4.7 Article

General analysis method for the signal enhancement of microwave gas sensor though variation of energy loss

期刊

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS B-CHEMICAL
卷 367, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2022.132117

关键词

Dielectric loss tangent; Graphite powder; Permittivity variation; Microwave gas sensor; Ammonia

资金

  1. Project of Jilin Province People?s Gov-ernment Department of Education, China [JJKH20211093KJ]
  2. Interdisciplinary Integration and Innovation Project of JLU, China [JLUXKJC2020204]
  3. Project of Science and Technology Bureau of Changchun, China [21ZY23]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a novel analysis method based on variation of energy loss was proposed for the first time, and a microwave gas sensor for NH3 detection was successfully developed. The sensor showed a low detection limit, excellent selectivity, humidity-resistance, and good linearity for NH3 concentration.
Microwave gas sensor (MGS) becomes a highlight recently because it can work at the room temperature (20 celcius) and has potential wireless application. However, there are still some problems such as low sensitivity and linearity. In this short communication, a novel analysis method based on variation of energy loss was proposed as sensor response for the first time. The as-prepared device is successfully used for NH3 detection based on commercial graphite powder which can achieve a low detection limit (1 ppm, 20 celcius), excellent selectivity and humidity-resistance (20-95% RH). Moreover, the sensor shows good linearity for low concentration range of NH3 from 1 to 5 ppm (R-2 = 0.999) or high concentration range from 10 to 200 ppm (R-2 = 0.99) through analyzing energy loss calculated by both reflection and transmission, which is more linear compared with that only using reflection or transmission. Therefore, this study provides a simple and universal method for response signal analysis, which can amplify the weak sensing signal then realize high-performance MGS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据