Comparison of a Quantum Cascade Laser and an Interband Cascade Laser for the Detection of Stable Carbon Dioxide Isotopes Using Tunable Laser Absorption Spectroscopy.

IF 2.2 3区 化学 Q2 INSTRUMENTS & INSTRUMENTATION
Ponkanok Nitzsche, Cem Dinc, Jens Goldschmidt, Leonard Nitzsche, Jürgen Wöllenstein, Katrin Schmitt
{"title":"Comparison of a Quantum Cascade Laser and an Interband Cascade Laser for the Detection of Stable Carbon Dioxide Isotopes Using Tunable Laser Absorption Spectroscopy.","authors":"Ponkanok Nitzsche, Cem Dinc, Jens Goldschmidt, Leonard Nitzsche, Jürgen Wöllenstein, Katrin Schmitt","doi":"10.1177/00037028241291157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quantum cascade lasers (QCLs) and interband cascade lasers (ICLs) are widely used as light sources in tunable laser absorption spectroscopy because they emit in the mid-infrared region where many strong and characteristic absorption bands are present. In this paper, we compare the performance of these lasers emitting at about 2310.1 cm<sup>-1</sup> to determine an optimal light source for detecting isotopic ratios of carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>). Our results show that the QCL has a higher relative intensity noise of up to 15 dBc/Hz compared to the ICL over the entire measured frequency range. In addition, it has a higher frequency fluctuation. However, the maximum tuning range of the QCL is up to 5.2 cm<sup>-1</sup> compared to up to 3.8 cm<sup>-1</sup> for the ICL. Both lasers lose more than half of their tuning range when the tuning rate is increased to 10 kHz. When measuring the isotope ratio of CO<sub>2</sub>, an uncertainty in the <math><msup><mi>δ</mi><mn>13</mn></msup></math> value of <math><msubsup><mi>σ</mi><mrow><mrow><mn>13</mn><mi>C</mi><mo>,</mo><mi>min</mi></mrow></mrow><mrow><mrow><mi>ICL</mi></mrow></mrow></msubsup><mo>=</mo><mn>0.17</mn></math>‰ was achieved with the ICL and of <math><msubsup><mi>σ</mi><mrow><mrow><mn>13</mn><mi>C</mi><mo>,</mo><mi>min</mi></mrow></mrow><mrow><mrow><mi>QCL</mi></mrow></mrow></msubsup><mo>=</mo><mn>0.42</mn></math>‰ with the QCL, both at an integration time of 0.2 s. In summary, the QCL is more appropriate for applications that require a larger spectral tuning range, such as the measurement of a complex gas mixture, while the ICL has an excellent signal-to-noise ratio and is therefore better suited for applications that require higher precision.</p>","PeriodicalId":8253,"journal":{"name":"Applied Spectroscopy","volume":" ","pages":"37028241291157"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Spectroscopy","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00037028241291157","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INSTRUMENTS & INSTRUMENTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Quantum cascade lasers (QCLs) and interband cascade lasers (ICLs) are widely used as light sources in tunable laser absorption spectroscopy because they emit in the mid-infrared region where many strong and characteristic absorption bands are present. In this paper, we compare the performance of these lasers emitting at about 2310.1 cm-1 to determine an optimal light source for detecting isotopic ratios of carbon dioxide (CO2). Our results show that the QCL has a higher relative intensity noise of up to 15 dBc/Hz compared to the ICL over the entire measured frequency range. In addition, it has a higher frequency fluctuation. However, the maximum tuning range of the QCL is up to 5.2 cm-1 compared to up to 3.8 cm-1 for the ICL. Both lasers lose more than half of their tuning range when the tuning rate is increased to 10 kHz. When measuring the isotope ratio of CO2, an uncertainty in the δ13 value of σ13C,minICL=0.17‰ was achieved with the ICL and of σ13C,minQCL=0.42‰ with the QCL, both at an integration time of 0.2 s. In summary, the QCL is more appropriate for applications that require a larger spectral tuning range, such as the measurement of a complex gas mixture, while the ICL has an excellent signal-to-noise ratio and is therefore better suited for applications that require higher precision.

量子级联激光器与带间级联激光器在利用可调谐激光吸收光谱法检测稳定的二氧化碳同位素方面的比较。
量子级联激光器(QCL)和带间级联激光器(ICL)在可调谐激光吸收光谱学中被广泛用作光源,因为它们在中红外区域发射,该区域存在许多强且有特征的吸收带。在本文中,我们比较了这些在约 2310.1 cm-1 处发光的激光器的性能,以确定检测二氧化碳(CO2)同位素比的最佳光源。我们的结果表明,在整个测量频率范围内,QCL 的相对强度噪声比 ICL 高 15 dBc/Hz。此外,它的频率波动也更大。不过,QCL 的最大调谐范围可达 5.2 cm-1,而 ICL 则为 3.8 cm-1。当调谐频率增加到 10 kHz 时,两种激光器都会失去一半以上的调谐范围。总之,QCL 更适合需要更大光谱调谐范围的应用,如测量复杂的气体混合物,而 ICL 则具有出色的信噪比,因此更适合需要更高精度的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Applied Spectroscopy
Applied Spectroscopy 工程技术-光谱学
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
5.70%
发文量
139
审稿时长
3.5 months
期刊介绍: Applied Spectroscopy is one of the world''s leading spectroscopy journals, publishing high-quality peer-reviewed articles, both fundamental and applied, covering all aspects of spectroscopy. Established in 1951, the journal is owned by the Society for Applied Spectroscopy and is published monthly. The journal is dedicated to fulfilling the mission of the Society to “…advance and disseminate knowledge and information concerning the art and science of spectroscopy and other allied sciences.”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信