Literature DB >> 30488253

Orthogonal gas sensor arrays by chemoresistive material design.

Nicolay J Pineau1, Julia F Kompalla1, Andreas T Güntner2, Sotiris E Pratsinis1.   

Abstract

Gas sensor arrays often lack discrimination power to different analytes and robustness to interferants, limiting their success outside of research laboratories. This is primarily due to the widely sensitive (thus weakly-selective) nature of the constituent sensors. Here, the effect of orthogonality on array accuracy and precision by selective sensor design is investigated. Therefore, arrays of (2-5) selective and non-selective sensors are formed by systematically altering array size and composition. Their performance is evaluated with 60 random combinations of ammonia, acetone and ethanol at ppb to low ppm concentrations. Best analyte predictions with high coefficients of determination (R2) of 0.96 for ammonia, 0.99 for acetone and 0.88 for ethanol are obtained with an array featuring high degree of orthogonality. This is achieved by using distinctly selective sensors (Si:MoO3 for ammonia and Si:WO3 for acetone together with Si:SnO2) that improve discrimination power and stability of the regression coefficients. On the other hand, arrays with collinear sensors (Pd:SnO2, Pt:SnO2 and Si:SnO2) hardly improve gas predictions having R2 of 0.01, 0.86 and 0.28 for ammonia, acetone and ethanol, respectively. Sometimes they even exhibited lower coefficient of determination than single sensors as a Si:MoO3 sensor alone predicts ammonia better with a R2 of 0.68. Graphical abstract Conventional arrays (red) with weakly-selective sensors span a significantly smaller volume in the analyte space than arrays containing distinctly-selective sensors (orthogonal array, green). Orthogonal arrays feature better accuracy and precision than conventional arrays in mixtures of ammonia, acetone and ethanol.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acetone; Ammonia; Electronic nose; Ethanol; Flame spray pyrolysis; Gas sensor; MoO3; SnO2; WO3

Year:  2018        PMID: 30488253     DOI: 10.1007/s00604-018-3104-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mikrochim Acta        ISSN: 0026-3672            Impact factor:   5.833


  15 in total

1.  Time variation of ammonia, acetone, isoprene and ethanol in breath: a quantitative SIFT-MS study over 30 days.

Authors:  Ann M Diskin; Patrik Spanel; David Smith
Journal:  Physiol Meas       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.833

2.  Can the electronic nose really sniff out lung cancer?

Authors:  Michael Phillips
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2005-10-15       Impact factor: 21.405

3.  Electronic nose: current status and future trends.

Authors:  Frank Röck; Nicolae Barsan; Udo Weimar
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2008-01-19       Impact factor: 60.622

Review 4.  A review on chemiresistive room temperature gas sensors based on metal oxide nanostructures, graphene and 2D transition metal dichalcogenides.

Authors:  Nirav Joshi; Takeshi Hayasaka; Yumeng Liu; Huiliang Liu; Osvaldo N Oliveira; Liwei Lin
Journal:  Mikrochim Acta       Date:  2018-03-10       Impact factor: 5.833

5.  Analysis of volatile organic compounds in the breath of patients with stable or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Authors:  Alex Pizzini; Wojciech Filipiak; Johannes Wille; Clemens Ager; Helmut Wiesenhofer; Róbert Kubinec; Jaroslav Blaško; Christoph Tschurtschenthaler; Chris A Mayhew; Günter Weiss; Rosa Bellmann-Weiler
Journal:  J Breath Res       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 3.262

6.  Analysis of discrimination mechanisms in the mammalian olfactory system using a model nose.

Authors:  K Persaud; G Dodd
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1982-09-23       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Highly Selective and Rapid Breath Isoprene Sensing Enabled by Activated Alumina Filter.

Authors:  Jan van den Broek; Andreas T Güntner; Sotiris E Pratsinis
Journal:  ACS Sens       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 7.711

8.  Noninvasive Body Fat Burn Monitoring from Exhaled Acetone with Si-doped WO3-sensing Nanoparticles.

Authors:  A T Güntner; N A Sievi; S J Theodore; T Gulich; M Kohler; S E Pratsinis
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 6.986

9.  Development of an Exhaled Breath Monitoring System with Semiconductive Gas Sensors, a Gas Condenser Unit, and Gas Chromatograph Columns.

Authors:  Toshio Itoh; Toshio Miwa; Akihiro Tsuruta; Takafumi Akamatsu; Noriya Izu; Woosuck Shin; Jangchul Park; Toyoaki Hida; Takeshi Eda; Yasuhiro Setoguchi
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 10.  Measuring breath acetone for monitoring fat loss: Review.

Authors:  Joseph C Anderson
Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 5.002

View more
  6 in total

1.  Temperature-controlled resistive sensing of gaseous H2S or NO2 by using flower-like palladium-doped SnO2 nanomaterials.

Authors:  Lingling Meng; Yuliang Li; Man Yang; Xiaohong Chuai; Zhijie Zhou; Changhua Hu; Peng Sun; Fangmeng Liu; Xu Yan; Geyu Lu
Journal:  Mikrochim Acta       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 5.833

2.  Highly crystalline {010} facet grown α-MoO3 nanobelts for resistive sensing of n-butanol vapor at room temperature.

Authors:  Parthasarathy Srinivasan; John Bosco Balaguru Rayappan
Journal:  Mikrochim Acta       Date:  2019-11-16       Impact factor: 5.833

3.  Palladium embedded in SnO2 enhances the sensitivity of flame-made chemoresistive gas sensors.

Authors:  Nicolay J Pineau; Sebastian D Keller; Andreas T Güntner; Sotiris E Pratsinis
Journal:  Mikrochim Acta       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 5.833

4.  Exploring SnxTi1-xO2 Solid Solutions Grown onto Graphene Oxide (GO) as Selective Toluene Gas Sensors.

Authors:  Eleonora Pargoletti; Simone Verga; Gian Luca Chiarello; Mariangela Longhi; Giuseppina Cerrato; Alessia Giordana; Giuseppe Cappelletti
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 5.076

5.  Facile Chemical Bath Synthesis of SnS Nanosheets and Their Ethanol Sensing Properties.

Authors:  Wei Shan; Zhengqian Fu; Mingsheng Ma; Zhifu Liu; Zhenggang Xue; Jiaqiang Xu; Faqiang Zhang; Yongxiang Li
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 6.  Gas sensors using ordered macroporous oxide nanostructures.

Authors:  Zhengfei Dai; Tingting Liang; Jong-Heun Lee
Journal:  Nanoscale Adv       Date:  2019-02-05
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.