4.7 Article

Optical anisotropy assessment in nanopaper sheets by imaging Mueller matrix polarimetry

Journal

CELLULOSE
Volume 30, Issue 8, Pages 5307-5319

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10570-023-05181-0

Keywords

Cellulose nanocrystal; Evaporation-induced self-assembly; pH; Mueller matrix; Optical anisotropy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P ristine nanopaper sheets were prepared by drop-casting water-based cellulose nanocrystals solutions with different solute concentrations and hydrogen potential values of the solvent. The optical properties associated with the microscopic structure of the substrates were assessed using imaging Mueller matrix polarimetry. Despite the expected depolarizing features in this kind of media, optical anisotropic parameters were measured at the microscopic level. The spatial distribution of birefringence depended not only on the raw material nanoconformation, but also on the applied processing method. The structural evaluation of nanopaper can contribute to the understanding and optimization of the optical response of sensing devices supported by these multifunctional materials.
Pristine nanopaper sheets have been produced by the drop-casting process using water-based cellulose nanocrystals solutions with different solute concentrations and hydrogen potential values of the solvent. In order to assess the optical properties associated to the microscopic structure of the resulting substrates, imaging Mueller matrix polarimetry was implemented. Even though the depolarizing features expected in this kind of media, optical anisotropic parameters were measured at microscopic level. It was found that spatial distribution of birefringence depends not only on the raw material nanoconformation, but also on the applied processing method. Nanopaper structural evaluation can help in understanding and optimizing optical response of sensing devices supported in these multifunctional materials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available