| Literature DB >> 30065193 |
Diana L Osorio-Arrieta1, José L Muñoz-Mata2, Georgina Beltrán-Pérez3, Juan Castillo-Mixcóatl4, Claudia O Mendoza-Barrera5, Víctor Altuzar-Aguilar6, Severino Muñoz-Aguirre7.
Abstract
This paper presents a new approach to reduce the measurement time by the prediction of the steady-state using the transient response to ethanol for quartz crystal microbalance gas sensors coated with ethyl cellulose. The experimentally measured response curves were successively fitted using a mathematical model based on the sum of two exponentials with different time constants. The parameters of the model were determined, and the time constants and the magnitude of the steady-state response were analyzed. Even though the time constants did not stabilize well, the parameter corresponding to the magnitude of the steady-state response quickly converged and stabilized after 37 s. Moreover, this calculated parameter was highly correlated with the measured values of the steady-state response, which was measured at five times the longest time constant (83 s) of the model. Therefore, the steady-state response could be predicted with a 55% reduction in the measurement (detection) time.Entities:
Keywords: QCM gas sensor; measurement time reduction; steady-state response prediction; transient response
Year: 2018 PMID: 30065193 PMCID: PMC6111298 DOI: 10.3390/s18082475
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Operation principle of a QCM gas sensor. (a) Gas sensor mechanism. (b) Sensor response.
Figure 2Dynamic response of the QCM gas sensor to a gas pulse stimulus.
Figure 3Experimental setup to measure the dynamic sensor response.
Figure 4Flow chart of the curve fitting algorithm.
Figure 5Curve fitting of the gas sensor response to ethanol.
Figure 6Sensor response from several measurements with respect to the ethanol concentration.
Figure 7Evolution of the time constant τ1 in function of time, as calculated from experimental data. Inset: behaviour of τ1 as a function of the ethanol concentration.
Figure 8Evolution of the time constant τ2 with time, as calculated from experimental data. Inset: behaviour of τ2 as a function of the ethanol concentration.
Figure 9Evolution of the c parameter with time, as calculated from experimental data for different ethanol concentrations.
Figure 10Comparison between the experimental steady-state response at 83 s and the calculated values of the c parameter at 37 s for different ethanol concentrations.