表纸
市场调查报告书

印刷型柔性传感器的全球市场 (2020-2030年):技术与企业及成长预测

Printed and Flexible Sensors 2020-2030: Technologies, Players, Forecasts

出版商 IDTechEx Ltd. 商品编码 942229
出版日期 内容资讯 英文 680 Slides
商品交期: 最快1-2个工作天内
价格
印刷型柔性传感器的全球市场 (2020-2030年):技术与企业及成长预测 Printed and Flexible Sensors 2020-2030: Technologies, Players, Forecasts
出版日期: 2020年06月15日内容资讯: 英文 680 Slides
简介

印刷传感器的市场预估在2030年时成长到45亿美金的规模。

本报告是调查全球的印刷型柔性传感器市场并提供市场定义与概要、按主要技术区别的详细分析、技术与技术开发的动向、主要产品与用途、企业构成、按各种区分的市场规模演变与预测、主要企业概说等资讯情报。

第1章 执行摘要

第2章 导论

第3章 光电探测器/图像传感器

  • 用于大面积图像传感器的有机光电探测器
  • 红外线检测
  • CMOS混合图像传感器OPD
  • CMOS混合图像传感器量子点
  • 摘要:印刷图像传感器
  • 公司简介:印刷图像传感器

第4章 印刷压阻传感器

  • 印刷压阻传感器技术
  • 印刷压阻传感器应用
  • 摘要:印刷压阻传感器
  • 公司简介:压阻传感器

第5章 印刷压电传感器

  • 概要
  • 压电聚合物
  • 基于PVDF的聚合物选件,用于感测触觉致动器
  • 低温压电油墨
  • 压电聚合物
  • 印刷压电传感器
  • 印刷压电传感器:原型
  • Pyzoflex
  • 用于扬声器和麦克风的压电致动器
  • PiezoPaint
  • 触觉执行器
  • 用法示例:触觉手套
  • 能量收集和传感的结合
  • 概述:印刷压电传感器
  • 公司简介:压电传感器

第6章 应变传感器

  • 应变传感器的应用
  • 摘要:应变传感器
  • 公司简介:应变传感器

第7章 电容式触摸传感器的ITO替代品

  • 透明导电材料:ITO
  • ITO替代品:银纳米线
  • ITO替代品:金属网
  • ITO替代品:碳纳米管
  • ITO替代品:PEDOT:PSS
  • 摘要
  • 公司简介:电容式触摸ITO替代品

第8章 温度感应器

  • 印刷温度传感器:简介
  • 各种温度传感器
  • 电阻温度传感器/热敏电阻:比较
  • PST传感器:矽纳米粒子墨水
  • 印刷矽纳米颗粒传感器
  • 印刷金属RTD传感器:Brewer Science
  • 印刷温度传感器基板问题
  • 科学研究:稳定的PEDOT:带有PSS的印刷温度传感器
  • 印刷温度传感器应用
  • 摘要
  • 公司简介:印刷温度传感器

第9章 气体/湿度传感器

  • 气体传感器技术
  • 印刷气体传感器的新兴市场
  • 摘要
  • 公司简介:气体和湿度传感器

第10章 印刷生物传感器

  • 电化学生物传感器:提供简单的检测机制
  • 电化学生物传感器的机理
  • 用于PoC电化学生物传感器的□
  • 电极沉积:丝网印刷与溅射
  • 印刷电化学测试件的挑战
  • 葡萄糖传感生物传感器
  • 其他用途的印刷生物传感器
  • 摘要
  • 公司简介:生物传感器

第11章 印刷的可穿戴电极和皮肤贴片

  • 印刷可穿戴电极/皮肤贴片:简介
  • 电极和皮肤贴剂的用途
  • 用电极测量生物电势
  • 一次性金属捕捉电极:电流电极技术
  • 金属捕捉Ag / AgCl电极市场
  • 集成电极皮贴片:印刷电极市场机会
  • 用于皮肤贴片的印刷电极示例
  • 智能服装和电子纺织电极
  • 摘要
  • 公司简介

第12章 印刷FHE传感器

  • FHE定义
  • FHE举例
  • 将传感器集成到FHE电路中
  • FHE电路印刷传感器示例
  • 公司简介:FHE电路印刷传感器

第13章 10年期间市场预测

  • 按类别分列的印刷传感器销售
  • 印刷传感器收入(包括生物传感器)
  • 印刷传感器收入(不包括生物传感器)
  • 有机光电探测器的销量和利润
  • 印刷/混合图像传感器的销量和利润
  • 压阻传感器的销量和利润
  • 压力传感器的销量和利润
  • 应变传感器的销量和利润
  • 印刷温度传感器的销售量和利润
  • 印刷气体和湿度传感器的销售量和利润
  • 印刷生物传感器的销售量和利润
  • 可穿戴电极的销量和利润
  • 印刷传感器的销售量和利润

第14章 调查企业名单

  • 图像传感器
    • Cambridge Display Technology
    • Holst Centre
    • Siemens Healthcare
    • ISORG, Fraunhofer FEP
    • Emberion
    • IMEC
    • SWIR Vision Systems
    • DpiX
    • TriEye
  • 压阻传感器
    • Peratech
    • Tangio
    • Tekscan
    • Sensitronics
    • Central Midori International
    • Tacterion
    • IEE
    • Interlink Electronics
    • Henkel, Holst Centre
    • Innovation Lab
    • Sensing Tex
    • Vista Medical
    • Nissha Printing
    • Infi-Tex, Sensel, Inkron
  • 压电传感器
    • Joanneum Research
    • Meggit
    • Suez
    • Yamagata University
    • Fraunhofer ISC
    • Piezotech-Arkema
    • Novasentis
  • 应变传感器
    • LEAP Technology
    • Parker Hannifin
    • Stretchsense
    • Bando Chemical
    • Brewer Science
    • Polymatech
    • Yamaha
    • Kureha
    • BeBop Sensors
  • 电容式触摸传感器的ITO替代品
    • Nitto Denko
    • BASF
    • C3nano
    • Cambrios
    • Fujifilm
    • Toppan printing
    • GiS
    • LG Chem
    • UniPixel
    • O-Film
    • MNTech
    • J-Touch
    • Fujikura Kasei
    • Komura Tech
    • Shashin Kagaku
    • Komori
    • Asahi Kasei
    • Konica Minolta
    • Gunze
    • Toray
    • Ishihara Chemical
    • Eastman Kodak
    • Kuroki
    • ITRI
    • Screen Holding
    • Consistent Materials Co
    • Tanaka Metal
    • Canatu
    • Heraeus
    • Agfa
    • Force Foundation
  • 温度感应器
    • PST Sensors
    • Brewer Science
    • Yamagata University
    • PARC (Xerox)
    • Temptime
    • Blue Spark Technologies
    • VivaLink
    • ISORG
  • 气体/湿度传感器
    • SPEC Sensors
    • SGX Sensortech
    • Mipex Technology
    • Capteur Sensors and Analysers
    • GE Global Research
    • Figaro
    • University of Manchester
    • FIS (Nissha)
    • Renesas
    • C2Sense
    • Alpha Szenszor
    • Brewer Science
    • K-Free
    • North Eagles
    • Argonne National Laboratory
    • AQMesh
    • Waggle
  • 生物传感器
    • Abbott
    • Roche
    • Johnson & Johnson
    • Ascensia Healthcare
  • 柔性电极
    • Toyobo
    • QT Medical
    • DMS Service
    • iRhythm
    • Quad Industries. GE Healthcare
    • ScreenTec Oy
    • Dupont
    • Henkel
    • Byteflies
    • Nissha GSI
    • Athos
    • Mitsufuji
    • Anico
  • 柔性混合电子电路的印刷传感器
    • American Semiconductor
    • PragmatIC
    • Muhlbauer
    • VTT
目录

Title:
Printed and Flexible Sensors 2020-2030: Technologies, Players, Forecasts
Including organic and hybrid photodetectors, biosensors, ITO replacement materials, wearable electrodes, and piezoresistive, piezoelectric, temperature, touch, gas, humidity and strain sensors.

Printed sensor market is projected to reach $4.5bn by 2030.

This IDTechEx Research report provides an extensive overview of the diverse underlying technologies and applications of printed and flexible sensors. This includes organic and hybrid photodetectors, piezoresistive and piezoelectric pressure sensors, stretchable strain sensors, temperature sensors, printed electrodes for skin patches, biosensors, ITO alternatives for capacitive touch sensors, and others. By profiling over 50 companies we map the commercial adoption prospects and challenges for each technology and develop granular market forecasts that span all printed sensor types, technologies, and applications. Our 10-year market forecasts cover 30 applications/technologies and are provided in revenue and printed area.

IDTechEx has been researching the emerging printed electronics market for well over a decade. We launched our first printed and flexible sensor report in 2012. Since then we have stayed very close to the technical and market developments, interviewing and visiting the key players worldwide, organising the largest global tradeshows and conferences, delivering numerous consulting projects, and running classes and workshops on the topic. The depth and breadth of our insight is truly unrivalled.

Printed and flexible sensors constitute the largest printed electronics market. Indeed, we forecast that the market for fully printed sensors will reach $4.5 billion by 2030. This takes place despite the sustained displacement of its largest market - printed glucose test strips - with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) approaches. The market growth is therefore enabled by the rise of many new applications and technologies.

This printed sensor market is highly complex and fragmented. Some sensors consist of a very simple structure with only a few layers, whilst others are much more complex and require the deposition of multiple layers and sophisticated, innovative materials. Some sensors are sheet-to-sheet screen printed whereas others are made using continuous roll-to-roll printing. The majority are on low-cost flexible large-area substrates, but some are to be found atop CMOS devices or various textile substrates.

This report covers the entire printed and flexible sensor landscape. More specifically, it covers:

  • Large area image sensors
  • Hybrid QD/Organic-on-CMOS image sensors
  • Hybrid sensors for SWIR imaging
  • Piezoresistive sensors
  • Piezoelectric sensors
  • Temperature sensors
  • Capacitive strain sensors
  • ITO alternatives for capacitive touch sensors
  • Gas and humidity sensors
  • Biosensors
  • Printed electrodes for skin patches and e-textiles

We also cover the integration of printed sensors within the emerging technology of flexible hybrid electronics, which included both printed and placed (non-printed) components.

Growth in emerging applications

Printed sensors span a diverse range of technologies and applications, ranging from image sensors to wearable electrodes. Each sensor category seeks to offer a distinct value proposition over the incumbent technology, with a specific motivation for using printing as a manufacturing methodology. Furthermore, each has its different technological and commercial challenges on route to widespread adoption.

Hybrid image sensors

Hybrid image sensors are an especially promising category. They are comprised of a thin film (a few 100 nm) of either an organic semiconductor or quantum dots printed over a silicon readout circuit. They offer three distinct value propositions over the incumbent silicon CMOS detectors: a tuneable bandgap to enable NIR and SWIR imaging at much longer wavelengths, voltage-dependent sensitivity that enables spatially-variable neutral density filter, and more rapid charge collection that facilitates a global rather than rolling shutter.

Critically, hybrid image sensors can be manufactured using repurposed CMOS lines, substantially reducing capital requirements and facilitating more rapid adoption. The OPD-on-CMOS technology is set to be launched imminently in broadcast cameras, while the QD-on-CMOS technology is already commercially available and will transition to higher-power out-door applications as the thermal and light flux stability of the material system evolves over time. Therefore, the technology can migrate from indoor low-light inspection to outdoor applications such as SWIR imaging for autonomous vehicles.

This disruptive hybrid approach meets genuine market needs, demonstrating that integrating printable, functional materials with standard technology and manufacturing methods can enable substantial performance improvements while lowering adoption barriers. To learn more about the current and future status of all technology options and business landscape, and about granular application-segmented applications in this exciting and rapidly developing sector, please consult the report.

Large area image sensors

Large area image sensors based on printed organic photodiodes (OPDs) are an innovative technology, representing a complete change from the conventional CMOS-based image detection and going beyond what other large-area image sensors technologies can offer. The technology has two related value propositions: it is flexible and lightweight, unlike large area a-Si image detectors, and in principle it can be printed rapidly at low cost using continuous manufacturing methods.

However, today there are very few manufacturers, and these are mainly targeting biometric sensing as a relatively high value application, thus enabling them to avoid competing with CMOS. In one proposed application, large area under-the-screen image sensors enable 4 fingerprints to be imaged simultaneously, in contrast to the incumbent technology that either images a single finger or requires a complex optical system to image a large area.

While technically impressive, large area image sensing appears to be largely driven by pushing the technology rather than maker need. It is questionable whether this capability represents a sufficient advance over incumbent methods to overcome the entry barrier to adoption, especially as fingerprint recognition must compete with incumbent methods.

Our report outlines current and future status of the technology, the application roadmap, and the associated market for each application.

Piezoresistive sensors

Printed piezoresistive force sensors are a longstanding application, widely used today in car occupancy sensors, musical instruments, industrial equipment, and some medical devices. While these markets are somewhat commoditized, the sector is innovating to access new, differentiated, higher value applications.

One example is 3D touch panels that can measure applied force as a function position, thus enabling the recognition of complex HMI gestures than the incumbent capacitive touch panels. Suppliers are continuing to target phones, computer gaming and automotive interiors. Other innovations include hybrid capacitive/piezoresistive sensor arrays that detect proximity but require a firm push to actuate, piezoresistive handles as a safety device for power tools, and manufacturing via roll-to-roll processing.

The challenge for differentiating piezoresistive sensors is that many applications do not require sophisticated functionality such as 3D touch or proximity sensing. Furthermore, the revenue streams can widely fluctuate with the various product cycles, requiring very active development of the application pipeline. The relatively low technology complexity can also mean that barriers to entry and the value capture are low. This is convincing some to go higher up in the value chain, offering fully integrated solutions.

Detailed discussion of the current and future status of the technology, the business landscape, and granular application-segmented applications is given in our report

Piezoelectric sensors

Piezoelectric sensors generate a voltage in response to an applied force, rather than changing their resistance. While, like piezoresistive sensors, they can be used for force sensing, they are more expensive to manufacture and less straightforward to integrate. As such, manufacturers are primarily targeting applications that utilize their unique capabilities, specifically their sensitivity to high frequency vibrations.

In this report we cover two printable piezoelectric materials: polymers and inorganic-containing composites. The former have seen greater commercial uptake, but both are still under development. The commercial difficulty for printed piezoelectric sensors is that their capabilities lie midway between two simple established technologies: Affordable piezoresistive pressure sensors, and sensitive, rigid ceramic piezoelectric sensors. As such, piezoelectric sensing applications are rather niche, unless the technological readiness level of energy harvesting dramatically increases to enable self-powered sensors.

A better value proposition, where these materials have unique capability, is for flexible high frequency actuators (i.e. wearable ultrasound generators for medical therapeutics). To learn more about the technologies, players, and market positioning of piezoelectric sensors, please see the report.

ITO remains the incumbent transparent conductive material used in touch screen, despite nearly two-decades of attempts to unseat it. This displacement was partly hampered by technical issues such as stability or haze and partly by commercial reasons. In particular, the dominant strategy of market share protection pursued by ITO suppliers and supported by the previous fall in indium prices drove a tough consolidation in the market.

Nonetheless, these alternatives are finally finding market in flexible or 3D shaped objects, in large-area multi-touch capacitive touch screens, and even nowadays sometimes in lower cost touch screens. Our report includes a detailed technical and commercial benchmarking of the different technology options, an application roadmap, and market forecasts segmented by Ag nanowires, carbon nanotubes, ITO film and various forms of hybrid or printed metal mesh.

Capacitive strain sensors

Various partially or fully printed stretchable strain sensors have been developed and commercialized over the years. Basic technology demonstration has proved relatively easy, but not every supplier has succeeded in transitioning to large-volume capability at lower costs.

The main challenge has been that flexible strain sensors are generally not replacing an existing product, meaning that completely new markets need to be developed. To address this challenge and to capture more value, many suppliers offer vertically integrated 'solutions'.

After years of development opportunities in industrial displacement sensing, in wearable electronics, and in continuous patient monitoring are now emerging. To learn more about the players, the technologies, the application roadmap, and segmented market forecasts please see the report.

Temperature sensors

Printing can also be used to create temperature sensors, using either a composite ink with silicon nanoparticles or carbon nanotubes. Given that temperature measurement requires good thermal contact, sensors based on conformal substrates might seem to offer a clear value proposition.

Their main challenge is the low cost, light weight, and ubiquity of very mature solutions such as thermistors and resistive temperature detectors. These can be deployed with a flexible thermal conductor, thus somewhat nullifying the value proposition of printed temperature sensors. As such, they are best suited to applications that require spatial resolution using conformal array, such as monitoring skin complaints. Monitoring the temperature of batteries in electric vehicles is another possible application, but one that has yet to be widely adopted and could arguably be achieved with multiple thermistors.

Gas and humidity sensors

Gas and humidity sensors can also be printed, although at present most are made from ceramics rather than organic material. Some of these ceramics are printed as a 'thick film' with very high curing temperatures, rendering them incompatible with flexible substrates. Emerging approaches are based around functionalized carbon nanotubes and other organic semiconductors. Multiple sensors with slightly different properties can be combined to form an 'electronic nose', with their composite output exhibiting a different 'fingerprint' for each analyte.

Gas sensors are already used in many industrial contexts and are likely to be increasingly adopted as concern about air pollution grows. Unlike some sectors, there is substantial scope for differentiation by sensitivity and analyte, leading to a fragmented market. Another promising long-term application in which printed gas sensors offer unique capability is directly printing onto food packaging to measure food degradation. However, this will likely require the development of flexible hybrid electronics to make such capability cost-effective via continuous manufacturing, along with the development of enabling technologies such as flexible ICs. Flexible hybrid electronics are discussed in more detail in the IDTechEx report: Flexible hybrid electronics 2020-2030: Applications, challenges, innovations, forecasts.

Biosensors

The largest category of printed sensors by revenue and volume is printed biosensors, dominated by glucose test strips. The annual demand is in the billions. However, use is gradually declining due to the adoption of convenient continuous glucose monitoring, a trend that will continue to grow. In parallel, there have been significant price pressures and commoditization as regulators have sought to supress the test prices and in doing so eroded the margins. Despite all this, this remains the largest volume and revenue business in the printed and flexible sensor landscape. Importantly, printed biosensors are not constrained to glucose sensing and an array of other sensors are emerging.

Wearable electrodes

Today, most medial electrodes comprise a metal snap fastening with an electrolytic gel, but these can only be used for short periods. For continuous monitoring, printed electrodes are gradually being adopted into skin patches, since they last longer, can be integrated into a product together with conductive interconnects (also printed) and are flexible. Wearable electrodes are also well suited to fitness context and have been integrated into e-textiles to monitor heart rate in a comfortable way. Both medical and fitness applications of printed wearable electrodes are likely to increase as the software for continuous monitoring develops thus creating greater demand, although the durability in e-textiles remains a concern for consumers. Skin patches and e-textiles are discussed more comprehensively in the IDTechEx reports: ‘Electronic skin patches: 2020-2030, and E-textiles and Smart Clothing 2020-2030: Technologies, Markets and Players’.

Our report discusses each of these printed sensor categories in considerable detail, evaluating the different technologies and the challenges to adoption. We also develop 10-year market forecasts for each technology and application sector, delineated by both revenue and printed sensor area.

Analyst access from IDTechEx

All report purchases include up to 30 minutes telephone time with an expert analyst who will help you link key findings in the report to the business issues you're addressing. This needs to be used within three months of purchasing the report.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  • 1.1. An introduction to printed and flexible sensors
  • 1.2. Opportunities for SWIR image sensors
  • 1.3. Growth areas for printed piezoresistive sensors
  • 1.4. Printed piezoresistive sensor application assessment (I)
  • 1.5. Printed piezoresistive sensor application assessment (II)
  • 1.6. Solution processed or hybrid ITO alternatives for capacitive touch
  • 1.7. Opportunities for printed temperature sensors
  • 1.8. Opportunities for printed gas/humidity sensors
  • 1.9. Wearable technology: An opportunity for capacitive strain sensors.
  • 1.10. Glucose test strips: A large but declining market
  • 1.11. Printed wearable electrode sensors: Opportunities in healthcare and fitness monitoring.
  • 1.12. 10-year forecast for printed sensor revenue by sensor type (Sensor categories: Image, pressure, gas & humidity, temperature, strain, wearable, glucose test strips)
  • 1.13. 10-year printed sensor forecast by revenue (Sensor categories: Image, pressure, gas & humidity, temperature, strain, wearable)
  • 1.14. 10-year printed sensor forecast by revenue: All categories
  • 1.15. 10-year printed sensor forecast by unit volume (in m2): All categories
  • 1.16. 10-year printed sensor forecast by unit volume (in m2): All categories (excluding biosensors)
  • 1.17. Key takeaways

2. INTRODUCTION

  • 2.1. What is a sensor?
  • 2.2. Sensor value chain example: Digital camera
  • 2.3. What defines a 'printed' sensor?
  • 2.4. Printed sensor manufacturing
  • 2.5. Motivation for printed electronics: Flexibility
  • 2.6. Motivation for printed electronics: Ease of manufacturing
  • 2.7. A brief overview of screen, slot-die, gravure and flexographic printing
  • 2.8. A brief overview of digital printing methods
  • 2.9. Towards roll to roll (R2R) printing
  • 2.10. Printed sensor categories
  • 2.11. What proportion is printed?
  • 2.12. Opportunities for printed sensors: Facilitating computational data analysis
  • 2.13. Opportunities for printed sensors: Healthcare
  • 2.14. Opportunities for printed sensors: Human machine interfaces (HMI)

3. PHOTODETECTORS AND IMAGE SENSORS

  • 3.1. Organic photodetectors for large area image sensors
    • 3.1.1. Organic photodetectors (OPDs)
    • 3.1.2. OPDs: Advantages and disadvantages
    • 3.1.3. Reducing OPD dark current
    • 3.1.4. Manipulating the detection wavelength
    • 3.1.5. Extending OPDs to the NIR region: Use of cavities
    • 3.1.6. Manufacturing challenges for cavity OPDs
    • 3.1.7. What can you do with organic photodetectors?
    • 3.1.8. 'Fingerprint on display' with OPDs
    • 3.1.9. Challenges for printed OPDs
    • 3.1.10. First OPD production line
    • 3.1.11. Applications based on TFT active matrix
    • 3.1.12. Manipulating OPD properties by changing molecular structure.
    • 3.1.13. OPDs for biometric security
    • 3.1.14. Spray-coated organic photodiodes for medical imaging.
    • 3.1.15. Flexible image sensors based on amorphous Si
    • 3.1.16. Materials for OPDs
    • 3.1.17. Challenges for large area OPD adoption
    • 3.1.18. Technical requirements/manufacturing approaches for OPD applications: Biometric recognition, smart shelving, x-ray sensing and SWIR imaging
    • 3.1.19. SWOT analysis of large area OPD image sensors
    • 3.1.20. Organic photodetector forecast
  • 3.2. Motivation for infra-red sensing
    • 3.2.1. Applications for NIR/SWIR imaging
    • 3.2.2. SWIR for autonomous mobility
    • 3.2.3. Other SWIR benefits: Better hazard detection
    • 3.2.4. Towards broadband hyperspectral imaging
    • 3.2.5. SWIR sensitivity of PbS QDs, Si, polymers, InGaAs, HgCdTe, etc...
    • 3.2.6. NIR sensing: limitation of Si CMOS
    • 3.2.7. Existing long wavelength detection: InGaAs
    • 3.2.8. InGaAs sensor design: Solder bumps limit resolution
    • 3.2.9. Innovative silicon based SWIR sensors (Trieye) (I)
    • 3.2.10. Innovative silicon based SWIR sensors (Trieye) (II)
    • 3.2.11. OmniVision: making silicon CMOS sensitive to NIR (II)
    • 3.2.12. SWIR: Incumbent and emerging technology options
  • 3.3. OPD on CMOS hybrid image sensors
    • 3.3.1. OPD on CMOS hybrid image sensors
    • 3.3.2. Hybrid organic/CMOS sensor for broadcast cameras
    • 3.3.3. Comparing hybrid organic/CMOS sensor with backside illumination CMOS sensor
    • 3.3.4. Hybrid organic/CMOS sensor (III)
    • 3.3.5. Progress in CMOS global shutter using silicon technology only
    • 3.3.6. Fraunhofer FEP: SWIR OPD-on-CMOS sensors (I)
    • 3.3.7. Fraunhofer FEP: SWIR OPD-on-CMOS sensors (II)
    • 3.3.8. SWOT analysis of OPD-on-CMOS image sensors
  • 3.4. Quantum dot on CMOS hybrid image sensors
    • 3.4.1. Quantum dots as optical sensor materials
    • 3.4.2. Lead sulphide as quantum dots
    • 3.4.3. Quantum dots: Choice of the material system
    • 3.4.4. Applications and challenges for quantum dots in image sensors
    • 3.4.5. QD layer advantage in image sensor (I): Increasing sensor sensitivity and gain
    • 3.4.6. QD-Si hybrid image sensors(II): Reducing thickness
    • 3.4.7. Detectivity benchmarking (I)
    • 3.4.8. Detectivity benchmarking (II)
    • 3.4.9. QD-Si hybrid image sensors (III): Enabling high resolution global shutter
    • 3.4.10. QD-Si hybrid image sensors(IV): Low power and high sensitivity to structured light detection for machine vision?
    • 3.4.11. Advantage of solution processing: ease of integration with ROIC CMOS?
    • 3.4.12. How is the QD layer applied?
    • 3.4.13. QD optical layer: Approaches to increase conductivity of QD films
    • 3.4.14. Quantum dots: Covering the range from visible to near infrared
    • 3.4.15. Hybrid quantum dots for SWIR imaging (I)
    • 3.4.16. SWIR Vision Sensors: first QD-Si cameras and/or an alternative to InVisage (now Apple)?
    • 3.4.17. SWIR Vision Sensors: first QD-Si cameras and/or an alternative to InVisage (now Apple)?
    • 3.4.18. SWIR Vision Sensors: First commercial QD-CMOS cameras
    • 3.4.19. Emberion: QD-graphene SWIR sensor
    • 3.4.20. Emberion: QD-Graphene-Si broad range SWIR sensor
    • 3.4.21. QD-on-CMOS from Hanyang University (South Korea)
    • 3.4.22. Challenges for QD-Si technology for SWIR imaging.
    • 3.4.23. Advantage of solution processing: Ease of integration with CMOS ROICs?
    • 3.4.24. Quantum dot films: Processing challenges
    • 3.4.25. How is the QD layer applied?
    • 3.4.26. PdS QDs: Optical sensor with high responsibility and wide spectrum
    • 3.4.27. Results and status for QD-Si sensors
    • 3.4.28. Nanoco loses the Apple project
    • 3.4.29. QD-on-CMOS integration examples (IMEC)
    • 3.4.30. QD-on-CMOS integration examples (RTI International)
    • 3.4.31. QD-on-CMOS integration examples (ICFO)
    • 3.4.32. QD-on-CMOS integration examples (ICFO continued)
    • 3.4.33. Overview of OPD-on-CMOS and QD-on-CMOS sensors
    • 3.4.34. Prospects for QD/OPD-on-CMOS detectors
    • 3.4.35. QD-on-CMOS sensors ongoing technical challenges
    • 3.4.36. SWOT analysis of QD-on-CMOS image sensors
  • 3.5. Summary: Printed image sensors
    • 3.5.1. Comparison of image sensors technologies
    • 3.5.2. Printed photodetector application assessment
    • 3.5.3. Printed image sensor supplier overview
    • 3.5.4. Technology readiness level snapshot of printed image sensors
    • 3.5.5. Printed image sensor adoption roadmap
    • 3.5.6. Printed image sensor application status summary
    • 3.5.7. Printed image sensors forecast methodology
    • 3.5.8. 10-year organic photodetector forecast by sales volume (in m2) and revenue
    • 3.5.9. 10-year printed/hybrid image sensors forecast by sales volume (in m2) and revenue
  • 3.6. Company profiles: Printed image sensors
    • 3.6.1. Company profiles: Printed image sensors

4. PRINTED PIEZORESISTIVE SENSORS

  • 4.1. Printed piezoresistive sensor technology
    • 4.1.1. What is piezoresistance?
    • 4.1.2. Percolation dependent resistance
    • 4.1.3. Quantum tunnelling composite
    • 4.1.4. Printed piezoresistive sensors: Anatomy
    • 4.1.5. Pressure sensing architectures
    • 4.1.6. Thru mode sensors
    • 4.1.7. Shunt mode sensors
    • 4.1.8. Force vs resistance characteristics
    • 4.1.9. Manipulating the force-resistance curve
    • 4.1.10. Importance of actuator area
    • 4.1.11. FSR inks
    • 4.1.12. Complete material portfolio approach is common
    • 4.1.13. Composition dependence
    • 4.1.14. Shunt-mode FSR sensors by the roll
    • 4.1.15. Example FSR circuits
    • 4.1.16. Effect of circuit design on sensor output
    • 4.1.17. 3D multi-touch pressure sensors
    • 4.1.18. Matrix pressure sensor architecture
    • 4.1.19. Printed foldable force sensing solution
    • 4.1.20. Hybrid FSR/capacitive sensors (Tangio)
    • 4.1.21. Hybrid FSR/capacitive sensors
    • 4.1.22. Curved sensors with consistent zero (Tacterion)
    • 4.1.23. Technological development of piezoresistive sensors.
  • 4.2. Applications of printed piezoresistive sensors
    • 4.2.1. Applications of piezoresistive sensors
    • 4.2.2. Medical applications of printed FSR (Tekscan)
    • 4.2.3. Medical applications of printed FSRs (Tekscan)
    • 4.2.4. Teeth topography from Innovation Lab
    • 4.2.5. Large-area pressure sensors
    • 4.2.6. Force sensor examples: Sensing Tex
    • 4.2.7. Force sensor examples: Vista Medical
    • 4.2.8. Automotive occupancy and seat belt alarm sensors
    • 4.2.9. Consumer electronic applications of printed FSR
    • 4.2.10. Textile-based applications of printed FSR
    • 4.2.11. SOFTswitch: Force sensor on fabric
    • 4.2.12. Pressure sensitive fabric (Vista Medical)
    • 4.2.13. Piezoresistive sensors in smartphones
    • 4.2.14. A portable MIDI controller - The Morph (Sensel)
    • 4.2.15. Smart carpet to enforce social distancing (due to coronavirus)
    • 4.2.16. Printed piezoresistive sensor application assessment (I)
    • 4.2.17. Printed piezoresistive sensor application assessment (II)
  • 4.3. Summary: Printed piezoresistive sensors
    • 4.3.1. Business models for printed piezoresistive sensors
    • 4.3.2. R2R vs S2S manufacturing
    • 4.3.3. Readiness level snapshot of printed piezoresistive sensor technologies
    • 4.3.4. Force sensitive resistor sensor supplier overview
    • 4.3.5. Printed piezoresistive sensor adoption roadmap
    • 4.3.6. SWOT analysis of piezoresistive sensors
    • 4.3.7. 10-year printed piezoresistive sensor forecast by sales volume (in m2) and revenue (Categories: industrial, medical, consumer, automotive)
    • 4.3.8. Summary: Printed piezoresistive sensor applications
  • 4.4. Company profiles: Piezoresistive sensors
    • 4.4.1. Company profiles: Piezoresistive sensors

5. PRINTED PIEZOELECTRIC SENSORS

  • 5.1.1. Piezoelectricity: An introduction
  • 5.1.2. Piezoelectric polymers
  • 5.1.3. PVDF-based polymer options for sensing and haptic actuators
  • 5.1.4. Low temperature piezoelectric inks (I) (Meggitt)
  • 5.1.5. Piezoelectric polymers
  • 5.1.6. Printed piezoelectric sensor
  • 5.1.7. Printed piezoelectric sensors: prototypes
  • 5.1.8. Pyzoflex
  • 5.1.9. Piezoelectric actuators in loudspeaker/microphones
  • 5.1.10. PiezoPaint (Meggit)
  • 5.1.11. Haptic actuators
  • 5.1.12. Example application: Haptic gloves
  • 5.1.13. Combining energy harvesting and sensing
  • 5.2. Summary: Printed piezoelectric sensors
    • 5.2.1. SWOT analysis of piezoelectric sensors
    • 5.2.2. Piezoelectric sensor supplier overview
    • 5.2.3. 10-year pressure sensor forecast (piezoelectric and hybrid) by sales volume (in m2) and revenue
    • 5.2.4. Summary: Piezoelectric sensors
  • 5.3. Company profiles: Piezoelectric sensors
    • 5.3.1. Company profiles: Piezoelectric sensors

6. STRAIN SENSORS

  • 6.1. Strain sensor applications
    • 6.1.1. Players with EAPs: Parker Hannifin
    • 6.1.2. Strain sensor applications
    • 6.1.3. Players with EAPs: Stretchsense
    • 6.1.4. Players with EAPs: Bando Chemical
    • 6.1.5. C Stretch Bando: Progress on stretchable sensors
    • 6.1.6. Other strain sensors (capacitive & resistive)
    • 6.1.7. Strain sensor examples: Polymatech
    • 6.1.8. Strain sensor example: Yamaha and Kureha
    • 6.1.9. Strain sensor examples: BeBop Sensors
    • 6.1.10. Industrial displacement sensors (LEAP Technology)
  • 6.2. Summary: Strain sensors
    • 6.2.1. Summary: Strain sensors
    • 6.2.2. SWOT analysis of flexible strain sensors
    • 6.2.3. Printed strain sensor forecast
    • 6.2.4. Printed high-strain sensor supplier overview
  • 6.3. Company profiles: Strain sensors
    • 6.3.1. Company profiles: Strain sensors

7. ITO REPLACEMENT FOR CAPACITIVE TOUCH

  • 7.1. Transparent conductive materials: ITO
    • 7.1.1. ITO film assessment: performance, manufacture and market trends
    • 7.1.2. ITO film shortcomings: flexibility
    • 7.1.3. ITO film shortcomings: limited sheet conductivity
    • 7.1.4. ITO film shortcomings: Limited sheet resistance
    • 7.1.5. ITO film shortcomings: index matching
    • 7.1.6. ITO film shortcomings: thinness
    • 7.1.7. ITO film shortcomings: price falls and commoditization
    • 7.1.8. ITO films: Current prices (2018)
    • 7.1.9. Indium: Price fluctuations drive innovation
    • 7.1.10. Indium's single supply risk: real or exaggerated?
    • 7.1.11. Recycling comes to the rescue?
    • 7.1.12. SWOT analysis of ITO
  • 7.2. ITO alternatives: Silver nanowires (Ag NW)
    • 7.2.1. Silver nanowires: basic introduction
    • 7.2.2. Ag NW: growth process
    • 7.2.3. Ag NWs: roll to roll formation
    • 7.2.4. Ag NW: Trade off between sheet resistance and transmission
    • 7.2.5. Ag NWs: Mechanical flexibility
    • 7.2.6. Ag NWs: 300,000 cycles and more with 1mm radius
    • 7.2.7. Ag NW: Patterning
    • 7.2.8. Ag NW: Ready-to-expose films?
    • 7.2.9. Ag NW: the haze issue
    • 7.2.10. Ag haze: Demonstrating impact of NW aspect ratio
    • 7.2.11. Stability
    • 7.2.12. Ag NWs: The stability issue been finally solved?
    • 7.2.13. Ag NWs: Photostability
    • 7.2.14. Ag NWs: Past or existing applications
    • 7.2.15. Ag NWs: Emerging applications
    • 7.2.16. Improving conductivity between Ag NWs - C3 Nano
    • 7.2.17. Foldable displays incorporating C3 Nano's AgNWs
    • 7.2.18. Future trends...
    • 7.2.19. Combining AgNW and CNTs for a TCF material (Chasm)
    • 7.2.20. Prospects for Ag NW adoption
    • 7.2.21. SWOT analysis of silver nanowires as a transparent conductor
  • 7.3. ITO Alternatives: Metal mesh
    • 7.3.1. Metal mesh: Photolithography followed by etching
    • 7.3.2. Fujifilm's photo-patterned metal mesh
    • 7.3.3. Toppan Printing's copper mesh transparent conductive films
    • 7.3.4. Panasonic's large area metal mesh
    • 7.3.5. GiS (integrator): Large area metal mesh displays
    • 7.3.6. Embossing/imprinting metal mesh
    • 7.3.7. O-Film's metal mesh technology: The basics
    • 7.3.8. Will O-Film rejuvenate its metal mesh business after disappointing sales?
    • 7.3.9. MNTech's metal mesh TCF technology (the incident)
    • 7.3.10. J-Touch: substantial metal mesh capacity
    • 7.3.11. Nanoimprinting metal mesh with 5um linewidth
    • 7.3.12. Metal mesh TCF is flexible
    • 7.3.13. Direct printed metal mesh transparent conductive films: performance
    • 7.3.14. Direct printed metal mesh transparent conductive films: major shortcomings
    • 7.3.15. Komura Tech: Improvement in gravure offset printed fine pattern (<5 um) metal mesh TCF ?
    • 7.3.16. Shashin Kagaku: offset printed metal mesh TCF
    • 7.3.17. Komori: Gravure offset all-printed metal mesh film?
    • 7.3.18. Asahi Kasei: taking steps to commercialize its R2R ultrafine printing process
    • 7.3.19. How is the ultrafine feature R2R mold fabricated?
    • 7.3.20. Konica Minolta: inkjet printing large area fine pitch metal mesh TCFs with <10um linewidth?
    • 7.3.21. Gunze: S2S screen printing finds a market fit?
    • 7.3.22. Toray's photocurable screen printed paste for fine line metal mesh
    • 7.3.23. Ishihara Chemical's gravure printed photo-sintered Cu paste
    • 7.3.24. Toppan Forms: Ag salt inks to achieve 4um printed metal mesh?
    • 7.3.25. Eastman Kodak: Transparent ultra low-resistivity RF antenna using printed Cu metal mesh technology
    • 7.3.26. Kuroki/ITRI: printed seed layer and plate Cu metal mesh?
    • 7.3.27. Replacing photolithography with photoresist printing for ultra fine metal mesh
    • 7.3.28. LCY gravure printing photoresist then etching
    • 7.3.29. Screen Holding: gravure printing photoresist then etching
    • 7.3.30. Consistent Materials' photoresist for metal mesh
    • 7.3.31. Tanaka Metal's metal mesh technology
  • 7.4. ITO Alternatives: Carbon nanotubes (CNTs)
    • 7.4.1. Introduction to Carbon Nanotubes (CNT)
    • 7.4.2. CNTs: Ideal vs reality
    • 7.4.3. Not all CNTs are equal
    • 7.4.4. Benchmarking of different CNT production processes
    • 7.4.5. Price position of CNTs (from SWCNT to FWCNT to MWCNT)
    • 7.4.6. Carbon nanotube transparent conductive films: performance
    • 7.4.7. Carbon nanotube transparent conductive films: performance of commercial films on the market
    • 7.4.8. Carbon nanotube transparent conductive films: Matched index
    • 7.4.9. Carbon nanotube transparent conductive films: mechanical flexibility
    • 7.4.10. Example of wearable device using CNT
  • 7.5. ITO alternatives: PEDOT:PSS
    • 7.5.1. PEDOT:PSS
    • 7.5.2. Patterning PEDOT:PSS
    • 7.5.3. Performance of PEDOT:PSS has drastically improved
    • 7.5.4. PEDOT:PSS is now on a par with ITO-on-PET
    • 7.5.5. PEDOT:PSS is mechanically flexible
    • 7.5.6. Stability and spatial uniformity of PEDOT:PSS
    • 7.5.7. Commercial product using PEDOT:PSS
    • 7.5.8. Use case examples of PEDOT:PSS TCFs
    • 7.5.9. Force Foundation: PEDOT used in solution coated smart windows
    • 7.5.10. SWOT analysis of PEDOT:PSS as a TCF
  • 7.6. Summary of ITO alternatives
    • 7.6.1. Quantitative benchmarking of different TCF technologies
    • 7.6.2. Technology comparison
    • 7.6.3. TCF material supplier overview
  • 7.7. Company profiles: ITO alternatives for capacitive touch.
    • 7.7.1. Company profiles: ITO alternatives for capacitive touch

8. TEMPERATURE SENSORS

  • 8.1.1. Introduction to printed temperature sensors
  • 8.1.2. Types of temperature sensors
  • 8.1.3. Comparing resistive temperature sensors and thermistors
  • 8.1.4. PST Sensors: Silicon nanoparticles ink
  • 8.1.5. Printed silicon nanoparticle sensors (PST)
  • 8.1.6. Printed metal RTD sensors: Brewer Science
  • 8.1.7. Substrate challenges for printed temperature sensors
  • 8.1.8. Academic research: Printed temperature sensor with stabilized PEDOT:PSS
  • 8.2. Applications of printed temperature sensors
    • 8.2.1. Coffee temperature sensors
    • 8.2.2. Research at PARC (Xerox)
    • 8.2.3. Time Temperature Indicators (TTIs)
    • 8.2.4. Chemical TTIs
    • 8.2.5. Chemical Time Temperature Indicators
    • 8.2.6. Examples of Chemical Time Temperature Indicators (TTIs
    • 8.2.7. Proof-of-concept prototype of an integrated printed electronic tag
    • 8.2.8. Wearable temperature monitors
    • 8.2.9. Novel applications for flexible temperature sensors
    • 8.2.10. CNT temperature sensors (Brewer Science)
    • 8.2.11. Temperature monitoring for electric vehicles batteries
    • 8.2.12. Printed temperature sensors and heaters (IEE)
  • 8.3. Summary: Printed temperature sensors
    • 8.3.1. SWOT analysis of printed temperature sensors
    • 8.3.2. Printed temperature sensor supplier overview
    • 8.3.3. Prospects for temperature sensors
    • 8.3.4. 10-year printed temperature sensors forecast by sales volume (m2) and revenue (Categories: organic and inorganic active materials)
  • 8.4. Company profiles: Printed temperature sensors
    • 8.4.1. Company profiles: Printed temperature sensors

9. GAS AND HUMIDITY SENSORS

  • 9.1. Gas sensor technology
    • 9.1.1. Gas sensor industry
    • 9.1.2. History of chemical sensors
    • 9.1.3. Transition to miniaturised gas sensors
    • 9.1.4. Comparison between classic and miniaturised sensors
    • 9.1.5. Concentrations of detectable atmospheric pollutants
    • 9.1.6. Five common detection principles for gas sensors
    • 9.1.7. Sensitivity for main available gas sensors
    • 9.1.8. Comparison of miniaturised sensor technologies
    • 9.1.9. Pellistor gas sensors
    • 9.1.10. Metal oxide semiconductors (MOS) gas sensors
    • 9.1.11. Printing MOS sensors
    • 9.1.12. Electrochemical (EC) gas sensors
    • 9.1.13. Infrared gas sensors
    • 9.1.14. Electronic nose (e-Nose)
    • 9.1.15. Integrating an 'electronic nose' with a flexible IC
    • 9.1.16. Screen printed MOS sensors (Figaro)
    • 9.1.17. MOS gas sensors with printed electrodes (FIS)
    • 9.1.18. Printed components of electrochemical gas sensor
    • 9.1.19. Printed traditional EC gas sensor
    • 9.1.20. Screen printed miniaturised EC gas sensor
    • 9.1.21. Screen printed MOS sensors (Renesas Electronics)
    • 9.1.22. Printed carbon nanotube based gas sensors
    • 9.1.23. Printed humidity/moisture sensor (Brewer Science)
    • 9.1.24. Humidity sensors based on organic electronics (Invisense)
  • 9.2. Emerging markets for printed gas sensors
    • 9.2.1. Gas sensors will find use in various IoT segments
    • 9.2.2. Gas sensors in automotive industry
    • 9.2.3. Emerging market: Personal devices
    • 9.2.4. Gas sensors for mobile devices
    • 9.2.5. Mobile phones with air quality sensors
    • 9.2.6. H2S professional gas detector watch
    • 9.2.7. Air quality monitoring for smart cities
    • 9.2.8. Home And Office Monitoring: A Connected Environment
  • 9.3. Summary: Gas and humidity sensors
    • 9.3.1. Prospects for gas and humidity sensors
    • 9.3.2. The gas sensor value chain
    • 9.3.3. Technology readiness level snapshot of gas sensors
    • 9.3.4. Supplier overview: Printed gas and humidity sensors
    • 9.3.5. Porters' five forces analysis for printed gas sensors
    • 9.3.6. Future challenges for sensor manufacturers
    • 9.3.7. 10-year printed gas and humidity sensors forecasts by sales volume (in m2) and revenue (Categories: uMOS, electrochemical, CNT, humidity)
  • 9.4. Company profiles: Gas and humidity sensors
    • 9.4.1. Company profiles: Gas and humidity sensors

10. PRINTED BIOSENSORS

  • 10.1.1. Electrochemical biosensors present a simple sensing mechanism
  • 10.1.2. Electrochemical biosensor mechanisms
  • 10.1.3. Enzymes used in PoC electrochemical biosensors
  • 10.1.4. Electrode deposition: screen printing vs sputtering
  • 10.1.5. Challenges for printing electrochemical test strips
  • 10.2. Biosensors for glucose sensing
    • 10.2.1. Anatomy of a glucose test strip
    • 10.2.2. Glucose test strip monitoring through an associated reader
    • 10.2.3. Sensors for diabetes management roadmap
    • 10.2.4. Summary: Printed biosensors
    • 10.2.5. Introduction to printed biosensors for diabetes management
    • 10.2.6. CGM begins to replace test strips (Abbott)
    • 10.2.7. Comparing test strip costs with CGM
    • 10.2.8. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is causing glucose test strip use to decline.
  • 10.3. Printed biosensors for other applications
    • 10.3.1. Electrochemical sensors are a more accurate method of ketone monitoring
    • 10.3.2. Lactic acid monitoring for athletes
    • 10.3.3. Traditional lactic acid monitors
    • 10.3.4. Cholesterol as an early indicator of cardiovascular disease
    • 10.3.5. A real market for PoC cholesterol tests?
  • 10.4. Summary: Biosensors
    • 10.4.1. The future of electrochemical PoC biosensors
    • 10.4.2. SWOT analysis of printed biosensors
    • 10.4.3. Supplier overview: Biosensors
    • 10.4.4. Printed biosensors market forecast
  • 10.5. Company profiles: Biosensors
    • 10.5.1. Biosensors: Company profiles

11. PRINTED WEARABLE ELECTRODES AND SKIN PATCHES

  • 11.1.1. Introduction to printed wearable electrodes and skin patches
  • 11.1.2. Applications for electrodes and skin patches
  • 11.1.3. Using electrodes to measure biopotential
  • 11.1.4. Disposable metal snap electrodes - the current electrode technology
  • 11.1.5. Market for metal snap Ag/AgCl electrodes
  • 11.1.6. Skin patches with integrated electrodes - an opportunity for printed electrodes.
  • 11.2. Examples of printed electrodes in skin patches
    • 11.2.1. Smart patch with printed silver ink (Quad Industries)
    • 11.2.2. QT Medical develop printed electrodes and interconnects
    • 11.2.3. Printed electrodes and interconnects for pregnancy monitoring (Monica Healthcare)
    • 11.2.4. Flexible and stretchable electrode (ScreenTec OY)
    • 11.2.5. Printed wireless wearable electrodes (Dupont)
    • 11.2.6. Printable dry ECG electrodes (Henkel)
    • 11.2.7. New printed electrode materials form Henkel
    • 11.2.8. Comparing printed and metal snap electrode performance
    • 11.2.9. Advantages of printed dry electrode adhesives
    • 11.2.10. Grid printed electrodes (Nissha GSI)
    • 11.2.11. Alternative printed electrode materials
  • 11.3. Electrodes in smart clothing and e-textiles
    • 11.3.1. E-Textiles: Where textiles meet electronics
    • 11.3.2. Biometric monitoring in apparel
    • 11.3.3. Integrating heart rate monitoring into clothing
    • 11.3.4. Sensors used in smart clothing for biometrics
    • 11.3.5. Companies with biometric monitoring apparel products
    • 11.3.6. Textile electrodes
    • 11.3.7. E-textile material use over time
    • 11.3.8. Printed electrodes on clothing (Toyobo)
    • 11.3.9. Monitoring racehorse health with printed electrodes (Toyobo)
    • 11.3.10. Stretchable conductive printed electrodes (Nanoleq)
  • 11.4. Summary: Flexible wearable electrodes
    • 11.4.1. SWOT analysis of printed flexible wearable electrodes
    • 11.4.2. Summary: Flexible wearable electrodes
    • 11.4.3. Supplier overview: Printed electrodes for skin patches and e-textiles (I)
    • 11.4.4. Supplier overview: Printed electrodes for skin patches and e-textiles (II)
  • 11.5. Company profiles: Flexible wearable electrodes
    • 11.5.1. Company profiles: Flexible wearable electrodes

12. PRINTED SENSORS WITH FHE

  • 12.1.1. Defining flexible hybrid electronics (FHE)
  • 12.1.2. FHE Examples: Combing conventional components with flexible/printed electronics on flexible substrates
  • 12.1.3. FHE: The best of both worlds?
  • 12.1.4. Overcoming the flexibility/functionality compromise
  • 12.1.5. What counts as FHE?
  • 12.1.6. Integrating sensors in FHE circuits
  • 12.2. Examples of printed sensors in FHE circuits
    • 12.2.1. Wine temperature sensing label
    • 12.2.2. Printed electronics enabling multi component integration some use NFC as wireless power
    • 12.2.3. Wearable ECG sensor from VTT
    • 12.2.4. PlasticArm: An electronic nose with FHE
    • 12.2.5. PlasticArm: Utilizing bespoke flexible processors
    • 12.2.6. Condition monitoring multimodal sensor array
    • 12.2.7. 'Sensor-less' sensing of temperature and movement
    • 12.2.8. FHE and printed sensors for smart packaging.
    • 12.2.9. Summary: Printed sensors in FHE circuits
    • 12.2.10. SWOT analysis of printed sensors in FHE circuits
    • 12.2.11. Supplier overview: Printed sensors in FHE circuits
  • 12.3. Company profiles: Printed sensors in FHE circuits
    • 12.3.1. Company profiles: Flexible wearable electrodes

13. MARKET FORECASTS

  • 13.1. Market forecast methodology
  • 13.2. Difficulties of forecasting discontinuous technology adoption
  • 13.3. 10-year printed sensors forecast by sales volume (in m2) (sensor categories: image, pressure, gas & humidity, temperature, strain, wearable electrodes)
  • 13.4. 10-year overall printed sensors forecast by revenue (no biosensors)
  • 13.5. 10-year overall printed sensors forecast by revenue (with biosensors)
  • 13.6. 10-year printed sensor forecast by revenue: All categories (except biosensors)
  • 13.7. Printed image sensors forecast methodology
  • 13.8. 10-year organic photodetector forecast by volume (in m2) and by revenue
  • 13.9. 10-year printed/hybrid image sensors forecast by volume (in m2) and by revenue
  • 13.10. 10-year piezoresistive sensor forecast by volume (in m2) and by revenue
  • 13.11. 10-year other pressure sensor forecast (piezoelectric and hybrid) by volume (in m2) and by revenue
  • 13.12. 10-year printed strain forecast by volume (in m2) and by revenue
  • 13.13. 10-year printed temperature sensor forecast (Categories: inorganic and organic)
  • 13.14. 10-year printed gas and humidity sensors forecasts by sales volume (in m2) and revenue (Categories: uMOS, electrochemical, CNT, humidity)
  • 13.15. 10-year printed biosensors forecast by volume in m2 and revenue
  • 13.16. 10-year wearable electrodes forecast by volume in m2 and revenue (Categories: Skin patch electrodes, smart clothing electrodes, other wearable electrodes)
  • 13.17. 10-year forecast: Material opportunities from printed sensors (by revenue and volume)

14. COMPANIES COVERED

  • 14.1. Image sensors
    • 14.1.1. Cambridge Display Technology
    • 14.1.2. Holst Centre
    • 14.1.3. Siemens Healthcare
    • 14.1.4. ISORG, Fraunhofer FEP
    • 14.1.5. Emberion
    • 14.1.6. IMEC
    • 14.1.7. SWIR Vision Systems
    • 14.1.8. DpiX
    • 14.1.9. TriEye
  • 14.2. Piezoresistive sensors
    • 14.2.1. Peratech
    • 14.2.2. Tangio
    • 14.2.3. Tekscan
    • 14.2.4. Sensitronics
    • 14.2.5. Central Midori International
    • 14.2.6. Tacterion
    • 14.2.7. IEE
    • 14.2.8. Interlink Electronics
    • 14.2.9. Henkel, Holst Centre
    • 14.2.10. Innovation Lab
    • 14.2.11. Sensing Tex
    • 14.2.12. Vista Medical
    • 14.2.13. Nissha Printing
    • 14.2.14. Infi-Tex, Sensel, Inkron
  • 14.3. Piezoelectric sensors
    • 14.3.1. Joanneum Research
    • 14.3.2. Meggit
    • 14.3.3. Suez
    • 14.3.4. Yamagata University
    • 14.3.5. Fraunhofer ISC
    • 14.3.6. Piezotech-Arkema
    • 14.3.7. Novasentis
  • 14.4. Strain sensors
    • 14.4.1. LEAP Technology
    • 14.4.2. Parker Hannifin
    • 14.4.3. Stretchsense
    • 14.4.4. Bando Chemical
    • 14.4.5. Brewer Science
    • 14.4.6. Polymatech
    • 14.4.7. Yamaha
    • 14.4.8. Kureha
    • 14.4.9. BeBop Sensors
  • 14.5. ITO replacement for capacitive touch
    • 14.5.1. Nitto Denko
    • 14.5.2. BASF
    • 14.5.3. C3nano
    • 14.5.4. Cambrios
    • 14.5.5. Fujifilm
    • 14.5.6. Toppan printing
    • 14.5.7. GiS
    • 14.5.8. LG Chem
    • 14.5.9. UniPixel
    • 14.5.10. O-Film
    • 14.5.11. MNTech
    • 14.5.12. J-Touch
    • 14.5.13. Fujikura Kasei
    • 14.5.14. Komura Tech
    • 14.5.15. Shashin Kagaku
    • 14.5.16. Komori
    • 14.5.17. Asahi Kasei
    • 14.5.18. Konica Minolta
    • 14.5.19. Gunze
    • 14.5.20. Toray
    • 14.5.21. Ishihara Chemical
    • 14.5.22. Eastman Kodak
    • 14.5.23. Kuroki
    • 14.5.24. ITRI
    • 14.5.25. Screen Holding
    • 14.5.26. Consistent Materials Co
    • 14.5.27. Tanaka Metal
    • 14.5.28. Canatu
    • 14.5.29. Heraeus
    • 14.5.30. Agfa
    • 14.5.31. Force Foundation
  • 14.6. Temperature sensors
    • 14.6.1. PST Sensors
    • 14.6.2. Brewer Science
    • 14.6.3. Yamagata University
    • 14.6.4. PARC (Xerox)
    • 14.6.5. Temptime
    • 14.6.6. Blue Spark Technologies
    • 14.6.7. VivaLink
    • 14.6.8. ISORG
  • 14.7. Gas and humidity sensors
    • 14.7.1. SPEC Sensors
    • 14.7.2. SGX Sensortech
    • 14.7.3. Mipex Technology
    • 14.7.4. Capteur Sensors and Analysers
    • 14.7.5. GE Global Research
    • 14.7.6. Figaro
    • 14.7.7. University of Manchester
    • 14.7.8. FIS (Nissha)
    • 14.7.9. Renesas
    • 14.7.10. C2Sense
    • 14.7.11. Alpha Szenszor
    • 14.7.12. Brewer Science
    • 14.7.13. K-Free
    • 14.7.14. North Eagles
    • 14.7.15. Argonne National Laboratory
    • 14.7.16. AQMesh
    • 14.7.17. Waggle
  • 14.8. Biosensors
    • 14.8.1. Abbott
    • 14.8.2. Roche
    • 14.8.3. Johnson & Johnson
    • 14.8.4. Ascensia Healthcare
  • 14.9. Flexible electrodes
    • 14.9.1. Toyobo
    • 14.9.2. QT Medical
    • 14.9.3. DMS Service
    • 14.9.4. iRhythm
    • 14.9.5. Quad Industries. GE Healthcare
    • 14.9.6. ScreenTec Oy
    • 14.9.7. Dupont
    • 14.9.8. Henkel
    • 14.9.9. Byteflies
    • 14.9.10. Nissha GSI
    • 14.9.11. Athos
    • 14.9.12. Mitsufuji
    • 14.9.13. Anico
  • 14.10. Printed sensors in flexible hybrid electronics circuits
    • 14.10.1. American Semiconductor
    • 14.10.2. PragmatIC
    • 14.10.3. Muhlbauer
    • 14.10.4. VTT