Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Oct;11(37):e2304409.
doi: 10.1002/advs.202304409. Epub 2023 Nov 12.

Structural Design and DLP 3D Printing Preparation of High Strain Stable Flexible Pressure Sensors

Xiangling Xia  1   2   3 , Ziyin Xiang  2   3 , Zhiyi Gao  2   3 , Siqi Hu  2   3 , Wuxu Zhang  2   3 , Ren Long  4 , Yi Du  5 , Yiwei Liu  2   3 , Yuanzhao Wu  2   3 , Wenxian Li  1   6   7 , Jie Shang  2   3 , Run-Wei Li  2   3
Affiliations

Structural Design and DLP 3D Printing Preparation of High Strain Stable Flexible Pressure Sensors

Xiangling Xia et al. Adv Sci (Weinh). 2024 Oct.

Abstract

Flexible pressure sensors are crucial force-sensitive devices in wearable electronics, robotics, and other fields due to their stretchability, high sensitivity, and easy integration. However, a limitation of existing pressure sensors is their reduced sensing accuracy when subjected to stretching. This study addresses this issue by adopting finite element simulation optimization, using digital light processing (DLP) 3D printing technology to design and fabricate the force-sensitive structure of flexible pressure sensors. This is the first systematic study of how force-sensitive structures enhance tensile strain stability of flexible resistive pressure sensors. 18 types of force-sensitive structures have been investigated by finite element design, simultaneously, the modulus of the force-sensitive structure is also a critical consideration as it exerts a significant influence on the overall tensile stability of the sensor. Based on simulation results, a well-designed and highly stretch-stable flexible resistive pressure sensor has been fabricated which exhibits a resistance change rate of 0.76% and pressure sensitivity change rate of 0.22% when subjected to strains ranging from no tensile strain to 20% tensile strain, demonstrating extremely low stretching response characteristics. This study presents innovative solutions for designing and fabricating flexible resistive pressure sensors that maintain stable sensing performance even under stretch conditions.

Keywords: digital light processing 3D printing; finite element simulation; flexible pressure sensors; strain stability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Scheme 1
Scheme 1
Diagram of structural design to realize tensile strain insensitivity of flexible pressure sensor.
Figure 1
Figure 1
Construction of 3D models of force‐sensitive structures. a) The workflow of parameterized 3D modeling. The corresponding relationship between each parameter and the geometric structure and spatial distribution of the force‐sensitive structure of the sensor: b) parameter n, c) parameter rb, d) parameter tb, e) parameter side, and f) parameter Dis, g) parameter Cur.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Orthogonal Experimental Results. a) Range analysis for the orthogonal experimental design. b) T‐values for the experimental and optimized groups in the orthogonal experimental design.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Impact of parameters on strain sensitivity and pressure sensitivity of the sensor. a) The top‐to‐bottom ratio, b) curvature, c) side edge count, and d) array density were studied for their influence on the strain sensitivity of the sensor. e) The top‐to‐bottom ratio, f) curvature, g) side edge count, and h) array density were studied for their influence on the pressure sensitivity of the sensor. i) The finite element optimized force‐sensitive structural model (units in mm).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Manufacturing process of DLP 3D printed flexible pressure sensor with high strain stability. a) Process flowchart for fabrication. b) Schematic diagram of the sensor structure. c) Optical magnification image of the sensor's force‐sensitive structure. d) Stress‐strain curves of the sensor's force‐sensitive structure and matrix material. e) SEM image of the top surface of the sensor's force‐sensitive structure. f) Cross‐sectional SEM image of the sensor's force‐sensitive structure.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Characterization of force‐electrical performance of sensor samples. a) Uniaxial tensile schematic diagram. b) Tensile strain‐resistance response curve of the samples. c) Uniaxial compression schematic diagram. d) Pressure‐resistance response curve of the samples. e) Tensile strain resistance variation rate and pressure sensitivity of the samples. f) Pressure sensitivity of Opti‐Hard samples at different strains. g) Response time of Opti‐Hard Samples to pressure.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Cyclic stability test of flexible pressure sensor. a) Schematic diagram of tensile cyclic testing. b) Resistance change rate curve during tensile cyclic testing. c) Schematic diagram of compression cyclic testing. d) Resistance change rate curve during compression cyclic testing.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Mechano‐electric properties of flexible pressure sensors in different service environments. a) Response graph of the sensor to pressing on a plane. b) Response graph of the hand‐held sensor to pressing with the finger joint extended and bent. c) Response graph of the sensor to pressing on a plane and on the curved surface of a beaker.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Resistance relative change and corresponding schematic of the sensor array under conditions of a) ε = 0%, b) ε = 20%, and c) ε = 20% with a glass rod placed.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. a) Liu C., Huang N., Xu F., Tong J., Chen Z., Gui X., Fu Y., Lao C., Polymers 2018, 10, 629; - PMC - PubMed
    2. b) Zhu G.‐J., Ren P.‐G., Wang J., Duan Q., Ren F., Xia W.‐M., Yan D.‐X., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 19988; - PubMed
    3. c) Matsuda R., Mizuguchi S., Nakamura F., Endo T., Isoda Y., Inamori G., Ota H., Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 12666; - PMC - PubMed
    4. d) Tang Z., Jia S., Zhou C., Li B., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 28669; - PubMed
    5. e) Li W., Jin X., Han X., Li Y., Wang W., Lin T., Zhu Z., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021, 13, 19211; - PubMed
    6. f) Cao M., Su J., Fan S., Qiu H., Su D., Li L., Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 406, 126777;
    7. g) Zhu G., Dai H., Yao Y., Tang W., Shi J., Yang J., Zhu L., Adv. Mater. Technol. 2022, 7, 2101239;
    8. h) Li Y., Long J., Chen Y., Huang Y., Zhao N., Adv. Mater. 2022, 34, 2200517; - PubMed
    9. i) Zhang Y., Yang J., Hou X., Li G., Wang L., Bai N., Cai M., Zhao L., Wang Y., Zhang J., Chen K., Wu X., Yang C., Dai Y., Zhang Z., Guo C. F., Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 1317. - PMC - PubMed
    1. a) Li G., Chen D., Li C., Liu W., Liu H., Adv. Sci. 2020, 7, 2000154; - PMC - PubMed
    2. b) Li T., Pan P., Yang Z., Wei J., Yang X., Liu J., Zhou J., Zhang X., Liu G., Adv. Mater. Technol. 2022, 7, 2101135;
    3. c) Lei X., Ma L., Li Y., Cheng Y., Cheng G. J., Liu F., Mater. Lett. 2022, 308, 131151.
    1. a) Hara T., Horii E., An K.‐N., Cooney W. P., Linscheid R. L., Chao E. Y. S., J. Hand Surg. 1992, 17, 339; - PubMed
    2. b) Nicol K., Rusteberg D., J. Biomech. 1993, 26, 1479. - PubMed
    1. a) Gao L., Wang M., Wang W., Xu H., Wang Y., Zhao H., Cao K., Xu D., Li L., Nano–Micro Lett. 2021, 13, 140; - PMC - PubMed
    2. b) Rajendran D., Ramalingame R., Palaniyappan S., Wagner G., Kanoun O., Sensors 2021, 21, 6082. - PMC - PubMed
    1. a) Wang X., Yu J., Cui Y., Li W., Sens. Actuators, A 2021, 330, 112838;
    2. b) Wang H., Li Z., Liu Z., Fu J., Shan T., Yang X., Lei Q., Yang Y., Li D., J. Mater. Chem. C 2022, 10, 1594.

LinkOut - more resources