Inconsistent interfacial tension

[BasvdVelde]

Dear Opendrop user,

When using opendrop to analyze the interfacial tension we get a lot of inconsistent results from analyzing the same photo twice (See pictures below).

It seems that the software 'integrates' the droplet the same. However, the interfacial tension is very different. Does anybody have a clue why this is happening, and more importantly, how to fix this?

Thank you in advance!

[ricotabor]

The processing coordinates and Bond number appear to be the same for both analyses, indicating that one of the user input parameters (or needle selection/image scaling) was input incorrectly. I would check that these are consistent between the two measurements, as the image analysis aspect appears to have functioned correctly. What were the values used?

On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 at 22:32, BasvdVelde notifications@github.com wrote:

Dear Opendrop user,

When using opendrop to analyze the interfacial tension we get a lot of inconsistent results from analyzing the same photo twice (See pictures below).

[image: Example 1] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/51747754/59351298-5b313e80-8d1e-11e9-859a-4fad4f426217.JPG

[image: Example 2] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/51747754/59351299-5b313e80-8d1e-11e9-86bb-733be56529fe.JPG

It seems that the software 'integrates' the droplet the same. However, the interfacial tension is very different. Does anybody have a clue why this is happening, and more importantly, how to fix this?

Thank you in advance!

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/jdber1/opendrop/issues/16?email_source=notifications&email_token=AC5DXH2PPV3MPS6FDXVR6IDP2DUG3A5CNFSM4HXIPN32YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4GZBTDJQ, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC5DXHZS74UKZJD3ZJL67U3P2DUG3ANCNFSM4HXIPN3Q .

[BasvdVelde]

The processing coordinates and Bond number appear to be the same for both analyses, indicating that one of the user input parameters (or needle selection/image scaling) was input incorrectly. I would check that these are consistent between the two measurements, as the image analysis aspect appears to have functioned correctly. What were the values used? … On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 at 22:32, BasvdVelde @.***> wrote: Dear Opendrop user, When using opendrop to analyze the interfacial tension we get a lot of inconsistent results from analyzing the same photo twice (See pictures below). [image: Example 1] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/51747754/59351298-5b313e80-8d1e-11e9-859a-4fad4f426217.JPG [image: Example 2] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/51747754/59351299-5b313e80-8d1e-11e9-86bb-733be56529fe.JPG It seems that the software 'integrates' the droplet the same. However, the interfacial tension is very different. Does anybody have a clue why this is happening, and more importantly, how to fix this? Thank you in advance! — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#16?email_source=notifications&email_token=AC5DXH2PPV3MPS6FDXVR6IDP2DUG3A5CNFSM4HXIPN32YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4GZBTDJQ>, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC5DXHZS74UKZJD3ZJL67U3P2DUG3ANCNFSM4HXIPN3Q .

Thank you for your fast reply! The physical input parameters were the same in both cases (drop density 1860, continuous density 998 and needle diameter 0.7176 mm.). We tried to keep the drop and needle selection as close as possible between the two. However, as this is a manual selection we can never make the same selection twice?

[ricotabor]

In this case I do not have a good answer for you without further investigation. Can you please provide the original image? I can test then whether we notice any problems. cheers, Rico

On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 10:36, BasvdVelde notifications@github.com wrote:

The processing coordinates and Bond number appear to be the same for both analyses, indicating that one of the user input parameters (or needle selection/image scaling) was input incorrectly. I would check that these are consistent between the two measurements, as the image analysis aspect appears to have functioned correctly. What were the values used? … <#m-3633226522410140411> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 at 22:32, BasvdVelde @.***> wrote: Dear Opendrop user, When using opendrop to analyze the interfacial tension we get a lot of inconsistent results from analyzing the same photo twice (See pictures below). [image: Example 1] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/51747754/59351298-5b313e80-8d1e-11e9-859a-4fad4f426217.JPG [image: Example 2] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/51747754/59351299-5b313e80-8d1e-11e9-86bb-733be56529fe.JPG It seems that the software 'integrates' the droplet the same. However, the interfacial tension is very different. Does anybody have a clue why this is happening, and more importantly, how to fix this? Thank you in advance! — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#16 https://github.com/jdber1/opendrop/issues/16?email_source=notifications&email_token=AC5DXH2PPV3MPS6FDXVR6IDP2DUG3A5CNFSM4HXIPN32YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4GZBTDJQ>, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC5DXHZS74UKZJD3ZJL67U3P2DUG3ANCNFSM4HXIPN3Q .

Thank you for your fast reply! The physical input parameters were the same in both cases (drop density 1860, continuous density 998 and needle diameter 0.7176 mm.). We tried to keep the drop and needle selection as close as possible between the two. However, as this is a manual selection we can never make the precise same selection twice?

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/jdber1/opendrop/issues/16?email_source=notifications&email_token=AC5DXH7M4UAHFMUU77PCK7TP2IBITA5CNFSM4HXIPN32YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODXS6VMQ#issuecomment-501607090, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC5DXH6FSNO3VE2NFMLI7PTP2IBITANCNFSM4HXIPN3Q .

[BasvdVelde]

Dear Rico,

I uploaded the original picture (see below).

Parameters used: needle diameter: 0.7176 Drop density: 1680 (FC-72) Continuous density: 997 (Water)

Edit: In the beginning I got this slice indices must be integers problem which I fixed by changing the exatract_profile.py (https://github.com/jdber1/opendrop/issues/13)

Can you also show how you make the selection, so I'm sure I am doing it correct

Thank you for your help!

Bas

[eugenhu]

Cleaning up old issues..