| Literature DB >> 31684134 |
Rongkun Wang1, Xuejian Xie2, Xiangang Xu3, Xiufang Chen4, Longfei Xiao5.
Abstract
Silicon-diaphragm-based fiber-optic Fabry-Perot sensors with different intracavity pressures were fabricated by anodic bonding and microelectromechanical techniques. The thermal stress and thermal expansion of the Fabry-Perot (FP) sensor caused by high-temperature bonding and temperature change were simulated by finite-element analysis. The calculated thermal stress is largest in the center and edge regions of the resonance cavity, reaching from 2 to 6 MPa. The reflection spectra and temperature sensitivity of the sensors were simulated by using a two-dimensional wave-optic model in Comsol. Theoretical calculations were also made for the FP cavity without considering silicon-diaphragm deformation and thermal stress. Four sensors with intracavity pressures of 0.01, 0.03, 0.04, and 0.05 MPa were tested at low temperatures, showing a high degree of consistency with the simulation results rather than theoretical calculation, especially for high intracavity pressure. This method is expected to aid the analysis of thermal stress generated during the bonding process and to facilitate better design and control of the temperature sensitivity of the sensor.Entities:
Keywords: fiber-optic Fabry–Perot sensor; finite-element analysis; temperature sensor
Year: 2019 PMID: 31684134 PMCID: PMC6864838 DOI: 10.3390/s19214780
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Schematic diagram of sensor diaphragm.
Figure 2Simulation results for (a) thermal stress and (b) thermal expansion of the sensor head.
Figure 3Thermal expansion coefficient of silicon.
Figure 4Simulation of distribution of electric-field intensity.
Figure 5Simulated reflection spectrum of the sensor.
Figure 6Simulated reflection spectra for different temperatures.
Figure 7Simulation of temperature sensitivity of sensor: Wavelength shift versus temperature.
Figure 8Simulation of temperature sensitivity of sensor for different intracavity pressures.
Figure 9Experimental setup.
Figure 10Optical-microscope image of sensor.
Figure 11Reflection spectra at different temperatures.
Figure 12Wavelength shift versus temperature for different intracavity pressures: (a) 0.01 MPa; (b) 0.03 MPa; (c) 0.04 MPa; (d) 0.05 MPa.