Table 1.
Side-by-side performance comparison between cantilever-enhanced DC-PAS and other OFC-PAS techniques.
| Ref. | Method | Sensing type | Gas | Wavelen-gth (m) | Time (s) | Detection limit (ppm) | NNEA (cm−1·Hz−1/2) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [36] | FT-PAS | Cantilever-enhanced | CH4 | ∼3.3 | / | 0.083 | / | |
| [37] | FT-PAS | Cantilever-enhanced | CH4 | ∼3.3 | 200 | 0.8 | 8 × 10−10 | |
| [14] | DC-PAS | Microphone | C2H2 | 1.53 | 1000 | 10 | / | |
| [9] | DC-PTS | Photothermal | C2H2 | 1.53 | 1000 | 8.7 | / | |
| [23] | DC-PAS | Quartz-enhanced | C2H2 | 1.53 | 100 | 0.0083 | 7 × 10−10 | |
| This work | DC-PAS | Cantilever-enhanced | C2H2 | 1.53 | 10 | 0.86 | 8.93 × 10−9 | |