Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Fig. 3 Comparison of the reflective properties.
Comparison of the reflective properties. (A to C) Measured reflectance intensity of an RSCF (A), a commercial pigment-based glass bead-type retroreflective sheeting (B), and the wing of a P. blumei butterfly (C) under coaxial illumination and viewing conditions at different angles of α. (D to F) Measured reflectance intensity of the RSCF (D), the commercial retroreflective sheeting (E), and the P. blumei butterfly (F) under oblique illumination angle β and at a fixed viewing angle of 0°. (G) Photographs taken normal to the RSCF (left), the P. blumei butterfly (middle), and the commercial retroreflective sheeting (right) under diffuse daylight. (H to K) Photographs of the three samples taken under coaxial conditions at different viewing angles of 0° (H), 10° (I), 20° (J), and 30° (K). (L to O) Photographs taken normal to the three sample surfaces and at an oblique illumination angle of 1° (L), 5° (M), 10° (N), and 20° (O). Scale bars, 2 cm (G to O). Wen Fan et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaaw8755 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.