ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Phase Noise of SAW Delay Line Magnetic Field Sensors.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Miniaturized double-wing ∆E-effect magnetic field sensors.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Phononic-Crystal-Based SAW Magnetic-Field Sensors.Micromachines · 2023Article
- Exchange biased surface acoustic wave magnetic field sensors.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Trends and Applications of Surface and Bulk Acoustic Wave Devices: A Review.Micromachines · 2022Review
- Sputter Deposited Magnetostrictive Layers for SAW Magnetic Field Sensors.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Thin-Film-Based SAW Magnetic Field Sensors.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Surface acoustic wave (SAW) sensors for the detection of magnetic fields are currently being studied scientifically in many ways, especially since both their sensitivity as well as their detectivity could be significantly improved by the utilization of shear horizontal surface acoustic waves, i.e., Love waves, instead of Rayleigh waves. By now, low-frequency limits of detection (LOD) below 100 pT/Hz can be achieved. However, the LOD can only be further improved by gaining a deep understanding of the existing sensor-intrinsic noise sources and their impact on the sensor's overall performance. This paper reports on a comprehensive study of the inherent noise of SAW delay line magnetic field sensors. In addition to the noise, however, the sensitivity is of importance, since both quantities are equally important for the LOD. Following the necessary explanations of the electrical and magnetic sensor properties, a further focus is on the losses within the sensor, since these are closely linked to the noise. The considered parameters are in particular the ambient magnetic bias field and the input power of the sensor. Depending on the sensor's operating point, various noise mechanisms contribute to f0 white phase noise, f-1 flicker phase noise, and f-2 random walk of phase. Flicker phase noise due to magnetic hysteresis losses, i.e. random fluctuations of the magnetization, is usually dominant under typical operating conditions. Noise characteristics are related to the overall magnetic and magnetic domain behavior. Both calculations and measurements show that the LOD cannot be further improved by increasing the sensitivity. Instead, the losses occurring in the magnetic material need to be decreased.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.