Development of Prototype Laboratory Setup for Selective Detection of Ethylene Based on Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes

Abstract

We report here a prototype laboratory setup for detecting ethylene (C2H4) in ppm level employing a sensor made of multiwalled carbon nanotubes of 40 nm average tube diameter. The proposed reversible chemoresistive ethylene sensor is fabricated using Kapton as the substrate onto which carbon nanotubes are coated using thick film technology. IDT silver electrodes are printed using piezo head based ink-jet printing technology. The increases in electrical resistance of the sensor element are measured on exposure to ethylene for different ethylene concentrations using a potentiostat and data acquisition system. The increase in resistance of the calibrated sensor element on exposure to ethylene (analyte) is about 18.4% at room temperature for 50 ppm ethylene concentration. This change is reversible. Our sensor element exhibits a better performance than those reported earlier (1.8%) and it has got the rise and fall time of 10 s and 60 s, respectively. It could be used for testing the ripening of fruits.

Ethylene Detection Based on Organic Field-Effect Transistors With Porogen and Palladium Particle Receptor Enhancements

“…Following this work, Kathirvelam et al published a multiwalled carbon nanotube sensor for ethylene on a flexible substrate. They report a sensitivity of 20 ppm and the response to be 10 times higher than the earlier single wall carbon nanotube sensor report, however no selectivity studies were reported . Selectivity is a major concern for the carbon nanotube based sensor devices due to various Van der-Waals interactions on carbon nanotube surface.…”

Ethylene Detection Based on Organic Field-Effect Transistors With Porogen and Palladium Particle Receptor Enhancements

“…Following this work, Kathirvelam et al published a multiwalled carbon nanotube sensor for ethylene on a flexible substrate. They report a sensitivity of 20 ppm and the response to be 10 times higher than the earlier single wall carbon nanotube sensor report, however no selectivity studies were reported . Selectivity is a major concern for the carbon nanotube based sensor devices due to various Van der-Waals interactions on carbon nanotube surface.…”

Design and development of ethylene gas sensor for non-destructive analysis of food quality: an updated review

“…Because of their tight bonding, MWCNT-based gas sensors typically experience a protracted recovery characteristic (up to 2.5 h at a high temperature of 150°C) when exposed to water molecules. Kathirvelan and Vijayaraghavan (2014) carried out an investigation on MWCNTs with a 40 nm diameter on average for the application of fruit ripening. This chemoresistive ethylene sensor was fabricated using Kapton substrates on CNTs coated with thick film technology.…”

Ethylene detection using TiO2–WO3 composite sensor for fruit ripening applications

“…The sensor exhibits significant linearity over the measured range. The proposed sensor exhibits better response compared with the IR sensor (Wei et al, 2015) and relatively lower response compared with the MWCNT (Kathirvelan and Vijayaraghavan, 2014) sensor, as shown in Table II.…”

Ethylene Detection Based on Organic Field-Effect Transistors With Porogen and Palladium Particle Receptor Enhancements

“…Following this work, Kathirvelam et al published a multiwalled carbon nanotube sensor for ethylene on a flexible substrate. They report a sensitivity of 20 ppm and the response to be 10 times higher than the earlier single wall carbon nanotube sensor report, however no selectivity studies were reported . Selectivity is a major concern for the carbon nanotube based sensor devices due to various Van der-Waals interactions on carbon nanotube surface.…”

Design and development of ethylene gas sensor for non-destructive analysis of food quality: an updated review

“…Because of their tight bonding, MWCNT-based gas sensors typically experience a protracted recovery characteristic (up to 2.5 h at a high temperature of 150°C) when exposed to water molecules. Kathirvelan and Vijayaraghavan (2014) carried out an investigation on MWCNTs with a 40 nm diameter on average for the application of fruit ripening. This chemoresistive ethylene sensor was fabricated using Kapton substrates on CNTs coated with thick film technology.…”

Ethylene detection using TiO2–WO3 composite sensor for fruit ripening applications

“…The sensor exhibits significant linearity over the measured range. The proposed sensor exhibits better response compared with the IR sensor (Wei et al, 2015) and relatively lower response compared with the MWCNT (Kathirvelan and Vijayaraghavan, 2014) sensor, as shown in Table II.…”

Ethylene Detection Based on Organic Field-Effect Transistors With Porogen and Palladium Particle Receptor Enhancements

“…Following this work, Kathirvelam et al published a multiwalled carbon nanotube sensor for ethylene on a flexible substrate. They report a sensitivity of 20 ppm and the response to be 10 times higher than the earlier single wall carbon nanotube sensor report, however no selectivity studies were reported . Selectivity is a major concern for the carbon nanotube based sensor devices due to various Van der-Waals interactions on carbon nanotube surface.…”

Design and development of ethylene gas sensor for non-destructive analysis of food quality: an updated review

“…Because of their tight bonding, MWCNT-based gas sensors typically experience a protracted recovery characteristic (up to 2.5 h at a high temperature of 150°C) when exposed to water molecules. Kathirvelan and Vijayaraghavan (2014) carried out an investigation on MWCNTs with a 40 nm diameter on average for the application of fruit ripening. This chemoresistive ethylene sensor was fabricated using Kapton substrates on CNTs coated with thick film technology.…”

Ethylene detection using TiO2–WO3 composite sensor for fruit ripening applications

“…The sensor exhibits significant linearity over the measured range. The proposed sensor exhibits better response compared with the IR sensor (Wei et al, 2015) and relatively lower response compared with the MWCNT (Kathirvelan and Vijayaraghavan, 2014) sensor, as shown in Table II.…”