| Literature DB >> 27554792 |
Yang Gao1,2, Jingfeng Song3,4, Shumin Li2,4, Christian Elowsky5, You Zhou5, Stephen Ducharme3,4, Yong Mei Chen1, Qin Zhou2,4, Li Tan2,4.
Abstract
Exploring the abundant resources in the ocean requires underwater acoustic detectors with a high-sensitivity reception of low-frequency sound from greater distances and zero reflections. Here we address both challenges by integrating an easily deformable network of metal nanoparticles in a hydrogel matrix for use as a cavity-free microphone. Since metal nanoparticles can be densely implanted as inclusions, and can even be arranged in coherent arrays, this microphone can detect static loads and air breezes from different angles, as well as underwater acoustic signals from 20 Hz to 3 kHz at amplitudes as low as 4 Pa. Unlike dielectric capacitors or cavity-based microphones that respond to stimuli by deforming the device in thickness directions, this hydrogel device responds with a transient modulation of electric double layers, resulting in an extraordinary sensitivity (217 nF kPa(-1) or 24 μC N(-1) at a bias of 1.0 V) without using any signal amplification tools.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27554792 PMCID: PMC4999501 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms12316
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Figure 1Highlight of hydrogel microphone.
(a) Photos (full view and sliced) and (b) scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image of the hydrogel membrane implanted with a patch (3 × 3 mm2) of silver dendrites (highlighted yellow). (c) Set-up and circuit using the membrane as a microphone. (d) Better performance of the hydrogel microphone at low frequencies than a commercial device (hydrophone). (e) Hydrogel microphone is capable of detecting underwater sound at 2 kHz and (f) at all angles. Note: the 0° orientation is for top surface of the microphone facing towards the loudspeaker.
Figure 2Fabrication of hydrogel microphones and their response to static pressures.
(a) Steps to fabricate deformable network of metal nanoparticles (MNPs) and surface electrode: (step 1) hydrogel pre-soaked in an aqueous bath of AgNO3 (10 mM); (step 2) hydrogel is sandwiched and biased between an amorphous silicon (a-Si) and an ITO plate; (step 3) photo-activated a-Si reduces Ag+ into Ag(0) nanoparticles at specific locations; (step 4) MNP–hydrogel soaked in copper sulfate bath to prepare a smooth and robust layer of surface electrodes. (b) Photos of patterned Ag nanoparticles in skin depth of the hydrogel. Scale bar, 3.0 mm. (c) High-resolution SEM image and schematic of a dendritic MNP network inside the hydrogel. (d) MNP–hydrogel (solid lines) responds to a static pressure of 5.4 kPa with more than four times in relative capacitance change or seven to eight times in capacitance change than MNP-free device (dashed lines). Note: data from Table 1, where tests with three samples for each data point are performed. The relative errors of ΔC and ΔC/C for MNP–hydrogel are, respectively, 21–25% and 3.5–4.5%. For MNP-free hydrogel, the relative errors of ΔC and ΔC/C0 are, respectively, 13.0–13.5% and 3.0–4.0% (Supplementary Table 1).
Pressure-induced capacitance change.
| 10−2 | 0.94 | 0.05 | 5.3 | 10.9 | 3.45 | 0.83 | 24.0 | 17.7 |
| 1 | 6.38 | 0.3 | 4.7 | 9.6 | 15.625 | 2.5 | 16.0 | 10.8 |
| 10 | 15 | 0.6 | 4.0 | 8.2 | 36.67 | 4.4 | 12.0 | 7.7 |
| 100 | 81.5 | 2.2 | 2.7 | 5.5 | 170.73 | 14 | 8.2 | 5.4 |
| 1,000 | 312.5 | 5.0 | 1.6 | 3.2 | 476.2 | 10 | 2.1 | 0.5 |
Note: all the values of C0, ΔC and ΔC/C0 showed here are the average values using three samples by performing one test on each sample.
Ion concentration modulation (Δn/n) and deformable MNP (ΔA/A) in hydrogel capacitors contribute to capacitance variation under a static pressure of 5.4 kPa.
Figure 3Response of hydrogel capacitors to deformations in air.
(a) Deformable network of metal nanoparticles (MNPs) makes the hydrogel sensitive to external load: (stress free) MNP network has fractal branches not yet wide open for EDL (electric double layer) build-up; (Compression) vertical pressure separates fractal branches apart (d>d and d'>d'), promoting charge trapping (increased capacitance due to EDL insertion); and (shear) lateral pressure squeezes branches together (ds
Figure 4Response of hydrogel microphone to underwater acoustic waves.
Hydrogel microphone with (a) a low (10−2 mM) or (b) high (100 mM) ion concentration responds to sound waves with different voltage output. (c) Capacitance change in microphone under sound pressures from 4 to 70 Pa, where gel membrane of 100 mM ions (unfilled squares) gives a higher sensitivity (217 nF kPa−1; device area of 9 mm2) than that of 10−2 mM (unfilled circles). (d) Frequency response of the hydrogel microphone from 20 Hz to 3 kHz, where ion concentration and bias direction affect the performance of the hydrogel microphone. Error bars (95% confidence) represent the variation of measurements due to sound interference inside the water tank. (e) Fourier transform on the frequency response further reveals a periodicity that is supposed to be caused by some form of wave propagating and interference through the thickness of the hydrogel. The wave velocity can be calculated from the periodicity (55 Hz) extracted in e and the thickness of the hydrogel (1 mm) to be 0.055 m s−1. This is further verified by the phase delay measurement shown in f, where a linearly increasing negative phase shift can be observed in the hydrogel devices (red—10−2 mM; dark blue—100 mM) but not the commercial hydrophone (light blue). This phase shift indicates a time delay of 15–20 ms, which suggest a wave velocity of 0.05–0.067 m s−1 (using 1 mm hydrogel thickness). The nature of this slowly propagating wave in the hydrogel is suspected to be ion concentration wave.