| Literature DB >> 30857265 |
Amjad Iqbal1, Amor Smida2,3, Omar A Saraereh4, Qais H Alsafasfeh5, Nazih Khaddaj Mallat6, Byung Moo Lee7.
Abstract
A compact, cylindrical dielectric resonator antenna (CDRA), using radio frequency signals to identify different liquids is proposed in this paper. The proposed CDRA sensor is excited by a rectangular slot through a 3-mm-wide microstrip line. The rectangular slot has been used to excite the CDRA for H E M 11 mode at 5.25 GHz. Circuit model values (capacitance, inductance, resistance and transformer ratios) of the proposed CDRA are derived to show the true behaviour of the system. The proposed CDRA acts as a sensor due to the fact that different liquids have different dielectric permittivities and, hence, will be having different resonance frequencies. Two different types of CDRA sensors are designed and experimentally validated with four different liquids (Isopropyl, ethanol, methanol and water).Entities:
Keywords: S-parameters; chemical sensing; circuit model; dielectric resonator
Year: 2019 PMID: 30857265 PMCID: PMC6427509 DOI: 10.3390/s19051200
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Proposed cylindrical dielectric resonator antenna to be used as a sensor (Ls = 7 mm, Ws = 2 mm, Hdra = 9 mm, h = 1.6 mm).
Figure 2Equivalent circuit model of the complete antenna system.
Figure 3Comparison of the EM model and equivalent circuit model: (a) Impedance (b) Return loss.
Equivalent circuit model components values.
| Components | Values | Components | Values | Components | Values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 250 |
| 950 |
| 0.50 |
|
| 0.981 pF |
| 1.915 pF |
| 1.382 |
|
| 0.67 nH |
| 0.793 nH |
Figure 4E-fields and H-fields distribution on DRA (a) Top view: E-fields (b) Top view: H-fields (c) Side view: E-fields (d) Side view: H-fields.
Figure 5Types of DRA-based sensors (a) Type 1: One cylindrical microwell for liquid testing (LT) (b) Type 2: Two cylindrical microwells for LT.
Figure 6Reflection coefficient of the sensors for different liquid chemicals (a) Type 1 sensor (b) Type 2 sensor.
Figure 7Type1: Frequency shift and sensitivity against (a) Radius of the microwell (b) Height of the microwell.
Figure 8Type2: Frequency shift and sensitivity against (a) Radius of the microwells (b) Height of the microwells.
Figure 9Measured results for CDRA sensor (a) Type 1 sensor (b) Type 2 sensor.
Comparison of the two types of sensors.
| No. | Resonance Frequency | Average Sensitivity |
| Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Type 1 Sensor | 5.25 GHz | 8.75 MHz/ | 202 MHz | 0.0024 |
| Type 2 Sensor | 5.25 GHz | 10.28 MHz/ | 450 MHz | 0.0031 |
represents the average sensitivity obtained through relation of . represents the maximum frequency shift among all the chemicals. is the sensitivity obtained through (5).
Comparison with the already designed sensors.
| Ref. | Size ( | Technology | Sensing | Sensitivity (MHz/ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | 0.5 × 0.5 | 4.4 | SIW | 500 | Single | 9.35–101 KHz/RH |
| [ | NA | 4–5 | SIW | 112.1, 265.7 | Dual | 17.5, 25.7 |
| [ | 1.25 × 1.25 | 5 | SIW | 380 | Single | 69.07 |
| [ | 0.21 × 0.21 | 2.02, 3.34 | Microstrip | 281, 309 | Dual | 3.57, 3.9 |
| [ | NA | 4.7 | SIW | 70 | Single | 12.73 |
| [ | 0.43 × 0.93 | 5.85 | SIW | 38 | Single | 5.84 |
| [ | 1.7 × 1.98 | 17 | SIW | 145 | Single | 26.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|