| ²é¿´: 3078 | »Ø¸´: 12 | ||
| µ±Ç°Ö»ÏÔʾÂú×ãÖ¸¶¨Ìõ¼þµÄ»ØÌû£¬µã»÷ÕâÀï²é¿´±¾»°ÌâµÄËùÓлØÌû | ||
PEEK_polymerгæ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
|
[ÇóÖú]
Image J ͳ¼Æ¿×³ß´ç ÒÑÓÐ2È˲ÎÓë
|
|
·¢ÅÝ |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
¹ú×ÔÈ»ÆÀÉóÒâ¼û
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
ϵͳ²é²»µ½
ÒѾÓÐ11È˻ظ´
ÓжàÉÙÈËÊǽñÌì²éϵͳ֪µÀ½á¹ûµÄ£¿
ÒѾÓÐ18È˻ظ´
Ϊʲô×ÊÖúÊý¸÷´ó¸ßУ¶¼´´Ð¸ߣ¬×Ô¼ºÉêÇëÔõô¾ÍÕâôÄÑ
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
ÓÐûÓÐÈÔûÊÕµ½ÐÅÏ¢µÄ
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
µ¼Ê¦Í²ۣºÎÒÔõô̯ÉÏÁËÕâô¸ö¼«Æ·Ñо¿Éú£¡
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
»ù½ð²»ÖУ¬¹²Ãã
ÒѾÓÐ11È˻ظ´
Â鷳ר¼ÒÃÇ¿´¿´ÆÀίÃǵÄÒâ¼û£¨F¿ÚÃæÉÏ£©
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
2026ÄêÒ¶ÆóËï»ù½ð
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
¹ú×ÔÈ»ÃæÉϸ´ÅÌ~»¶ÓÌÖÂÛ
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´
dota
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 19 (СѧÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 1743.5
- É¢½ð: 3711
- ºì»¨: 9
- Ìû×Ó: 1258
- ÔÚÏß: 1385.2Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 302890
- ×¢²á: 2006-12-03
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: Chem & Biomed Imaging
5Â¥2015-11-24 11:04:46
dota
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 19 (СѧÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 1743.5
- É¢½ð: 3711
- ºì»¨: 9
- Ìû×Ó: 1258
- ÔÚÏß: 1385.2Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 302890
- ×¢²á: 2006-12-03
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: Chem & Biomed Imaging
¡¾´ð°¸¡¿Ó¦Öú»ØÌû
¸Ðл²ÎÓ룬ӦÖúÖ¸Êý +1
|
1) Set scale. Enlarge your image, draw a line of the exactly same length to the scale bar. For you image, 81.5 pixel = 20 um) 2) Adjust threshold, which showed reasonable segmentations. 3) Analysis Particles. Based on the visional pore sizes, I would say areas between 100 um^2 and 600 um^2 should be the correct pores. 4) Copy the results into the Excel to calculate the average and the stDev. The 45 pores were detected out. The pore perimeter is 25.6 +/- 9.8 um. Some pore might be missed due to either the irregular shapes or the low image contrasts (not good segmentations) Cheers! |
2Â¥2015-11-24 09:36:04
dota
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 19 (СѧÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 1743.5
- É¢½ð: 3711
- ºì»¨: 9
- Ìû×Ó: 1258
- ÔÚÏß: 1385.2Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 302890
- ×¢²á: 2006-12-03
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: Chem & Biomed Imaging
3Â¥2015-11-24 09:38:56
PEEK_polymer
гæ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 19
- Ìû×Ó: 8
- ÔÚÏß: 8.8Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 3414039
- ×¢²á: 2014-09-13
- רҵ: ¸ß·Ö×Ó²ÄÁϽṹÓëÐÔÄÜ
4Â¥2015-11-24 10:12:29









»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥
Ì«¸ÐлÁË£¡£¡»¹ÓÐÒ»¸öÎÊÌ⣬¾ÍÊÇãÐÖµÒªÔõôµ÷²ÅËãºÏÊÊ£¿Auto ºÃÏñ²»Ì«¶Ô
30