This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2866689, IEEE Sensors
Journal
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <
FBG-Embedded 3D Printed ABS Sensing Pads:
The Impact of Infill Density on Sensitivity and
Dynamic Range in Force Sensors
Arnaldo G. Leal-Junior, Carlos Marques, Moisés R. N. Ribeiro, Maria José Pontes and Anselmo
Frizera, Member, IEEE
 electromagnetic noise immunity [11].
Abstract—The 3D printing process is a flexible, automated,
customizable and low cost fabrication process. Fiber Bragg
gratings (FBGs) sensors can be embedded into 3D printed
elements to obtain customized and low cost sensing elements.
However, the material infill is an important printing parameter
that may affect the FBG response on both temperature and
strain. This paper investigates the material infill influence on
FBG-embedded 3D printed sensing pads by both numerical and
experimental approaches. The obtained sensing pads are able to
withstand a force of 1 kN with sensitivities of about 0.7 pm/N and
linearity higher than 98%. Numerical results show that the fiber
has influence on the strain distribution of the 3D printed
structure. Experimental results show that the infill’s thermal
expansion-induced temperature sensitivity of the embedded FBG
reported in the literature can be reduced by simply setting the
correct infill density. The results obtained enable the application
of 3D printed sensing pads for structural health monitoring, soft
robotics application and force detectors for teleoperation in
harsh environments.
Index Terms—Fiber Bragg grating, 3D printing, Force sensor
I. INTRODUCTION
F IBER Bragg Gratings (FBGs) have been employed in
sensor applications in different fields, such as industry [1],
medical applications [2], structural health monitoring (SHM)
[3]. Silica FBGs are sensitive to temperature and strain [4],
and they can be coated with different materials [5] or embed in
different structures [6] to measure parameters like force [7],
acceleration [8], humidity [9], liquid level [10], detection of
chemical compounds [5], among others. The advantages of
applying FBG sensors are related to its lightweight, chemical
stability, compactness, multiplexing capability and
This research is financed by CAPES (88887.095626/2015-01), FAPES
(72982608) and CNPq (304192/2016-3 and 310310/2015-6). C. Marques
acknowledges the financial support from FCT through the fellowship
SFRH/BPD/109458/2015, program UID/EEA/50008/2013 by the National
Funds through the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia / Ministério da
Educação e Ciência, and the European Regional Development Fund under the
PT2020 Partnership Agreement
A. G. Leal-Junior, M. R. N. Ribeiro, M. J. Pontes and A. Frizera are with
the Graduate Program of Electrical Engineering of Federal University of
Espirito Santo, Vitória, Brazil (arnaldo.leal@aluno.ufes.br;
moises@ele.ufes.br; mjpontes@ele.ufes.br; frizera@ieee.org).
C. Marques is with Instituto de Telecomunicações and Physics Department
& I3N, University of Aveiro, Portugal (carlos.marques@ua.pt)
1558-1748 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1
Silica fibers present low strain limits (about 1%), which can
handicap their application to SHM and to other strain-related
parameters [12]. An option to tackle this limitation is to
employ polymer optical fiber Bragg gratings (POFBGs)
instead. They present strain limit of about 10% [12].
Nevertheless, polymer optical fiber presents higher
transmission losses and this limits its application to remote
sensing, which is desirable SHM as well as industrial
applications. Alternatively, silica FBGs can be also embedded
into different materials to increase the strain limits that the
sensor is able to operate.
FBG embedment into different materials can be done
through the application of glues [13], ribbon tapes [14] and
epoxy resins [15]. However, these methods are time-
consuming, require different molds or tools and present lower
repeatability. On the other hand, 3D printing, also known as
additive layer manufacturing (ALM), comprises of the layer-
by-layer injection of hot or melted polymer materials [16],
which generally are polylactic acid (PLA) or acrylonitrile
butadiene styrene (ABS). The advantages of 3D printing are
its flexibility on the manufacturing process, , automated
reproducible process of customization, speed and ease of parts
design and with no need for additional post-fabrication
process such as scraping, milling or sanding [17].
Furthermore, 3D printing presents low cost and the wasted
material can be recycled [18], which makes it an
environmental friendly solution. Owing to these advantages,
3D printing is known as an important technology of the third
industrial revolution [17].
The FBGs imbedding into 3D printed structures enable to
obtain a compact, simple and low cost protection for the fiber,
which has the potential to enhance its measurement range.
Fang et al [16] presented the SHM of a 3D printed structure
under flexural loads, the tests were performed under constant
temperature and it was demonstrated that the FBGs can
withstand a force of 30 N. Similarly, Lima et al. [18]
presented a FBG embedded into a 3D printed cantilever for
the assessment of the cantilever displacement, for measuring
acceleration. And the FBG temperature dependence into the
polymer structure was also assessed. Strain measurements of
the FBG embedded on a 3D printed with PLA is demonstrated
in [19] at constant temperature. The strain and temperature
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2866689, IEEE Sensors
Journal
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <
responses of POFBG positioned on a sensing pad is
experimentally demonstrated in [20] but temperature
instability of the embedded POFBG was also reported. Zhang
et al [21] presented a sensing platform based on FBG-
embedded 3D printed pressure sensors for plantar pressure
assessment.
Despite the recent advances, the role played by material
infill has not yet been addressed. Infill density is related with
the amount of material that the printer inserts on the part,
which is a key design parameter of the 3D printer. It is
expected that the infill density may directly influence
embedded FBG sensor sensitivity, dynamic range and
temperature sensitivity.
This paper investigates strain and temperature relations with
the material infill density both numerically and experimentally
on a 3D printed sensing pad. In order to limit the analysis to
only the infill density, the sensing pads present the same
geometry, dimensions and are made with the same material
(ABS). This material is particularly appealing to sensing pad
applications due to its flexibility, both impact and thermal
resistance [19]. It is experimentally demonstrated that our
ABS sensing pads can stand forces up to 1 kN. Therefore,
these sensing pads can be applied for force detection in special
environments, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and
SHM of overhead transmission lines.
The remainder of the paper is divided as follows. Section II
presents the sensor fabrication and setup employed for in both
numerical and experimental assessment of sensing pads.
Section III presents results for sensing pads with and without
the fiber and the comparison between the different infill
density employed for the 3D printing process. The focus of
this paper is to identity infill’s impact on forces and
temperatures sensitivity of the sensing pad. Conclusions and
future works are outlined in Section IV.
II. SENSOR FABRICATION AND EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
The 3D structure manufacture was made using a low cost
3D printer UP! 3D mini (3D Printing Systems, Australia).
There are four options for the material infill, which are 99% of
infill, 65%, 20% and shell. The infill density refers to the
percentage of material in the printed part. Whereas, the shell is
a hollow structure (But it does not provide the desired
mechanical protection to the fiber and will not be considered
as an option for sensing pads). Figure 1 shows the cross
sectional view of the materials at each infill density, the
structure presented is the same one that the printed employed
for our sensing pad prototypes. The sensing pads shown in
Fig. 1 presents a cross section with 25 mm of width and height
and the thickness of the printing structures is 5 mm.
1558-1748 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
2
Fig. 1. Infill pattern employed on the 3D printed 25x25x5 mm structures.
The fabrication of such FBG-embedded structures is
made by setting the desired infill on the 3D printer. The
printing resolution employed is 0.25 mm. The printing process
is paused when half of the part is printed and the FBG is
positioned at the patch center. In order to provide a better
positioning of the fiber, a v-groove can be designed to
properly accommodate the FBG. Furthermore, the geometry of
the sensing pad and the methodology employed for the FBG
positioning also enable the application of a pre-strain on the
FBG during the manufacturing process. In order to maintain
the proper pre-strain, the fiber is fixed on both extremities of
the printing platform. After the positioning of the FBG, the
printing process is resumed and the FBG-embedded sensing
pad is created. Since there is a material deposition over the
FBG, it is possible that the printing process could cause a
wavelength shift on the FBG.
The strain response of the sensing pads with different infill
properties are numerically analyzed with and without the
embedded FBG. This would allow us to verify if material
features vary under strain when the FBG is embedded. The
optical fiber presents Young’s modulus more than an order of
magnitude higher than the ABS, i.e., 69.9 GPa and 6.7 GPa,
respectively. The numerical analysis presented in this paper
was performed in Ansys Workbench through the finite
element method (FEM). The constrains and setup employed
on the numerical analysis are presented in Fig. 2 where a load
of 1 kN is applied on the face of the sensing pad indicated by
an arrow. Furthermore, the setup presented in Fig. 2 is also the
one employed for the force characterization of the sensing
pad.
Fig. 2. Setup employed on the numerical analysis and on the force
characterization of the sensor.
After obtaining the strain distribution in the sensing pad, the
FBG spectrum for the fiber embedded in each of the three
infill density is simulated. In addition, three different grating
lengths are tested (3 mm, 5 mm and 10 mm), in order to
estimate the influence of this parameter. For this numerical
analysis, we made the modified transfer matrix simulation,
there is thoroughly presented and analyzed in [22]. In this
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2866689, IEEE Sensors
Journal
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 3

case, the periodical perturbation in the FBG effective applied to obtain the forward and backward coupling after
refractive index (δneff) is defined as: each grating section as follows.

 2   Ri   Ri 1 
 neff ( z )   neff 1  cos z   ( z) , (1)  S   Fi S  . (8)
 0   i  i 1 

where  neff is the average index variation over a grating The T-matrix F is obtained for each grating section as
period, Λ0 is the nominal period, z is the length, ν is the fringe follows, where  B  k 2   2 .
visibility and Φ(z) is the grating chirp.
Using the coupled-mode theory considering a single mode   k 
fiber and no energy is coupled to radiation modes, the mode cosh( B z )  i  sinh( B z ) i sinh( B z )
B 
propagation for forward (R(z)) and backward (S(z)) modes Fi   B

amplitudes in z direction are presented in Eqs. (2) and (3).  k  
 i sinh( B z ) cosh( B z )  i sinh( B z ) 
 B B 
dR( z )
 i R( z )  ikS ( z ) , (2) (9).
dz
For the temperature characterization of the proposed FBG-
dS ( z ) embedded structure, the sensing pads are positioned inside a
 i S ( z )  ikR( z ) , (3)
climate chamber 1/400ND (Ethik Technology, Brazil) with
dz
closed-loop temperature control. Furthermore, a FBG that is
where k and σ are “ac” and “dc” coupling coefficients, not embedded to any structure is also positioned inside the
respectively, which are estimated as follows. climate chamber to provide a comparison between the
responses of the embedded and non-embedded FBGs. The
temperature range employed in this characterization is 40°C to

k  neff , (4) 55°C with steps of 5°C, since it is the region of highest
 temperature stability of the climatic chamber employed. The
setup employed on the FBG-embedded sensing pad force
1 1  2 1 characterization comprises of a platform with the 3D printed
  2 neff     neff   '( z ) . (5)
 B   2 sensing pad centered beneath it. The platform was positioned
in a way that all the force on the platform is transmitted to the
Referring to Eqs. (4) and (5), neff is the effective refractive
sensing pad. Then, four different weights, namely 25 kg,
index, λ is the wavelength and λB is the Bragg wavelength,
55 kg, 72 kg and 98 kg are positioned on the center of the
which varies with temperature and strain. However, for the
platform during 30 seconds.
FBG spectrum simulations, only the strain variation is
considered as presented in Eq. (6).
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
B  D  [1  Pe z ( z )] , (6) A. Numerical Analysis of the sensing pad structure and FBG
spectral response
where λD is the design wavelength Pe is the effective The finite element analysis performed can provide an
photoelastic constant and εz(z) is the strain distributed in the insight of the sensing pad functionality. Furthermore, it is an
grating length obtained in the FEM analysis. evaluation of the fiber influence on the sensing pad structure.
The next step after determining R(z) and S(z) is the The analysis presented are made with respect to the equivalent
calculation of grating reflectivity (r) is estimated through (Von-Mises) elastic strain on each sensing pad analyzed.
Eq. (7). Figure 3(a) presents the result of the FEM on the sensing pad
with 20% infill density without the fiber, whereas the result of
2 the fiber-embedded sensing pad with the same infill is shown
 L  in Fig. 3(b). The software used in the FEM analysis is Ansys
S 
r ( )  
2  , (7) Workbench 15.0. The colorbars in Figs. 3(a) and (b) represent
 L  the strain in the sensing pad.
R 
 2 

where L is the grating physical length. In order to model the

grating subjected to a non-constant strain distribution, the
transfer matrix approximation is employed in which the FBG
is divided in M smaller sections [22]. Thus, the T-matrix is

1558-1748 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2866689, IEEE Sensors
Journal
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <
(a)
(b)
Fig. 3. Equivalent elastic strain FEM results for the sensing pad with 20%
(a) without the fiber and (b) with the fiber embedded.
The results presented in Figs. 3(a) and (b) show that the
application of the FBG does not lead to considerable changes
on the strain distribution on the sensing pad. The strain is
lower in the lateral of the sensing pad, since there is the region
with the highest stiffness, especially in the 20% infill case.
However, comparing Figs. 3(a) and (b), there is an increase of
the strain on the central region of the pad, which may be
related to the interaction with the silica fiber that presents a
Young’s modulus with an order of magnitude higher than the
one of the ABS. In addition, it is worth to mention that the
strain on the structure reduces when a higher infill density is
employed, since such higher density increases the structure
stiffness. Nevertheless, the results presented are only the
superficial strain on the part. For this reason, it is inserted a
probe on the middle of the sensing pads and the simulation is
repeated to obtain the strain inside the part. Figure 4 shows the
strain on the middle of the sensing pad for each of the three
infill tested (with and without the embedded FBG). Regarding
the strain on each sensing pad, as expected, the increase of the
infill leads to a reduction on the strain. If the comparison is
made for each infill with and without the fiber, it is possible to
note that the fiber presents an influence on the strain of the
1558-1748 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
4
whole part. The strain after the fiber embedment is generally
lower, since the fiber (with higher Young’s modulus than the
ABS) can act as a structural reinforcement for the ABS. In
addition, the strain decrease with respect to the infill density,
which is expected due to the stiffness increase of the structure
when the infill density increases. This difference on both
curves can also indicate that the influence of the fiber in the
strain of the structure also depends on the infill density.
Fig. 4. Relation between the strain on the center of the sensing pad and the
infill density for the cases with and without embedding the fiber under 1 kN of
applied force.
From the results presented in numerical simulations, the
maximum strain obtained at each of the six cases tested (three
different infill with and without the fiber) with an applied load
of 1 kN is lower than the maximum strain for the ABS
material. Thus, the proposed sensing pad is capable of
withstand forces as high as 1 kN distributed on the whole area
of the pad. It was also demonstrated that the fiber has
influence on the behavior of the 3D printed structure under
strain. Therefore, it is necessary to consider of the fiber
influence on FBG-embedded structures for sensing
applications.
Figure 4 also shows that the effect of structural
reinforcement provided by the fiber depends on the material
infill density. As the density increases, the strain of the
structures with the fiber is closer to the one without the fiber,
where the structure presents almost the same strain with and
without the fiber when the infill density is 99%.
In order to present the influence of the strain field in the
FBG spectral response, a numerical analysis through the
transfer matrix formulation [22] is made. In this analysis, the
coupled-mode theory is employed and the grating is divided
into a predefined number of sections, which are combined to
obtain the FBG spectrum [23]. The reason to employ this
formulation is the fact that the strain field is not constant in the
sensing pad (see Fig. 3). Thus, there will be a non-constant
strain field in the FBG, which can lead to variations in the
spectrum [22] and this formulation approach enables obtaining
the spectral response at each point along the grating length.
The strain field simulated through FEM for each infill density
for the region in which the FBG is positioned is applied for
three different grating lengths, namely 3 mm, 5 mm and
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2866689, IEEE Sensors
Journal
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 5

10 mm. The obtained results as a function of the grating length

for a 99% infill density are presented in Fig. 5(a). The results
for the 10 mm grating for different infill density are presented
in Fig. 5(b), where the parameters used in the simulation are
presented in Table I.

TABLE I
PARAMETERS EMPLOYED IN THE GRATINGS SIMULATION

Parameter Symbol Value

Nominal period Λ0 536 nm

Fringe visibility ν 1
Grating chirp Φ(z) 0
Design wavelength λD 1550 nm
Photoelastic constant Pe 0.22
Effective refractive neff 1.4455
index (b)
Number of grating M 200 Fig. 5. FBG spectral response for different (a) grating lengths and (b) different
sections material infill.

In all cases simulated, the strain in the FBG is increasing The spectrum of the FBG before and after the embedment
linearly with respect to the grating physical length. However,
on a sensing pad with an infill of 99% is presented in Fig. 6
the initial value and variation of the strain is different for each
for the 10-mm FBG used in the experimental analysis. The
material infill density, where the highest strain occurs at 99%
spectra presented in Fig. 6 confirm the conclusions obtained in
and the lowest at 20%. Since it is the one that leads to the
highest strain distribution in the fiber, the 99% infill is the simulation, i.e., the wavelength shift before and after the
employed to compare the influence of the grating length. By printing is related to the material infill employed. In addition,
comparing each spectrum of Fig. 5(a), the 3-mm FBG presents there are a reduction in the grating strength and slightly
lowest influence of the strain distribution in the FBG spectral increase of the bandwidth as anticipated by the numerical
response, which is expected since the strain variation is a analysis.
function of the grating length. Thus, a grating with smaller
length presents lower strain distribution, which leads to lower
variations in the grating strength and bandwidth [23]. Then,
the material infill is analyzed for the case in which there is the
highest variation of the spectrum with the strain distribution,
being the one with 99% infill density. The results presented in
Fig. 5(b) show an increase of wavelength shift as a function of
the material infill density. In addition, there is also an increase
of the grating bandwidth and a reduction of the grating
strength.

Fig. 6. FBG reflection spectrum before and after the embedment on the
sensing pad.

B. Temperature Characterization
The three FBG-embedded sensing pads are positioned
inside a climatic chamber for the temperature characterization.
For comparison purposes, another FBG without any coating is
also used as the reference FBG. Therefore, the results of the
sensing pad at each infill density is compared with the
reference FBG results. Figure 7 presents the results of the four
(a)
FBGs employed. The temperatures tested were 40°C to 55°C
in steps of 5°C, where each temperature was maintained for
5 minutes. The temperature shift presented is calculated with
respect to the wavelength of each FBG at 40°C.

1558-1748 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2866689, IEEE Sensors
Journal
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 6

chamber with constant temperature of 26°C and a force of

50 N up to 200 N on 50 N steps. Figure 8 presents the
obtained results, where it can be seen that the smallest slope is
presented by the structure with 99% infill density, which
means that its structure is the less sensitive to the applied
force. This reduced sensitivity is related to a lower strain that
is transmitted to the FBG due to the higher stiffness that the
99% infill density provides when compared to the other infill
tested. Since lower strain is transmitted, the structure with
99% infill presents a higher dynamic range than the other
structures.
Regarding the structures with 65% and 20% infill, its
sensitivities to the force applied are similar, 2.21 pm/N and
2.22 pm/N, respectively. Although the amount of material in
the structure with 65% infill is considerably higher than the
one of the 20% infill, the difference between the amount of
material may not be of great difference on the specific region
Fig. 7. Temperature characterization for the sensing pads with different infill
that the FBG is in, which may explain the similarity of the
density. force sensitivity.

The reference FBG temperature sensitivity of 10.0 pm/°C is

the typical value for silica FBGs [11]. However, the
temperature sensitivity of the sensing pad with 99% infill
density is 124.6 pm/°C. The reason for the ten-fold increase in
the sensitivity is the thermal expansion of the polymer, which
induces strain on the FBG. Therefore, the temperature
variation represents a wavelength shift on the FBG due to both
temperature and strain. On one hand, for applications that
involve the assessment of parameters like force, strain and
pressure, this behavior leads to measurement errors due to
temperature variations. On the other hand, this high
temperature sensitivity of the sensing pad with 99% infill
suggests its application as a temperature sensor, since the
higher infill can also provide lower cross-sensitivity with
strain.
The 3D structure with 65% infill presents a higher slope on Fig. 8. Force characterization at controlled temperature.
the temperature characterization curve until the temperature of
45°C is reached. Then, there is a stabilization of the Since the climatic chamber employed presents a
temperature for the rest of the test. The reason for this temperature controller with resolution of 0.1°C, it is possible
behavior is the tradeoff between the thermal expansion of the to perform the force characterization with the controlled
polymer in contact with the FBG and the insulation effects of temperature needed for the 3D structure that presents an infill
the air inside structure. The slope of the curve until 45°C is density of 99%. However, for the force interval between
41.8 pm/°C, which is reduced to 0.9 pm/°C in the interval 200 N and 1 kN, the test was made outside the climatic
between 45°C and 55°C. Similar behavior occurs with the chamber due to its space limitation. Since the 99% infill
20% infill-sensing pad. However, in this case there is a lower density presents high temperature sensitivity (see Fig. 7) and
amount of material in contact to the FBG and higher quantity low force sensitivity (Fig. 8), this infill density does not reach
of entrapped air in the structure, which leads to lower stabilization in the tests without a controlled temperature
temperature sensitivity environment. For this reason, only the infill density of 20%
The results presented in this section show the influence of and 65% were used in the force characterization in the range
the infill density in the temperature stabilization of the FBG of 200 N to 1 kN.
embedded 3D structures and demonstrate that is possible to Figure 9 presents the results obtained on the force platform
reduce the temperature instability reported in [18], [20] by for the sensing pads of 65% and 20%, where it can be seen an
controlling infill density in the 3D printer. increase of the difference of the sensitivities of both sensing
pads. In this case, the slope obtained for the 20% infill is
C. Force Characterization 0.79 pm/N and 0.63 pm/N for the structure with infill density
Since the polymer stress-strain curve presents two regions: of 65%.
one with higher slope and the other, with higher strain/stress,
which has lower slope [12]. For this reason, two sets of tests
were performed to evaluate the response of each sensing pad
to force variation. The first one is made inside the climatic

1558-1748 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2866689, IEEE Sensors
Journal
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <
Fig. 9. Force characterization for the sensing pads with infill of 20% and
65% for the forces on the range of about 250 N to about 1 kN.
The results obtained from both Fig. 8 and 9 show that the
sensor presents two distinct operation conditions: one below
the 200 N, where the sensitivity is about 2 pm/N and the other
above the 250 N with a sensitivity of about 0.7 pm/N. This can
be explained, as mentioned above, by the stress-strain curve
for the polymer , which presents a region with higher slope at
lower stress and another region with lower slope as the stress
increases [12]. Therefore, the results obtained for both force
characterization tests are in accordance with the theory and
with the material characterization. Furthermore, both sensing
pads (20 and 65% infill density) were able to withstand the
force of 1 kN in repetitive cycles, which demonstrate the
feasibility of the proposed FBG-embedded sensing pads for
the sensing of considerable levels of forces, pressures and
strains.
Comparing with the numerical analysis, the strain variation
on the fiber at each infill density can be inferred by the
wavelength shift, since it is directly proportional to the
wavelength shift of a FBG [24]. In addition, the relation
between force and displacement is obtained from the well-
known Hooke’s law. For this reason, the material stiffness
plays an important role in the stress-strain relations between
the fiber and the sensing pad structure. Considering the
stiffness variation for each infill density, the strain variation is
17% for infill densities of 20 and 65% at 1 kN. The strain
variation of the sensing pad structure (obtained by the
numerical analysis) is also related to the material stiffness and
is 25%. The differences between the experimental and
numerical values are related to some simplifications in the
numerical analysis, such as material isotropy and
nonlinearities. Table II summarizes the obtained results, where
the three tested infill densities (20, 65 and 99%) are compared
with respect to their temperature and force sensitivities at each
dynamic range.
TABLE II
COMPARISON BETWEEN EACH INFILL DENSITY
Temperature
Force Force
Infill sensitivity sensitivity
sensitivity
(region 1) (region 2)
20% 7.8 pm/°C 2.22 pm/N 0.79 pm/N
65% 14.0 pm/°C 2.21 pm/N 0.63 pm/N
99% 120.6 pm/°C 0.60 pm/N - “Corrosion resistant FBG-based quasi-distributed sensor for crude
1558-1748 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
7
The results presented in Table II show a tradeoff between
the infill densities for each sensor application, where the
sensing pad with 99% infill density presents high temperature
sensitivity and low force sensitivity. These features make the
99% infill the most suitable (among the ones tested) for
temperature sensors application, where it is desirable high
sensitivity and low strain/force cross-sensitivity. In force
sensing applications, the 20% infill presents higher sensitivity
and lower temperature sensitivity, which makes it a feasible
force sensor.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presented the numerical and experimental
analysis of FBG-embedded 3D printed sensing pads for
increasing the dynamic range of FBGs used in force, pressure,
and strain assessment. Three different infill conditions were
tested to evaluate the effects of the fiber on the sensing pad
structure. Temperature variation on each 3D printed structure
and their force response were characterized.
The numerical results show the influence of the fiber over
the equivalent elastic stain of each infill density. Therefore,
this influence has to be considered when a 3D printed
structure with FBGs is designed. Such influence can be
estimated by performing a FEM analysis prior to the structure
fabrication.
Temperature tests shown that the structures with infill
density of 20% and 65% present a temperature stabilization
when it reaches 45°C, which is even lower than the one of a
FBG without coating or embedded structure for the case of
20% density infill. However, the structure with 99% infill
presents a temperature sensitivity of more than 120 pm/°C.
Force characterization tests demonstrated that the sensing
pads could withstand a force up to 1 kN with high sensitivity
and linearity. In addition, the force characterization tests show
that the 99% infill- structure presents a low force sensitivity,
which may enable its application as a temperature sensor with
sensitivity comparable to some interferometers [25], but with
the additional advantages of lower strain cross-sensitivity and
higher multiplexing capabilities that will be studied in future
works. Therefore, this paper shows that the infill density has a
significant impact in the sensor response. Such feature was not
considered in the literature, where the results show it is
possible to increase the embedded sensor dynamic range or its
sensitivity with the correct adjustment of the infill density.
REFERENCES
[1] L. Alwis, T. Sun, and K. T. V Grattan, “Developments in optical
fibre sensors for industrial applications,” Opt. Laser Technol., vol.
78, pp. 62–66, 2016.
[2] E. A. Al-Fakih, N. A. Abu Osman, F. R. Mahamd Adikan, A.
Eshraghi, and P. Jahanshahi, “Development and Validation of Fiber
Bragg Grating Sensing Pad for Interface Pressure Measurements
Within Prosthetic Sockets,” IEEE Sens. J., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 965–
974, 2016.
[3] Z. Yazdizadeh, H. Marzouk, and M. A. Hadianfard, “Monitoring of
concrete shrinkage and creep using Fiber Bragg Grating sensors,”
Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 137, pp. 505–512, 2017.
[4] R. da Silva Marques, A. R. Prado, P. F. da Costa Antunes, P. S. de
Brito André, M. R. N. Ribeiro, A. Frizera-Neto, and M. J. Pontes,
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2866689, IEEE Sensors
Journal
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 8

oil tank dynamic temperature profile monitoring,” Sensors, vol. 15, M. R. N. Ribeiro, and M. J. Pontes, “Multi-Parameter
no. 12, pp. 30693–30703, 2015. Interferometric Sensor Based on a Reduced Diameter Core Axial
[5] Y. Zhang, H. Peng, X. Qian, Y. Zhang, G. An, and Y. Zhao, Offseted Fiber,” vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 239–242, 2017.
“Recent advancements in optical fiber hydrogen sensors,” Sensors
Actuators B Chem., vol. 244, pp. 393–416, 2017.
[6] T. Li, C. Shi, Y. Tan, R. Li, Z. Zhou, and H. Ren, “A diaphragm
type fiber Bragg grating vibration sensor based on transverse
property of optical fiber with temperature compensation,” IEEE
Sens. J., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1–1, 2016.
[7] X. Hu, D. Saez-Rodriguez, C. Marques, O. Bang, D. J. Webb, P.
Mégret, and C. Caucheteur, “Polarization effects in polymer FBGs:
study and use for transverse force sensing,” Opt. Express, vol. 23,
no. 4, p. 4581, 2015.
[8] A. Stefani, S. Andresen, W. Yuan, N. Herholdt-Rasmussen, and O.
Bang, “High sensitivity polymer optical fiber-bragg-grating-based
accelerometer,” IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett., vol. 24, no. 9, pp.
763–765, 2012.
[9] G. Woyessa, K. Nielsen, A. Stefani, and C. Markos, “Temperature
insensitive hysteresis free highly sensitive polymer optical fiber
Bragg grating humidity sensor,” vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 1206–1213,
2016.
[10] C. A. F. Marques, A. Pospori, D. Saez-Rodriguez, K. Nielsen, O.
Bang, and D. J. Webb, “Aviation Fuel Gauging Sensor Utilizing
Multiple Diaphragm Sensors Incorporating Polymer Optical Fiber
Bragg Gratings,” IEEE Sens. J., vol. 16, no. 15, pp. 6122–6129,
2016.
[11] D. J. Webb, “Fibre Bragg grating sensors in polymer optical fibres,”
Meas. Sci. Technol., vol. 26, no. 9, p. 92004, 2015.
[12] K. Peters, “Polymer optical fiber sensors—a review,” Smart Mater.
Struct., vol. 20, no. 1, p. 13002, 2011.
[13] A. Montero, I. S. de Ocariz, I. Lopez, P. Venegas, J. Gomez, and J.
Zubia, “Fiber bragg gratings, IT techniques and strain gauge
validation for strain calculation on aged metal specimens,” Sensors,
vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1088–1104, 2011.
[14] T. H. Loutas, P. Charlaftis, A. Airoldi, P. Bettini, C. Koimtzoglou,
and V. Kostopoulos, “Reliability of strain monitoring of composite
structures via the use of optical fiber ribbon tapes for structural
health monitoring purposes,” Compos. Struct., vol. 134, pp. 762–
771, 2015.
[15] L. F. Ferreira, P. Antunes, F. Domingues, P. A. Silva, and P. S.
André, “Monitoring of sea bed level changes in nearshore regions
using fiber optic sensors,” Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed., vol. 45, no.
6, pp. 1527–1533, 2012.
[16] L. Fang, T. Chen, R. Li, and S. Liu, “Application of Embedded
Fiber Bragg Grating (FBG) Sensors in Monitoring Health to 3D
Printing Structures,” IEEE Sens. J., vol. 16, no. 17, pp. 6604–6610,
2016.
[17] B. Berman, “3-D printing: The new industrial revolution,” Bus.
Horiz., vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 155–162, 2012.
[18] R. Lima, R. Tavares, S. O. Silva, P. Abreu, M. T. Restivo, and O.
Frazão, “Fiber Bragg grating sensor based on cantilever structure
embedded in polymer 3D printed material,” in 25th International
Conference on Optical Fiber Sensors, OFS 2017, 2017, p. 1032331.
[19] R. Zelený and J. Včelák, “Strain Measuring 3D Printed Structure
with Embedded Fibre Bragg Grating,” Procedia Eng., vol. 168, pp.
1338–1341, 2016.
[20] M. G. Zubel, K. Sugden, D. Saez-Rodriguez, K. Nielsen, and O.
Bang, “3D printed sensing patches with embedded polymer optical
fibre Bragg gratings,” in Sixth European Workshop on Optical Fibre
Sensors, 2016, p. 99162E.
[21] Y.-F. Zhang, C.-Y. Hong, R. Ahmed, and Z. Ahmed, “A fiber Bragg
grating based sensing platform fabricated by fused deposition
modeling process for plantar pressure measurement,” Measurement,
vol. 112, no. April, pp. 74–79, 2017.
[22] M. Prabhugoud and K. Peters, “Modified Transfer Matrix
Formulation for Bragg Grating Strain Sensors,” J. Light. Technol.,
vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 2302–2309, Oct. 2004.
[23] H. Y. Ling, K. T. Lau, W. Jin, and K. C. Chan, “Characterization of
dynamic strain measurement using reflection spectrum from a fiber
Bragg grating,” Opt. Commun., vol. 270, no. 1, pp. 25–30, 2007.
[24] A. G. Leal-Junior, A. Frizera, C. R. Diaz, M. R. N. Ribeiro, and M.
J. Pontes, “FBG-Embedded Oblong Diaphragms with Extended
Dynamic Range,” IEEE Sensors Lett., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1–4, Jun.
2018.
[25] C. E. S. Castellani, H. C. B. Ximenes, R. L. Silva, A. Frizera-neto,

1558-1748 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.