# Experiments with rough surfaces

## To Do

* Identify good driving for S1 and QC12 formation
* Find good driving for density map calibration **DONE**
* Measure roughness change after long experiments
* Try S1 and QC12 self assembly

## MEMO
* Good driving for calibration black sandblast **$f=53$ Hz, $A_o=140$ $mV_{pp}$ Sinu. Experiment nov/dic 2023
* Good driving for calibration glass craters **$f=120$ Hz, $A_o=240$ $mV_{pp}$ Sinu
* Good driving initial shaking **$f=53$ Hz, $A_o=150$/$A_o=160$ $mV_{pp}$ Sinu
* exposure time dense systemL: 47379. Exposure time dilute system or for high rate acquisition: 5575.
* Regular acquisition rate 0.0333 fps, acq rater for calibration 0.25 fps, acq rate for high acq rate 50 fps.

#### State points for S1 formation

| $x_S$ $\downarrow$ --- $\phi$ $\rightarrow$ | 0.8576 | 0.8476 | 0.8376 |0.8276 |
| ------------------------------------------- | ---- | ----- | ---- |---- |
| 0.509 |State1 | State2 | State3 |State4 |

[comment]: <> (| 0.524 | State4 | State3 | |)
[comment]: <> (| 0.55 | | State5 | State6 |)

#### State points for QC12 formation (TO BE DONE!)

## Supporting info

Measuring plate acceleration without sample at $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$.

Oscilloscope : $\Delta V=330$ mV (Peak to Peak). This means $\Gamma=1.66$
Multimeter : $V_{RMS}=126$ mV. This means 356 mV Peak to Peak then $\Gamma=1.79$

## Experimental runs

## S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 2 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8484 \pm 0.0005$, $x_S=0.512 \pm 0.0008$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 07/06/2024)
FOLDER RAW DATA:
acquisition0706_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State2

STATE POINT acq0706_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1264.17 Nsmallstd=3.8342013509986663
Nbigmean=1202.94 Nbigstd=0.23748684174075835
xSmean=0.5124080822244867 xSstd=0.0007651273609791492
phimean=0.8483598689655927 phistd=0.0005372457977013532

## S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 2 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi= \pm 0.0007$, $x_S= \pm 0.0009$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 06/06/2024)

NOT GOOD, probably it is because I started from a configuration with a lot of hexagonal

## S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 4 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8300 \pm 0.0007$, $x_S=0.5134 \pm 0.0009$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 05/06/2024)

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition0506_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State4

STATE POINT acq0506_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1240.88 Nsmallstd=4.561315599692702
Nbigmean=1175.97 Nbigstd=0.1705872210923198
xSmean=0.5134269073307229 xSstd=0.0009157872982892216
phimean=0.830045081926865 phistd=0.0006507606104650056

## S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 3 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8395 \pm 0.0006$, $x_S=0.5118 \pm 0.0009$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 04/06/2024)

Calibration done today

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition0406_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State3

STATE POINT acq0406_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1248.78 Nsmallstd=4.561973257264887
Nbigmean=1190.97 Nbigstd=0.1705872210923198
xSmean=0.5118458193070502 xSstd=0.0009143100861616719
phimean=0.8395257104236982 phistd=0.0006444689650546841

## S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 6 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8201 \pm 0.0006$, $x_S=0.5127 \pm 0.0007$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 23/05/2024)

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition2305_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State6

STATE POINT acq2305_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1223.08 Nsmallstd=3.6432952117554236
Nbigmean=1162.63 Nbigstd=0.5030904491242107
xSmean=0.5126680710995792 xSstd=0.0007434289185213163
phimean=0.8201092715611114 phistd=0.000600880133907574

## S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 5 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8096 \pm 0.0007$, $x_S=0.512 \pm 0.001$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 21/05/2024)

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition2105_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State5

STATE POINT acq2105_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1204.06 Nsmallstd=4.805871409016268
Nbigmean=1148.56 Nbigstd=0.5161395160225576
xSmean=0.5117933429740247 xSstd=0.001026271423642819
phimean=0.8095954081470977 phistd=0.0006767197678585644

## S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 1 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.858 \pm 0.001$, $x_S=0.513 \pm 0.001$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 17/05/2024)

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition1705_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State1

STATE POINT acq1705_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1280.87 Nsmallstd=6.732985964637084
Nbigmean=1216.35 Nbigstd=0.7794228634059949
xSmean=0.5129148713215428 xSstd=0.0013281477488110084
phimean=0.8581811857324151 phistd=0.0010258222826067078

## S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 3 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8399 \pm 0.0007$, $x_S=0.5140 \pm 0.0008$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 15/05/2024)

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition1505_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State3

STATE POINT acq1505_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1257.81 Nsmallstd=4.225387556189373
Nbigmean=1189.46 Nbigstd=0.6232174580353154
xSmean=0.5139631245416176 xSstd=0.0008446804551059552
phimean=0.839943193180775 phistd=0.0006959991419833928

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 3 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8397 \pm 0.0007$, $x_S=0.5140 \pm 0.001$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 02/05/2024)

I did again calibration the second of may. This experiment was good.

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition0205_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State3

STATE POINT acq0205_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1255.76 Nsmallstd=4.737341026356452
Nbigmean=1189.47 Nbigstd=0.5376802023508025
xSmean=0.5135531580370004 xSstd=0.0009638999660491802
phimean=0.8396625442370542 phistd=0.0006915437642532146

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 3 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8376 \pm 0.0007$, $x_S=0.509 \pm 0.001$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 30/04/2024)

THIS EXPERIMENT WAS PROBLEMATIC

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition3004_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State3

da verificare con printastatepoint

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 4 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.828 \pm 0.001$, $x_S=0.512 \pm 0.001$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 29/04/2024)
Ricomincio nuova serie dopo calibrazione
FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition2904_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State4

STATE POINT acq2904_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1231.33 Nsmallstd=6.95421454946567
Nbigmean=1174.64 Nbigstd=0.5919459434779496
xSmean=0.5117770596651149 xSstd=0.0014005582620782984
phimean=0.8279688382486924 phistd=0.001069558727595741

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 4 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8297 \pm 0.0007$, $x_S=0.513 \pm 0.001$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 25/04/2024)

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition2504_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State4

STATE POINT acq2504_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1238.75 Nsmallstd=4.114304315434142
Nbigmean=1175.93 Nbigstd=0.9407975340103735
xSmean=0.513006597604821 xSstd=0.0008598825564280592
phimean=0.8297253376078995 phistd=0.0007666630467532691

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 3 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8392 \pm 0.0007$, $x_S=0.511 \pm 0.001$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 24/04/2024)

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition2404_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State3

STATE POINT acq2404_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1246.8382352941176 Nsmallstd=5.114024241694273
Nbigmean=1190.8441176470587 Nbigstd=0.38630312425118746
xSmean=0.5114829748628212 xSstd=0.0010276721525006491
phimean=0.8391842829554375 phistd=0.0007488285058327861

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 2 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.847 \pm 0.001$, $x_S=0.509 \pm 0.001$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 23/04/2024)

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition2304_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State2

STATE POINT acq2304_Amid_SmallBig_pl_WithMask.csv
Nsmallmean=1250.3235294117646 Nsmallstd=7.2487972340274505
Nbigmean=1204.8101604278074 Nbigstd=0.47256663614755634
xSmean=0.5092647552948864 xSstd=0.0014594853141319784
phimean=0.8474710315774144 phistd=0.0010319153001039077

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 1 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.8576 \pm 0.0007$, $x_S=0.509 \pm 0.001$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 04/04/2024)

FOLDER RAW DATA: acquisition0404_fps0.0333_spacer_startHomo_Amid_MEDIUM_ProLabo_Sinu_f53_A110_State1

Nsmallmean=1266.1121794871794 Nsmallstd=5.17237289874597
Nbigmean=1218.9839743589744 Nbigstd=0.1255739616933316
xSmean=0.5094800444272146 xSstd=0.0010230416077351245
phimean=0.8575916940647491 phistd=0.0007223381403810813

NON BENDED PLATE

Start

End


### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 1 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.851 \pm 0.001$, $x_S=0.500 \pm 0.002$. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=110$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 05/12/2023)
Nsmallmean=1218.545842217484 Nsmallstd=8.449809726769088
Nbigmean=1219.5820895522388 Nbigstd=0.6881413306249659
xSmean=0.4997815212063029 xSstd=0.0017332042765744852
phimean=0.8512842310187041 phistd=0.0012580021148010383

NON BENDED PLATE
Start
Frame 2174 (after 1 night)
Frame $\sim 2900$ (after 24h)
Frame $\sim 5468$ (after 48h)
Frame $\sim 8800$ (after 73h)

BOOPS
Frac s1
Clusters
Only q4>0.8
Start
final

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 1 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.85 \pm $, $x_S=0.5 \pm $. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=115$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 04/12/2023)
NON BENDED PLATE
Start
frame 916 (maxq4)
Final (after $\sim$ 1 night)
BOOPS
Frac S1

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 1 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.85 \pm $, $x_S=0.5 \pm $. Driving: $f=53$ $Hz$, $A_o=115$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 29/11/2023)
BENDED PLATE
Start
frame 340 (maxq4)
Final (after $\sim$ 1 night)
BOOPS
Frac S1

### S1 polyamid (Prolabo) State 1 SMALL L=15cm: $\phi=0.85 \pm $, $x_S=0.5 \pm $. Driving: $f=120$ $Hz$, $A_o=240$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. (acq 28/11/2023)
BENDED PLATE
Start
Final (after $\sim$ 1 night)

## Calibration

### Pentacol Experiment (june 04 2024, medium system, rough surface with anodization)

$L=0.15$ m, $N=170$, $\phi=0.095$ $f=53$ Hz, $A_o=115$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. ExP time 5575. Acquisition at 0.25 fps.

after 0 adj

after 2 adj

### Pentacol Experiment (may 15 2024, medium system, rough surface with anodization)

$L=0.15$ m, $N=170$, $\phi=0.095$ $f=53$ Hz, $A_o=115$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. ExP time 5575. Acquisition at 0.25 fps.

after 3 adj

### Pentacol Experiment (may 2 2024, medium system, rough surface with anodization)

$L=0.15$ m, $N=170$, $\phi=0.095$ $f=53$ Hz, $A_o=115$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. ExP time 5575. Acquisition at 0.25 fps.

after 3 adj

### Pentacol Experiment (april 29 2024, medium system, rough surface with anodization)
Very strange: today if I use $f=53$ Hz, $A_o=240$ I observe super high energy... Why? Mybe the amplifier was not at the maximum?

$L=0.15$ m, $N=170$, $\phi=0.095$ $f=53$ Hz, $A_o=115$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. ExP time 5575. Acquisition at 0.25 fps.
after 1 adj


### Pentacol Experiment (april 26 2024, medium system, rough surface with anodization, just after the series of experiments done between the 4-25 april)
$L=0.15$ m, $N=170$, $\phi=0.095$ $f=53$ (not sure) Hz, $A_o=240$ (not sure) $mV_{pp}$ SINU. ExP time 5575. Acquisition at 0.25 fps.

after 0 adj


after 4 adj

### Pentacol Experiment (april 03 2024, medium system, rough surface with anodization)
$L=0.15$ m, $N=173 ?$, $\phi=0.097$ $f=53$ Hz (not sure), $A_o=240$ (not sure) $mV_{pp}$ SINU. ExP time 5575. Acquisition at 0.25 fps.

After 4 adjustment

### Pentacol Experiment (december 04 2023, medium system, rough surface with anodization)
$L=0.15$ m, $N=173$, $\phi=0.097$ $f=53$ Hz, $A_o=240$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. ExP time 5575. Acquisition at 0.25 fps.

After 1 adjustment

### Pentacol Experiment (July 10 2023, small system, rough surface with glass craters)
$L=0.1$ m, $N=183$, $f=120$ Hz, $A_o=240$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. ExP time 5575. Acquisition at 0.25 fps.

before adjustments

after 3 adjustments

**$f=120$ Hz, $A_o=240$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU IS A GOOD DRIVING FOR CALIBRATION WITH ROUGH SURFACE GLASS CRATERS**

## Surface profile

## Preliminary tests

### Comment on the experiments done the 10th/11th of July

Naive feeling that with rough surfaces you can go to high amplitudes without triggering piling up. But I see a lot of heterogeneous mobility in the experiment acq1007state3 $f=120$ $Hz$, $A_o=190$ $mV_{pp}$ SINU. After the exp I checked that there are signs of the bouncing beads in the less mobile zones where crystalline domains formed. I also cleaned the surface with kimthec and I saw a lot of powder on it:

Part of it was robably already there because I find a bit of it in my hand before the exp but the great part has been created in the exp.

Then I do a density field mesurement with the calib system and was quite ok. Bu then I checked with the loaded system and I saw mobility gradient and particle segregation: more mobile top right more small particles bottom left.
But from the calibration density field I woul expected the opposite. Anyway, after the 20 min of calib there was abit of powder on the kimtech so maybe also the calibration is moothing the surface...


---

So heterogeneous mobility triggered by powder as happened few months ago? I rinsed the beads and I'll start the same exp agai to see what happens.

### S1 State $\sim$ 4 SMALL: $\phi=0.853 \pm $, $x_S=0.527 \pm $. Driving: $f=350$ $Hz$, $A_o=450$ $mV_{pp}$. (acq 30/03/2023)

Initial fast S1 formation followed by size segregation with a huge hex island in the center

Start conf
Frame 9
Final Conf
Over Time Boops

### S1 State $\sim$ 4 SMALL: $\phi=0.853 \pm $, $x_S=0.527 \pm $. Driving: $f=350$ $Hz$, $A_o=300$ $mV_{pp}$. (acq 30/03/2023 BIS)

Hexagonal island metling
Start Conf
Final Conf
Over Time Boops