• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.20 no.4
• /
• pp.501-509
• /
• 2015

Purpose: To evaluate the reliability of refractive power by comparing the marked refractive power in an automatic phoropter and actually measured spherical/cylindrical refractive power. Methods: Actual refractive power of minus spherical lens and cylindrical lens in an automatic phoropter was measured by a manual lensmeter and compared with the accuracy of marked refractive power. Furthermore, combined refractive power and spherical equivalent refractive power of two overlapped lenses were compared and evaluated with the refractive power of trial lens. Results: An error of 0.125 D and more against the marked degree was observed in 70.6% of spherical refractive power of spherical lens which is built in phoropter, and the higher error was shown with increasing refractive power. Single cylindrical refractive power of cylindrical lens is almost equivalent to the marked degree. Combined spherical refractive power was equivalent to spherical refractive power of single lens when spherical lens and cylindrical lens were overlapped in a phoropter. Thus, there was no change in spherical refractive power by lens overlapping. However, there was a great difference, which suggest the effect induced by overlapping between cylindrical refractive power and the marked degree when spherical lens and cylindrical lens were overlapped. Spherical equivalent refractive power measured by using a phoropter was lower than that estimated by trial glasses frame and marked degree. The difference was bigger with higher refractive power. Conclusions: When assessment of visual acuity is made by using an automatic phoropter for high myopes or myopic astigmatism, some difference against the marked degree may be produced and they may be overcorrected which suggests that improvement is required.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.263-276
• /
• 2015

Purpose: The current study aimed to evaluate the reliability for the combined refractive power when a spherical lens and a cylindrical lens were overlapped in a trial frame. Methods: The refractive powers, central thickness and peripheral thickness of spherical trial lenses and cylindrical lenses with negative power were measured. The combined refractive power of the spherical and cylindrical lenses was measured by auto lens meter. Measurement was repeated by changing the insertion order, and their results were further compared with the calculated combined refractive power. Results: There was no correlation between the variation of central and peripheral thickness in trial lenses and that of the lens power. Among 79 trial lenses, 3 trial lenses wasn't met the international standard. The refractive power calculated by Gullstrand's formula that could compensate vertex distance had smaller difference with the estimated power when compared with that calculated by thin lens formula however, it was significantly different from the estimated power. The refractive powers were generally apparent regardless of the insertion order of a spherical lens and a cylindrical lens: thin lens formula > actual measurements > Gullstrand's formula. The error was only found in cylindrical power calculated by Gullstrand's formula when inserted a spherical lens inside and a cylindrical lens outside however, the error was found in both of cylindrical and spherical powers calculated by Gullstrand's formula when inserted as a opposite order. By comparing actual measurements of equivalent spherical power, the accuracy was higher and the possibility of over-correction was lower when inserted a spherical lens inside and a cylindrical lens outside. Conclusions: From the results, those were revealed that the combined refractive power is influenced by the factors other than the vertex distance and the refractive power varies in accordance with the insertion order of a spherical lens and a cylindrical lens. Thus, it can be suggested that the establishment of standard for these is neccesaty.

• Korean Chemical Engineering Research
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.388-394
• /
• 2014

Inorganic-organic hybrid coating solutions were synthesized using titania sol from titanium isopropoxide (TTIP) as an inorganic component and mixture of two or three types of silane coupling agents, such as methacryloxypropyl trimethoxysilane (MPTMS), aminopropyl triethoxysilane (APS), glycidoxypropyl trimethoxysilane (GPTMS) and vinyltriethoxysilane (VTES) as an organic component. The hard coating films were obtained by spin-coating on the polycarbonate sheets and curing the inorganic-organic hybrid coating solutions. The coating films made from the mixture of two types of silane coupling agents showed poor pencil hardness and adhesion, while those from the mixture of three types of silane coupling agents exhibited an improved pencil hardness of 2H~4H and adhesion of 5B. The refractive indexes of coating films were increased from 1.56 to 1.63 at 550 nm by increasing the content of titania sols from 20 to 30 g.

• Elastomers and Composites
• /
• v.44 no.2
• /
• pp.175-181
• /
• 2009

The solution polymerization was conducted to synthesize pressure sensitive adhesive for polarizer film using acrylic monomers. 2-Ethylhexyl acrylate, butyl acrylate, acrylic acid were used as acrylic monomers, benzoyl peroxide as initiator, ethyl acetate as solvent. The ratio of monomers was 2-ethylhexyl acrylate: butyl acrylate: acrylic acid = 25:50:3.6 reflecting $-40^{\circ}C$ of glass transition temperature in the pressure sensitive adhesive. The amount of initiator was determined as 0.09% to monomer considering wetting power and initial tackiness. The ratio of monomer to solvent was determined as 1:1.7 considering wetting power and transmissivity. The transmissivity of pressure sensitive adhesive increased with decreasing both viscosity and molecular weight due to reducing of refractive index by low entanglement between molecules. In the measurement of pot life, it was found that the storage stability was good at 1:1.7 of monomer: solvent without large change of viscosity during 200 min.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.65-70
• /
• 2001

We obtained the sum of two curvature ($C_x+C_y$) in toric lens which two toroidal surface is the right angle each other. $$C_x+C_y=\frac{x^2+y^2}{2r_1}+\frac{x^2}{2}(\frac{1}{r_2}-\frac{1}{r_1})$$ and the sum of two curvature ($C_a+C_b$) in toric lens about the cross angle. $$(C_a+C_b)=\frac{x^2cos^2{\alpha}_1}{2r_1}+\frac{x^2cos^2{\alpha}_2}{2r_2}+\frac{y^2sin^2{\alpha}_1}{2r_1}+\frac{y^2sin^2{\alpha}_2}{2r_2}$$ and claculated the parameter S, C, ${\theta}$ of a combination power in toric lens of the cross angle including surface curvature ($C_x$, $C_y$) values. $$S=(n-1)\[\frac{C_x}{x^2}+\frac{C_y}{y^2}\]-\frac{C}{2},\;C=-\frac{2(n-1)}{sin2{\theta}}\[\frac{C_x}{x^2}+\frac{C_y}{y^2}\]$$ $${\theta}=\frac{1}{2}tan^{-1}\[-\frac{{C_xy^2sin2{\theta}_1}+{C_yx^2sin2{\theta}_2}}{{C_xy^2cos2{\theta}_1}+{C_yx^2cos2{\theta}_2}}\]$$.