Journal of Electroceramics

, Volume 41, Issue 1–4, pp 9–15 | Cite as

The effect of surface treatment using ceramic powder on adhesion properties in high reliability pressure sensor

  • Gon-Jae Lee
  • Duck-Kyun ChoiEmail author


An increasing number of pressure sensors are built in Si MEMS bridge structure using resistance devices. Recently, due to advance in autonomous driving and vehicles, numerous research in stability and sensitivity of pressure sensors have been conducted. In this research, metal diaphragm surface treatment characteristics, when MEMS devices are adhesived to the structure, to which pressure is transferred from the metal diaphragm, were studied. For surface structure shape, sand blasting process was used for the surface treatment. It is known that during the sand blasting process, adhesive strength increases with increases in penetration of the adhesive material and in surface roughness which results from an increase in powder sizes. However, based on the result obtained from this experiment, the uniformity of roughness determines adhesion, after a certain level of roughness is reached. Past a particular size of a SiC ceramic powder, adhesion shows decreasing trend because the thickness of adhesive materials decreases due to local variation in the surface. We could verify that in order to optimize the adhesion of the adhesive material from the sand blasting treatment, SiC ceramic powder sizes and treatment pressure need to be optimized.


Surface treatment Sand blasting SiC ceramic powder Adhesion Pressure sensor 


  1. 1.
    W.J. Fleming, Overview of automotive sensors. Sens. J. IEEE 1(4), 296–308 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. Boon-Brett, J. Bousek, P. Moretto, Reliability of commercially available hydrogen sensors for detection of hydrogen at critical concentrations: Part II – Selected sensor test results. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 34(1), 562–571 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. Boon-Brett, J. Bousek, G. Black, P. Moretto, P. Castello, T. Hübert, U. Banach, Identifying performance gaps in hydrogen safety sensor technology for automotive and stationary applications. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 35(1), 373–384 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    W.J. Buttner, M.B. Post, R. Burgess, C. Rivkin, An overview of hydrogen safety sensors and requirements. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 36(3), 2462–2470 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Goel, S. Sharma, Electroceramics research in India. J. Electroceram. 12(3), 175–179 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Singh, Low Lee Ngo, Ho Soon Seng, F.N.C. Mok, A Silicon Piezoresistive Pressure Sensor, the First IEEE International Workshop on Electronic Design, Test and Applications. (Christchurch, 2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S.M. Sze, Semiconductor Sensors (Willey, Hoboken, 1994), pp. 160–189Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R.E. Bicking, Fundamentals of pressure sensor technology. Sensors, Nov 1 (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K.N. Bhat, M.M. Nayak, MEMS pressure sensors-an overview of challenges in technology and packaging. J. Inst. Smart Struct. Syst. 2(1), 39–71 (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liwei Lin and Weijie Yun (1998), MEMS pressure sensors for aerospace applications, Proceedings of Aerospace conference, 429–436Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D.s. Eddy, R. Douglas, S. Spark, Application of MEMS Technology in Automotive Sensors and Actuators. Proc. IEEE 86(8), 1747–1756 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Meti et al., MEMS Piezoresistive pressure sensor: A survey. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl., ISSN: 2248–9622 6(4 (Part −1)), 23–31 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. hussian et al., Characterization of MEMS automotive sensor for tire pressure monitoring system. J. Appl. Sci. 6, 810–815 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    W.P. Eaton, J.H. Smith, D.J. Monk, G. O’Brien, T.F. Miller, Comparison of bulk- and surface-micromachined pressure sensors. Proc. SPIE 3514, 431–438Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Baldan, Adhesively-bonded joints and repairs in metallic alloys, polymers and composite materials: Adhesives, adhesion theories and surface pretreatment. J. Mater. Sci. 39(1), 1–49 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Baleani, M. Viceconti, A. Toni, The effect of sandblasting treatment on endurance properties of titanium alloy hip prostheses. Artif. Organs 24, 296–299 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Z. Wang, J. Miao, C.W. Tan, X. Ting, Fabrication of piezoelectric MEMS devices-from thin film to bulk PZT wafer. J. Electroceram. 24(1), 25–32 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Z.R. El-Shrkawy, M.M. El-Hosary, O. Saleh, M.H. Mandour, Effect of different surface treatments on bond strength, surface and microscopic structure of zirconia ceramic. Future Dent. J. 2(1), 41–53 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    R.N. Torah, S.P. Beeby, M.J. Tudor, N.M. White, Thick-film piezoceramics and devices. J. Electroceram. 19, 97–122 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Japanese Standards Association (JSA), JIS B0601-2001, (Japan Industrial Standard, 2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    ASTM International, ASTM D7127-17, (American Society for Testing and Materials, 2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringHanyang UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.R&D Center, Mando CorporationSungnamSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations