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.2018.2874065, IEEE
Sensors Journal
A Flexible, Planar-Coil-Based Sensor for
Through-Shaft Angle Sensing
Narendiran Anandan, Aditya Varma, and Boby George, Member, IEEE
Abstract—In this paper, a simple angle sensor is presented,
which is easy to fabricate and is low cost. The sensor is
constructed using square shaped flexible planar coils, bent
and arranged in a cylindrical pattern. The sensor design was
verified using appropriate analytical design, and an algorithm
to identify the quadrants of the measured angle was developed.
The output of the sensor is tolerant towards errors due to the
axial displacement of the sensing coil. This makes it suitable for
applications where the shaft may be subjected to axial motion
(even up to 30% of sensing coil length) in addition to angular
motion. The radial space required for the existing through-
shaft angle sensors is large. Although capacitive sensors can be
employed, their output is sensitive to moisture, dust, and oil.
The proposed sensor requires very small radial space (about
1.5 mm) and its output is not sensitive to such environmental
parameters. A prototype sensor was constructed to verify the
sensor operation and to evaluate its performance. The prototype
sensor had an r.m.s error of 0.58% and the maximum error
was within ±1%. The resolution of the measurement system
was estimated to be 0.15◦ . A detailed error analysis has been
conducted and the outcome shows that the output of the sensor
has very low sensitivity to the source of errors.
Index Terms—Angle Measurement, Inductive Sensor, Mutual
Inductance, Planar Coil Sensor, LVDT
I. I NTRODUCTION
The measurement of angular position is important in many
industrial, automotive and robotic applications [1], [2], [3].
Some of the traditional angle sensing techniques employ
resistive (potentiometer), capacitive or magnetic based sensing
elements [4], [5]. The former is susceptible to wear and has
a limited lifespan, and the latter may not always be suitable
in harsh industrial environments that are susceptible to the
presence of dust, oil etc. Measurement methods based on
optical and magnetic sensing techniques do not have these
disadvantages.
Optical rotary encoders [6] use a coded disk, light source
and light detector. A technique based on analysis of 2D images
to determine the angle unambiguously is presented in [7]. A
coding free optical rotary sensor is presented in [8] that is
simple to construct.
Magnetic sensors can be classified into two categories based
on the method used to generate the excitation signal. In the first
type, permanent magnet(s) are used to generate the magnetic
field which is then measured with the help of suitable sensing
element. The magnet is usually placed on the moving part
and the magnetic field seen by the sensor varies with respect
Narendiran A. and George B. are with the Department of Electrical
Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IITM), Chennai, TN,
India. M. Aditya is with School of Eletronics Engineering, Vellore Institute
of Technology, Vellore, TN, India. e-mail:a.narendiran@gmail.com
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
to the displacement of the moving magnet. These type of
sensors are often bulky and prone to errors due to loss of
magnetic properties in the permanent magnet. The rotational
position sensor reported in [9] utilizes a magnetic ring whose
central axis has a preset eccentricity. Hall effect sensors placed
around the ring are used to measure the change in magnetic
field, from which the angular position can be calculated using
complex algorithms and curve fitting techniques. A transducer
that combines the use of Hall effect sensors and the variable
reluctance technique was reported in [10].
In the second type, a magnetic field is generated by an
excitation coil and the associated signal is then detected by
sensing elements such as Hall effect sensors or other coils.
The field seen by the receiver varies with respect to the relative
position between the excitation coil and the sensing element.
Linear variable differential transformers (LVDTs) belong to
this category of sensors [11], [12], [13], and are commonly
used to measure linear displacements. An angle sensor that
is capable of measuring the absolute angular position was
reported in [14]. The sensor consists of a coded copper disc
and five spiral planar coils, one of which is a larger excitation
coil and the remaining four smaller coils serve as the receiver
coils. The voltage induced in the receiving coils are affected
by the movement of the copper code disc in the vicinity of
the coils. The angular position is determined from the detected
signal and a suitable algorithm.
An angular displacement sensor based on planar coils is
presented in [15]. It consists of ferromagnetic stator and rotor
with face slots, and for planar sinusoidal shaped coils. The
sensor uses the primary coils to generate magnetic field which
has sinusoidal distribution between the stator and rotor. A self-
inductance displacement sensor for active magnetic bearings
is presented in [16]. For the sensor, the variation in inductance
has a paramount influence on it linearity and sensitivity. An
angle sensor based on planar coil structure is presented in [17].
The coil layout consists of an excitation coil and two sensing
coils laid on a single plane of a PCB. A circular metallic disk
with a sector aperture alters the induced voltage in the sense
coils. The angle is determined from the induced voltage in the
sense coils, which are sine and cosine functions of the angular
position of disk. In [18], design techniques are presented to
minimize errors due to eccentricities in axial flux resolvers.
Most of the through-shaft angle sensors available are not
suitable for applications where the radial space available for
sensor installation is limited. In this paper we propose a
new inductive sensor constructed using planar coils fabricated
on thin flexible PCBs. The angle is measured based on the
change in the mutual inductance between the sensor coils. The
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.2018.2874065, IEEE
Sensors Journal
2

Excitation Coils L1 0
+a
Shaft 0 θ
0 +90 L4 L2
-a 90
270

-90 L3 180

Moving Coil L1 L2 L3 L4

Bending
0 90 180 270 0

(a) 3D perspective view (b) Representation of the planar coil bent (c) Relative position and the an-
of the proposed sensor. along a semicircular arc. gular separation of all the coils.
Fig. 1. Structure of the proposed sensor. In (a) the radial separation between excitation coils and the moving coil is shown exaggerated for the sake of clarity.

Planar Displacement (mm) v1 v2 v3 v4 Quad 1 Quad 2 Quad 3 Quad 4

Vm
-140
-105

105
140
-70
-35

1
35
70
0

2.5
λm
Induced Voltage (V)

Nume.
Expt. 2 0.5
Induced Voltage (V)

Output rθ
0.5Vm
Flux Linkage

1.5
0.5λm 0
1

0.5 -0.5
0
0 0

-0.5 -1
-180
-135
-90
-45
0
45
90
135
180

45

90

135

180

225

270

315

360

45

90

135

180

225

270

315

360
Angular Displacement (degrees) Angular Displacement (degrees) Angular Displacement (degrees)
(a) Comparison between the numerical results of (b) Induce voltages in the moving coil as a func- (c) Ratiometric output parameter.
straight planar coil and experimental result on bent tion of angle.
planar coil.
Fig. 2. Simulation Results. Here v1 , v2 , v3 , v4 are the induced voltages corresponding to the excitation in coils L1 , L2 , L3 and L4 respectively. In (a) the
value of λm depends on the current through the coil as well as number of turns. For our simulation it was 1.11 µWb.

proposed sensor can measure angles over full circle range with along a semicircular arc and the moving coil is placed very
good accuracy, and can be easily constructed at low cost. The close to the stationary coils, the linear displacement of the
thickness of the sensor is very small (< 1.5 mm), its output moving coil in the range −a to a can be used to represent
is not sensitive to the presence of dust, moisture oil, etc., and angular displacement in the range −90◦ to 90◦ . The coils
is tolerant to the presence of axial offsets. were modeled as a combination of concentric square loops, the
magnetic field produced by the coils at a point (p) is obtained
II. S ENSOR D ESIGN AND W ORKING P RINCIPLE using the Biot-Savart law as,
Fig. 1 shows the structure of the proposed sensor. The sensor N
X µ0
I ~ × ~r
I dl
consists of four excitation coils (L1 to L4 ) and one moving B(p) = (1)
coil (LM C ). All the coils are made using identical planar n=1
4π ln |~ r |3
square inductors by bending the planar square coil along a
where N is the number of loops in the coil, µ0 is the
semi-cylindrical, arc as illustrated in Fig. 1b. The moving coil ~ is the
permeability of free space, ln is the nth loop, dl
is attached to a rotating shaft while the excitation coils are th
differential element along the n loop and ~r is the vector from
mounted on a fixed platform surrounding the rotating shaft. ~ to the point p. The flux linked (λx )
the differential element dl
The coils are angularly spaced 90◦ apart and cover an angular
to the moving coil is obtained by integrating the magnetic field
span of 180◦ . The center of the first stationary coil is present
over its area [19],
at the angular position 0◦ , the second coil at 90◦ and so on.
N Z
The angular displacement to be measured is the radial distance X
between the centers of the moving coil and the first stationary λx = Bz (s) ds. (2)
n=1 An
coil.
An analytical design was developed to predict the behavior When a sinusoidal excitation signal is applied to the sta-
of the sensor and the induced voltage characteristics. An tionary coil, the voltage induced in the moving coil will be
initial study was performed on planar square coils of length proportional to the flux linkage between the two coils. Fig. 2a
(2a = 140 mm), 70 turns, and were excited with 1 mA using shows the numerically obtained [19] relationship between the
the technique presented in [19]. When the coils are bent flux-linkage and linear displacement (left and top axes), and its

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.2018.2874065, IEEE
1: Choose the coil (A) corresponding to the maximum in-
duced voltage (va ) among (v1 to v4 )
2: Between the neighboring coils of A, choose the coil (B)
whose output is higher (Vb ).
3: if the pair of coils (A, B) = (1, 2) or (2, 1) then
4: The measured angle is between 0◦ and 90◦
5: else if the pair of coils (A, B) = (2, 3) or (3, 2) then
6: The measured angle is between 90◦ and 180◦
7: else if the pair of coils (A, B) = (3, 4) or (4, 3) then
8: The measured angle is between 180◦ and 270◦
9: else if the pair of coils (A, B) = (4, 1) or (1, 4) then
10: The measured angle is between 270◦ and 360◦
11: end if
Fig. 3. Algorithm to determine the quadrant of the measured angle.
comparison to experimentally obtained relationship between
the angular displacement and induced voltage (bottom and
right axes). Here it can be clearly seen that the obtained exper-
imental results are in excellent agreement with the analytical
design, validating that this planar coil model is sufficient to
calculate the curved coil behavior.
When four stationary coils - spaced equally apart - are
present around a circle, the relation between the voltage
induced in the moving coil due to excitation in each stationary
coil is shown in Fig. 2b. In the figure, it can be observed that in
each quadrant, the output corresponding to excitation in coils
closest to the quadrant is higher than the others. Based on this
property, we can determine the quadrant of the measured angle
based on the induced voltages using the algorithm presented
in Fig. 3. Furthermore, the voltage induced in the moving
coil due to the stationary coils within a quadrant varies in a
differential manner. Hence, we can use the ratiometric [19]
approach (given in (3)) to obtain the output parameter from
the voltages va and vb determined using Fig. 3, which has
improved (piecewise) linearity.
va − vb
rθ = . (3)
va + vb
The relationship between the output parameter rθ and the
angular displacement of the moving coil is shown in Fig. 2c.
Here we can see that rθ is piecewise function of angle. For an
ideal sensor, rθ will be a periodic curve with a period of 90◦ . In
practice, the curve in each quadrant will have a slight variation
due to non-idealities in coil fabrication and misalignments in
sensor construction. The characteristics in each segment can
be modeled as a straight line as,
rθ = k1 θ + k0 .
Once the constants k0 and k1 are determined from (3) and (4),
the unknown angle can be obtained as,
rθ − k0
θ= . (5)
k1
III. E XPERIMENTAL RESULTS
In order to test the proposed through shaft angle sensor, a
prototype sensor was built using five identical square planar
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.
Sensors Journal
3
coils as shown as shown in Fig. 4a. The coils were fabricated
on a thin flexible printed circuit board (PCB) of thickness
0.2 mm, each having a length of 140 mm and 70 turns. The
copper traces constituting the coil were of width 0.4 mm and
of thickness 35 µm with a separation of 0.6 mm between the
conductors. Four of these coils were used as fixed excitation
coils and the fifth one was the rotating receiver coil. The
fixed coils are vertically wrapped around a cylinder of outer
diameter 90 mm, with 90◦ offset between them as illustrated
in Fig. 1. The moving coil was bent to fit the curvature of the
cylinder and placed over the fixed coil structure.
The measurement circuit used is illustrated in Fig. 4b.
As the sensor operates on a signal of fixed frequency and
amplitude, the analytical design can be used to reason about its
behavior. The fixed coils were excited using a sinusoidal signal
of amplitude 5 V and of frequency 10 kHz. The operating
frequency was chosen based on the frequency response char-
acteristics of the coil system (induced voltage vs. frequency),
such that the induced voltage is maximum without being
affected by the parasitic capacitances present in the coils [19].
The excitation signal was switched between the four coils
using a bidirectional analog multiplexer (MAX 4709). The
voltage was measured from the moving coil using twisted pair
cables, such an approach can be used in applications where
the shaft has limited range of rotation (i.e. less than 360◦ ):
for applications with unlimited rotational range, slip rings can
be used. The voltage induced in the moving coil for each
excitation was amplified using an instrumentation amplifier
(INA 128) configured with a gain set to 10. An NI-myDAQ
data acquisition system was used to generate the multiplexer
control signal, the coil excitation signal, and to acquire the
induced voltage in the moving coil. A LabVIEW program was
used to generate the multiplex control signals and to acquire
the excitation signal (VS ) and the output signal (VO ). The
input and output signals were measured over a period of 20 ms
for each coil and synchronous demodulation techniques were
then employed to determine the amplitude and phase of the
induced voltage. The time taken to process the obtained data
was negligible compared to acquisition time, the total time
taken to measure the angle was ≈80 ms.
In order to evaluate the performance of the sensor, measure-
ments were taken by rotating the moving coil in step size of 5◦
over the angular measurement range from 0◦ to 360◦ . At each
step, an amplified version of the induced voltage (INA output)
in the moving coil was recorded, corresponding to excitation
from each of the stationary coils. The results obtained are
shown in Fig. 5. Initially, calibration measurements were taken
to compute the sensor constants k0 and k1 . Fig. 5b shows
(4) the variation of the output parameter (rθ ) of the sensor with
respect to the angular displacement. As expected, the output
changed from +1 to −1 for every 90◦ , resulting in a sensitivity
of ∆rθ /∆θ = (1/45) per degree. Here, in each quadrant, least
square error curve fitting techniques were employed to fit the
output curve to a straight line and the sensor constants were
obtained. The constants obtained for the prototype sensor are
listed in Table I.
After the calibration phase, the sensor performance was
studied by varying the angular displacement and observing
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.2018.2874065, IEEE
Sensors Journal
4

Prototype Sensor Final Output

L1
VS

MUX
L2

L3

L4
+
VO
LMC INA
Induced Voltages −

TO PC
DAS
Measurement Circuit DAS

(a) Prototype Sensor and measurement system. (b) Measurement Circuit.

Fig. 4. Experimental Setup. Note: In (a) only the stationary coils of the sensor are shown for the sake of clarity. Mutual inductance is present between LM C
and every other coil L1 to L4 .

v1 v2 v3 v4 Quad 1 Quad 2 Quad 3 Quad 4 Estimated Angle %Error

2.5 360 3

Estimated Angle (degrees)

1
315
2 2

Estimation Error
270
0.5
1.5 1
Output (V)

Output rθ

225
1 0 180 0
135
0.5 -1
-0.5
90
0 -2
45
-1
-0.5 0 -3
0

45

90

135

180

225

270

315

360

45

90

135

180

225

270

315

360

0
45
90
135
180
225
270
315
360
Angular Displacement (degrees) Angular Displacement (degrees) Actual Angle (degrees)

(a) Measured values of induced voltages. (b) Obtained value of output parameter. (c) Error Estimation.
Fig. 5. Experimental results obtained from the prototype sensor.

TABLE I resolution was obtained as 0.15◦ .

S ENSOR CONSTANTS
Sensor
Constant 1 2
k1 (per degree) -0.0234
k0 (dimensionless) 1.066
the output. The induced voltages were used to determine the
quadrant of the measurement angle and the output parameter
rθ using the procedure in Fig. 3. From the obtained rθ and the
sensor constants corresponding to the identified quadrants, the
angle was computed using (4). The results obtained are shown
in Fig. 5c. The sensor was able to measure the angle with peak
error bound to within ±1%. The r.m.s error in measurement
over its entire measurement range was found to be 0.58%. For
the proposed sensor and its measurement scheme, the overall
resolution of the measurement system will be mostly limited
by the noise in the measurement circuit. In order to estimate
the resolution, a repeatability test was performed. The standard
deviation (σr ) in the output over multiple measurements was
found to be 0.0034. The resolution of the system can be
obtained from the standard deviation and sensor constants as,
σr
resolution = (6)
|k1 |min
where |k1 |min is the minimum value of the sensor constant
k1 among all four constants. For the prototype sensor the
The operation of the sensor is based on the movement of two
Quadrant closely spaced coils and the resulting variation in their mutual
3 4 inductance. Simulation was performed by moving a planar
-0.0234 -0.0238 -0.0249 coil on top of another identical coil and obtaining the flux
3.1583 5.3673 7.8239
linkage vs displacement characteristics [19]. In order to verify
if the model for planar coils can be applied for a bent coil,
experimental measurements were done and the characteristics
(shape) of the experimentally obtained results were compared
against the simulation results (Fig. 2a). As long the coils are
closely spaced and bent together in a similar manner, even if
the surfaces are not exactly round or cylindrical, the analysis
and the reasoning inferred from the planar coils can be applied
for the bent coils.
The ratiometric output rθ is tolerant to the errors due to
variation in the radial separation between the coils [19]. As the
moving coil and excitation coils are formed from planar coils
of similar dimensions, the eccentricity and the vertical separa-
tion, axis coincidence/skew between them will be constrained
by a very small range of values due to mechanical limitations.
For these range of values, the error in the ratio-metric output is
negligible. The centers of the excitation coils have to be placed
90◦ apart for the sensor and its quadrant detection algorithm
to work correctly. The coils do not necessarily have span full
180◦ each. In Fig. 2a, only the region −70 mm to +70 mm of
linear movement range is mapped to the angular range −90◦
to +90◦ , here each coil spans 180◦ range around the shaft.

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.2018.2874065, IEEE
Sensors Journal
5

However, we can use the region (−85 mm to +85 mm) for

0° 0° 0°
representing the angular range (−90◦ to +90◦ ) on a cylinder

L1

L1

L1
1

1
4 ,L

4 ,L

4 ,L
,L 2

,L 2

,L 2
of larger diameter, without affecting the quadrant detection

L
algorithm. In this case, each coil would span only 148 degrees

270°

270°

270°
90°

90°

90°
around cylindrical shaft. Moving
Coil
Sha

L3

L3

L3
3

3
2 ,L

2 ,L

2 ,L
,L 4

,L 4

,L 4
L

L
IV. S OURCES OF E RROR Excitation Coils 180° 180° 180°

This section presents the possible sources of error, its (a) (b) (c)
quantification from the prototype and the remedies. Errors are Fig. 6. Cross-sectional view of the sensor with shaft. Excitation coils (L1
to L4 ) that are active for the each 90◦ range are indicated. The rotating or
present due to the misalignments of the coils, deviation in moving coil LM C is visible. (a) ideal case, (b) misalignment in y-direction
the shape of the coils, circuit parameters of the coil and non- and (c) misalignment in x and y-directions.
ideal characteristics of the measurement circuit. The details
are discussed below.
0 mm 5 mm 10 mm 20 mm 30 mm
A. Errors Due to the Eccentricity Vm

The excitation coils shown in Fig. 1a, are fitted to a non-

Induced Voltage
magnetic and non-conductive circular bobbin. Similarly, the
moving coil is attached to another bobbin that is firmly fitted
to the rotating shaft. There will be a minimum gap required 0.5Vm
between the outer radius of moving coil and inner radius of v2 v1
the excitation coil bobbin to ensure non-contact rotation of
the shaft. This will be decided based on the tolerances of
the mechanical system involved in positioning the shaft and 0
the fixed coil bobbin. This can lead to a situation wherein 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
the centers of the excitation coil and the moving coil are not Angular Displacement (degrees)
aligned. A cross-sectional view of the sensor with and without (a) Induced voltages in coils 1 and 2.
concentric misalignment is shown in Fig. 6.
A correctly aligned system will give induced voltage in the 0 mm 5 mm 10 mm 30 mm 20 mm
moving coil LM C as a function of angle as in Fig. 2b, but 4
0.8
when the axes of the fixed and moving coils are not aligned, Output plots 3
0.6
the characteristic will change as there is a deviation in the Error plots
0.4 2
change in the corresponding mutual inductances. In the case
Output rθ

0.2 1

of Fig. 6b, the gap between the moving coil and the fixed coil
L1 increased compared to an ideal condition. This will result
in a reduction in the corresponding induced voltage and a non-
linearity in the induced voltage vs. angle characteristic as the
air gap changes as a function of angle. Part of the coils L2 and
L4 are also affected. When the shaft is rotated by 180◦ , there
will be increased voltage in LM C as L3 is closer to LM C than
the ideal case. In the case Fig. 6c, the moving coil will have
the largest gap when it is under L1 and L2 (i.e., 0◦ -90◦ ) and
the smallest gap when it is under L3 and L4 . To quantify the
effect of misalignment illustrated in Fig. 6c, an experimental
study was conducted at an angle of 45◦ . The gap between
the moving coil and the fixed coil was increased by 3 mm in
steps of 1 mm. The change in output due to this misalignment
was negligible. The study was repeated at 30◦ and a 0.02%
additional error in reading was noted for 3 mm misalignment.
B. Axial Misalignment of Moving Coil
The moving coil is expected to be placed in such a way
that the center of the coil is in the same plane (the normal of
which is parallel to the shaft) as the center of the excitation
coils as illustrated in Fig. 1a. Since the moving coil is fitted
on the shaft, it will move along with the shaft. The shaft
will have an up/down play depending on the application and
%Error
0 0
-0.2 -1
-0.4 -2
-0.6 -3
-0.8 -4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Angular Displacement (degrees)
(b) Output parameter (rθ )
Fig. 7. Effect of axial misalignment between the moving coil and the
excitation coils L1 and L2 . As expected, there is a reduction in the induced
voltage due to the increased airgap. This is shown in (a), while (b) shows the
non-linearity introduced in the final output. The non-linearity introduced is
less than 2% even for a 30 mm gap that was introduced.
tolerance of the mechanical system. This condition has been
tested in the prototype by displacing the moving coil axially
out from its ideal position. We moved it up for about 30% of
its total length. Output due to coils L1 and L2 changed by
the same factor and no noticeable change in the final output
was observed. This is due to the quadrant-wise ratio-metric
approach used to obtain the final output.
The analytical design in section-II has been extended by
introducing axial misalignment. The center of the moving coil

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.2018.2874065, IEEE
L4 L3
L1 L2
ϕsk
Skewed Moving Coil
0 90 180 270
Fig. 8. Skewed moving coil with respect to the excitation coil set.
4 the operation. Similarly, the percentage reduction is present in
2 case shown).
% Error
0
-2
-4
-5 -3 -1 1 3
Skewing Angle (degrees)
Fig. 9. Experimental results for error due to skewed moving coil.
was moved away from the centers of the excitation coils along
the axis of the shaft from 0 mm to 30 mm, in steps of 5 mm.
The expected variation in the axial displacement in practice
is less than 1 mm for rotating shafts. For such a range, the
effect will be negligible. Hence it was intentionally tested
for a higher range. The results obtained are given in Fig.
7. As explained above, there is reduction in the maximum
voltage that is induced. Also, the shape of the characteristic
is slightly altered. A small non-linearity is observed near 30◦
and 60◦ . The final output computed from these plots shows
negligible effect in the magnitude and shape even for such a
large misalignment. This is due to the ratio-metric computation
(3) employed.
C. Skewed Moving Coil
The magnitude of the induced voltage in a skewed moving
coil will deviate from the ideal characteristic. A moving coil
under the ideal and skewed conditions for an angle 90◦ is
illustrated in Fig. 8. Due to skewing, the overlap area of the
moving coil with that of the excitation coil will reduce. Let us
consider that an angle φsk is present between ideal position
of the moving coil and the skewed coil as shown in Fig. 8.
The reduction in overlap area per side is a2 tan(φsk ), where
2a is the width of the planar square coil. Thus, there will be
a percentage relative reduction of [1 − tan(φsk )] × 100 in the
total overlap. Same will be observed in the amplitude of the
induced voltage. As can be seen from Fig. 8, some portion of
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.
Sensors Journal
6
L4
0° 0°
L1
L1
1
1
4 ,L
4 ,L
,L 2
,L 2
L
270°
270°
90°
90°
L3
L3
3
3
2 ,L
2 ,L
,L 4
,L 4
L
L
180° 180°
(a) (b)
Fig. 10. Moving coil with (a) symmetrical and (b) unsymmetrical eccentricity.
360
the moving coil has entered into the next fixed coil. Since the
algorithm looks for the maximum output corresponding to the
excitation coil pair, to identify the position, it will not affect
the induced voltages of both the coils (say L1 and L2 in the
Since the magnetic field of the excitation coil is not uniform
throughout the area of the coil, the above assumption is not
very accurate. The coil has the largest flux density value at the
center and reduces drastically as we move away from there
[19]. Thus, to verify the actual effect, the moving coil was
5 set at 90◦ and φsk was introduced from −5◦ to +5◦ . The
corresponding error noted for −5◦ to +5◦ are plotted in Fig.
9. To realize an accurate sensor the φsk should be kept very
low. In practice suitable packaging can be provided to maintain
proper alignment for the fixed and moving coils. This will
avoid such skewing.
Another type of skewing occurs when an angle is introduced
between the axis of the moving coil and that of the fixed coil.
As long as the skewed angle remains same while rotating,
the error introduced will be very small. This has been verified
experimentally by introducing such a misalignment at 45◦ and
30◦ . The bottom region of the moving coil was at correct
position while the air gap at top region was increased by 4 mm.
The error introduced was negligible.
D. Eccentricity of the Coil
The moving and fixed coils are expected to have perfect
circular shape. But in practice it will deviate from the circular
shape, as illustrated in Fig. 10, due to manufacturing defects or
misalignments [20]. To test the effect of such a misalignment,
the moving coil shape has been modified. The middle region
of the coil throughout its length was kept at an air gap of
4 mm. Then, the air gap was decreased to minimum (i.e.,
4 mm change) as we move towards the vertical edges of the
moving coil. This introduced a symmetrical eccentricity as
in shown Fig. 10. A coil with such a shape introduced no
additional error for the test conducted at 45◦ , but when the
portion that is from middle to the left side of the moving coil
was kept in circular shape and when the other portion was
kept at 4 mm misalignment (unsymmetrical eccentricity as in
Fig. 10), there was an error of 0.3%. Thus, eccentricity that
is not symmetrical introduces small amount of error.
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.2018.2874065, IEEE
Sensor Range Resolution
Potentiometer 360◦ Continuous
RVDT ±80◦ Continuous
MR Angle Sensor [2] 360◦ 0.5◦
Rotary Magnetic Encoder [21] 360◦ 0.1◦
This paper 360◦ 0.15◦
+2° +1° -1° -2°
1 with small air gap with the excitation coil, all coils will have
Output plots
Final Output (rθ)
0.5
Error plots
0 0
-0.5
Error for -2° after gain correction
-1
-1.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Angular Displacement (degrees)
Fig. 11. Output and error due to error in the overlapping angle of fixed coils
L1 and L2 . The error can be reduced to a lower value by a calibration and
gain correction, as shown in the case of −2◦ error.
E. Error in the Overlapping Area of the Fixed Coils
The final output rθ in each quadrant is obtained from output
of two of the coils in the sector. There will be some effect,
if the overlapping area of those coils are less than or more
than 90◦ . For example, if L2 is shifted by +2◦ , the section
of the induced voltage vs. angle characteristic (shown in Fig.
2b) that is seen by the moving coil for 0◦ to 90◦ will move
towards Vm . This increases the output due to L2 by small
amount (not by a constant amount) and reduces the value of the
final output. Error introduced in the output due to −2◦ , −1◦ ,
+1◦ and +2◦ of overlapping angle by L2 has been computed
from the experimental data and presented in Fig. 11. It can
be seen that 2◦ error in overlap introduces about 1% error.
If a calibration can be performed after manufacturing, the
error can be corrected to some extent using a gain correction,
considering that the output is almost linear. We applied the
same for −2◦ overlap angle and the maximum error has been
reduced to -0.5% as in Fig. 11.
F. Presence of External Conductive Objects
The sensor uses planar coils for the excitation and to
measure the induced voltage. A conductive or magnetic object
in the close vicinity of the sensor coils will alter the impedance
of the excitation coils and induced voltage in the moving coil.
If all the excitation coils are exposed to the same object, then
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.
Sensors Journal
7
TABLE II
C OMPARISON OF ROTARY S ENSORS
Construction Complexity Circuit Complexity Note
Moderate Simple Suffers from wear and tear.
Moderate Simple Moving part is relatively heavy.
Complex Moderate Bulky and toothed wheels are required.
Moderate Complex Requires noticeable radial space to
house the multi-part magnetic ring.
Moderate Simple Suitable for installation
in small radial space.
the error will be negligible due to ratio-metric approach. Thus,
1.5 if the sensor is covered using a thin magnetic/conductive tube
1
equal effect and no additional error will be introduced. The
tube will also stop other time-varying external magnetic fields
0.5 % Error
interfering with the moving coil.
-0.5 G. Non-Linearity
-1 A linear output characteristic is preferred from the sensor.
But, the analytical and experimental studies show some non-
linearity. Let us consider the induced voltage in Fig. 7. The
voltage curves v1 and v2 are not straight lines, but they
satisfy a 3rd order polynomial with sufficient accuracy. The
polynomials are symmetric about 45◦ . Thus, when ratio-
metric computation as in (3) is computed, the even terms will
be canceled in the numerator. Similarly, the odd terms will
be canceled in the denominator of (3). Since the even terms
are present in the denominator, and the third order term is
present in the numerator, a non-linearity will be introduced
in the output. This can be seen in the error plot in Fig. 7.
For a perfectly aligned sensor, this error is found to be very
small. When the alignments are not perfect as explained in
the previous sub-sections, the coefficients of the polynomials
corresponding to the pair of the excitation coils for each
quadrant will have mismatch and hence effectiveness of the
(3) will be reduced. The non-linearity error is very small in a
properly manufactured and assembled sensor. The parameters
of the coil such as winding resistance, inductance and parasitic
capacitance will have negligible effect in the final output as the
coils are almost identical. There will be drift in the resistance
due to temperature but it will be same for all the coils. The
INA that is used to amplify the induced voltage in the moving
coil has a fixed gain. Since induced voltage due to each coil is
measured using the same INA, any gain error that is present
will be canceled in the final output, due to the ratio-metric
approach employed.
V. C ONCLUSION
A mutual inductance based, low-cost through-shaft angle
sensor is presented in this paper. The sensor utilizes four
identical flexible planar coils, arranged in cylindrical quadrants
as excitation coils. A fifth coil that was placed close to the
stationary coils serves as the moving coil whose azimuthal
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.2018.2874065, IEEE
Sensors Journal
8

angle was being measured. By measuring the voltages induced
in the moving coil and performing a simple computation, the
rotational displacement is determined. A prototype sensor was
fabricated and tested to evaluate the sensor performance. The
maximum error in measurement was bound to within ±1%
and the r.m.s error in measurement was found to be 0.58%.
The resolution of the measurement system was limited by the
noise in the circuit and was estimated to be 0.15◦ . As can be
seen in Table II, in comparison with the most of the existing
angle sensors, the new sensor presented possesses a number
of benefits such as simple to construct, low cost, the signal
conditioning circuit required is simple and the sensor requires
a very small amount of vertical space for its installation.
The sensor will be suitable in various industrial and robotic
applications, where the rotating shaft may also be subjected
to limited axial motion.
[18] Z. Nasiri-Gheidari and F. Tootoonchian, “Axial flux resolver design
techniques for minimizing position error due to static eccentricities,”
IEEE Sensors J., vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 4027–4034, July 2015.
[19] N. Anandan and B. George, “Design and development of a planar
linear variable differential transformer for displacement sensing,” IEEE
Sensors J., vol. 17, no. 16, pp. 5298–5305, Aug 2017.
[20] C. J. Schantz and S. B. Leeb, “Self-sensing induction motors for
condition monitoring,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 3735–3743,
June 2017.
[21] S. Wang, Z. Wu, D. Peng, S. Chen, Z. Zhang, and S. Liu, “Sensing
mechanism of a rotary magnetic encoder based on time grating,” IEEE
Sensors J., vol. 18, no. 9, pp. 3677–3683, May 2018.

R EFERENCES
[1] Y. P. Yang and Y. Y. Ting, “Improved angular displacement estimation
based on hall-effect sensors for driving a brushless permanent-magnet
motor,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 504–511, Jan
2014.
[2] W. Xiaoling, Z. Yan, and W. Hong, “Non-conduct steering sensor for
electric power steering,” in 2009 Int. Conf. on Info. and Automation,
June 2009, pp. 1462–1467.
[3] A. Nag, S. C. Mukhopadhyay, and J. Kosel, “Wearable flexible sensors:
A review,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 17, no. 13, pp. 3949–3960, July 2017.
[4] H. E. John G. Webster, Measurement, Instrumentation, and Sensors
Handbook, Second Edition: Spatial, Mechanical, Thermal, and Radi-
ation Measurement, 2nd ed. CRC Press, 2014.
[5] A. N. Montanari and E. de Souza Oliveira, “A novel analog multisensor
design based on fuzzy logic: A magnetic encoder application,” IEEE
Sensors J., vol. 17, no. 21, pp. 7096–7104, Nov 2017.
[6] T. A. Tameh, M. Sawan, and R. Kashyap, “Novel analog ratio-metric
optical rotary encoder for avionic applications,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 16,
no. 17, pp. 6586–6595, Sept 2016.
[7] T. Dziwiski, “A novel approach of an absolute encoder coding pattern,”
IEEE Sensors J., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 397–401, Jan 2015.
[8] S. Das and B. Chakraborty, “Design and realization of an optical rotary
sensor,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 2675–2681, April 2018.
[9] S. T. Wu, J. Y. Chen, and S. H. Wu, “A rotary encoder with an eccentri-
cally mounted ring magnet,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 63, no. 8,
pp. 1907–1915, Aug 2014.
[10] C. S. Anoop and B. George, “A new variable reluctance-hall effect based
angle sensor,” in Sixth International Conference on Sensing Technology
(ICST), Dec 2012, pp. 454–459.
[11] M. Martino, A. Danisi, R. Losito, A. Masi, and G. Spiezia, “Design of
a linear variable differential transformer with high rejection to external
interfering magnetic field,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 674–
677, Feb 2010.
[12] G. Chen, B. Zhang, P. Liu, and H. Ding, “An adaptive analog circuit for
LVDT’s nanometer measurement without losing sensitivity and range,”
IEEE Sensors J., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 2248–2254, April 2015.
[13] A. Grima, M. D. Castro, A. Masi, and N. Sammut, “Electrical metro-
logical characterization of ironless inductive position sensors with long
cables,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 18, no. 17, pp. 7114–7121, Sept 2018.
[14] Z. Zhang, F. Ni, Y. Dong, C. Guo, M. Jin, and H. Liu, “A novel absolute
magnetic rotary sensor,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 62, no. 7, pp.
4408–4419, July 2015.
[15] Q. Tang, D. Peng, L. Wu, and X. Chen, “An inductive angular displace-
ment sensor based on planar coil and contrate rotor,” IEEE Sensors J.,
vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 3947–3954, July 2015.
[16] K. Wang, L. Zhang, Y. Le, S. Zheng, B. Han, and Y. Jiang, “Optimized
differential self-inductance displacement sensor for magnetic bearings:
Design, analysis and experiment,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 17, no. 14, pp.
4378–4387, July 2017.
[17] B. P. Reddy, A. Murali, and G. Shaga, “Low cost planar coil structure
for inductive sensors to measure absolute angular position,” in 2017 2nd
International Conference on Frontiers of Sensors Technologies (ICFST),
April 2017, pp. 14–18.

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.