Hi Amanda,

Don't know if there exist a "standard" for your application and I'd say it's up to you to choose the shape parameters you want to work with. Typically, in your first pictures, you're measuring a "projected length" whereas in your second picture, you're measuring a "total length" / "deployed length".

Both parameters have merits depending on what you want to correlate them to.

As an example, we're simulating the shedding of micro glassfibers from glassfibers filters and we decided to measure the deployed length because that would be a harsher measurement to predict fuel injectors clogging by those fibers.

On the other hand, if you want to keep the original shape in your pictures because you believe that it is more representative of the circular volume that could be actually occupied by the fiber, use the projected length.

I suggest you try and get hold of one of the books by Russ to learn more about stereology and shape parameters in image analysis : http://drjohnruss.com/books.html

Amanda Dawson Your image software should be able to draw a continous line. A good microscope with camera usually comes with such software which can draw continous line for curved and curly objects and also give the measurement.

Based on your image (nylonb), I would go with longest length of the fibre

Hi Amanda, Please find attached two papers from the Canadian West Coast that may be of interest to you. Kindest regards ! Remi

I am in the same concern right now but I believe measuring the longest length would be the most appropriate way. I am making exceptions for entangled microfibers, which are ver hard to estimate in terms of longest length.

I would bet probably Juan Carlos Alvarez Zeferino , Arely Areanely Cruz Salas can comment on that. Experts on the field and they have also done some great research on stadarized methodologies on MPs.