PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16854362

Recent progress in axisymmetric drop shape analysis (ADSA).

Abstract

Axisymmetric Drop Shape Analysis (ADSA) is a powerful technique for the measurement of interfacial properties from the shape of drops/bubbles. It relies on the best fit between theoretical curves with known surface tension values and an experimental profile. Despite the general success of ADSA, inconsistent results are obtained for nearly spherical drop shapes. Since the source of this and possible other limitations are unknown, the entire ADSA technique including hardware and software is systematically scrutinized. The hardware consists of electronics, and optical and mechanical components that generate a digital image of a drop. Since the quality of images has a considerable impact on the surface tension measurements, general guidelines for the use of hardware components are developed to enhance the quality of the image. The scrutiny of the software of ADSA is significantly more involved. The software consists of image analysis and numerical schemes. One of the key elements is the modularization of the software, since a generic software package is not suitable for all experimental situations. As a result, a more versatile image analysis module is introduced. In this context a variety of state-of-the-art edge detection techniques are studied, and a more robust technique is adopted. The two existing ADSA numerical schemes are also compared systematically, and the more efficient one is implemented. It is shown that even this superior numerical scheme has convergence problems for nearly spherical drops. This difficulty is due to numerical truncation and accumulation of round-off errors, which are the ultimate limitation of all numerical schemes. This intrinsic limitation becomes more pronounced as drops become closer to spherical in shape, but there were no objective criteria available to define "close to spherical drops". Therefore, a quantitative criterion called shape parameter is introduced to identify the range of applicability of ADSA. The improved version of ADSA not only determines the interfacial properties more accurately but, through the shape parameter, also provides an a priori knowledge of the accuracy of the results.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Hoorfar, A W Neumann. 2006-07-18. Recent progress in axisymmetric drop shape analysis (ADSA).. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2006.06.001

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗