| Literature DB >> 31083614 |
Donggee Rho1, Caitlyn Breaux2, Seunghyun Kim3.
Abstract
An optical cavity-based sensor using a differential detection method has been proposed for point-of-care diagnostics. We developed a low-cost and portable optical cavity-based sensor system using a 3D printer and off-the-shelf optical components. In this paper, we demonstrate the sensing capability of the portable system through refractive index measurements. Fabricated optical cavity samples were tested using the portable system and compared to simulation results. A referencing technique and digital low pass filtering were applied to reduce the noise of the portable system. The measurement results match the simulation results well and show the improved linearity and sensitivity by employing the differential detection method. The limit of detection achieved was 1.73 × 10-5 Refractive Index Unit (RIU), which is comparable to other methods for refractive index sensing.Entities:
Keywords: biosensors; optical cavity sensor; portable system; refractive index measurements
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31083614 PMCID: PMC6539703 DOI: 10.3390/s19092193
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1(a) Schematic diagram of the optical cavity-based sensor using 830 nm and 880 nm laser diodes. (b) Cross-sectional view of the optical cavity structure.
Figure 2(a) Simulation results showing efficiencies of 830 nm (blue dashed line) and 880 nm (red dotted line) and differential value (green solid line) versus the refractive index inside the optical cavity in the range between 1.328 and 1.338. (b) Simulation results as shown in Figure 2a with the range of refractive index between 1.3329 and 1.3338.
Figure 3(a) Fabricated optical cavity sample including 6 fluidic channels. 3D printed adapters are attached to inlets and outlets. (b) Prototype of portable optical cavity-based sensor. (c) Optical components mounted on the middle level plate of the portable system. (d) Schematic of servo motors (blue parts) with blocking plates (yellow parts) to block laser diodes alternately.
Figure 4The frequency response of the digital low-pass filter (LPF).
The standard deviation (STD) by applying the referencing technique and the low-pass filter (LPF) compared to that of the raw data.
| Methods | STD |
|---|---|
| Raw data | 8.49 × 10−3 |
| Apply Equation (2) | 3.35 × 10−3 |
| Apply Equation (2) and LPF | 2.29 × 10−3 |
Figure 5Measurement results showing the average pixel intensities for 830 nm (blue dashed line) and 880 nm (red dotted line) and differential value (green solid line) versus the refractive indices in the same range (1.3329–1.3338) as shown in Figure 2b.
The limit-of-detection (LOD), R2, and relative standard deviations (RSD) for 830 nm, 880 nm, and differential value obtained by the refractive index measurement.
| LOD (RIU) | R2 | RSD (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 830 nm | 3.12 × 10−5 | 0.9796 | 0.48 |
| 880 nm | 2.73 × 10−5 | 0.8803 | 0.39 |
| Differential | 1.73 × 10−5 | 0.9802 | 1.05 |