Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32024283›Full record

ArticlePolymers2020

Optimization of Shapes and Sizes of Moth-Eye-Inspired Structures for the Enhancement of Their Antireflective Properties.

Ji Seong Choi, Joon Hyung An, Jong-Kwon Lee, Ji Yun Lee, Seong Min Kang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ji Seong ChoiDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Korea.
Joon Hyung AnDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Korea.
Jong-Kwon LeeNational NANOFAB center, Division of Nano-Convergence Material Development, Daejeon 34141, Korea.
Ji Yun LeeNational NANOFAB center, Division of Nano-Convergence Material Development, Daejeon 34141, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6959-2321
Seong Min KangDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8952-8500

Funding

Korea government (Ministry of Science and ICT) COI1913M001National Research Foundation of Korea 2017R1C1B1005834
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novel antireflective (AR) structures have attracted tremendous attention and been used in various applications such as solar cells, displays, wearable devices, and others. They have also stimulated the development of several other methods, including moth-eye-inspired technologies. However, the analyses of the shapes and sizes of nanostructures remain a critical issue and need to be considered in the design of effective AR surfaces. Herein, moth-eye and inverse-moth-eye patterned polyurethane-acrylate (PUA) structures (MPS and IMPS) with three different sizes are analyzed and compared to optimize the designed nanostructures to achieve the best optical properties pertaining to maximum transmittance and minimum reflectance. We fabricated moth-eye-inspired conical structures with three different sizes using a simple and robust fabrication method. Furthermore, the fabricated surfaces of the MPS and IMPS structures were analyzed based on the experimental and theoretical variation influences of their optical properties according to their sizes and shapes. As a result of these analyses, we herein propose a standard methodology based on the optimal structure of IMPS structure with a 300 nm diameter.

Indexed as

anti-reflective surfacesdiffraction grating effectdouble replication methodinverse-moth-eye structuresmoth-eye structures

Identifiers

PMID32024283
PMCPMC7077486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.