Acta Optica Sinica, Volume. 42, Issue 18, 1830004(2022)
Optimization Design of H-Type Differential Photoacoustic Cell and NO2 Detection
Figures & Tables(19)
Fig. 1. Conventional H-type photoacoustic cell. (a) Finite element simulation model; (b) first-order longitudinal resonance mode; (c) light beam energy distribution; (d) sound pressure-frequency characteristic curves; (e) phase-frequency characteristic curves
Fig. 6. Optimization results of acoustic signal outlet tube. (a) Length; (b) radius
Fig. 8. Optimized results of H-type differential photoacoustic cell. (a) Sound pressure-frequency characteristic curves; (b) phase-frequency characteristic curves
Fig. 9. Optimized mechanical model of H-type differential photoacoustic cell. (a) Main view of the model; (b) left view of the model;(c) physical map
Fig. 11. Emission spectrum of laser diode and absorption spectrum of NO2 near 450 nm
Fig. 12. Results measured by two microphones in H-type differential photoacoustic cell. (a) Photoacoustic signal; (b) phase
Fig. 13. Measurement results of H-type differential photoacoustic cell. (a) Differential photoacoustic signal; (b) phase
Fig. 15. Relationship among photoacoustic signal, background noise, and light source power. (a) Photoacoustic signal changed with light source power; (b) background noise changed with light source power
Table 1. Comparison of physical parameters before and after optimization
View tableTable 1. Comparison of physical parameters before and after optimization
Parameter Value before optimization Value after optimization Acoustic resonance tube length /cm 9 14 Acoustic resonance tube radius /cm 0.4 0.4 Buffer cavity radius /cm 1 1.1 Buffer cavity length /cm 1 1.4 Acoustic resonance tube position /cm 0.5 0.55 Acoustic signal outlet tube length /cm 0.2 0.1 Acoustic signal outlet tube radius /cm 0.6 3 Microphone installation gap height /cm 0.2 0.2
Table 2. Comparison of performance before and after optimization
View tableTable 2. Comparison of performance before and after optimization
Parameter Sound pressure Quality factor Value before optimization 8.4×10-6 Pa 59 Value after optimization 32.3×10-6 Pa 256 Improvement 385% 434%
Table 3. Comparison of NO2 photoacoustic sensors reported in recent years
View tableTable 3. Comparison of NO2 photoacoustic sensors reported in recent years
Light source PAC+detector Response capacity /（106 mV） Linearity Time Ref. 453 nm LED（9 W） Cylinder+EMFIT film microphone — — Detection time：2.1 s 10×10-9 ［ 2 ］Thermal radiation（70 mW） H-type+microphone 0.0048 0.9967 Integration time：1 s 1.07×10-6 ［ 10 ］532 nm laser（4.7 W） Cylinder+cantilever — 0.9997 Detection time：1 s 50×10-12 ［ 14 ］447 nm multimode LD（3.5 W） H-type difference+microphone — 0.9999 Integration time：1 s 54×10-12 ［ 18 ］450 nm LD（480 mW） H-type+MEMS microphone 0.814 — Integration time：5 s 33×10-12 ［ 22 ］410 nm LED T-type+MEMS microphone — — Detection time：1.5 s 32×10-9 ［ 11 ］405 nm LED（65 mW） H-type+microphone 0.016 0.998 Average time：60 s 1.22×10-9 ［ 23 ］405 nm LED（65.3 mW） H-type+microphone 0.2562 0.9986 Average time：600 s — ［ 24 ］405 nm LED（20 mW） Integrating sphere+microphone 0.011 0.997 Integration time：1 s 3×10-6 ［ 25 ］450 nm LD（500 mW） Sphere-tube+microphone 0.52546 0.9998 Detection time：100 s 0.7×10-9 ［ 15 ］450 nm LD（500 mW） Differential H-type+microphone 1.08022 0.999 Detection time：5 s 124×10-12 Proposed method
Tools
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Zhengang Li, Jiaxiang Liu, Ganshang Si, Zhiqiang Ning, Yonghua Fang, Ying Pan. Optimization Design of H-Type Differential Photoacoustic Cell and NO2 Detection[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2022, 42(18): 1830004
Paper Information
Category: Spectroscopy
Received: Mar. 7, 2022
Accepted: Apr. 5, 2022
Published Online: Sep. 15, 2022
The Author Email: Fang Yonghua (yhfang@aiofm.ac.cn)
© Copyright 2018-2021 | Chinese Laser Press.
All Rights Reserved 沪ICP备15018463号-20