Calibration of a Quartz Tuning Fork as a Sound Detector
Source abstract
Abstract
This study compares the performance of a quartz tuning fork (QTF) with a highly sensitive ultrasound microphone in the context of acoustic measurements, applying the substitution calibration method. QTF sensors are increasingly used for high-precision tasks due to their sensitivity and stability, while microphones are still the standard in general acoustic measurements. The aim of this study is to evaluate both technologies across several key performance metrics, including linearity of response, sensitivity, noise characteristics, and acoustic detection limit. Which sensor is better suited to which acoustic and physical condition? The results show that QTFs perform exceptionally well in applications requiring high precision, especially in high-frequency and narrow-band measurements. The signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) of the QTF at its resonance frequency is 14 dB higher than that of the microphone, whereas the detection limit and linearity are comparable. The findings suggest that QTF sensors are particularly advantageous for specialized applications like photoacoustic spectroscopy (PAS).
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Spectroscopy and Laser Applications · Advanced Sensor Technologies Research · Scientific Research and Discoveries
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Heinrich Blasius Institute of Physical Technologies, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Berliner Tor 21, 20099 Hamburg, Germany
School of Computing, Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Scotland High Street, Paisley PA1 2BE, UK
References (21)
Show source-provided references
1. The evolution of time measurement, Part 2: Quartz clocks [Recalibration]10.1109/MIM.2011.6041381 ↗
2. Bloch, M., Mancini, O., and McClelland, T. (2002, January 31). Performance of rubidium and quartz clocks in space. Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Frequency Control Symposium and PDA Exhibition (Cat. No. 02CH37234), New Orleans, LA, USA.
3. QEPAS sensor in a butterfly package and its application10.1364/AO.415236 ↗
4. Modeling and design of a semi-integrated QEPAS sensor
5. Liberatore, N., Viola, R., Mengali, S., Masini, L., Zardi, F., Elmi, I., and Zampolli, S. (2022). Compact GC-QEPAS for On-Site Analysis of Chemical Threats. Sensors, 23.10.3390/s23010270 ↗
6. Quartz-enhanced photoacoustic spectroscopy (QEPAS) and Beat Frequency-QEPAS techniques for air pollutants detection: A comparison in terms of sensitivity and acquisition time10.1016/j.pacs.2023.100479 ↗
7. Integrated near-infrared QEPAS sensor based on a 28 kHz quartz tuning fork for online monitoring of CO2 in the greenhouse10.1016/j.pacs.2022.100332 ↗
8. Coherent control in quartz-enhanced photoacoustics: Fingerprinting a trace gas at ppm-level within seconds10.1364/OPTICA.544448 ↗
9. Highly sensitive QEPAS sensor for sub-ppb N2O detection using a compact butterfly-packaged quantum cascade laser10.1007/s00340-023-08140-6 ↗
10. High-sensitivity methane detection based on QEPAS and H-QEPAS technologies combined with a self-designed 8.7 kHz quartz tuning fork10.1016/j.pacs.2024.100592 ↗
11. Quartz-enhanced photoacoustic spectroscopy for hydrocarbon trace gas detection and petroleum exploration10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118118 ↗
12. Hussain, D., Zhang, H., Song, J., Yongbing, W., Meng, X., Xinjian, F., and Xie, H. (2017, January 25–28). Amplitude calibration of quartz tuning fork (QTF) force sensor with an atomic force microscope. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 17th International Conference on Nanotechnology (IEEE-NANO), Pittsburgh, PA, USA.10.1109/NANO.2017.8117406 ↗
13. Calibration of Quartz Tuning Fork transducer by coulometry for mass sensitive sensor studies10.1016/j.jelechem.2018.12.003 ↗
14. Falkhofen, J., Bahr, M.-S., Baumann, B., and Wolff, M. (2024). Quartz enhanced photoacoustic spectroscopy on solid samples. Sensors, 24.10.3390/s24134085 ↗
15. Quartz–enhanced photoacoustic spectrophones exploiting custom tuning forks: A review
16. (2017). GRAS Sound & Vibration. Instruction Manual 42AG Multifunction Calibrator, GRAS Sound & Vibration. Available online: google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwigmbLvlqWMAxW2cfEDHedhJFQQFnoECBsQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.grasacoustics.com%2Ffileadmin-gras%2FProducts%2FFiles%2Fmanual_42AG_LI0196.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2zSv6vyAbbX1oodBTclSgp&opi=89978449.
17. (2008). Chemische Analytik–Nachweis-, Erfassungs-und Bestimmungsgrenze unter Wiederholbedingungen, Verfahren, Auswertung (Standard No. DIN 32645).
18. Falkhofen, J., and Wolff, M. (2023). Near-ultrasonic transfer function and SNR of differential MEMS microphones suitable for photoacoustics. Sensors, 23.10.3390/s23052774 ↗
19. Beat frequency quartz-enhanced photoacoustic spectroscopy for fast and calibration-free continuous trace-gas monitoring10.1038/ncomms15331 ↗
20. Winkowski, M., and Stacewicz, T. (2019). Low noise, open-source QEPAS system with instrumentation amplifier. Sci. Rep., 9.10.1038/s41598-019-38509-7 ↗
21. Wieczorek, P.Z., Starecki, T., and Tittel, F.K. (2020). Improving the signal to noise ratio of QTF preamplifiers dedicated for QEPAS applications. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10124105 ↗