Performance Comparison of 3-D Printed Photoacoustic Gas Sensors and a Commercial Quartz Enhanced Photoacoustic Spectrometer
Performance Comparison of 3-D Printed Photoacoustic Gas Sensors and a Commercial Quartz Enhanced Photoacoustic Spectrometer
复制标题
DOI：
10.1109/jsen.2023.3335649
复制
发表时间：
2024-01
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Utkarsh Dwivedi;Mark Donnachie;Metin Ilke;Ralf Bauer;M. Lengden
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Utkarsh Dwivedi;Mark Donnachie;Metin Ilke;Ralf Bauer;M. Lengden
本文对使用不同3D打印机制造的光声光谱(PAS)气体传感器进行了比较。传感器设计了不同的谐振器直径，1 mm和2 mm，长度12.34 mm和30 mm，并使用了两个不同的麦克风，一个驻极体麦克风和一个微型机电系统(MEMS)麦克风。对比显示，基于打印机类型或几何形状的传感器性能几乎没有变化。然而，与使用驻极体麦克风的传感器相比，基于MEMS麦克风的传感器的归一化噪声等效吸收(NNEA)性能提高了2-3倍。此外，还对商用石英增强型光声传感器进行了测试，与基于MEMS的3-D印刷光声传感器相比，其NNEA性能也差了2-3倍。最后，对本工作中使用的3D打印单元和以前的3D打印PAS传感器的性能进行了讨论。
This article presents a comparison of photoacoustic spectroscopy (PAS) gas sensors manufactured using different 3-D printers. The sensors have been designed with varying resonator diameters, 1 and 2 mm, and lengths, 12.34 and 30 mm, and using two different microphones, an electret microphone and a micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) microphone. The comparison showed little variation in sensor performance based on printer type or geometry. However, the MEMS microphone-based sensors showed a factor of 2–3 improved normalized noise equivalent absorption (NNEA) performance compared to sensors using the electret microphones. A commercial quartz enhanced photoacoustic sensor was additionally tested and also showed a factor of 2–3 poorer NNEA performance compared to the MEMS-based, 3-D printed photoacoustic sensors. Finally, a discussion is provided on the performance of the 3-D printed cells used in this work and previous 3-D printed PAS sensors.