Fig. 1. Structure of VAN cell.

Fig. 2. Experimental device for evaluating image sticking by the capacitance voltage method.

Fig. 3. C-U curve and RDCV evaluation principle of FFS1 in the VAN cell.

Fig. 4. Curve of capacitance slope variation with AC voltage in negative LC FFS1 in VAN cell.

Fig. 5. VAN cell response time measurement setup.

Fig. 6. Curve of RDCV in VAN cell varies with time when DCB is 0.4 V, 0.6 V, and 0.8 V, respectively.

Fig. 7. TEM image of γ-Fe2O3 nanoparticles: (a) 43,000 times, (b) 97,000 times.

Fig. 8. POM image of PAN cell undoped and doped with different concentrations of γ-Fe2O3 nanoparticles. (a) Undoped, (b) 0.017 wt.%, (c) 0.034 wt.%, (d) 0.051 wt.%, (e) 0.068 wt.%, (f) 0.136 wt.%, (g) 0.204 wt.%, and (h) 0.272 wt.%. A and P represent the perpendicular analyzer and polarizer, respectively, and n represents the rubbing direction of PI.

Fig. 9. Relationship between SRDCV and doping concentration in the 3.85 μm VAN cell under 0.4 V, 0.6 V, and 0.8 V DCB.

Fig. 10. Relationship between SRDCV and doping concentration in the 11.5 μm VAN cell under 0.6 V DCB.

Fig. 11. Decay and rise times at different doping concentrations in the 11.5 μm VAN cell.

Fig. 12. Relationship between doping concentration and response time. (a) Normalized transmittance and decay time. (b) Normalized transmittance and rise time. (c) Decay time and doping concentration. (d) Rise time and doping concentration.

Table 1. Negative LC Parameters with Undoped and Doped γ-Fe2O3 Nanoparticles