2021
DOI: 10.1109/jsen.2021.3064451
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Flexible M-Tooth Hybrid Micro-Structure-Based Capacitive Pressure Sensor With High Sensitivity and Wide Sensing Range

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These results demonstrate the superiority of the VG electrodes and micro-pyramidal dielectrics. In addition, when compared with the results in the literature, the pyramid structure of the dielectric layer is superior to other geometries, as shown in Table S5 [ 43 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These results demonstrate the superiority of the VG electrodes and micro-pyramidal dielectrics. In addition, when compared with the results in the literature, the pyramid structure of the dielectric layer is superior to other geometries, as shown in Table S5 [ 43 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…The following supporting information can be downloaded at: , Figure S1: Height distribution ratios of the VG1, VG2, and VG3 films analyzed using Image J software; Figure S2: Sheet resistance of the VG1, VG2, and VG3 films; Figure S3: Step response of the VG1-F sensor at the pressure of 0–1 kPa; Figure S4: Illustration of the size and interval of the micro-pyramids in the PDMS dielectric layer; Figure S5: Relative capacitance changes of the VG1-based capacitive pressure sensors with different micro-pyramid sizes and intervals at a pressure range of 0–10 kPa; Table S1: Growth conditions of the VG films with different morphologies; Table S2: Comparison of the sensitivities of the VG1-F, VG2-F, and VG3-F sensors; Table S3: Comparison of the sensitivities of the VG-based sensors with different micro-pyramid sizes and intervals; Table S4: Comparison of the sensitivities of the VG-based sensors and graphite paper-based sensors with/without micro-pyramidal PDMS dielectric layer; Table S5: Comparison of the performances of the pyramid structured interfaces with other reported geometries. References [ 43 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 ] are cited in the supplementary materials. Table S6: Comparison of the performances of the VG based sensor with other pressure sensors in the literature.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It can be seen that the times vary slightly with the addition of PMMA at different mass ratios. Firstly, considering the reasons that affect their performance, the viscoelastic nature of elastomers prevents long response times and obtaining high sensitivity values [61]. Secondly, the performance of the electromechanical device affects the response and relaxation times when the pressure is applied to the sample, and it cannot fully load and unload the pressure [62].…”
Section: Pressure Sensing Capacitance Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…[15] Zhu et al fabricated a piezoresistive sensor using synthetic aerogel of MXene and graphene with a sensitivity of up to 609 kPa(−1) in the range of 0-10 kPa and with a response time of 232 ms. [16] The microstructure of a flexible pressure sensor affects the contact-separation of the sensor. To effectively improve the performance of pressure sensors, a wide variety of microstructures (e.g., spyramidal, [17] dentate, [18] and biomimetic structures [19] ) have been developed through different ways, including photolithography, bionic design, and other methods. The use of porous structures with a relatively simple process can increase the sensor sensitivity and improve its mechanical properties; so, this method has been used to fabricate flexible sensors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%