Measurement Science and Technology

PAPER Related content

- Resistive flex sensors: a survey
Hysteresis compensation technique applied to Giovanni Saggio, Francesco Riillo, Laura
Sbernini et al.
polymer optical fiber curvature sensor for lower - Design and characterization of a magneto-
rheological series elastic actuator for a
limb exoskeletons lower extremity exoskeleton
Bing Chen, Xuan Zhao, Hao Ma et al.

To cite this article: Arnaldo Gomes Leal-Junior et al 2017 Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 125103 - Validation of a single-mode polymer
optical fiber sensor and interrogator for
large strain measurements
Omid Abdi, Kara Peters, Mervyn Kowalsky
et al.

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 131.170.21.110 on 05/12/2017 at 17:07

 Measurement Science and Technology

Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 (2017) 125103 (9pp) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6501/aa946f

Hysteresis compensation technique applied

to polymer optical fiber curvature sensor
for lower limb exoskeletons
Arnaldo Gomes Leal-Junior , Anselmo Frizera-Neto , Maria José Pontes
and Thomaz Rodrigues Botelho
Graduate Program, Electrical Engineering, Federal University of Espírito Santo, Fernando Ferrari avenue,
29075-910, Vitória, ES, Brazil

E-mail: arnaldo.leal@aluno.ufes.br

Received 3 May 2017, revised 16 October 2017

Accepted for publication 18 October 2017
Published 22 November 2017

Abstract
Polymer optical fiber (POF) curvature sensors present some advantages over conventional
techniques for angle measurements, such as their light weight, compactness and immunity to
electromagnetic fields. However, high hysteresis can occur in POF curvature sensors due to the
polymer viscoelastic response. In order to overcome this limitation, this paper shows how the
hysteresis sensor can be compensated by a calibration equation relating the measured output
signal to the sensor’s angular velocity. The proposed method is validated using an exoskeleton
with an active joint on the knee for flexion and extension rehabilitation exercises. The results
show a decrease in sensor hysteresis and a decrease by more than two times in the error
between the POF sensor and the potentiometer, which is employed for the angle measurement
of the exoskeleton knee joint.

Keywords: fiber optic sensors, polymer optical fiber, angle measurement

(Some figures may appear in colour only in the online journal)

1. Introduction system. Potentiometers can also be employed; however, they

Robotic therapy is an efficient method for use in active and
passive rehabilitation training. Moreover, it can provide spe­
cific strategies for rehabilitation as well as optimize human
resources in physiotherapy [1]. For this reason, lower limb
exoskeletons can be applied not only as a gait assistance
device, but also as a tool for advanced rehabilitation thera­
pies. Robotic exoskeletons have been successfully employed
in rehabilitation exercises due to their high repeatability, and
the use of the sensor allows quantitative feedback to be taken
during patient recovery [2], which may be used to evaluate
the patient’s progress with predefined objectives, enabling
the customization of treatment with increasing levels of dif­
ficulty [3].
The sensors applied to the measurement of the joint angle
of the exoskeleton are generally encoders [3], whose mechan­
ical supports need to be precisely assembled due their sen­
sitivity to misalignment. This can result in a less compact
may present the same issue as encoders regarding mechan­
ical assembly and can also result in noisy measurements
[4]. Furthermore, inertial measurement units (IMUs), which
can also be employed for angle measurement applications,
need frequent calibration and are highly sensitive to electro­
magnetic field changes [5]. This is especially undesirable
in strategies that require the activation of actuators, causing
electromagnetic perturbations that affect IMU performance.
In order to eliminate electromagnetic interference, a planar
vestibular dynamic inclinometer is proposed in [6]. However,
it comprises four dual-axis accelerometers and one tri-axial
gyroscope, increasing the system complexity and requiring
quick and reliable calibration, which is not always achieved,
especially for the gyroscope [6].
Optical fibers are compact and lightweight, allow multi­
plexing systems, are chemically stable and are not influenced
by electromagnetic fields. These characteristics make them
suitable for sensor applications [7]. Polymer optical fibers

1361-6501/17/125103+9$33.00 1 © 2017 IOP Publishing Ltd  Printed in the UK

Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 (2017) 125103 A G Leal-Junior et al

(POF) present the additional advantage of having higher

elastic strain limits, higher fracture toughness and higher flex­
ibility in the bend than silica fibers [8]. These mechanical
advantages make POFs very sensitive to strain, which is a
desirable characteristic for kinematic parameter sensors [7].
POFs typically present diameters between 0.25 mm and 1 mm,
giving them a larger diameter than silica fibers. Therefore, it is
possible to use low-precision plastic connectors, which gener­
ally result in a cheaper system [7]. Moreover, polymers have
great biocompatibility, which makes them a promising alter­
native for biomedical applications [8]. Furthermore, POFs can
withstand more than 100 000 bending cycles without signifi­
cant loss of transmission or failure [9], which make them a
robust alternative for joint angle measurements.
Regarding the knee angle measurement, Donno et al [10]
developed a POF goniometer capable of measuring angles up
to 90°. Dynamical tests are conducted in three frequencies:
0.1 Hz, 1.25 Hz and 5 Hz, with a low error between the POF
sensor and the reference potentiometer. Bilro et al [11] present
a similar approach to knee angle monitoring. However, the
Figure 1.  A schematic view of the POF sensor under curvature.
sensor is characterized by quasi-static tests and the sensor is
evaluated with a video-based system, which only accounts for
movements on the sagittal plane.
A POF curvature sensor generally employs light attenua­
tion due to macrobending as the measuring principle [10, 11].
Even though it is a simple sensing mechanism, it is dependent
on some parameters, such as the curvature radius of the fiber
Figure 2.  The experimental setup for the tests of the optical fiber
and the lateral section geometry, which are made to enhance sensor.
the sensitivity of the sensor. The lateral section is denoted as
the sensitive zone, because it is the region of the fiber with the Besides the sensitive zone length, depth and surface rough­
highest amount of bend sensitivity [12]. The sensitive zone ness, the curvature radii also affect the sensor sensitivity, hys­
depth, length and surface roughness, along with the sensor teresis and linearity. If the curvature radius is too small, more
curvature radius, has an influence on the POF sensor hyster­ stress is supported by the fiber, with this high stress leading
esis, sensitivity and linearity. However, the analytical models to higher variation of the refractive index of the fiber and the
proposed so far do not take into account the influence of all the output signal having higher attenuation. The polymer is a vis­
mentioned parameters [12, 13]. Moreover, the POF curvature coelastic material, which does not respond constantly to stress
sensors, based on the macrobend principle, are the source of or strain [16]. For this reason, higher amounts of stress on the
some errors, including the undesired bending of the fiber, light fiber may provoke higher amounts of hysteresis. Leal Junior
source power deviations and high hysteresis [13]. et al [17] proposed a hysteresis compensation technique based
Regarding POF curvature sensors based on intensity vari­ on a calibration routine to obtain calibration equations  for
ations due to macrobending, there is variation in the output flexion and extension cycles with the compensation of hys­
signal proportional to the curvature angle. In the case of con­ teresis. Although it successfully compensates the hysteresis, it
cave bending, there is an increase in reflections on the convex can also lead to additional errors in the sensor measurements.
side of the curvature and a decrease on the concave side. For This paper proposes the application of a POF curvature
this reason, if the sensitive zone is on the convex side, there sensor on a lower limb exoskeleton with an active joint on the
will be a lower reflection ratio when compared with the fiber knee. A hysteresis compensation technique is presented based
in the straight position. Furthermore, the angle between the on experimental characterization with different velocities. The
incident ray and the sensitive zone surface increases with the calibration routine applied here is similar to the one presented
fiber curvature, which leads to coupling between some higher in [17]. However, in this paper, an additional regression was
guided modes and lower guided modes with an increase in the included for the reference response, which reduces not only
surface scattering loss, which also creates attenuation on the the hysteresis, but also the sensor errors. The sensor is valid­
POF with the sensitive zone [14]. Despite the attenuation due to ated by the flexion and extension cycles of the knee joint in
macrobending and surface scattering, output signal attenuation the angle range of 10–80° for a lower limb exoskeleton with
caused by the stress-optical effect is also present. Since the cur­ an active joint on the knee. The POF curvature sensor results
vature of the fiber also generates stress, the POF refractive index are compared with the potentiometer of the exoskeleton knee
changes, leading to the attenuation of the POF sensor signal joint.
which is proportional to the stress on the fiber [15]. Figure 1 This paper is organized as follows. Section  2 pre­
shows the attenuation mechanisms of the POF curvature sensor. sents the materials and methods employed for the sensor

2
Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 (2017) 125103
Figure 3.  The prototype employed in the POF curvature sensor characterization and exoskeleton with the POF curvature sensor assembled.
In order to obtain a better visualization of the optical components, the thigh support and the reference fiber are not shown.
characterization and validation. The hysteresis compensa­
tion technique and the sensor validation of the exoskeleton
employed is presented in section 3. Finally, the final remarks
and future works are discussed in section 4.
2.  Material and methods
2.1.  System setup
The tests performed for characterization and validation com­
prise bending the fiber with a constant angular velocity for
flexion and extension in a defined range. As bending occurs,
the light attenuation increases due to the fiber curvature.
The variation in light is acquired by IF-D91 photodiodes
(Industrial Fiber Optics, USA). The signal is acquired using
the USB-6008 board (National Instruments, USA) at 200 Hz.
The light source is a low cost 3 mW 650 nm laser. The laser
provides light for the light coupler IF-562 (Industrial Fiber
Optics, USA), which has one input and two outputs to divide
the laser signal into the reference output and sensor fiber.
Figure  2 shows the experimental setup, where ‘Reference’
refers to a second fiber that is not submitted to curvatures and
is used to compensate for deviations in the light source. Such
compensation is performed by normalizing the ‘Sensor’ power
output with the ‘Reference’ power output [11, 18]. In order to
enhance the sensitivity of the sensor, lateral sections with con­
trolled length, depth and surface roughness were made on the
fiber through abrasive removal of the material.
The experimental setup presented in figure 2 is applied to
the test prototype for the POF sensor characterization and the
lower limb exoskeleton employed for sensor validation.
The dynamic test for sensor characterization is made by
fixing a multimode HFBR-EUS100Z POF (Broadcom Limited,
Singapore) with a step index on the test prototype presented in
figure 3. The supports are placed in different positions to pro­
vide different curvature radii for the tests. The POF curvature
sensor sensitivity zone depth, length, surface roughness and
curvature radius are optimized via a multi-objective genetic
algorithm [19] to obtain a sensor with the maximum possible
sensitivity and linearity. The objective functions applied to the
optimization are the relation of the sensitive zone parameters
and curvature radius with the sensor sensitivity and linearity,
3
A G Leal-Junior et al
which were obtained in the experimental results from sensors
with different curvature radii and sensitive zone parameters.
The tested sensors present a sensitive zone length ranging
from 5–30 mm, a depth from 0.6–1.1 mm and surface rough­
ness variation obtained with the side polish of the fiber with a
sandpaper grit size of 80–800.
For experimental validation of the sensor, an exoskeleton is
employed with three degrees of freedom: two that are passive
on the hip and ankle and another that is active on the knee. The
motor unit of the device is comprised of a DC motor (Maxon
Motors, Switzerland) and a harmonic drive (Harmonic Drive
AG, Germany), which provides a range of movement of
0–90°. A precision potentiometer of 10 kΩ and a  ±  2% lin­
earity (Vishay, USA) is connected to a harmonic drive output
through a toothed belt and is responsible for the knee joint
position measurement as well as being used as a reference for
comparison in this study.
Since the exoskeleton was originally constructed to have
its angles measured by a potentiometer, it does not have any
supports for the POF curvature sensor. For this reason, sup­
ports for the fiber had to be designed. The support design
has to consider the physical limits of the exoskeleton and
user comfort. It needs to provide a degree of freedom for the
fiber bending region, and at the same time, it cannot cause the
undesired bending of the fiber at angles close to 0°, which is a
source of errors for POF curvature sensors [11]. Furthermore,
the space for the POF sensor components—the light coupler,
laser and circuit board—must be taken into account.
By taking these design parameters into account, the fiber
supports are designed and manufactured with a 3D printer.
Figure 3 also shows the exoskeleton with the supports for the
sensor as well as with the fiber and its components.
2.2.  Hysteresis compensation technique
The sensor hysteresis can be understood as the output signal
difference due to the trajectory of the sensor movement [20].
In this case, it is the difference between the sensor response
for the flexion and extension cycles. For a viscoelastic mat­
erial, the stress–strain response presents hysteretic behavior
for loading/unloading cycles where the highest value of hys­
teresis is presented in the middle of the cycle [21]. Since
Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 (2017) 125103
Figure 4.  Typical stress–strain curve for a viscoelastic material.
the POF curvature sensor works with the stress and strain
applied to the fiber due to its curvature, the sensor response
is expected to present similar stress–strain curve behavior for
the viscoelastic material presented in figure 4, where (xfm,ymp)
are the points of maximum hysteresis for the loading cycle
and (xem,ymn) are the points of maximum hysteresis for the
unloading cycle, which generally occurs in the middle of the
cycle. For the fiber curvature case, the loading cycle is the
joint flexion movement, whereas the unloading cycle is the
joint extension movement.
Since the maximum hysteresis for viscoelastic materials
typically occurs in the middle range of the cycle, the maximum
hysteresis is obtained through the ratio between the vertical
distance of the flexion and an extension of the linear approx­
imation curves [20]. (Ymn − Ymp ) is the distance between the
flexion and extension curve at the middle point of the curve
and (YMax − YMin ) is the difference between the maximum
and minimum points of the sensor response presented at the
stress–strain curve of figure 4 (equation (1)).
 
 (Ymn − Ymp ) 
(1) Hysteresis (%) =    × 100% .
(YMax − YMin )  sensor response, which is the point of maximum hysteresis, it
The theoretical basis for the compensation technique pre­
sented in this section comes from the presence of hysteresis
in the polymer viscoelastic response [21]. For this reason,
the sensor hysteresis is provoked by the POF material visco­
elastic response. Since the viscoelastic response varies with
the movement frequency [22], a method for obtaining a cali­
bration equation  relating the sensor response to the angular
velocity may be able to compensate for the effects of the hys­
teresis due to the viscoelastic response of the sensor.
Therefore, the hysteresis compensation technique com­
prises a calibration equation  relating the velocity and the
sensor response to the dynamic condition. In order to obtain
the compensated calibration equation, the first step is to per­
form quasi-static tests to find the calibration curve where the
velocity has a low influence. This test is made by means of
bending the fiber from 0° to 90° in steps of 5°, with the fiber
remaining in the desired position for 10 s. After this first char­
acterization, the sensor is tested in sequential flexion/extension
4
A G Leal-Junior et al
Table 1.  Angular velocities applied to sensor characterization.
Test Angular velocity (rad s−1)
1 0.0209
2 0.0273
3 0.0419
4 0.0561
5 0.898
6 0.1047
7 0.1726
8 0.3415
9 0.4304
cycles with different angular velocities, and the sensor hyster­
esis at each velocity is compared with the angular velocity to
obtain an experimental equation relating the hysteresis and the
angular velocity of the sensor. Moreover, the sensor response
at each angular velocity is also compared with the response
of the quasi-static condition, and a linear regression is made
between the quasi-static response and the dynamic response.
Table 1 shows the angular velocities employed by the sensor
characterization. These velocities are within the angular
velocity limits of the exoskeleton employed for rehabilita­
tion. In order to obtain a better visualization of the procedure,
figure 5 shows the block diagram of the technique to obtain a
compensated equation.
Referring to figure  5, ‘f1’ is the exponential equa­
tion obtained by experimental fitting that relates the angular
velocity in rad s−1 and the sensor hysteresis. Even though
the linear relation of the coefficients and the linear regression
between the compensated and measured voltage at a constant
angular velocity is assumed, the resulting equation  is not
linear due to the exponential behavior of the hysteresis with
the angular velocity. For this reason, model ‘f2’ is an exper­
imental equation  relating the linear regression terms (ax , bx)
and the hysteresis. The results of model ‘f2’ are substituted in
model ‘f3’ to obtain a compensated hysteresis voltage (Vcomp,1)
with respect to the measured voltage (Vmeas ). Although model
‘f3’ compensates the hysteresis at the middle point of the
can lead to errors in the angles at the beginning and end of the
cycle, since it will dislocate the flexion and extension curves
to compensate the hysteresis. In order to reduce the errors pro­
voked by model ‘f3’, model ‘f4’ is the linear regression between
the output of the model ‘f3’ (Vcomp,1) and the sensor response
in quasi-static tests. Model ‘f4’ results in an equation for the
flexion and another for the extension movement that com­
pensates for the hysteresis of the cycle and compensates for
the errors of the angles that may be introduced by model ‘f3’,
which leads to a higher reduction of the sensor errors when
compared with the technique presented in [17]. Finally, the
output of the model ‘f4’ (Vcomp,2) is applied to the calibration
equation relating the angle measured by the potentiometer and
the measured voltage on the sensor, which is referred to in
figure  5 as model ‘f5’. The equations  related to the models
presented in figure 5 are summarized in table 2, where ω is
the angular velocity in rad s−1, h is the sensor hysteresis, and
the parameters c1−10 are obtained by the experimental fitting
Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 (2017) 125103 A G Leal-Junior et al

Figure 5.  Compensation technique block diagram.

Table 2.  Angular velocities applied to the sensor characterization.

Model General equation

f1 h = c1 ec2 ω
f2 ax = c3 h + c4
f2 bx = c5 h + c6
f3 x
Vcomp,1 = ax Vmeas + bx
x x
f4 Vcomp,2 = c7 Vcomp,1 − c8
x
f5 αx = −c9 Vcomp,2 + c10

of the equations and are presented in section 3.1. Furthermore,

αx is the angle measured by the POF sensor.
A combination of the models ‘f1’ to ‘f5’ resulted in non­
linear equations  to compensate for hysteresis: one for the
flexion and one for the extension movement. Therefore, the
method described is a calibration procedure to obtain the
sensor response with lower hysteresis. A quasi-static test is
performed to relate the angle variation with the POF attenua­
tion. Tests with different angular velocities are made to relate
the sensor angular velocity with the hysteresis. Since the pro­
cedure depends on the characterization of the hysteresis at
each angular velocity, the equations for flexion and extension
cycles are related to such a parameter. For the proposed exo­
skeleton application, the angular velocity dependence is not
an issue, since the exoskeleton works at predefined speeds.
Nevertheless, these velocities can be obtained from the rate of
angle variation in gait assistance applications.
The equations  obtained by the proposed calibration pro­
cedure are capable of compensating for the hysteresis at each
angle and each angular velocity interval that is within the
range of calibration. In the cases presented in this work, the
angle and angular velocity ranges are from 0 to 90° and from
0.0209 to 0.4304 rad s−1, respectively.
3.  Results and discussion
By applying the methodology presented in section 2.1 on POF
curvature sensors with different sensitivity zone depth, length
and surface roughness mounted with different curvature radii,
a sensor with a sensitivity of 0.0229 V/° and a linearity of
0.9992 is obtained after the optimization of each parameter
through a multi-objective genetic algorithm. This sensitivity
is more than two times higher than those obtained in other
POF curvature sensors with the sensitive zone presented in
[11, 23]. Furthermore, the linearity is also higher than those
obtained in the reference works [11, 23].
Figure 6.  The POF curvature sensor response to the quasi-static
characterization test.
3.1.  Hysteresis compensation technique results
The first step of the calibration routine for hysteresis compen­
sation is a quasi-static test. Figure 6 shows the result obtained
by the quasi-static characterization.
The calibration method presented in section 2.2 is applied
and equation (2) is the experimental equation that relates the
angular velocity (ω ) to rad s−1 and the sensor hysteresis (h),
and is represented in figure 5 as model ‘f1’.
(2) h = 2.641e−3.494ω .
Model ‘f2’ is an experimental equation  relating the linear
regression terms (ax , bx) and the hysteresis. These terms are
obtained by comparing the reference voltage provided by
the quasi-static test and the measured voltage for flexion and
extension. Figure 7(a) shows the comparison between the ref­
erence voltage and the measured voltage for a flexion cycle
with an angular velocity of 0.0209. The regressions of each
of the nine angular velocities tested result in different linear
regression terms (ax , bx), and these terms correlate linearly
with the hysteresis, as presented in figure 7(b) for the flexion
movement.
Applying the same procedure to the extension movement,
it is possible to obtain equations for the flexion and extension
that relate the linear regression terms to the hysteresis. The
subscript ‘f’ stands for the flexion movement and the subscript
‘e’ stands for the extension. The equation for each coefficient
at each movement phase is shown in equations (3)–(6):
af = 0.009 552h + 0.9256
(3)

5
Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 (2017) 125103 A G Leal-Junior et al

Figure 7.  (a) Comparison between the sensor response at the angular velocity of 0.0561 rad s−1 and the reference voltage obtained in
quasi-static tests. (b) The linear regression terms ((a) and (b)) for the flexion movement and its linear relation with the hysteresis.

the analyzed cases when compared to the case in which only

bf = −0.0443h + 0.3614
(4) the equation obtained in the quasi-static tests was employed.
A mean reduction of about nine times is obtained. Moreover,
ae = 0.010 67h + 0.9141
(5) the compensation technique also reduces the error between
the POF curvature sensor and the reference potentiometer in
be = −0.041 47h + 0.4104.
(6) all cases analyzed. Figure 8(a) shows the response of the POF
The output of model ‘f2’ is substituted in equation (7) to obtain sensor to the angular velocity of 0.3415 rad s−1 by applying
the equation relating the input and output of model ‘f3’. only the linear regression obtained in the quasi-static test
x
Vcomp,1 = ax Vmeas + bx . without hysteresis compensation, whereas figure 8(b) shows
(7)
the compensated response of the sensor. The root mean
Equations (8) and (9) show the experimental equations, squared error (RMSE) of the sensor without the compensation
respectively, for the flexion and extension represented in technique is 1.6° and this value is reduced to 1.4° with the
figure  6 as the ‘f4’ block. They are obtained by the linear hysteresis compensation technique. However, as can be seen
regression between the output of model ‘f3’ (Vcomp,1) and the in figure 8, the presented compensation technique may lead to
sensor response to quasi-static tests errors at the end of the cycle, which happen due to the shift in
the flexion and extension curves caused by model ‘f3’ to com­
V fcomp,2 = 1.091Vcomp,1
(8) f
− 0.4075
pensate for the hysteresis that has a higher value in the middle
of the cycle. Although model ‘f4’ compensates for some of this
V ecomp,2 = 1.079V ecomp,1 − 0.3624.
(9) shift, it cannot eliminate it.
Finally, the angle compensated voltage is applied to model
‘f5’, which relates the voltage (V xcomp,2 ) and the angle (αx ) and 3.2.  Validation by the lower limb exoskeleton
was obtained by the quasi-static test (equation (10))
x The results obtained in section 3.1 are validated by the exo­
αx = −45.6621Vcomp,2
(10) + 198.67.
skeleton. The POF curvature sensor is positioned on the
Combining all the equations  presented in this section, two exoskeleton as shown in figure 3. In order to validate the com­
calibration equations are obtained: one for the flexion and the pensation technique, flexion and extension cycles are carried
other for the extension (equations (11) and (12), respectively). out on the five different angular velocities applied to the reha­
These equations depend on the angular velocity of the sensor. bilitation exercises, which are chosen empirically based on
Furthermore, the same calibration procedure can be applied to the level of rehabilitation that the patient needs. These angular
different POF curvature sensors based on the macrobending velocities are presented in table 3 and three cycles are made
principle. at each angular velocity. The compensation technique resulted
f
in hysteresis and RMSE reduction at all the angular veloci­
αf = (−1.255 exp(−3.494ω) − 46.078)Vmeas ties tested. Furthermore, the RMSE and the hysteresis of each
+ 5.84 exp(−3.494ω) + 199.149 (11) cycle is presented in table 3 with a comparison of the response
 with and without the compensation technique proposed.
e
αe = (−1.37 exp(−3.494ω) − 44.831)Vmeas Since the compensation technique has already been valid­
ated by the exoskeleton, a test is performed with a subject.
+ 5.393 exp(−3.494ω) + 195. (12)
 The test comprises five flexion/extension cycles in the range
of 10–80°. The reason for this range relates to patient com­
Applying equation (11) to the flexion and equation (12) to the fort and the mechanical limits of the exoskeleton angles.
extension on a POF curvature sensor with an optimized sensi­ Moreover, an angle of 90° may provoke higher vibration of
tive zone and curvature radius, the hysteresis is reduced in all the motor, which is transmitted to the potentiometer response.

6
Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 (2017) 125103 A G Leal-Junior et al

Figure 8.  (a) The POF sensor response with respect to the reference potentiometer without the hysteresis compensation technique. (b)
The POF sensor response with respect to the reference potentiometer with the compensation technique. The angular velocity of this test is
0.3415 rad s−1.

Table 3.  The RMSE and hysteresis of each cycle with and without the compensation technique.

Angular velocity Compensated Uncompensated Compensated Uncompensated

Cycle (rad s−1) RMSE (°) RMSE (°) hysteresis (%) hysteresis (%)
1 0.05 1.83 2.78 0.31 1.68
2 0.05 2.90 4.50 0.03 0.84
3 0.05 2.28 2.96 0.54 1.57
4 0.10 2.52 4.00 1.23 2.07
5 0.10 2.66 4.01 0.29 0.68
6 0.10 2.11 3.30 0.34 1.70
7 0.16 1.92 2.10 0.15 0.57
8 0.16 2.20 2.50 0.46 1.18
9 0.16 1.74 1.92 1.31 2.02
10 0.21 2.74 2.96 0.89 1.02
11 0.21 2.60 2.87 0.45 1.55
12 0.21 2.27 2.30 0.44 1.32
13 0.26 1.80 4.23 0.60 1.65
14 0.26 1.58 4.56 2.42 4.77
15 0.26 2.13 4.40 2.63 5.10

The patient is comfortably positioned in the chair and the

exoskeleton is fixed to his thigh, shank and foot. In the case
of unexpected behavior of the robotic device, the user may
stop the exoskeleton using an emergency button. Figure  9
shows the user with the exoskeleton before the experimental
validation.
The test results are presented in figure 10. The compensa­
tion technique was capable of reducing the hysteresis and the
error of the flexion/extension movement. Although the com­
pensation technique is capable of reducing the hysteresis in
the sensor, it cannot guarantee a constant value, due to the
high variation of this parameter. However, the hysteresis is
kept in a range lower than 2.5% in all the cycles analyzed.
Moreover, it leads to a reduction of the hysteresis to about Figure 9.  The subject with the exoskeleton before the experiment.
half of its value when compared with the response without the The passive joint of the hip, the POF curvature sensor and the
reference arm were not connected at the time the picture was taken.
compensation technique. The flexion/extension cycle shown
in figure 10 is the first of the five cycles performed. The hys­ the sensor response at each tested angular velocity, figure 11
teresis of this cycle is 0.1646% and the RMSE is 0.9167°. shows the POF sensor and the potentiometer response of
In figure 10, the flexion and extension responses are shown one cycle at each velocity tested, as presented in table  3.
through a linear equation, since the objective is to show the Furthermore, figure  11 enables the visualization of errors at
sensor hysteresis. In order to have a broader visualization of each velocity.

7
Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 (2017) 125103
Figure 10.  The POF sensor response (vertical axis) and
potentiometer response (horizontal axis) for the first cycle of the
rehabilitation exercise.
Figure 11.  The POF sensor response and potentiometer response
for the five different angular velocities tested. Regions 1, 2, 3, 4 and
5 refer to the angular velocities of 0.05 rad s−1, 0.10 rad s−1, 0.16
rad s−1, 0.21 rad s−1 and 0.26 rad s−1 respectively.
Figure 11 shows that the errors tend to be reduced as the
angular velocity increases. However, the errors also vary with
the angle measured. For this reason, figure 12 shows the error
at each angle. The shaded line represents the standard devia­
tion of the error at each velocity in each cycle. Moreover, the
maximum error is about 2.4° at about 47°. The region between
40° and 65° has the highest amount of errors, which is expected
since the viscoelastic response has hysteresis in the regions
that correspond to half the stress or strain cycle [22]. For this
reason, the stress applied to the fiber due to its curvature will
provoke higher hysteresis in the region of half of the cycle,
leading to errors in the angle measurement in this region.
Nevertheless, the compensation technique proposed
reduces this hysteresis as demonstrated above, which means
a reduction in error in this region, but there is still some
remaining hysteresis, which leads to greater errors in this
region when compared with the regions at the beginning or
at the end of the movement cycle. However, the mean error of
8
A G Leal-Junior et al
Figure 12.  The error between the POF sensor and the potentiometer
on the vertical axis. The potentiometer angle is presented on the
horizontal axis. The shaded part of the error represents the standard
deviation of the error at each velocity in each cycle.
the five cycles tested is 1.2°. Furthermore, the standard devia­
tion is less than 1°.
4. Conclusions
This paper presents a POF curvature sensor for exoskeleton
applications. A POF curvature sensor with an optimized sensi­
tive zone and a curvature radius is employed and a hysteresis
compensation technique is presented to attenuate the effect
of these parameters on the proposed curvature sensor, with
good results achieved for the flexion/extension rehabilitation
exercises. This led to a reduction in the hysteresis and error at
all the angular velocities tested in the presented experimental
setup and from the validation performed on the exoskeleton.
Moreover, the highest amount of POF curvature sensor error
with the compensation technique was below 3°. Although
this may result in different values for the calibration equa­
tion for sensors with different sensitive zone parameters, the
calibration method presented in this paper can be applied to
any POF curvature sensor based on the macrobending prin­
ciple. Furthermore, the ease of implementing and positioning
the sensor makes it a promising alternative for soft robotics
applications, where the sensor needs to be positioned on flex­
ible structures.
Since the proposed hysteresis compensation technique
needs to be characterized at different constant angular veloci­
ties, future works will include an analysis of the POF sensor
response under different amounts of acceleration, which is
common behavior in knee joints on the gait cycle. This com­
pensation can be done after characterization of the sensor’s
viscoelastic parameters, which is another future work.
Acknowledgments
The authors have no relevant financial interest in the manu­
script and no other potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
Meas. Sci. Technol. 28 (2017) 125103
This work was partially funded by CAPES grant
88887.095626/2015-01, FAPES grants 67566480 and
72982608, CNPq grant 304192/2016-3 and Petrobras grant
23068.013529/2012-56.
ORCID iDs
Arnaldo Gomes Leal-Junior https://orcid.org/0000-0002-
9075-0619
Anselmo Frizera-Neto https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0687-
3967
Maria José Pontes https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9009-2425
References
[1] Cai L L, Fong A J, Otoshi C K, Liang Y, Burdick J W,
Roy R R and Edgerton V R 2006 Implications of assist-as-
needed robotic step training after a complete spinal cord
injury on intrinsic strategies of motor learning J. Neurosci.
26 10564–8
[2] Kwakkel G, Kollen B and Krebs H 2008 Effects of robot-
assisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: a
systematic review Neurorehabil. Neural Repair
22 111–21
[3] dos Santos W M, Caurin G A P and Siqueira A A G 2015
Design and control of an active knee orthosis driven by a
rotary series elastic actuator Control Eng. Pract. 58 1–12
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2015.09.008)
[4] Moreno J C, Bueno L and Pons J L 2008 Wearable
robot technologies Wearable Robots: Biomechatronic
Exoskeletons (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley) (https://doi.
org/10.1002/9780470987667.ch6)
[5] El-Gohary M and McNames J 2012 Shoulder and elbow joint
angle tracking with inertial sensors IEEE Trans. Biomed.
Eng. 59 2635–41
Bilro L et al 2012 Optical sensors based on plastic fibers
Sensors 12 12184–207
[6] Vikas V and Crane C D 2015 Joint angle measurement using
strategically placed accelerometers and gyroscope J. Mech.
Robot. 8 21003
[7] Peters K 2011 Polymer optical fiber sensors—a review Smart
Mater. Struct. 20 013002
[8] Zubia J and Arrue J 2001 Plastic optical fibers: an introduction
to their technological processes and applications Opt. Fiber
Technol. 7 101–40
A G Leal-Junior et al
[9] Ziemann O, Krauser J, Zamzow P E and Daum W
2008 POF Handbook: Optical Short Range
Transmission Systems (Berlin: Springer) (https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-540-76629-2)
[10] Donno M, Palange E, Nicola F, Bucci G and Ciancetta F 2008
A new flexible optical fiber goniometer for dynamic angular
measurements: application to human joint movement
monitoring IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 57 1614–20
[11] Bilro L, Oliveira J G, Pinto J L and Nogueira R N 2011 A
reliable low-cost wireless and wearable gait monitoring
system based on a plastic optical fibre sensor Meas. Sci.
Technol. 22 045801
[12] Fu Y, Di H and Liu R 2010 Light intensity modulation fiber-
optic sensor for curvature measurement Opt. Laser Technol.
42 594–9
[13] Kovacevic M, Djordjevich A and Nikezic D 2008 Analytical
optimization of optical fiber curvature gauges IEEE Sens. J.
8 227–32
[14] Liu R, Fu Z, Zhao Y and Cao Q 2006 Operation principle of
a bend enhanced curvature optical fiber sensor IEEE Int.
Conf. Intell. Robot. Syst. 1966–71 (https://doi.org/10.1109/
IROS.2006.282403)
[15] Zubia J, Arrue J and Mendioroz A 1997 Theoretical analysis
of the torsion-induced optical effect in a plastic optical fiber
Opt. Fiber Technol. 3 162–7
[16] Stefani A, Andresen S, Yuan W and Bang O 2012 Dynamic
characterization of polymer optical fibers IEEE Sens. J.
12 3047–53
[17] Leal Junior A, Frizera A and Pontes M J 20174 Hysteresis
compensation technique for POF curvature sensors 25th
Optical Fiber Sensors Conf. pp 1–4
[18] Moraleda A T et al 2013 A temperature sensor based on a
polymer optical fiber macro-bend Sensors 13 13076–89
[19] Konak A, Coit D W and Smith A E 2006 Multi-objective
optimization using genetic algorithms: a tutorial Reliabil.
Eng. Syst. Safety 91 992–1007
[20] Kalantar-Zadeh K 2013 Sensors: an Introductory Course
(New York: Springer) pp 11–28
[21] Lakes R 2009 Constitutive Relations, Viscoelastic
Materials (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
pp 14–54
[22] Zeltmann S E, Kumar B R B, Doddamani M and Gupta N
2016 Prediction of strain rate sensitivity of high density
polyethylene using integral transform of dynamic
mechanical analysis data Polymer 101 1–6
[23] Stupar D Z, Bajic J S, Manojlovic L M, Slankamenac M P,
Joza A V and Zivanov M B 2012 Wearable low-cost system
for human joint movements monitoring based on fiber-optic
curvature sensor IEEE Sens. J. 12 3424–31