When it comes to LED lighting applications light diffusers made of polycarbonate or acrylic are appropriate from Maurice Sidney's blog

The decision between PC and PMMA is not straightforward, and no simple answer can be provided. When comparing the price, processing ease, and optical properties of PC and PMMA, it is clear that the two materials are nearly identical. However, at this point, the comparison is complete, and the selection is made on the basis of the requirements of the specific application being considered. After that, there will be a comparison of the properties that designers and manufacturers should take into consideration when deciding which polymer to use between the two types of materials.

To make the best decision possible, manufacturers and developers must prioritize the importance of different properties. Consider the following scenario: If a plastic part is intended for an indoor application, mechanical properties may be less important than aesthetics, and acrylic may be the most suitable material for that application. Once again, when it comes to optical properties, acrylic may be the most suitable material when the goal is to achieve the highest possible value while maintaining the lowest possible illuminance level (measured in lux units). Despite the fact that polycarbonate is a common material for many applications, it is the only material available if the application requires fire resistance properties due to building codes or the possibility of a fire occurring.

It is necessary to measure the amount of light that diffuses.

Let's get down to the business of measuring light diffuser by polycarbonate vs acrylic and determining the optical performance of various types of materials now, shall we? The task at hand may appear to some of you as being relatively straight-forward. In practice, however, this is not the case at all. Manufacturers and developers use a variety of methods to assess the overall quality of their diffusion products before releasing them to the market. There is currently no standard method or standard in place for expressing the performance of light diffusion at this time. The lack of uniformity in the construction and performance of plastic light diffuser systems makes it difficult to describe and compare the characteristics of different systems.

A light diffuser by polycarbonate vs acrylic material's performance is determined by two parameters: the amount of light transmitted (transparency) and the amount of light diffused (diffusion). A system with low light transmission and high diffusion, or vice versa, can be created in a relatively simple and inexpensive manner, and a system with low light transmission and high diffusion can be created in a relatively simple and inexpensive manner. A significant increase in the difficulty of the task arises when attempting to create a system with high levels of plastic light diffuser and transmission while keeping the system's brightness as close as possible to the original source light level. During the testing process, it is therefore necessary to measure both light transmission and light diffuser by polycarbonate vs acrylic in order to evaluate the optical performance of a system's optical performance. When both system parameters are available, it is possible to specify the optical quality of the system in question. There is no other way to achieve this result.

This characteristic is difficult to determine because manufacturers and designers use different terminology as well as measurement methods to describe and quantify it. Therefore, determining the light diffusion characteristics of an object is not always straightforward. In the vast majority of cases, even on a laboratory scale, plastic light diffuser properties are more difficult to determine than light transmission measurements. As previously stated, this is the most common reason. This is due to the fact that standard laboratory devices, such as the haze meter discussed earlier, only provide partial information about the system's diffusion performance, making it the most common reason.

The term "haze" refers to the amount of  that has been measured and is used to describe this phenomenon. As previously stated, haze is defined as the amount of light that has been subjected to wide-angle scattering at angles greater than 2.5° from the normal, which is measured in lux. Haze is defined as the amount of light that has been subjected to wide-angle scattering at angles greater than 2.5° from the normal. ASTM D1003 specifies how to measure haze, and, as with L. T measurements, the results are determined by either an L. T meter or, in the case of light transmission measurements, a haze meter, depending on whether the measurement is of light transmission or not. The primary disadvantage of the haze parameter is that it is only moderately sensitive to changes in the surrounding environment. When medium-to-high levels of diffusion are present, it is possible to use haze as a reliable indicator of system performance at certain times of year. On the other hand, when dealing with highly diffusing systems the haze value reaches its maximum and the meter becomes incapable of distinguishing between different levels of light diffusion from that point on.