4.6 Article

Development of a Waterproof Crack-Based Stretchable Strain Sensor Based on PDMS Shielding

期刊

SENSORS
卷 18, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s18041171

关键词

crack-based stretchable strain sensor; waterproof sensor; PDMS shielding; underwater strain sensing

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant - Korea government [2015R1A2A1A14027903, 2011-0030075, 2017R1D1A3B03032910, 2017R1A6A3A11036525, 2017M3C1B2085309]
  2. Industrial Technology Innovation Program - Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MI, Korea) [10048358]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper details the design of a poly(dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS)-shielded waterproof crack-based stretchable strain sensor, in which the electrical characteristics and sensing performance are not influenced by changes in humidity. This results in a higher number of potential applications for the sensor. A previously developed omni-purpose stretchable strain (OPSS) sensor was used as the basis for this work, which utilizes a metal cracking structure and provides a wide sensing range and high sensitivity. Changes in the conductivity of the OPSS sensor, based on humidity conditions, were investigated along with the potential possibility of using the design as a humidity sensor. However, to prevent conductivity variation, which can decrease the reliability and sensing ability of the OPSS sensor, PDMS was utilized as a shielding layer over the OPSS sensor. The PDMS-shielded OPSS sensor showed approximately the same electrical characteristics as previous designs, including in a high humidity environment, while maintaining its strain sensing capabilities. The developed sensor shows promise for use under high humidity conditions and in underwater applications. Therefore, considering its unique features and reliable sensing performance, the developed PDMS-shielded waterproof OPSS sensor has potential utility in a wide range of applications, such as motion monitoring, medical robotics and wearable healthcare devices.

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

4.6
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