Braided Fabrication of a Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor
<p>(<b>a</b>) A drawing to help understand the definition of Poisson’s ratio. (<b>b</b>) The lap angle, lap yarn pitch, and the circumferential length of the braided cross-section, causing a negative Poisson’s ratio in tubular braiding.</p> "> Figure 1 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) A drawing to help understand the definition of Poisson’s ratio. (<b>b</b>) The lap angle, lap yarn pitch, and the circumferential length of the braided cross-section, causing a negative Poisson’s ratio in tubular braiding.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>The correlation between the fiber Bragg grating sensor and the braiding angle and wrap angle. An example of (<b>a</b>) is the braiding angle during the braiding process and (<b>b</b>) the polyurethane wrap angle. (<b>c</b>) The wrap pitch of 0.6π and the sensor cross-section diameter of 3 mm for the 12-strand polyurethane sensor. (<b>d</b>) The 16-strand polyurethane wrap pitch of 0.7π and the sensor cross-section diameter of 3.5 mm. (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) The samples after brazing, and (<b>e</b>) electron micrograph of the braided sensor. It also shows a core position in the optical fiber with a 125 µm diameter and the Bragg grating sensor core with a 6.3 µm diameter. (<b>f</b>) The process of the stress–strain response applied to the Bragg grating sensor through the braiding process.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) A photorealistic view of processing Bragg gratings in a femtosecond laser precision processing stage using a phase mask. (<b>b</b>) Photograph of the phase mask (period: 2132 nm, type: uniform, spacing: 2 nm, size: 25 × 3 mm, illumination: 808 nm) used for femtosecond laser processing.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) The overall structure of the braiding machine. (<b>b</b>) The trajectory of the yarn movement of the braiding machine. Eight groups of braiding yarn tracks and one wrap yarn track used for braiding create a combination of spindle movements by repeating the same speed. The core yarn in c9 is surrounded by a tubular braiding structure and by a spindle combination of braiding yarn and wrap yarn. The sensor is inserted along with the core yarn and processed into a tubular bladed process.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>The measurement equipment used in the experiment. (<b>A</b>) Structure of experimental measurement. (<b>B</b>) Actual photo of experimental measurement. (<b>C</b>) Manual measuring tool. The fan-out can accurately connect the laser and Bragg wavelength shift to the interrogator with a Bragg grating core. optical manual device can measure the length (1 mm) and angle (1°) with precision resolution. 10 kHz interrogator ran for real-time monitoring.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Experimental measurement device with a length unit of 1 cm and an angle unit of 10°. (<b>b</b>) A diagram of the experimental measurement device for measuring the maximum and minimum values. Each fixed position and moving position were selected, and rubber tabs for the fixed optical axis were installed at both ends of the sensor.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>The wavelength variation for the change in the maximum and minimum values was measured; the morphology of the braid. Before the braid (<b>A</b>) and after the 12-strand braid (<b>B</b>) show the effectiveness of the sensor (<b>C</b>). The noise signal in the 16-strands braid.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>The morphology of the sensor’s length and angle unit wavelength variations and the maximum and minimum values of the sensors before and after braiding under the same conditions (<b>a1</b>,<b>a1’</b>,<b>a2</b>,<b>a</b><b>2’</b>,<b>c1</b>,<b>c1’</b>,<b>c2</b>,<b>c2’</b>). The linearity of the wavelength variation through the trend line. (<b>b1</b>,<b>b</b><b>1’</b>,<b>b2</b>,<b>b2’</b>,<b>d1</b>,<b>d1’</b>,<b>d2</b>,<b>d2’</b>): a1, a1’, b1, b1’: 1cm stress-strain response graph for displacement. a2, a2’, b2, b2’: The morphology of the wavelength shift (<b>a1</b>,<b>a1’</b>,<b>b1</b>,<b>b1’</b>) in real time (nm/msec) measured in the interrogator. (<b>c1</b>,<b>c1’</b>,<b>d1</b>,<b>d1</b><b>’</b>): 1° stress-strain response graph for displacement. (<b>c2</b>,<b>c2’</b>,<b>d2</b>,<b>d2</b><b>’</b>): The real time (nm/msec) morphology of the wavelength shift (<b>c1</b>,<b>c1’</b>,<b>d1</b>,<b>d1</b><b>’</b>) in the interrogator.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>The result of <a href="#sensors-20-05246-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>. The reliability value of each experiment is presented by the reliability constant for each result value. The stress–strain response change before and after braiding. (<b>a1</b>) The wavelength shift for 1 cm displacement before braiding. (<b>a2</b>) The wavelength shift for the unit (1 cm) displacement after braiding.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>(<b>a1</b>) The sensor stress–strain wavelength shift before braiding. (<b>a2</b>) The wavelength variation after braiding. The wavelength shifts according to 1 radian.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>Comparison of the stress–strain response of the optical waveguide axis before and after braiding (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>). The fast rate of responsiveness to stress–strain. (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) The stress–strain response minimum (0%) before and after braiding on the optical waveguide axis. Before and after the stress–strain response, maxima (100%) were compared (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>).</p> "> Figure 12
<p>The experimental results analysis of the sensor braiding condition. (<b>a1</b>–<b>a3</b>) Prototype A condition. (<b>b1</b>–<b>b3</b>) Prototype B condition. (<b>c1</b>–<b>c3</b>) Prototype B condition. (<b>a1</b>,<b>b1</b>,<b>c1</b>): Braiding angle relationship between sensor angle and amount of polyurethane; (<b>a2</b>,<b>b2</b>,<b>c2</b>): One pitch diameter curling spiral secondary distortion structure diameter; (<b>a3</b>,<b>b3</b>,<b>c3</b>): Braid sensor diameter Cross section structure diameter.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>Analysis of sensor stress–strain signal results according to braiding conditions.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Measurement Method of Bragg Grating Sensor
1.2. Braiding Mechanical Structure
Negative Poisson’s Ratio
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Design of the Braided Sensor
2.2. Methodology
2.3. Experiment
2.3.1. Prototype
Bragg Grating Sensor Process
Braiding Process
2.3.2. Prototypes A, B, C
2.3.3. Subject
2.3.4. Experimental Device and Tools
2.3.5. Protocol
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Correlation | Deleted Variable | Standardized Cronbach’s α | Difference | Correlation with Total |
---|---|---|---|---|
Standardized Cronbach’s α | 1546.497 1546.509 1546.496 1546.499 1546.507 1546.505 | 0.847 0.863 0.884 0.904 0.842 0.840 | −0.038 −0.022 −0.001 0.019 −0.043 −0.045 | 0.8023 0.7065 0.5766 0.4457 0.8337 0.8433 |
0.885 | ||||
Correlation | Pair | Kendall’s tau | 95% | CI |
1546.497, 1546.509 1546.497, 1546.496 1546.497, 1546.499 1546.497, 1546.507 1546.497, 1546.505 1546.509, 1546.496 1546.509, 1546.499 1546.509, 1546.507 1546.509, 1546.505 1546.496, 1546.499 1546.496, 1546.507 1546.496, 1546.505 1546.499, 1546.507 1546.499, 1546.505 1546.507, 1546.505 | 0.645 0.678 0.381 0.803 0.652 0.435 0.539 0.739 0.622 0.501 0.589 0.492 0.410 0.488 0.711 | 0.481 0.507 0.167 0.699 0.531 0.206 0.368 0.597 0.494 0.325 0.394 0.320 0.205 0.320 0.606 | 0.809 0.849 0.594 0.772 0.665 0.709 0.881 0.750 0.677 0.785 0.665 0.615 0.655 0.817 | |
Variable | Mean | SD | Minimum | Median |
1546.497 1546.509 1546.496 1546.499 1546.507 1546.505 - 1546.497 1546.509 1546.496 1546.499 1546.507 1546.505 | 1546.5837 1546.5791 1546.5804 1546.5744 1546.5693 1546.5838 1546.497 0.001692 8.484 × 10−4 0.001105 4.466 × 10−4 0.001017 9.849 × 10−4 | 1546.522 1546.526 1546.499 1546.524 1546.519 1546.541 1546.496 0.001105 5.603 × 10−4 0.001966 5.545 × 10−4 6.880 × 10−4 6.323 × 10−4 | 1546.522 1546.526 1546.499 1546.524 1546.519 1546.541 1546.496 0.001105 5.603 × 10−4 0.001966 5.545 × 10−4 6.880 × 10−4 6.323 × 10−4 | 1546.5890 1546.5850 1546.5920 1546.5675 1546.5740 1546.5865 1546.499 4.466 × 10−4 4.338 × 10−4 5.545 × 10−4 7.592 × 10−4 2.490 × 10−4 2.638 × 10−4 |
References
- Li, Z.; Liu, S.; Bai, Z.; Fu, C.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, Z.; Liu, X.; Wang, Y. Residual-stress-induced helical long period fiber gratings for sensing applications. Opt. Express 2018, 26, 24114–24123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huang, C.; Chen, X.; Oladipo, A.O.; Panoiu, N.C.; Ye, F. Generation of Subwavelength Plasmonic Nanovortices via Helically Corrugated Metallic Nanowires. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 13089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McCoy, C.A.; Gregor, M.C.; Polsin, D.N.; Fratanduono, D.E.; Celliers, P.M.; Boehly, T.R.; Meyerhofer, D.D. Shock-wave equation-of-state measurements in fused silica up to 1600 GPa. J. Appl. Phys. 2016, 119, 215901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Durana, G.; Kirchhof, M.; Luber, M.; de Ocariz, I.S.Á.; Poisel, H.; Zubia, J.; Vazquez, C. Use of a Novel Fiber Optical Strain Sensor for Monitoring the Vertical Deflection of an Aircraft Flap. IEEE Sens. J. 2009, 9, 1219–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, X.; Du, F.; Guo, T.; Lao, J.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, F.; Li, J.; Chen, C.; Guan, B.-O. Liquid Crystal-Embedded Tilted Fiber Grating Electric Field Intensity Sensor. J. Lightwave Technol. 2017, 35, 3347–3353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, D.-H.; Feng, M.Q. Real-Time Structural Health Monitoring Using a Novel Fiber-Optic Accelerometer System. IEEE Sens. J. 2007, 7, 536–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choudhury, D.; Macdonald, J.R.; Kar, A.K. Ultrafast laser inscription: Perspectives on future integrated applications. Laser Photonics Rev. 2014, 8, 827–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alemohammad, H.; Toyserkani, E.; Pinkerton, A.J. Femtosecond laser micromachining of fiber Bragg gratings for simultaneous measurement of temperature and concentration of liquids. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 2008, 41, 185101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bilisik, K.; Sahbaz, N. Structure-unit cell-based approach on three-dimensional representative braided preforms from four-step braiding: Experimental determination of effects of structure-process parameters on predetermined yarn path. Text. Res. J. 2012, 82, 220–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rana, S.; Zdraveva, E.; Pereira, C.; Fangueiro, R.; Correia, A.G. Development of hybrid braided composite rods for reinforcement and health monitoring of structures. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 170187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Meng, Z.; Hu, X.; Su, L.; Sun, Y. Modeling and analysis of friction in end-face/inner-face circular braiding processes. J. Text. Inst. 2018, 109, 1400–1408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmadi, M.S.; Johari, M.S.; Sadighi, M.; Esfandeh, M. An experimental study on mechanical properties of GFRP braid-pultruded composite rods. Express Polym. Lett. 2009, 3, 560–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Czichos, R.; Bareiro, O.; Pickett, A.K.; Middendorf, P.; Gries, T. Experimental and numerical studies of process variabilities in biaxial carbon fiber braids. Int. J. Mater. 2020, 10, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zou, Q.; Xue, W.; Lin, J.; Fu, Y.; Guan, G.; Wang, F.; Wang, L. Mechanical characteristics of novel polyester/NiTi wires braided composite stent for the medical application. Results Phys. 2016, 6, 440–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rawal, A.; Saraswat, H.; Sibal, A. Tensile response of braided structures: A review. Text. Res. J. 2015, 85, 2083–2096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, G.; Liang, J.; Wang, B.; Wang, Y. Effect of Interface Properties on Mechanical Behavior of 3D Four-Directional Braided Composites with Large Braid Angle Subjected to Uniaxial Tension. Appl. Compos. Mater. 2011, 18, 449–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rawal, A.; Gupta, S.; Saraswat, H.; Sibal, A. Geometrical modeling of near-net shape braided preforms. Text. Res. J. 2015, 85, 1055–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soh, D.B.S.; Nilsson, J.; Sahu, J.K.; Cooper, L.J. Geometrical factor modification of helical-core fiber radiation loss formula. Opt. Commun. 2003, 222, 235–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tchen, T. The Bragg law modified for X-ray diffraction from a bent crystal in the backscattering mode. Tech. Phys. Lett. 2003, 29, 235–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tiwari, U.; Mishra, V.; Bhalla, A.; Singh, N.; Jain, S.C.; Garg, H.; Kapur, P. Fiber Bragg grating sensor for measurement of impact absorption capability of mouthguards. Dent. Traumatol. 2011, 27, 263–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, Z.; Sun, Q.; Wang, C.; Sun, Z.; Mou, C.; Zhou, K.; Zhang, L. Refractive index and temperature sensitivity characterization of excessively tilted fiber grating. Opt. Express 2017, 25, 3336–3346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guyader, G.; Gabor, A.; Hamelin, P. Analysis of 2D and 3D circular braiding processes: Modeling the interaction between the process parameters and the pre-form architecture. Mech. Mach. Theory 2013, 69, 90–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, N.; Hu, H. Auxetic Yarn Made with Circular Braiding Technology. Phys. Status Solidi 2019, 256, 1800168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Subramani, P.; Rana, S.; Ghiassi, B.; Fangueiro, R.; Oliveira, D.V.; Lourenco, P.B.; Xavier, J. Development and characterization of novel auxetic structures based on re-entrant hexagon design produced from braided composites. Compos. Part B Eng. 2016, 93, 132–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- David, B.P.; David, B.; Royall, B. New Directions in Braiding. J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 2013, 8, 11–12. [Google Scholar]
- McAfee, J.; Faisal, N.H. Parametric sensitivity analysis to maximise auxetic effect of polymeric fibre based helical yarn. Compos. Struct. 2017, 162, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sry, V.; Mizutani, Y.; Endo, G.; Suzuki, Y.; Todoroki, A. Estimation of the Longitudinal Elasticity Modulus of Braided Synthetic Fiber Rope Utilizing Classical Laminate Theory with the Unit N/tex. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rawal, A.; Kumar, R.; Saraswat, H. Tensile mechanics of braided sutures. Text. Res. J. 2012, 82, 1703–1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Types | Prototype A | Prototype B | Prototype C | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Parameter | ||||
Sensor fabrication conditions | flexible rod-body frame | 12 strands | 16 strands | |
Cross-section diameter (cm) | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.35 | |
Initial braid angle (degree) | No | 45 | 45 | |
Number of polyurethane strands (number) | No | 12 | 16 | |
Braided sensor body curling diameter (cm) | 9 | 6 | 3 | |
Prototype photos | ||||
Subject | Length (Wavelength Shift/1 cm) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Prototype | ||||||
flexible frame | 1 cm 6 cm | 2 cm 7 cm | 3 cm 8 cm | 4 cm 9 cm | 5 cm 10 cm | |
1547.337 nm 1547.563 nm | 1547.409 nm 1547.568 nm | 1547.44 nm 1547.594 nm | 1547.519 nm 1547.619 nm | 1547.53 nm 1547.63 nm | ||
y = 0.172x + 1575.2 R2 = 0.9562 (1st, 2nd, 3rd mean) | ||||||
Standardized Cronbach’s α 0.894 (3rd) (α ≧ 0.9 (excellent), 0.8 ≦ α ≦ 0.9 (good), 0.7 ≦ α ≦ 0.8 (acceptable)) | ||||||
12-strand braid | 1575.321 nm 1575.63 nm | 1575.392 nm 1575.71 nm | 1575.465 nm 1575.79 nm | 1575.52 nm 1575.86 nm | 1575.355 nm 1575.948 nm | |
y = 0.0701x + 1575.2 R2 = 0.9562 (1st, 2nd, 3rd mean) | ||||||
Standardized Cronbach’s α 0.861 (3rd) (α ≧ 0.9 (excellent), 0.8 ≦ α ≦ 0.9 (good), 0.7 ≦ α ≦ 0.8 (acceptable)) | ||||||
16-strand braid | NO | |||||
angle (wavelength shift/1°) | ||||||
flexible frame | 0° 50° | 10° 60° | 20° 70° | 30° 80° | 40° 90° | |
1547.7 nm 1547.561 nm | 1547.671 nm 1547.538 nm | 1547.611 nm 1547.527 nm | 1547.597 nm 1547.496 nm | 1547.571 nm 1547.458 nm | ||
y = 0.134x + 1547.4 R2 = 0.9827 (1st, 2nd, 3rd mean) | ||||||
Standardized Cronbach’s α 0.885 (3rd) α ≧ 0.9 (excellent), 0.8 ≦ α ≦ 0.9 (good), 0.7 ≦ α ≦ 0.8 (acceptable), 0.6 ≦ α ≦0.7 (questionable), 0.5 ≦ α ≦ 0.6 (poor), α ≦ 0.5 (unacceptable) | ||||||
12-strand braid | 1547.453 nm 1547.568 nm | 1547.467 nm 1547.594 nm | 1547.493 nm 1547.612 nm | 1547.512 nm 1547.63 nm | 1547.563 nm 1547.451 nm | |
y = 0.0233x + 1547.4 R2 = 0.9827 (1st, 2nd, 3rd mean) | ||||||
Standardized Cronbach’s alpha. 0.884 (3rd) α ≧ 0.9 (excellent), 0.8 ≦ α ≦ 0.9 (good), 0.7 ≦ α ≦ 0.8 (acceptable), 0.6 ≦ α ≦ 0.7 (questionable), 0.5 ≦ α ≦ 0.6 (poor), α ≦ 0.5 (unacceptable) | ||||||
16-strand braid | NO | |||||
maximum and minimum values of the stress–strain response | ||||||
flexible frame | 0° 1546.901 nm | 90° 1549.925 nm | y = −3.567x + 1554.1 R2 = 1 (1st, 2nd, 3rd mean) | |||
12-strand braid | 1546.916 nm | 1549.483 nm | y = −6.424x + 1559.7 R2 = 1 (1st, 2nd, 3rd mean) | |||
16-strand braid | NO |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lee, S.; Lee, J. Braided Fabrication of a Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor. Sensors 2020, 20, 5246. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20185246
Lee S, Lee J. Braided Fabrication of a Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor. Sensors. 2020; 20(18):5246. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20185246
Chicago/Turabian StyleLee, Songbi, and Joohyeon Lee. 2020. "Braided Fabrication of a Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor" Sensors 20, no. 18: 5246. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20185246