Archivos mensuales: septiembre 2019

Surface Roughness and Features of a Solar Cell
Importance of Solar Panel Testing
Maximizing a solar cell’s energy absorption is key for the technology’s survival as a renewable resource. The multiple layers of coating and glass protection allow for the absorption, transmittance, and reflection of light that is necessary for the photovoltaic cells to function. Given that most consumer solar cells operate at 15-18% efficiency, optimizing their energy output is an ongoing battle.
Studies have shown that surface roughness plays a pivotal role in the reflectance of light. The initial layer of glass must be as smooth as possible to mitigate the reflectance of light, but the subsequent layers do not follow this guideline. A degree of roughness is necessary at each coatings interface to another to increase the possibility of light scattering within their respective depletion zones and increase the absorption of light within the cell1. Optimizing the surface roughness in these regions allows the solar cell to operate to the best of its ability and with the Nanovea HS2000 High Speed Sensor, measuring surface roughness can be done quickly and accurately.
Measurement Objective
In this study we will display the capabilities of the Nanovea Profilometer HS2000 with High Speed Sensor by measuring the surface roughness and geometric features of a photovoltaic cell. For this demonstration a monocrystalline solar cell with no glass protection will be measured but the methodology can be used for various other applications.
Test Procedure and Procedures
The following test parameters were used to measure the surface of the solar cell.
Results and Discussion
Depicted below is the 2D false-color view of the solar cell and an area extraction of the surface with its respective height parameters. A Gaussian filter was applied to both surfaces and a more aggressive index was used to flatten the extracted area. This excludes form (or waviness) larger than the cut-off index, leaving behind features that represent the solar cell’s roughness.


Conclusion
In this study we were able to display the Nanovea HS2000 Line Sensor’s ability to measure a monocrystalline photovoltaic cell’s surface roughness and features. With the ability to automate accurate measurements of multiple samples and set pass fail limits, the Nanovea HS2000 Line Sensor is a perfect choice for quality control inspections.
Reference
1 Scholtz, Lubomir. Ladanyi, Libor. Mullerova, Jarmila. “Influence of Surface Roughness on Optical Characteristics of Multilayer Solar Cells “ Advances in Electrical and Electronic Engineering, vol. 12, no. 6, 2014, pp. 631-638.
NOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT YOUR APPLICATION

Scratch Resistance of Cellphone Screen Protectors
Importance of Testing Screen Protectors
Although phone screens are designed to resist shattering and scratching, they are still susceptible to damage. Daily phone usage causes them to wear and tear, e.g. accumulate scratches and cracks. Since repairing these screens can be expensive, screen protectors are an affordable damage prevention item commonly purchased and used to increase a screen’s durability.
Using the Nanovea PB1000 Mechanical Tester’s Macro Module in conjunction with the acoustic emissions (AE) sensor, we can clearly identify critical loads at which screen protectors show failure due to scratch1 testing to create a comparative study between two types of screen protectors.
Two common types of screen protector materials are TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane) and tempered glass. Of the two, tempered glass is considered the best as it provides better impact and scratch protection. However, it is also the most expensive. TPU screen protectors on the other hand, are less expensive and a popular choice for consumers who prefer plastic screen protectors. Since screen protectors are designed to absorb scratches and impacts and are usually made of materials with brittle properties, controlled scratch testing paired with in-situ AE detection is an optimal test setup for determining the loads at which cohesive failures (e.g. cracking, chipping and fracture) and/or adhesive failures (e.g. delamination and spallation) occur.
Measurement Objective
In this study, three scratch tests were performed on two different commercial screen protectors using Nanovea’s PB1000 Mechanical Tester’s Macro Module. By using an acoustic emissions sensor and optical microscope, the critical loads at which each screen protector showed failure(s) were identified.
Test Procedure and Procedures
The Nanovea PB1000 Mechanical Tester was used to test two screen protectors applied onto a phone screen and clamped down to a friction sensor table. The test parameters for all scratches are tabulated in Table 1 below.
Results and Discussion
Because the screen protectors were made of a different material, they each exhibited varying types of failures. Only one critical failure was observed for the TPU screen protector whereas the tempered glass screen protector exhibited two. The results for each sample are shown in Table 2 below. Critical load #1 is defined as the load at which the screen protectors started to show signs of cohesive failure under the microscope. Critical load #2 is defined by the first peak change seen in the acoustic emissions graph data.
For the TPU screen protector, Critical load #2 correlates to the location along with the scratch where the protector began to visibly peel off the phone screen. A scratch appeared on the surface of the phone screen once Critical load #2 was surpassed for the remainder of the scratch tests. For the Tempered Glass screen protector, Critical load #1 correlates to the location where radial fractures began to appear. Critical load #2 happens towards the end of the scratch at higher loads. The acoustic emission is a larger magnitude than the TPU screen protector, however, no damage was done to the phone screen. In both cases, Critical load #2 corresponded to a large change in depth, indicating the indenter had pierced through the screen protector.
Conclusion
In this study we showcase the Nanovea PB1000 Mechanical Tester’s ability to perform controlled and repeat-able scratch tests and simultaneously use acoustic emission detection to accurately identify the loads at which adhesive and cohesive failure occur in screen protectors made of TPU and tempered glass. The experimental data presented in this document supports the initial assumption that Tempered Glass performs the best for scratch prevention on phone screens.
The Nanovea Mechanical Tester offers accurate and repeatable indentation, scratch, and wear measurement capabilities using ISO and ASTM compliant Nano and Micro modules. The Mechanical Tester is a complete system, making it the ideal solution for determining the full range of mechanical properties of thin or thick, soft or hard coatings, films, and substrates.
NOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT YOUR APPLICATION

Lubricating Eye Drop Comparison using the Nanovea T50 Tribometer
Importance of Testing Eye Drop Solutions
Measurement Objective
In this study, the coefficient of friction (COF) of three different lubricating eye drop solutions was measured using the pin-on-disk setup on the Nanovea T50 Tribometer.
Test Procedure and Procedures
A 6mm diameter spherical pin made of alumina was applied to a glass slide with each eye drop solution acting as the lubricant between the two surfaces. The test parameters used for all experiments are summarized in Table 1 below.
Results and Discussion
The maximum, minimum, and average coefficient of friction values for the three different eye drop solutions tested are tabulated in Table 2 below. The COF v. Revolutions graphs for each eye drop solution are depicted in Figures 2-4. The COF during each test remained relatively constant for most of the total test duration. Sample A had the lowest average COF indicating it had the best lubrication properties.
Conclusion
In this study we showcase the capability of the Nanovea T50 Tribometer in measuring the coefficient of friction of three eye drop solutions. Based on these values, we show that Sample A had a lower coefficient of friction and therefore exhibits better lubrication in comparison to the other two samples.
Nanovea Tribómetros offers precise and repeatable wear and friction testing using ISO and ASTM compliant rotative and linear modules. It also provides optional high temperature wear, lubrication, and tribo-corrosion modules available in one pre-integrated system. Such versatility allows users to better simulate the real application environment and improve fundamental understanding of the wear mechanism and tribological characteristics of various materials.
NOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT YOUR APPLICATION
Categorías
- Notas de aplicación
- Bloque sobre tribología anular
- Tribología de la corrosión
- Pruebas de fricción | Coeficiente de fricción
- Pruebas mecánicas a alta temperatura
- Tribología de alta temperatura
- Humedad y gases Tribología
- Humedad Pruebas mecánicas
- Indentación | Fluencia y relajación
- Indentación | Resistencia a la fractura
- Indentación | Dureza y elasticidad
- Indentación | Pérdida y almacenamiento
- Indentación | Esfuerzo frente a deformación
- Indentación | Límite elástico y fatiga
- Pruebas de laboratorio
- Tribología lineal
- Pruebas mecánicas de líquidos
- Tribología de líquidos
- Tribología a baja temperatura
- Pruebas mecánicas
- Comunicado de prensa
- Perfilometría | Planitud y alabeo
- Perfilometría | Geometría y forma
- Perfilometría | Rugosidad y acabado
- Profilometría | Altura y grosor del escalón
- Profilometría | Textura y grano
- Perfilometría | Volumen y área
- Pruebas de perfilometría
- Tribología anillo sobre anillo
- Tribología rotacional
- Prueba de arañazos | Fallo adhesivo
- Prueba del rasguño | Fallo de cohesión
- Pruebas de arañazos | Desgaste en varias pasadas
- Pruebas de rayado | Dureza al rayado
- Pruebas de rayado Tribología
- Feria de muestras
- Pruebas de tribología
- Sin categoría
Archivos
- septiembre 2023
- agosto 2023
- junio 2023
- mayo 2023
- julio 2022
- mayo 2022
- abril 2022
- enero 2022
- diciembre 2021
- noviembre 2021
- octubre 2021
- septiembre 2021
- agosto 2021
- julio 2021
- junio 2021
- mayo 2021
- marzo 2021
- febrero 2021
- diciembre 2020
- noviembre 2020
- octubre 2020
- septiembre 2020
- julio 2020
- mayo 2020
- abril 2020
- marzo 2020
- febrero 2020
- enero 2020
- noviembre 2019
- octubre 2019
- septiembre 2019
- agosto 2019
- julio 2019
- junio 2019
- mayo 2019
- abril 2019
- marzo 2019
- enero 2019
- diciembre 2018
- noviembre 2018
- octubre 2018
- septiembre 2018
- julio 2018
- junio 2018
- mayo 2018
- abril 2018
- marzo 2018
- febrero 2018
- noviembre 2017
- octubre 2017
- septiembre 2017
- agosto 2017
- junio 2017
- mayo 2017
- abril 2017
- marzo 2017
- febrero 2017
- enero 2017
- noviembre 2016
- octubre 2016
- agosto 2016
- julio 2016
- junio 2016
- mayo 2016
- abril 2016
- marzo 2016
- febrero 2016
- enero 2016
- diciembre 2015
- noviembre 2015
- octubre 2015
- septiembre 2015
- agosto 2015
- julio 2015
- junio 2015
- mayo 2015
- abril 2015
- marzo 2015
- febrero 2015
- enero 2015
- noviembre 2014
- octubre 2014
- septiembre 2014
- agosto 2014
- julio 2014
- junio 2014
- mayo 2014
- abril 2014
- marzo 2014
- febrero 2014
- enero 2014
- diciembre 2013
- noviembre 2013
- octubre 2013
- septiembre 2013
- agosto 2013
- julio 2013
- junio 2013
- mayo 2013
- abril 2013
- marzo 2013
- febrero 2013
- enero 2013
- diciembre 2012
- noviembre 2012
- octubre 2012
- septiembre 2012
- agosto 2012
- julio 2012
- junio 2012
- mayo 2012
- abril 2012
- marzo 2012
- febrero 2012
- enero 2012
- diciembre 2011
- noviembre 2011
- octubre 2011
- septiembre 2011
- agosto 2011
- julio 2011
- junio 2011
- mayo 2011
- noviembre 2010
- enero 2010
- abril 2009
- marzo 2009
- enero 2009
- diciembre 2008
- octubre 2008
- agosto 2007
- julio 2006
- marzo 2006
- enero 2005
- abril 2004