The Effect of Multiple Antireflective Coatings and Center Thickness on Resistance of Polycarbonate Spectacle Lenses to Penetration by Pointed Missiles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Previous work has shown that the impact resistance to blunt missiles is affected by coatings applied to either CR-39 or polycarbonate lenses. We investigated the effects of multiple antireflection (minimum angle of resolution [MAR]) coatings on the resistance of polycarbonate lenses to puncture on impact by sharp, high-speed missiles. METHODS: Four groups of surfaced plano polycarbonate lenses were investigated. Two groups had a scratch-resistant (SR) coating applied to both surfaces. One of these groups had a 2-mm center thickness and the other had a 3-mm center thickness. The other two groups of 2-mm and 3-mm thick lenses had a MAR coating applied over the SR coating. The lenses were impacted by a missile consisting of an industrial sewing machine needle mounted in a cylindrical aluminum carrier. RESULTS: The sharp missiles were able to pierce the lenses at speeds between 29.6 m/s and 46.2 m/s. Impact resistance was lowest for the thinner lenses and lenses with a MAR coating. The effect of the MAR and lens thickness was subadditive. CONCLUSIONS: We have confirmed previous observations that polycarbonate lenses are more susceptible to penetration by sharp, high-speed missiles than blunt missiles. We have also found that reducing lens center thickness and applying a MAR coating further reduces the penetration resistance. Therefore, the use of 2-mm center thickness and MAR-coated polycarbonate lenses should be discouraged for industrial eye protectors where sharp missile hazards are possible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it