| Literature DB >> 35056284 |
Farid Sayar Irani1, Ali Hosseinpour Shafaghi1, Melih Can Tasdelen1, Tugce Delipinar1, Ceyda Elcin Kaya2, Guney Guven Yapici3, Murat Kaya Yapici1,4,5.
Abstract
High accuracy measurement of mechanical strain is critical and broadly practiced in several application areas including structural health monitoring, industrial process control, manufacturing, avionics and the automotive industry, to name a few. Strain sensors, otherwise known as strain gauges, are fueled by various nanomaterials, among which graphene has attracted great interest in recent years, due to its unique electro-mechanical characteristics. Graphene shows not only exceptional physical properties but also has remarkable mechanical properties, such as piezoresistivity, which makes it a perfect candidate for strain sensing applications. In the present review, we provide an in-depth overview of the latest studies focusing on graphene and its strain sensing mechanism along with various applications. We start by providing a description of the fundamental properties, synthesis techniques and characterization methods of graphene, and then build forward to the discussion of numerous types of graphene-based strain sensors with side-by-side tabular comparison in terms of figures-of-merit, including strain range and sensitivity, otherwise referred to as the gauge factor. We demonstrate the material synthesis, device fabrication and integration challenges for researchers to achieve both wide strain range and high sensitivity in graphene-based strain sensors. Last of all, several applications of graphene-based strain sensors for different purposes are described. All in all, the evolutionary process of graphene-based strain sensors in recent years, as well as the upcoming challenges and future directions for emerging studies are highlighted.Entities:
Keywords: MEMS; gauge factor; graphene; graphene transfer and integration; piezoresistance; piezoresistivity; strain gauge; strain sensor
Year: 2022 PMID: 35056284 PMCID: PMC8779301 DOI: 10.3390/mi13010119
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
Figure 1Piezoresistivity mechanisms of graphene: (a) symmetrical strain distribution, asymmetrical strain distribution perpendicular to C-C bonds and asymmetrical strain distribution parallel to C-C bonds [51]; (b) schematic illustration of piezoresistivity of graphene sheets [71]; (c) schematic illustration of the tunneling model. Reprinted with permission from ref. [72]. Copyright Clearance Center.
Figure 2Overview of the most common techniques to obtain graphene categorized based on top-down and bottom-up processes, along with a tabular comparison on the thickness, lateral size, fundamental advantages and disadvantages of each technique. Reprinted with permission from ref. [74].
Figure 3Methods for synthesizing graphene (a) Schematic of the initial state growth of graphene on copper from ethanol-CVD method. Adapted with permission from ref. [90]. Copyright (2013) American Chemical Society. (b) Schematic illustration of the mechanical exfoliation [92]. (c) An image of graphene flakes on scotch tape [93]. (d) Optical microscopy image of relatively large few layers of transferred graphene flakes on a SiO2/Si. Reprinted from ref. [94], with the permission of AIP Publishing. (e) Schematic diagram of chemical exfoliation by ethanol to form graphene nano plates [95]. (f) The schematic diagram of reducing graphene oxide to develop reduced graphene oxide [96]. (g) Epitaxial growth of graphene on a SiC wafer [97]. (h) Schematic of flash Joule heating (FJH) [79].
Figure 4Dry transfer process for a graphene film grown on a Ni film using a soft substrate, PDMS. (a–c) Schematic illustration of synthesis, etching and transferring processes of graphene films without and with a PDMS stamp. Reprinted with permission from ref. [101]. Copyright (2009) Springer Nature. (d) Using FeCl3 solution to etch underlying Ni layer. Reprinted with permission from ref. [137]. Copyright (2009) Royal Society of Chemistry.(e) Transparent graphene films on the PDMS substrate. Reprinted with permission from ref. [138]. Copyright (2017) Elsevier (f) Optical microscope image of a patterned nickel layer on which graphene is grown and image of the graphene layer on a SiO2 substrate following successful transfer. Adapted with permission from ref. [133]. Copyright (2009) American Chemical Society. (g) A schematic of micropatterned single layer graphene transferring process to a substrate. (h) An optical microscope image of patterned SLG electrode on SiO2. (i) An optical microscope image of patterned SLG electrode on PET/graphene/PVP. Reprinted with permission from ref. [135]. Copyright (2011) John Wiley and Sons.
Classification of graphene-based strain gauges in terms of the method used to obtain graphene, along with the device topology and performance metrics like gauge factor and strain range.
| Graphene Synthesis Method | Device Topology | Gauge | Strain | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVD | RPECVD graphene on mica substrate | 325 | 0.30% | [ |
| Graphene-nano graphene sheets on finger | 500 | 1% | [ | |
| Suspended CVD graphene membrane | 1.6 | 0.25% | [ | |
| Suspended CVD graphene membrane | 3.67 | 0.29% | [ | |
| CVD graphene on suspended perforated SiNx membrane | 4.4 | 0.22% | [ | |
| Graphene glow sensor | 2.4 | 1.8% | [ | |
| CVD graphene woven fabric on PDMS | 106 | 10% | [ | |
| Graphene-graphene woven on PDMS | 223 | 3% | [ | |
| Fragmented graphene foam on PDMS | 15–29 | 77% | [ | |
| Graphene tactile sensor | 1.4 | - | [ | |
| CVD graphene on PDMS | 6.1 | 1% | [ | |
| braided graphene belts sensor | 175.16 | 55% | [ | |
| planar and crumpled graphene | 20.1 | 105% | [ | |
| graphene/g-C3N4 heterostructure on PDMS | 1.89 | 25% | [ | |
| Graphene-single layer graphene on finger | 42.2 | 20% | [ | |
| Graphene wrapped CNTs | 20 | 1.20% | [ | |
| PDMS graphene reinforced CNT network | 0.36 | - | [ | |
| Exfoliated graphene | Spray-deposited graphene on a flexible plastic substrate | 10–100 | 1.70% | [ |
| Mechanical exfoliated graphene on a silicon wafer | 10–15 | 0.08% | [ | |
| Mechanical exfoliated graphene nanoribbons | 0.6 | 0.054% | [ | |
| Mechanical exfoliated graphene nanoribbons | 8.8 | 5% | [ | |
| Graphene-printed fragments | 125 | 0.30% | [ | |
| Mechanical exfoliated graphene nanoribbons | 1.9 | 3% | [ | |
| Graphene solution coated on polypropylene film | 1000 | 0.05–0.265% | [ | |
| Polymer-functionalized hydrogen-exfoliated graphene | 10 | 0.35% | [ | |
| Graphene nanoplatelet on PDMS | 62.5 | 2.5–25% | [ | |
| PDMS-graphene nanoplatelet/CNT hybrids | 1000 | 18% | [ | |
| Carbon nanotube-graphene nanoplatelet hybrid film | <1 | - | [ | |
| rGO | Mechanical exfoliated Graphene ripple on PDMS | −2 | 20% | [ |
| 3D graphene foam-PDMS nanocomposite | 178 | 30% | [ | |
| rGO on a PET substrate | 61.5 | 0.01–0.04% | [ | |
| rGO membrane porous structure | 15.2–46.1 | 1% | [ | |
| PDMS-cellulose-rGO/CNFs hybrids | 9.4 | 70% | [ | |
| 3D porous PDMS CNT/rGO hybrid | 1.6 | 80% | [ | |
| Polyurethane-silver nanowires/graphene hybrids | 20–400 | 0.3–1% | [ | |
| rGO-microtube on PDMS | 630 | 50% | [ | |
| Crumpled graphene-nanocellulose composite on elastomer matrix | −7.1 | 100% | [ | |
| rGO doped with polystyrene nanoparticles (PS) on PDMS | 250 | 1.05% | [ | |
| Polymerized rGO on TPU | 23.15–6583 | 550% | [ | |
| rGO mesh on an LCP substrate | 375–473 | 0.1–1.4% | [ | |
| rGO-fish scale like on an elastic tape | 16 | 82% | [ | |
| rGO-conductive cotton fabric | - | 0.02–0.35% | [ | |
| rGO-FET on polyethersulfone (PES) | 20 | 50% | [ |
Figure 5CVD graphene-based strain gauges: (a) optical microscope images of the as-patterned devices with the zoom-in image of an individual device (arrow marks the bending direction) along with a plot of the resistance change normalized to baseline resistance (ΔR/R0) versus applied strain. Reprinted with permission from ref. [140]. Copyright (2012) AIP Publishing. (b) photograph of transparent graphene strain sensor and variation of resistance with respect to stretching up to 7.1% for graphene strain sensor. Reprinted with permission from ref. [143]. Copyright (2013) Elsevier. (c) photo of “e-skin” with an 8 × 8 device array and resistance change rate with an increase in applied strain. Adapted with permission from ref. [136]. Copyright (2015) American Chemical Society. (d) compression of universal strain sensing and corresponding changes in resistance under different deformation. Reprinted with permission from ref. [144]. Copyright (2012) Elsevier.
Figure 6Exfoliated graphene-based strain gauges (a) Sample of graphene film and curves of normalized change in electrical resistance versus strain for several strain gauges. Adapted with permission from ref. [154]. Copyright (2012) American Chemical Society. (b) SEM image of four suspended graphene devices made from a single flake and the electrical measurements of uniaxially strained graphene (relative change of resistance as function of strain). Adapted with permission from ref. [159]. Copyright (2011) American Chemical Society. (c) Piezoresistive measurement of the fabricated strain sensor on the aluminum specimen, which is under uniaxial tensile loading and relative change in resistance against applied strain [161]. (d) Optical photographs of fabricated GNP/PDMS strain sensor at stretchable, foldable, twistable and demonstration of fabricated GNP strain sensor and relative resistance versus strain [162].
Figure 7rGO graphene-based strain gauges: (a) digital photos of arbitrarily bent and twisted strain sensor and the relative resistance changes versus strain curves of the strain sensor under various strains. Adapted with permission from ref. [172]. Copyright (2015) American Chemical Society. (b) photograph of rGO strain sensor and relative resistance-strain curve of a rGO strain sensor recorded at a stretching rate of 10% min−1. Adapted with permission from ref. [177]. Copyright (2016) American Chemical Society. (c) porous rGO membrane on a PET substrate and the relative variation of resistance versus strain for rGO and porous rGO membranes with different membrane porosities, Reprinted with permission from ref. [168]. Copyright (2016) AIP Publishing. (d) SEM images of the cellulose-rGO composites and the relative resistance change, R/R0, as a function of the applied strain. Reprinted with permission from ref. [169]. Copyright (2018) Elsevier.
Figure 8(a) Optical microscope image of graphene woven fabrics (GWFs)-PDMS-tape composite film (scale bar 0.1 mm) and the relative resistance change as a function of applied strain varying between 0% and 0.2%. Reprinted with permission from ref. [187]. Copyright (2014) John Wiley and Sons. (b) Photograph of a strain sensor attached to the vibrating membrane of a loudspeaker and to a participants’ throat, where similar change in relative resistance was observed as the same sentence was played from the loudspeaker (black curve) and read out loud (red curve). Reprinted with permission from ref. [189]. Copyright (2015) Springer Nature. (c) Application of graphene nanopaper-based sensors on a glove is imaged and the transitions between the corresponding resistance changes of the strain sensor by the motion of each of the fingers. Reprinted with permission from ref. [173]. Copyright (2013) John Wiley and Sons. (d) Observation of relative resistance changes in the strain sensor on a glove when the finger bends or unbends and using a rosette gauge on the glove to detect the direction of principal strain by applying stretch gently. Reprinted with permission from ref. [143]. Copyright (2013) Elsevier.
Figure 9(a) 3D design of an accelerometer with a suspended graphene ribbons and an attached proof mass [202]. (b) 1-Optical microscope image of graphene piezoresistors on silicon nitride membrane and the schematic of suspended silicon nitride layer under the applied differential pressure. Reprinted with permission from ref. [23]. Copyright (2013) AIP Publishing. (c) Schematic of a suspended graphene cover a circular cavity to measure the chamber pressure due to pressure difference [64].