Advertisement

A Deformable Foam-Layered Triboelectric Tactile Sensor with Adjustable Dynamic Range

  • Dongun Lee
  • Jihoon Chung
  • Hyungseok Yong
  • Sangmin LeeEmail author
  • Dongjun ShinEmail author
Regular Paper
  • 55 Downloads

Abstract

The triboelectric effect utilizes the electric potential of materials to generate an electrical output through electrostatic induction between the two oppositely charged surfaces, which grants them unique self-powered characteristics. By utilizing this effect, self-powered tactile sensors have been studied in the previous researches. However, the conventional triboelectric tactile sensors have drawbacks of limited dynamic range due to the decreasing sensitivity under increased applied pressures. Owing to this disadvantage, the triboelectric tactile sensor has not been extensively employed in smart manufacturing applications where a consistently high sensitivity within the dynamic range is preferred. In order to address this issue, a lightweight, compact, bio-friendly and highly sensitive self-powered triboelectric tactile sensor has been investigated based on the triboelectric effect. By integration of deformable foam layer, triboelectric tactile sensor is able to shift the dynamic range by 76–98 kPa without having to employ gain adjustment circuit board or modifying the properties of the sensor (geometric, materials, etc.). The proposed tactile sensor can be employed in various smart manufacturing applications in which light, self-powered, and high-performance tactile sensors are required to reduce the weight and energy consumption.

Keywords

Deformable foam layer Triboelectric tactile sensor Adjustable dynamic range Self-powered 

List of symbols

VOC

Open-circuit voltage (V)

Pa

Applied pressure/stress (Pa)

Fa

Applied force (N)

Asensor

Sensor area (m2)

k

Sensor stiffness (N/m)

dL

Deformation in the direction of the applied pressure (m)

L0

Initial thickness of the sensor (m)

εa

Elastic strain

E

Elastic modulus (Pa)

kPDMS

PDMS layer stiffness (N/m)

LPDMS0

Initial thickness of the PDMS layer (m)

dLPDMS

Deformation of the PDMS layer (m)

kFoam

Foam layer stiffness (N/m)

LFoam0

Initial thickness of the foam layer (m)

dLFoam

Deformation of the foam layer (m)

EPDMS

Elastic modulus of the PDMS layer (Pa)

EFoam

Elastic modulus of the foam layer (Pa)

Notes

Acknowledgement

Dongun Lee and Jihoon Chung contributed equally to this work. This research was supported by the Chung-Ang University Research Scholarship Grants in 2014. This research was supported by Nano Material Technology Development Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016M3A7B4910532).

References

  1. 1.
    Ahn, S.-H. (2014). An evaluation of green manufacturing technologies based on research databases. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 1(1), 5–9.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kang, H. S., Lee, J. Y., Choi, S., Kim, H., Park, J. H., Son, J. Y., et al. (2016). Smart manufacturing: past research, present findings, and future directions. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 3(1), 111–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Park, Y.-L., Chen, B.-R., & Wood, R. J. (2012). Design and fabrication of soft artificial skin using embedded microchannels and liquid conductors. IEEE Sensors Journal, 12(8), 2711–2718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nie, B., Li, R., Brandt, J. D., & Pan, T. (2014). Microfluidic tactile sensors for three-dimensional contact force measurements. Lab on a Chip, 14(22), 4344–4353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hammond, F. L., Mengüc, Y., & Wood, R. J. (2014). Toward modular soft sensor-embedded glove for human hand motion and tactile pressure measurement. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2014), Chicago, IL, USA (pp. 4000–4007). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ulmen, J., & Cutkosky, M. (2010). A robust, low-cost and low-noise artificial skin for human-friendly robots. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Anchorage, Alaska, USA (pp. 4836–4841).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Phan, S., Quek, Z. F., Shah, P., Shin, D., Ahmed, Z., Khatib, O., & Cutkosky M. (2011). Capacitive skin sensors for robot impact monitoring. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, San Francisco, CA, USA (pp. 2992–2997).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Šekoranja, B., Bašić, D., Švaco, M., Šuligoj, F., & Jerbić, B. (2014). Human-robot interaction based on use of capacitive sensors. Procedia Engineering, 69, 464–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim, K., Lee, K. R., Kim, W. H., Park, K.-B., Kim, T.-H., Kim, J.-S., et al. (2009). Polymer-based flexible tactile sensor up to 32 x 32 arrays integrated with interconnection terminals. Sensors and Actuators A, 156(2), 284–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pang, C., Lee, G.-Y., Kim, T.-I., Kim, S. M., Kim, H. N., Ahn, S.-H., et al. (2012). A flexible and highly sensitive strain-gauge sensor using reversible interlocking of nanofibers. Nature Materials, 11, 795–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ma, C.-W., Hsu, L.-S., Kuo, J.-C., & Yang, Y.-J. (2015). A flexible tactile and shear sensing array fabricated using a novel buckypaper patterning technique. Sensors and Actuators A, 231, 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Park, J.-H., Lim, T.-W., Kim, S.-D., & Park, S.-H. (2016). Design and experimental verification of flexible plate-type piezoelectric vibrator for energy harvesting system. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 3(3), 253–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang, Z. L. (2014). Triboelectric nanogenerators as new energy technology and self-powered sensors—principles, problems, and perspectives. Faraday Discussions, 176, 447–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Büscher, G. H., Kõiva, R., Schürmann, C., Haschke, R., & Ritter, H. J. (2015). Flexible and stretchable fabric-based tactile sensor. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 63(3), 244–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Siddiqui, S., Kim, D.-I., Roh, E., Duy, L. T., Trung, T. Q., Nguyen, M. T., et al. (2016). A durable and stable piezoelectric nanogenerator with nanocomposite and nanofibers embedded in an elastomer under high loading for a self-powered sensor system. Nano Energy, 30, 434–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spanu, A., Pinna, L., Viola, F., Seminara, L., Valle, M., Bonfiglio, A., et al. (2016). A high-sensitivity tactile sensor based on piezoelectric polymer PVDF coupled to an ultra-low voltage organic transistor. Organic Electronics, Vo., 36, 57–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Anton, S., Farinholt, K., & Erturk, A. (2014). Piezoelectret foam-based vibration energy harvesting. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 25(14), 1681–1692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang, S., Lin, L., & Wang, Z. L. (2015). Triboelectric nanogenerators as self-powered active sensors. Nano Energy, 11, 436–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lin, L., Xie, Y., Wang, S., Wu, W., Niu, S., Wen, X., et al. (2013). triboelectric active sensor array for self-powered static and dynamic pressure detection and tactile imaging. ACS Nano, 7(9), 8266–8274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Badi, N., Bensaoula, A., & Nair, M. (2013). Dynamic range and sensitivity of field emission pressure sensors with non-silicon membranes. Applied Surface Science, 285, 907–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhu, Y., Qin, M., Huang, J., Yi, Z., & Huang, Q.-A. (2016). Sensitivity improvement of a 2D MEMS thermal wind sensor for low-power applications. IEEE Sensors J., 16(11), 4300–4308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Seol, M.-L., Lee, S.-H., Han, J.-W., Kim, D., Cho, G.-H., & Choi, Y.-K. (2015). Impact of contact pressure on output voltage of triboelectric nanogenerator based on deformation of interfacial structures. Nano Energy, 17, 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Luo, J., Fan, F. R., Zhou, T., Tang, W., Xue, F., & Wang, Z. L. (2015). Ultrasensitive self-powered pressure sensing system. Extreme Mechanics Letters, 2, 28–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Xia, X., Chen, J., Guo, H., Liu, G., Wei, D., Xi, Y., et al. (2017). Embedding variable micro-capacitors in polydimethylsiloxane for enhancing output power of triboelectric nanogenerator. Nano Research, 10(1), 320–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hande, N. (2006). Long-term safety and efficacy of polyurethane foam-covered breast implants. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 26(3), 265–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Genina, N., Holländer, J., Jukarainen, H., Mäkilä, E., Salonen, J., & Sandler, N. (2016). Ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) as a new drug carrier for 3D printed medical drug delivery devices. European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 90, 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wang, Z. (2011). Polydimethylsiloxane mechanical properties measured by macroscopic compression and nanoindentation technique. Graduate Theses and Dissertations.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Witkiewicz, W., & Zieliński, A. (2006). Properties of the polyurethane (PU) light foams. Advances in Materials Science, 6(2), 35–51.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Verdejo, R., & Mills, N. J. (2004). Heel-shoe interactions and the durability of EVA foam running-shoe midsoles. Journal of Biomechanics, 37(9), 1379–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Oroszlány, Á., Nagy, P., & Kovács, J. G. (2015). Compressive properties of commercially available PVC foams intended for use as mechanical models for human cancellous bone. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 12(2), 89–101.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society for Precision Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringChung-Ang UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations