A comparison of pre-coated stock antireflection coating lenses in terms of transmission, durability and quality

Thokozile I. Metsing, Anthony S. Carlson
{"title":"A comparison of pre-coated stock antireflection coating lenses in terms of transmission, durability and quality","authors":"Thokozile I. Metsing, Anthony S. Carlson","doi":"10.4102/aveh.v81i1.688","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Antireflection coatings (ARCs) applied to ophthalmic plastic lenses must have a good quality base hard coat for the ARC to adhere to. The hard coating must be durable so as not to crack, craze or peel under different atmospheric conditions. The purpose of ARC is also to increase the transmission of light through the lenses and eliminate reflections.Aim: The aim of this research was to compare the quality of eight different pre-coated ARC stock lenses in terms of light transmission and durability.Setting: The measurements were taken in the physics laboratory at the University of Johannesburg.Methods: Eight different stock ARC lenses were obtained from different lens suppliers. The performances were assessed by measuring the light transmission through each lens, exposure to chemicals such as salt–water solution and adhesion and abrasion tests to assess the quality of the coatings.Results: The performance and quality of the different lenses differed slightly in terms of hardness, durability and quality. The lenses also differed slightly in average transmission percentage. The difference between the control lens and the highest average percentage transmission was 4.8%, and the lowest average transmission was 2.2%. The lens that performed the best overall was Crizal Forte and the worst was Precision.Conclusion: Not all lenses have the same quality of ARC applied and durable qualities. Quality control should be carried out regularly in batches so as to maintain high standards set out by the different suppliers.","PeriodicalId":7694,"journal":{"name":"African Vision and Eye Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Vision and Eye Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/aveh.v81i1.688","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Antireflection coatings (ARCs) applied to ophthalmic plastic lenses must have a good quality base hard coat for the ARC to adhere to. The hard coating must be durable so as not to crack, craze or peel under different atmospheric conditions. The purpose of ARC is also to increase the transmission of light through the lenses and eliminate reflections.Aim: The aim of this research was to compare the quality of eight different pre-coated ARC stock lenses in terms of light transmission and durability.Setting: The measurements were taken in the physics laboratory at the University of Johannesburg.Methods: Eight different stock ARC lenses were obtained from different lens suppliers. The performances were assessed by measuring the light transmission through each lens, exposure to chemicals such as salt–water solution and adhesion and abrasion tests to assess the quality of the coatings.Results: The performance and quality of the different lenses differed slightly in terms of hardness, durability and quality. The lenses also differed slightly in average transmission percentage. The difference between the control lens and the highest average percentage transmission was 4.8%, and the lowest average transmission was 2.2%. The lens that performed the best overall was Crizal Forte and the worst was Precision.Conclusion: Not all lenses have the same quality of ARC applied and durable qualities. Quality control should be carried out regularly in batches so as to maintain high standards set out by the different suppliers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预涂原片增透镀膜透镜透光性、耐用性和质量的比较
背景:抗反射涂层(ARC)应用于眼科塑料镜片必须有一个高质量的基础硬涂层,以使ARC粘附。硬涂层必须耐用,以免在不同的大气条件下开裂、开裂或剥离。ARC的目的也是为了增加光通过透镜的透射,消除反射。目的:本研究的目的是比较八种不同的预涂覆ARC镜片在透光性和耐久性方面的质量。环境:测量是在约翰内斯堡大学的物理实验室进行的。方法:从不同的透镜供应商处获得8种不同的库存ARC透镜。通过测量每个透镜的透光率、暴露于化学物质(如盐水溶液)和粘附性和磨损测试来评估涂层的质量,从而评估其性能。结果:不同晶状体在硬度、耐久性和质量上略有差异。透镜的平均透射率也略有不同。对照透镜与最高平均透射率的差值为4.8%,与最低平均透射率的差值为2.2%。整体表现最好的镜头是Crizal Forte,最差的是Precision。结论:并非所有的镜片都具有相同的ARC应用质量和耐用性。质量控制应定期分批进行,以保持不同供应商设定的高标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
African Vision and Eye Health
African Vision and Eye Health Health Professions-Optometry
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
期刊最新文献
Optometrists’ perspectives on speciality programme development in South Africa Pathophysiology of dry eye disease and novel therapeutic agents Impact of spectacle wear on the quality of life of learners with hearing impairment in Ghana Clinical characteristics and associated factors of diabetic retinopathy in Sudanese patients Refractive error accuracy and user perceptions of a smartphone home-based tester
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1