Seiji Wakabayashi1, Takayuki Arie1, Seiji Akita1, Kuniharu Takei1,2. 1. Department of Physics and Electronics, Osaka Prefecture University, Sakai, Osaka 599-8531, Japan. 2. JST PRESTO, Kawaguchi, Saitama 332-0012, Japan.
Abstract
In artificial intelligence and deep learning applications, data collection from a variety of objects is of great interest. One way to support such data collection is to use very thin, mechanically flexible sensor sheets, which can cover an object without altering the original shape. This study proposes a thin, macroscale, flexible, tactile pressure sensor array fabricated by a simple process for economical device applications. Using laser-induced graphene, a transfer process, and a printing method, a relatively stable, reliable, macroscale, thin (∼300 μm), flexible, tactile pressure sensor is realized. The detectable pressure range is about tens to hundreds of kPa. Then, as a proof-of-concept, the uniformity, sensitivity, repeatability, object mapping, finger pressure distribution, and pressure mapping are demonstrated under bending conditions. Although many flexible, tactile pressure sensors have been reported, the proposed structure has the potential for macroscale, thin, flexible, tactile pressure sensor sheets because of the simple and easy fabrication process.
In artificial intelligence and deep learning applications, data collection from a variety of objects is of great interest. One way to support such data collection is to use very thin, mechanically flexible sensor sheets, which can cover an object without altering the original shape. This study proposes a thin, macroscale, flexible, tactile pressure sensor array fabricated by a simple process for economical device applications. Using laser-induced graphene, a transfer process, and a printing method, a relatively stable, reliable, macroscale, thin (∼300 μm), flexible, tactile pressure sensor is realized. The detectable pressure range is about tens to hundreds of kPa. Then, as a proof-of-concept, the uniformity, sensitivity, repeatability, object mapping, finger pressure distribution, and pressure mapping are demonstrated under bending conditions. Although many flexible, tactile pressure sensors have been reported, the proposed structure has the potential for macroscale, thin, flexible, tactile pressure sensor sheets because of the simple and easy fabrication process.
In the next phase of the
“Internet of Things (IoT)”
society, the ability to analyze tremendous information data from a
variety of objects will be instrumental in predicting trends and enhancing
human life. To collect vast amounts of datasets from objects, including
nonplanar surfaces, conformally attached macroscale, flexible, and
stretchable sensor sheets are of great interest as alternatives to
conventional inflexible sensor chips. In fact, mechanically flexible
sensors have been proposed for applications of wearable devices,[1−6] robotics,[7−9] electronic skins,[10−18] environmental monitoring,[19] and others[20−22] by integrating diverse sensors on a film such as tactile pressure,
strain, temperature, and chemical sensors. Flexible pressure sensors
are important components in many applications. For example, they monitor
the pressure distribution in a vehicle that requires human/object
motion detection and fluid dynamics such as a car or an airplane.In these applications, macroscale, flexible sensor sheets, which
can cover the large object conformally, are required. However, such
devices have size limitations and are cost prohibitive because the
fabrication process involves clean room facilities, including a vacuum
deposition system.[7,10,12,13,15,23] To overcome this challenge, some material transfer,
printing, and laser ablation techniques have been proposed to form
active materials on a macroscale, flexible film.[14,19,24,25] In particular,
macroscale, flexible, tactile pressure sensor arrays have been widely
developed as resistive, capacitive, and piezoelectric type sensors.[8,26−30] Although different potential fabrication processes have been proposed,
practical products of macroscale, flexible pressure sensor arrays
have not been released to date. Because of this reason, another efficient
fabrication process may be required to move forward to building practical
device applications.In this study, we propose a macroscale,
very thin, tactile pressure
sensor array to monitor the pressure distribution on various surfaces
without disturbing the original shape by developing a simple fabrication
process. Unlike conventional inflexible sensor chips, which must be
affixed to an object with a design change, very thin film-based flexible
sensor arrays can be located in any place with a negligible change
in shape. This conformal and very thin covering of the sensor over
the object is advantageous for applications where a shape change due
to attaching a sensor is detrimental. A high-pressure range can be
detected although the sensor sheet is thin (∼300 μm).
Furthermore, a simple macroscale fabrication method is proposed using
a laser-induced graphene (LIG) layer, transfer method, and printing
techniques, resulting in good scalability. After characterizing the
fundamental tactile pressure properties, finger pressure mapping on
a pen and roller pressure distribution monitoring are demonstrated
as proofs-of-concept for applications in the rehabilitation field.
Results and Discussion
Figure shows the
detailed fabrication process and photos of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS)
films with LIG layers and the tactile pressure device laminated by
PDMS onto polyethylene terephthalate (PET) films. Because the sensor
sheet is very flexible, it can easily cover various surfaces without
drastically changing the object shape. It should be noted that large-scale
(6 × 6 cm2) sensor sheets can be readily fabricated
using simple transfer and screen-printing processes.
Figure 1
(a) Fabrication process
for flexible, tactile pressure sensor sheets.
Photos of (b) the LIG-embedded PDMS thin film and (c) the tactile
pressure sensor sheet. (d) SEM image of the surface of the LIG-embedded
PDMS film. (e) Raman spectroscopy of the LIG film before and after
transferring onto PDMS.
(a) Fabrication process
for flexible, tactile pressure sensor sheets.
Photos of (b) the LIG-embedded PDMS thin film and (c) the tactile
pressure sensor sheet. (d) SEM image of the surface of the LIG-embedded
PDMS film. (e) Raman spectroscopy of the LIG film before and after
transferring onto PDMS.
LIG
Scanning electron microscopy
(SEM) was used to investigate the LIG film transferred onto the PDMS
substrate (Figure d). The LIG film had a periodic line structure with a distance of
about 100 μm because of the laser scanning step. This structure
was a consequence of our laser machine. Because of random LIG formation,
the LIG surface after transfer was also rough. The LIG-embedded PDMS
surface had a wave structure, where the height of the LIG region in
PDMS was higher than that of the non-LIG region. This height difference
was about 50 μm. This waved surface realized a contact area
difference as a function of the applied pressure. The detailed mechanism
is discussed later. For the transferred LIG layer, the Raman spectrum
displayed peaks at 1350 cm–1 (D-band) and 1580 cm–1 (G-band) (Figure e). Although the distinctive 2D peak (2700 cm–1) of graphene was observed before transferring the LIG films on the
polyimide (PI) films onto PDMS, this peak disappeared after transferring,
indicating that the transferred LIG layers are randomly located and
contain many defects.
Sensing Mechanism
The contact area
dependence corresponding to the contact resistance was used to detect
tactile pressure as a resistive-type sensor. Figure a schematically depicts images with and without
tactile pressure over a sensor. When a pressure is applied to the
sensor, the contact area between LIG and Ag electrodes increases because
of deformation of the LIG-PDMS layer, which decreases the contact
resistance R1 compared to the initial
resistance R0 (i.e., R1 < R0). Because
the LIG-PDMS surface has a waved structure, the contact area is largely
changed by deforming the LIG-PDMS structure. Hence, an applied pressure
can be detected by measuring the change in the contact resistance.
Figure 2
(a) Schematics
of the sensing mechanism. (b) Total device thickness
and (c) initial resistance of the sensor as functions of the laser
power to form the LIG film. (d) Initial sensor resistance distributions
at 10 W laser power. (e) Sensor resistance change ratio at different
laser powers as a function of the applied pressure. (f) Sensor sensitivity
distribution extracted at 56.6 kPa applied pressure at 10 W laser
power. (g) Sensitivity at three applied pressure ranges (28.3, 283,
and 566 kPa) for three different laser powers.
(a) Schematics
of the sensing mechanism. (b) Total device thickness
and (c) initial resistance of the sensor as functions of the laser
power to form the LIG film. (d) Initial sensor resistance distributions
at 10 W laser power. (e) Sensor resistance change ratio at different
laser powers as a function of the applied pressure. (f) Sensor sensitivity
distribution extracted at 56.6 kPa applied pressure at 10 W laser
power. (g) Sensitivity at three applied pressure ranges (28.3, 283,
and 566 kPa) for three different laser powers.
Flexible, Tactile Pressure Sensors
The
total device thickness is discussed as a function of the laser
power for LIG formation. Increasing the laser power increases the
LIG thickness. To transfer all LIG layers onto the PDMS film, the
film must be thicker than the LIG layer thickness. Consequently, the
total device thickness changes linearly with the laser power at a
rate of ∼43.5 μm/W starting at 5 W laser power (i.e., ∼215 μm at 10 W and ∼302 μm
at 20 W) (Figure b).The initial resistance without applied pressure of the sensor was
measured. The initial resistance decreases as the laser power increases
because of the change in the thickness of the LIG film (Figure c). Importantly, the initial
resistance value corresponds to the reproducibility. This is because
the resistance value relies on the LIG nanostructure contact in the
PDMS film. The probability of poor electrical connections is higher
for a low-density LIG film at a low laser power condition. The resistance
distribution for the sample at 10 W is 1062 ± 610 Ω (Figure d), whereas that
at 5 W is 4901 ± 2616 Ω.To extract the sensor sensitivity
at different applied pressures, Figure e shows the resistance
change ratio, which is expressed by ΔR/R0, where ΔR is the resistance difference
between R1 and R0. The resistance largely decreases in the lower pressure range
below 100 kPa, regardless of the laser power condition, whereas the
resistance change is much smaller in the higher pressure range (i.e., >100 kPa). In this structure, ∼30 kPa is
the
minimum pressure to detect tactile pressure stably. Because the resistance-change
trends in lower and higher pressure ranges differ, the sensitivities
extracted by the linear fitting are separated by these ranges (∼28,
∼280, and ∼560 kPa). The sensitivity distribution at
56.6 kPa and 10 W laser power depicts that the sensitivity is about
−0.6 ± 0.3%/kPa (Figure f). Figure g shows the sensitivity for each different laser power and
pressure range. The maximum sensitivity achieved by the 5 W laser
power is about −1.48%/kPa, whereas that for the 15 W laser
condition sample is about −0.177%/kPa in the 28.3 kPa pressure
range. Although the device fabricated by 5 W laser power has both
better sensitivity and less thickness, its reproducibility and uniformity
(sensitivity at 28.3 kPa is −1.48 ± 3.29%/kPa) are not
good, whereas the sample at 10 W laser shows −0.18 ± 0.02%/kPa.
Reproducibility is an important factor to practically detect the applied
pressure distribution. Consequently, the 10 W laser power condition
was used for further characteristics and demonstrations. By considering
the commercial application, the uniformity even at higher laser power
is still not good enough. To improve the uniformity, probably, the
formation of LIG layers and the embedding process using PDMS solution
should be optimized, which are beyond the scope of this study. Further,
it should be noted that because of the use of LIG embedded onto the
PDMS film, temperature dependence of the LIG-PDMS resistance was observed.
However, to understand the sensing mechanism and characterize the
performance precisely, we need further studies for this temperature
dependence. Because of this reason, the results about the temperature
dependence are not shown in this report.Figure a shows
the applied pressure and the corresponding resistance change ratio
of the sensor in real-time measurement. A stable resistance change
is observed by applying pressure. Hysteresis of the pressure sensor
is an important parameter for continuous pressure monitoring. To evaluate
the sensor properties, the response time of the pressure sensors was
measured by applying a pulse pressure with a duration of about 0.7
s. This speed is a limitation of the equipment used in this study
(Figure b). Based
on the results, the response time is less than 0.1 s. Because of the
experimental setup limitation, it can be concluded that the sensor
has a capability to measure the pressure with an operating speed of
>10 Hz. Although the recovery time after releasing the pressure
quickly
returns close to the initial value (within 0.1 s), it takes ∼0.9
s to completely restore the initial value. This slow recovery time
is attributed to the slow deformation of the PDMS elastomer polymer,
which should be improved in the future. However, because the resistance
error immediately after applying pressure is small, the pressure distribution
can be readily monitored using this simple platform for applications
where a small error is acceptable.
Figure 3
(a) Continuous real-time pressure monitoring
and (b) response time
measurement results. Top: applied pressure. Bottom: sensor resistance
change ratio. (c) Resistance change ratio as a function of the sensor
bending radius. (d) Repeatable cycle test for about 4500 cycles for
>6 h. Insets show enlarged graphs of the sensor response at the
beginning
and end of the cycle tests.
(a) Continuous real-time pressure monitoring
and (b) response time
measurement results. Top: applied pressure. Bottom: sensor resistance
change ratio. (c) Resistance change ratio as a function of the sensor
bending radius. (d) Repeatable cycle test for about 4500 cycles for
>6 h. Insets show enlarged graphs of the sensor response at the
beginning
and end of the cycle tests.Thin, flexible pressure sensors must detect the applied pressure
distribution correctly, regardless of the target surface shape. To
demonstrate this, a mechanical flexibility test was conducted by measuring
the resistance change under bending conditions (Figure c). The sensor resistance change is independent
of the bending radius above 2 cm. However, the sensor resistance increases
gradually below 2 cm radius and drastically at 0.075 cm radius. This
is attributed to the reduced contact between LIG and Ag electrodes
because of the large lateral deformation of the PDMS film caused by
the bending strain. Not only can this sensor cover an object with
>2 cm radius, it can also be used for objects with smaller radius
up to 0.075 cm, if accurate pressure detection is not required. It
should be noted that 0.022 cm radius was also tested. However, after
bending the sensor, the sensor resistance does not return to the initial
resistance at the flat state, concluding that the sensor cannot be
used under such a small radius.To shed further light on the
tactile pressure sensor characteristics,
a repeatable cycle test of the pressure application was conducted. Figure d shows the results
for >4500 cycles at ∼70 kPa for >6 h. The sensor resistance
change for the whole cycle test is relatively stable, although a small
resistance drift is observed in the first 10 min of the experiment.
It should be noted that the applied pressure fluctuates because of
the equipment used in this measurement. The resistance change of the
sensor also responds to the fluctuating pressure, suggesting that
the sensor is stable and can reliably detect multicycle pressure applications.
It is worthy to note that the resistance increases right after applying
tactile pressure, as clearly shown in Figure b,d. This is because the LIG-PDMS layer is
also deformed and stretched laterally when the pressure is applied,
resulting in an increase in the resistance of LIG-PDMS. At a low applied
pressure, most likely, the resistance change of the deformation of
LIG-PDMS is large compared to the change of contact resistance between
LIG-PDMS and Ag electrodes.
Demonstrations
As a proof-of-concept
of a thin, flexible, tactile pressure sensor, a 4 × 4 sensor
array monitored the applied pressure distributions. The resistance
changes of all pixels were simultaneously recorded by a data logger.
First, objects representing the letters of “O,” “P,”
and “U” (Figure a) were placed and pressurized over the sensor. Figure b displays the pressure mapping
of the resistance change ratio for each pressure sensor. The letters
are detected along the object shape.
Figure 4
(a) Photos of “O,” “P,”
and “U”
shape objects. (b) Pressure mapping when the objects in (a) are applied
onto the sensor sheet. (c) Photo of a pen conformally covered by the
sensor sheet on a hand. (d) Pressure distribution when the pen is
held by the hand shown in (c). (e) Photos of the roller with sensor
sheets while rolling from the left to right. (f) Pressure mapping
when the roller is rolling as shown in (e).
(a) Photos of “O,” “P,”
and “U”
shape objects. (b) Pressure mapping when the objects in (a) are applied
onto the sensor sheet. (c) Photo of a pen conformally covered by the
sensor sheet on a hand. (d) Pressure distribution when the pen is
held by the hand shown in (c). (e) Photos of the roller with sensor
sheets while rolling from the left to right. (f) Pressure mapping
when the roller is rolling as shown in (e).The finger pressure distribution was demonstrated on a pen with
a 1.3 cm radius (Figure c). Even under a bending condition, the pressure distribution due
to fingers is correctly monitored (Figure d). Thus, the sensor can quantitatively measure
human motion for applications such as rehabilitation.The final
demonstration monitored the pressure distribution of
a roller covered by a flexible, tactile pressure sensor sheet while
rolling it on a floor (Figure e). The pressurized position can be precisely monitored by
the sensor sheet without changing the object shape during rolling
on a floor (Figure f). These findings agree well with the position of the roller movement
shown in Figure e.
Conclusions
This study demonstrates a macroscale,
thin, flexible, tactile pressure
sensor array formed by LIG/PDMS and Ag electrodes on the PET film.
The main advantage is its scalability including the large sheet size
and small thickness via a very simple process. Despite a simple fabrication
process, the sensor shows a relatively high stability, reproductivity,
and reliability in a pressure range from tens to hundreds of kPa.
Compared to other flexible, tactile pressure sensor arrays, the sensitivity
and flexibility are not remarkable. However, the proposed macroscale
simple fabrication process for the planar integrated sensor array
may be a possible practical method. Furthermore, by integrating the
sensor into an array formation, the applied pressure distribution
can be successfully monitored without affecting the object shape.
The sensor structure, material, and thickness may be optimized for
small pressure ranges less than 10 kPa. For this low-pressure detection,
the LIG-PDMS layer should be thinner to obtain more mechanical flexibility.
However, to obtain more flexibility, the detectable high-pressure
range may be sacrificed. Depending on the application, the film thickness
corresponding to the pressure range should be designed. In principle,
this sensor platform can be applied to a variety of pressure ranges,
which will be the target of a future study. Although many flexible,
tactile pressure sensors have been reported, this proposed sensor
has great promise for practical applications such as detecting smooth
human motion over an object for rehabilitation or monitoring the pressure
distribution from a shallow space in an industrial setting.
Experimental Section
Fabrication Process
Figure a illustrates
the fabrication
process. LIG films were formed by carbonizing 125 μm thick PI
films using a CO2 laser (Universal VLS2.30, USA) [Fig. a(1)].[24,25,31] The LIG film size corresponding
to one-pixel is 3 × 3 mm2. An uncured PDMS solution
(Dow Silicones, SYLGARD184, USA) was poured on the PI films with the
LIG films, and the subsequent spin-coating realized a PDMS thin film.
The PDMS was cured at 90 °C for 10 min [Figure a(2)]. The thinnest PDMS film in this study
was ∼200 μm thick because thinner films were torn during
the fabrication process. Next, the PDMS was peeled from the PI films
to transfer the LIG films onto the PDMS [Figure a(3,4)]. This transfer process firmly embedded
the LIG film in the PDMS because of random, vertical, and porous LIG
films on the PI films. Furthermore, silver (Ag) electrodes were printed
and cured at 90 °C on a PET film (38 μm) using screen printing
for both interconnections and contacts with the LIG films [Figure a(5)]. Finally, the
PDMS substrate with the LIG films and the Ag electrodes on the PET
film were laminated [Figure a(6)]. The adhesion between the PDMS substrate and the PET
film was relatively strong because of the conformal covering over
the PET film realized by the thin film and the strong adhesion of
PDMS on the PET film.
Demonstration
For the pressure distribution
mapping, each resistive tactile pressure sensor was connected to a
resistor in series to make a voltage divider. The applied voltage
was 2 V. A data logger (LR8401, HIOKI) was used to simultaneously
detect the voltage change caused by the sensor resistance change.