for Test either limit of a pre-specified range by an amount equal to SR
Method B was found to be 0.99 and the coefficient of has a 68 % probability of satisfying specification. A profile
determination was found to be 0.93. within 1.5 SR of a specified limit has an 86 % probability of
12.2.2 Precision—In an interlaboratory study of Test satisfying specification and a profile within 2.0 SR of a
Method B in which two operators, each running two tests on specified limit has a 95 % probability of satisfying the speci-
separate days, in each of five laboratories tested eight surfaces fication. Fig. 2 is a plot, using the data in Table 1, of peak count
with a broad range of profile characteristics and levels, the versus measured profile.
intralaboratory coefficient of variation was found to be 19 % 12.3.6 The precision statement was determined through
with 113 df and the interlaboratory coefficient was found to be statistical examination of 160 test results, reported by eleven
28 % with 32 df, after rejecting three results for one time laboratories, on five surfaces of differing profile covering the
because the range between repeats differed significantly from approximate profile range of 30 to 110 µm (1.2 to 4.4 mils).
all other ranges. Based on these coefficients, the following The five surfaces bore the internal control code numbers 102,
114, 124, 124, and 119.
TABLE 1 Profile Measurement Statistics 12.4 Bias—At the time of this study, there was no generally
accepted reference method suitable for determining the bias for
Replica Tape
Reproducibility this test method, therefore no formal statement regarding bias
Average Replica Standard Deviation is being made.
Coded Surface Tape Profile (mils)
ID Number (mils) SR
9
102 1.29 0.12 Supporting data have been filed at ASTM International Headquarters and may
114 2.65 0.23 be obtained by requesting Research Report RR:D01-1177. Contact ASTM Customer
124 2.79 0.18 Service at [email protected].
10
121 3.75 0.15 Supporting data have been filed at ASTM International Headquarters and may
119 4.22 0.18 be obtained by requesting Research Report RR:D01-1169. Contact ASTM Customer
Service at [email protected].

5
 D4417 − 21
TABLE 2 Test Method D Profile Measurement Statistics
Stylus Instrument Stylus Instrument
Profile – Rt Peak Count
Reproducibility Reproducibility
Stylus Instrument Standard Deviation Stylus Instrument Standard Deviation
Coded Surface Average Profile – Rt (mils) Average Peak Count (mils)
ID Number (mils) Sr (mils) Sr
102 1.18 0.076 174.8 8.4
114 2.50 0.210 140.2 7.8
124 2.91 0.286 159.3 12.9
121 4.06 0.345 92.1 6.7
119 4.52 0.356 51.3 3.5

TABLE 3 Comparison of Test Methods C and D for Bias

Estimation
Test Method
Replica Tape Average D7127
Reproducibility Test Method Rerpoducibility
Average Standard D7127 Standard Devia-
Coded Replica Deviation Determined Pro- tion
Surface Tape Profile (mils) file Rt (mils)
ID Number (mils) SR (mils) SR
102 1.29 0.12 1.18 0.076
114 2.65 0.23 2.50 0.210
124 2.79 0.18 2.91 0.286
121 3.75 0.15 4.06 0.345
119 4.22 0.18 4.52 0.356

profiles for the five surfaces measured using both methods has
a slope of 0.9. Over the tested range, the straight line fit
suggests that profiles measured with the two methods nowhere
differ by more than about 8 µm (0.3 mils).
NOTE 6—The test methods measure different values and the qualitative
rating on which the applicability was determined also measures a different
value. The mode is determined with the comparator of Test Method A. The
height of a single valley below a plane at the level of the highest
surrounding peaks is measured with the fine pointed probe of Test Method
B. The distance from the bottoms of many of the deepest valleys to the
FIG. 2 Electronic Roughness Testers – Peak Count tops of the highest peaks (maximum profiles) are measured with the
composite plastic of Test Method C. The height of a single peak above an
12.4.1 Nevertheless, testing in support of Test Method D adjacent valley below is measured with a microscope for the qualitative
rating that is compared with each of the methods in correlation calcula-
relied on measurements of the same roughness test panels used tions. Because the results for the microscope and for the fine pointed probe
to determine precision for method C of this standard. Com- are measurements to an individual valley, the readings range over much
parison of data obtained using these two procedures gives a broader limits than the results of the tape or the comparator.
measure of relative method bias. Table 3 presents these data.
12.4.2 Fig. 3 is a plot of replica tape-determined profile 13. Keywords
against the Portable-Stylus-Instrument-determined parameter 13.1 abrasive; abrasive blast cleaning; anchor pattern; peak
Rt showing good agreement within the error associated with count; peak density; peak height; surface profile; surface
each of the two methods. A least-square straight line fitted to roughness

6
 D4417 − 21

Comparison method (horizontal axis) is that referenced in Test Method D, describing use of electronic stylus surface roughness testers. Grit blasted panels were
measured using both method and plotted against one another. Each plotted point’s x-value and horizontal error bar was deduced from 99 electronic stylus measurements
(Test Method D). Each point’s y-value and vertical error bar was deduced from 33 replica tape measurements (Test Method C).
FIG. 3 Illustration of Replica Tape Surface Roughness Precision and Bias

ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.

This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.

This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org). Permission rights to photocopy the standard may also be secured from the Copyright Clearance Center, 222
Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, Tel: (978) 646-2600; http://www.copyright.com/