Smart Materials and Structures

You may also like

- Study of public’s perceptions toward land
Optical fiber sensing technique for impact use in Pasar Kaget (Case study: Pasar
Kaget at Jalan Ahmad Yani Binjai)
detection and location in composites and metal P Y A Rajali, B Hamid and I F Pane

- Water Quality and Trophic Status Study in

specimens Sembrong Reservoir during Monsoon
Season
S I N S Hashim, S H A Talib, M S Abustan
To cite this article: J A Greene et al 1995 Smart Mater. Struct. 4 93 et al.

- False Trajectory Privacy Protection

Scheme Based on Location Service
Chen Yang and Wei Yan

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 115.66.87.104 on 21/01/2024 at 11:51

Smart Mater. Struct. 4 (1995) 93-99. Printed in the U K

Optical fiber sensing technique for impact

I defactinn and 'Incatinn in Pnmnncitec and
W Y I Y V . . V . .
r--.--- -..U .VVUI.V.. ... WV...
-9.-

metal specimens

Jonathan A Greenet, Tuan A R a n t , Vikram Bhatiaz, Michael F

Gunthea, Anbo Wangz, Kent A Murphy* and Richard 0 Claus#
tFiber and Sensor Technologies, Inc., 250 Arbor Drive NE, Christiansburg,
VA 24073, USA
-..*".,.,
+Ci*^" ^ ^ A C,^^*..^ n"&:,.-D^^^^I^ O?-Ar^,,
Y1aU"y
.& ".,+"-.+
+""r, all" L ' r r u u - u p u r ~I l r i ) r a l C I I "TIILTI,
^'r,-.-+..:.--,
U'pa.lL""1'L UI L l r l l l l l O L l

Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.

VA 24061-0111, USA
Received 30 January 1995, accepted for publication 22 February 1995

Abstract.We present a novel technique for effective detection and location of impacts
in metals and graphite/epoxycomposite laminates. This scheme employs the highly
sensitive extrinsic Fabry-Perot interferometric (EFPI) optical fiber-based sensing
system for recording the differential arrival times of impact-generated acoustic
signals using a set of four sensors whose location is predetermined.The sensors are
surface-mountedon an aluminum sample and completely embedded in the
composite specimen. A mathematical model is coded into a computer program to
enable real-time, on-line determination of impact locations. The precise location of
the impact can b e deduced typically with a 0.5" resolution and an accuracy bettei
than 5". An improvement in the sensitivity of this system is proposed by using
high-finesse Fabry-Perot cavities which modify the output transfer function curve of
the sensor.

1. Introduction metals and composites. Low-velocity impacts in compo-

The detection of acoustic stress waves in materials has
numerous non-destructive evaluation (NDE) applications
[I]. The development of acoustic wave detection and
similar health monitoring techniques has resulted in
strengthening d e concept of 'smart' materials and
structures, where sensors embedded inside or mounted
on such structures provide real-time information about
their properties and damage state, and through
processed feedback, self-actuation and control is
attained [2]. During the life-cycle of the material
system, d e measurement of acoustic waves can be used
for determination of microstructural properties. inspec-
tion of materials for strict quality control, and in-situ
analysis of material degradation and failure.
During the fatigue loading of composites, initial
acoustic emissions (AE) have been found to occur due
to damage initiation and propagation [3]. During the
latter part of q&ng, the s ~ u r c pof Q I J C ~zp-issions is
thought to be friction among delaminated, debonded
or other fractured surfaces. Hence, detection of the
nature of acoustic waves could help engineers to esti-
mate the stage of the structural damage in a composite
structure. Additionally, both low-velocity and high-
velocity impacts generate acoustic stress waves in
sites have been found to be the primary cause of delami-
nation 141. Such impacts give rise to primary matrix
cracks, which on intersection with the secondary cracks
precipitate delamination between two collocated plies. In
metals, high-strength impacts lead to crack initiation
that on progression could lead to severe structural degra-
dation. Hence, in both metals and compositesit becomes
necessary to detect impacts occurring on the surfaces or
edges of the specimens. The detection of location of such
impacts yields important information about the region in
which crack propagation would initiate. Quantitative
data about the strength of such impacts could therefore
provide information about the damage modes most
likely to occur.
It is often necessary to determine the location of such
impacts on-line without terminating the operation of a
high performance structure because such interruptions, if
at all possible in applications such as ships and aircraft,
cin be ~?eca.n.onici!2.n.d ciEbersame. Moreaver, in
some cases, impact detection needs to be implemented
in harsh conditions such as high heat flux and intense
electromagnetic radiation. Additionally, the impact
detection scheme should not in any way alter the
properties of the host material, which in itself might
influence the measurement procedure.

0964-1726/95/020093 + 07 519.50 0 1995 IOP Publishing Ltd 93

J A Greene et a/
Many techniques have been proposed to detect the
source of origin of acoustic waves. Methods using piezo-
electric transducers made of quartz, lithium niobate or
lead zirconium titanate (PZT) are commonly seen in the
literature. Tobias presented a scheme of locating an
acoustic source on a flat plate by employing three piezo-
electric sensors [SI.Later, Asty modified Tobias' work by
generalizing the theory to calculate the acoustic source
location on a sphere, again by using three sensors. This
theory could also he applied to the case of a flat plate by
letting the radius of the sphere approach infinity [6].Asty
additionally suggested the possibility of using four
sensors to allow unambiguous impact location, hut did
not elaborate on a method. Later, the location of
acoustic sources using two pairs of sensors forming the
vertices of an exact square was proposed by Bobrenko et
a l [ 7 ] .In this technique, complex families of geometrical
curves are used to determine the location of the AE
source, thus inhibiting real-time impact detection.
Although conventional piezoelectric transducer-
based techniques have been fairly successful in impact
detection measurements, the implementation of all the
desired features discussed above has not yet been
achieved. Towards this end, optical fiber sensors have
been developed which offer a myriad of advantages
over their electronic and pneumatic counterparts [S, 91.
Fiber sensors are small, light-weight and easy to
fabricate. Such sensors are immune to electromagnetic
interference and have been shown to outperform other
sensing mechanisms in harsh environments. Optical fiber
sensors can also he easily integrated within the existing
communication networks for remote operation.
Moreover, these sensors have excellent multiplexing
properties, and perform well in both surface-mounted
and completely-embedded configurations. Additionally,
fiber optic sensors have a wideband frequency response
restricted in most cases only by the limited bandwidth of
the detection electronics. Optical fiber sensors can he
categorized into intensity and phase (or interfero-
metric) sensors depending on which optical parameter
is modulated by the applied external perturbation.
Although intensity sensors are easier to implement,
they lack the sensitivity of the interferometric sensors.
To our knowledge, Spillman and Fuhr were the first
to use optical fiber sensors to detect and locate impacts
[IO]. They used two perpendicularly-oriented, distributed
and integrating-effect optical fiber sensors surface-
attached near the two edges of a rectangular composite
panel to detect the arrival times of the acoustic waves
generated by the impact. Unfortunately, a long fiber
sensing length increases the susceptibility of the inter-
ferometer to phase noise due to vibration and temperature
variation. Moreover, such conventional interferometers
which rely on long integrating sensing schemes are likely
to encounter problems of signal-fading and drifting [I I].
We present a non-conventional impact detection and
location scheme using the extrinsic Fabry-Perot inter-
ferometric sensor [12]. The sensor design, fabrication
and operation is first described. A mathematical model
to determine the coordinates of impact is next developed.
94
Preliminary experimental results for impact detection in
metals and composites are discussed in the following
section. The use of high finesse Fabry-Perot cavities to
improve the performance of this system is proposed. To
conclude, we discuss applications and future directions
in this field.
2. Extrinsic Fabry-Perot interferometric (EFPI) sensor
The configuration of the conventional extrinsic Fahry-
Perot interferometric sensor, first described by Murphy
et al, is shown in figure 1 [13].The sensor head consists of
a hollow-core silica fiber which encases a single-mode
input/output fiber. The cleaved end of a single-mode or
multimode fiber, aligned inside the hollow-core fiber
facing the end of the single-mode fiber, functions as a
Fresnel reflector and forms one side of the air-gap that
acts as a low-finesse Fabry-Perot cavity. The optical
reflection at the single-mode fiber-air interface acts as
the reference reflection signal for the interferometer. The
second reflection from the surface of the multimode fiber
generates the sensing reflection signal. The interference
between the two reflections is observed at one output of
the 2 x 2 fiber coupler as a sinusoidal variation in optical
intensity. Although multiple reflections occur within the
air-gap, the effect of reflections subsequent to the afore-
mentioned ones can be shown to he negligible, and hence
the device can properly he termed a two-heam inter-
ferometer [14]. The typical sinusoidal output transfer
function curve for a low-finesse, two beam interfero-
meter is shown in figure 2. The middle of the linear
intensity output region is termed the quiescent-point or
simply, the Q-point of the sensor. Since the change in
output intensity with displacement is maximum at the
Q-point, the sensitivity of the sensor is the greatest at
this point, and for small external perturbations it is
desired that the operation of the sensor be limited to
the linear region around the Q-point.
The sensor head is assembled by first inserting the
cleaved end of a multimode fiber into an approximately
SWPORT SYSTEhl
SPLICE
"0 TO
OSCULOSCOPE MATCHING
-- ----_ 4MULll MODE FIBER
OLLOW CORE W E R
--___
Figure 1. Set-up of the extrinsic Fabry-Perot interferometric
(EFPI) sensor system

DISPLACEMENT
Figure 2. Transfer function curve of the EPPI sensor.
1 cm long hollow-core fiber with an inner diameter of
145pm and an outer diameter of 250pm. The multi-
mode fiber is then permanently bonded to the inside of
the hollow core fiber using a high-temperature adhesive.
Next, the opposite end of the hollow-core fiber is care-
fdly. slipped over the single-mode fiber end using a
special alignment stage. To obtain maximum reflected
signal power, the surface quality of the cleaved multi-
mode fiber end must be critically monitored. The
single-mode fiber is then attached to the hollow-core
fiber while actively modulating the gap separation, thus
ensuring that the sensor is set close to quadrature to
allow maximum sensor sensitivity. The exact separation
which sets this quadrature-point is determined by pulsing
ultrasonic waves into the translation stage that supports
the sensor assembly, and monitoring the output intensity
from the retum lead of the 2 x 2 coupler for the signal
having the greatest modulation depth. When maximum
sensitivity is obtained, the hollow-corefiber is bonded to
the single-mode fiber with epoxy adhesive.
Particle motion of the surface acoustic waves (SAW)
can be decomposed into two orthogonal components,
one in the direction of the wave and parallel to the
surface, and the other normal to the surface. For simpli-
city, we assume that the interaction of the SAW with the
sensor results in complete strain transfer from the
medium to the sensor and that the SAW displacement
field is unaffected by the presence of the sensor. We
also assume that the displacements are continuous, slip-
page does not occur and the effect of axial strains domi-
nates the sensor response. An EFPI sensor of gage length,
L is most sensitive to a SAW of wavelength, A, if L is an
odd multiple of A. This implies that as the impact loca-
tion vanes, the wavelength of the SAW along the sensor
axis changes, resulting in the modulation of the sensor
sensitivity. This variation of the EFPI sensitivity with
impact position is ignored for the following analysis.
This limitation can be overcome by placing a sensor
rosette instead of individual sensors, such that the
sensors constituting the rosette have different axial
orientations. This would increase the required signal
processing and the cost of the system.
An incoming acoustic wave induces a periodic
axial strain field in the hollow core which modulates
Optical fiber sensing technique
(a) I
Figure 3. (a) Schematic of EFPI sensors in composite panel.
(b) Location of sensors within composite layers.
the length of the air gap, d, in the fabricated EFPI. The
change in the output intensity, I , is given by the
expression,
where, X is the laser diode wavelength and, Io, the
maximum output intensity. Thus, impact-induced
acoustic stress waves result in the change of the output
intensity of an EFPI located in proximity due to the modu-
lation of the cavity length, d (figure 1).
A ten-ply 3501-6 resin/AS4 graphite fiber composite
laminate having dimensions 121 x 79 x 0.325cm was
constructed with four embedded sensors (S1 to S4)
according to the three-dimensional geometry depicted
in figure 3. As shown, the sensors were embedded
between adjacent plies having parallel graphite fiber
orientation, with the long axis of each fiber and sensor
head parallel to the graphite fiber direction of the plies.
This configuration minimizes the size of the local resin-
rich region which typically surrounds the embedded
elements. Short lengths of high-temperature polymer
tubing were slipped over the fibers to extend several
millimeters into the edges of the laminate prior to cure
and protect the fist several centimeters of each fiber
from possible damage where it exited the laminate.
Each pair of EFPI sensors was interrogated using a sepa-
rate support optoelectronics system, and three two-
channel oscilloscopes are arranged to determine the
difference in the times of amval of signals to sensors
SljS2, S3/S4, and Sl/S3. From this data, impact loca-
tion may be uniquely determined, as discussed in the next
section. The composite panel was impacted by both
throwing and shooting 0.22gage pellets from distances
ranging from 10 cm to 5 m, and at angles between on-axis
and approximately 45 ' off-axis. Although the projectiles
locally damaged the laminates during some of the tests,
the sensors operated continuously, even though the
impacts were as close as 1cm to the sensor heads.
For impact tests on a metal specimen, a 144 x
132 x 0.25cm aluminum panel with four surface-
mounted EFPIS was employed. The reflector fiber was
not attached to the hollow-core fiber but was instead
bonded to the metal panel about 2mm from the point
where it exited the hollow capillary tube. This was done
95
JA Greene et a/
to improve the responsivity of the *PIS to low-amplitude
surface acoustic waves. The output of the four sensors
was monitored using a single four-channel oscilloscope.
Impacts to the horizontal aluminum plate were gener-
ated by dropping a 28g stainless steel ball from a
height of about 20 cm. Again, the difierence in the time
of arrival of the acoustic signal at each of the four sensors
was recorded and the impact location calculated using
the model described in the next section.
3. Mathematical model for impact location
When a projectile is incident upon the panel, both
surface and bulk acoustic waves are excited. The four
sensors embedded in or attached to the test panels are
used to determine the time at which the local super-
position of these acoustic waves reaches the sensors. In
this section, the approximate location of an impact is
derived in general from these four measured amval
times.
The coordinate system of a panel monitored by four
sensors is shown in figure 4, such that,
Atiwi = ri (i= 1,2,3,4) (2)
where, vi is the propagation speed of the acoustic
wave along the direction from impact-point (Q) to
sensor i, At, is the propagation time of the acoustic
wave from Q to the sensor, and ri is the distance
between point Q and the sensor. Generally, the informa-
tion obtained from these multiple sensors is a set of
relative acoustic wave amval time delays between
sensors rather than an absolute measure of the propaga-
tion time of the acoustic wave from the impact site to the
$ensor ! o c ~ ~ ; o.A&o
~ . a g s ~ ~ nthat
g tk.e mater;.al is
isotropic (vi= w, for i = 1, 2, 3, 4), we obtain,
(At, - Atl)w = rz - rl (34
(At, - Atl)w = r3 - rl (36)
(At, - Atl)w = r, - r l .
(34
If the propagation speed, w, of the acoustic wave in the
Figure 4. Coordinate system employed for impact detection
algorithm..
96
material is exactly known, the use of three sensors should
suffice for impact location. Four sensors are used in
applications where either the value of the acoustic wave
propagation speed is unknown, or the material is aniso-
tropic. Moreover, four sensors reduce the error that
might result from inaccuracies in measurement of the
acoustic wave velocity. Equations (34-(3c) can be
rewritten as
(1 - A ) r l = rz - Ar3 (44
(1 - B)rl = rz - Er4 (4b)
where,
E = (At2 -At11
(At, -At,) ’
Equations (44 6) form a non-linear system of equations
and the coordinates (x, y ) of an impact can be obtained
by using Newton’s iteration method. Equations (4a,b)
can be simplified to,
U ( X > Y )= 0 (64
W(Xj y ) =0 (hh)
and Po(xO,yo)
is tried as an initial solution such that,
I aU au i
then the possible solution of equation 7 can be expressed
as,
i 8u i
When the diEerence between and P, is small
enough, depending on the desired accuracy, the itera-
tion process is complete. The Newton method can
easily be implemented using a personal computer.
4. Experimental results
For the composite panel the difference in the time of
amval of the acoustic waves to the four sensors was
determined by using three two-channel oscilloscopes
and for the metal plate this was accomplished by using
a single four-channel oscilloscope. Figures 5, 6 and 7
depict the temporal outputs at impact from three pairs
of sensors embedded inside the composite specimen.
Figure 8 shows the acoustic wave signatures detected
by the four surface-mounted EFPIS on the aluminum
panel. Since no attempt was made to control the posi-
tion of the Q-point of the sensors on their respective
sinusoidal transfer functions during the tests, the initial
slopes of the acoustic events are arbitrary. The arrival
 Optical fiber sensing technique

- -
31
._
3,. ._
3%
._ 2$;>
3=
-
..
3
.

xmc Time
( I Wdir.) (I mldir.)

Figure 5. Output of sensor Si (top) and sensor S2 (bottom) Figure 7. Output of sensor S3 (top)and sensor S2 (bottom)
during impact on the composite panel. during impact on the composite panel.

Figure 8. Output of four sensors SI to S4 from top to bottom

during impact on the aluminum panel.

Figure 6. Output of sensor S4 (top) and sensor S2 (bottom)

d.ring i.mpact on the co~positepane!.
time of each acoustic wave was identified as the first
received data point above the maximum value of the
noise signal preceding impact. This simple rule allowed
the determination of Ati and hence, the constants A and
B for the particular impact. The solution of the algorithm
for the location of the impact site on the surface of the
panel was then determined using a personal computer.
Two measured impact locations for both the composite
and the aluminum panel are shown in table 1, along with
the exact impact location. The percentage error is given
by 100xeye/A,, where, x, and ye are respectively, the
errors in measurement of x and y coordinates, and A,
is the area of the face of the metal or composite panel on
which the sensors are mounted or embedded. For the
composite sample, the error is less than 0.001% of the
total surface area. For the aluminum plate the corre-
sponding value is 0.002%. It is noted that the compli-
cated acoustic wave transmission properties of the
composite laminate may cause internal scattering,
guided mode and interface wave propagation effects.
mode conversion, and symmetric and antisymmetric
plate mode behaviour, all of which may cause errors in
the determination of effective acoustic wave velocities
and times of arrival. Errors may also result because of
the dependence of the surface and bulk wave velocities
on their frequency content.

Table 1. Coordinates (in cm) of actual and experimental values for composite and
aluminum samples. Also shown is the percentage error for each trial with respect to
the area of the impact surface.

Experimental (65.3, 34.8) (51.8,41.44) (3.13,12.15) (7.6,14.9)

Actual (67. 35) (52. 40) 12.8.12.4) (7.0. 14.8)
Percentage error (O.MJI@/~) (0.0015%) (0.00086"/.) (0.00062a~)

97
J A Greene et a/
5. High-finesse Fabry-Perot cavities
As previously mentioned, the conventional EFPI system
uses input and reflecting fibers such that any subsequent
reflections, other than the fundamental ones, can effec-
tively be neglected, and a simplised two beam interfer-
ence analysis can be camed out. If metal or dielectric
films are deposited at the ends of these fibers, the
resulting Fabry-Perot cavity includes higher-order
reflections which increase the overall sensitivity of the
-___A--
byarcm. *- : &--*
tu i u p v i UUL
&--
yarauirrrL
...h:-h
WIUCU
-_--
-1... . . . . : - b
GU~L~GL=LIL.CO
the Fabry-Perot cavity is called the &esse, F [14],
(9)
where, r is the reflectivity of the fiber end-faces
(0 < r < 1). The finesse of the cavity increases with the
increase in reflectivity, r, of the end-faces. The overall
reflectance, R (ratio of refiected to incident power), in
the absence of absorption is given by the well known
Airy function L5],
ksin2(+/2)
R=
+
1 ksin2(+/2)
+
where, is the phase difference due to the interferometer
path difference (4 = 4?id/X) and,
4r
k=-
(I-r)"
For small values of I , equation (10) reduces to a simple
cosine variation, as given in equation (1). Figure 9 shows
the change in reflectance, R, as a function of this phase
difference, 4, for different values of r. As can be seen, the
increase in the value of r, and hence the finesse, F , results
in a larger slope of the R versus r curve. This implies that
a larger intensity change occurs per unit phase change,
for an increased value of r, enhancing the overall sen-
sitivity of the system. Sensitivity improyement of an
order of magnitude have been obtained using values of
_-PYCPRS
reflectivities in _..____-- 90%
of ~- Since. fnr ... the same value
of 4, the output of a higher finesse cavity is larger in
amplitude, a more accurate determination of the differ-
ence of arrival times can be made. This would improve
the overall accuracy and resolution of the system.
PHASEDIFFERENCE(O --C
Figure 9. Variation of the reflectance, R , with phase differ-
ence, $, for different values of interface reflectivity (r).
98
By placing the sensor in the middle of the linear
region of the high finesse Airy output, a larger dynamic
linear range can be obtained. Moreover, for low-velocity
impacts where the maximum displacement is less than
half a fringe, the change in output can be employed to
determine the impact magnitude. Thus, it is possible to
simultaneously detect the location and strength of an
impact using high-finesse EFPI cavities.
f C^..^l..r:^-r
U. " V 1 I I I I Y ~ ~ V I I ~
We have presented a novel method to detect the occur-
rence of an impact and determine its location on both
metal and composite specimens. This scheme utilizes the
intensity-modulated output of extrinsic Fabry-Perot
interferometric fiber optic sensors for impact detection.
The location of the impact is determined by using a
mathematical model based on the difference in the
amval times of the impact-generated acoustic waves to
a set offour sensors, embedded in the case of the compo-
site panel, and surface-mounted on the aluminum plate.
In both cases, the experimental error in the location of
impact was less than 0.002% of the total surface area on
which the impact occurred. Improvement in the sensi-
tivity of the system is proposed by the use of
high-finesse EFPI cavities.
Future work in this area would include the use of
simple intensity-based or wavelength-modulated
sensors, such as in-line fiber Bragg gratings for simulta-
neous impact location and strength detection. Impact
detection tests would also be carried out in metal and
polymer matrix composites using high 6nesse EFPI
cavities. The use of neural network for real-time impact
detection and location would also be investigated.
Presently work is underway to analyze the axial sensi-
tivity of EFPI sensors to impact locations and techniques
to overcome this limitation are being evaluated.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the Virginia Center
for Innovative Technology for financial support for
this project. Thanks also to Dr M R Gorman for
technical assistance in interpreting the experimental
data and Brian Fogg and Suzzane Starr for help in
setting up the equipment for impact detection tests in
composites.
References
[I] Liptai R G 1972 Acoustic emission from composite
materials Composite Materials: Testing and Design
(Second Conference), ASTM STP 497, American
Societyfor Testing and Materials. pp 285-98
[2] Clam R 0 1991 Smart materials and structures Fiber
Optical Product News November 1991
[3] Awerbuch J, Madhukar M and Gorman M R 1984
Monitoring damage accumulation in filament-wound
graphitejepoxy laminate coupons during fatigue

loading through acoustic emission J. Reinforced
Plnslics Composites 3 2-39
[4] Reifsnider K L (ea) 1991 Farigue of Composite Materials
(Amsterdam: Elsevier)
[5] Tobias A 1916 Acoustic emission source location in two
dimensions by an a m y of three sensors Nondestruct.
Test. 9 9-12
[a Asty M 1978 Acoustic emission source location on a
spherical and plane surface. Nondestruct. Test. 11 223-6
[A Bobrenko V M and Polesskaya L M 1981 Determination
of the coordinates of an acoustioemission source by
two pairs of receivers Acowtic Methodr (New York
Plenum)
[XI Dakin J and Culshaw B 1988 OpticalFiber Sensors:
Principles md Components, Artech House, MA,
1988
191 Giallorenzi T G, Bncaro J A, Dandridge A, Sigel, Jr, G H,
Cole J H, Rashleigh S C and Priest R G 1982 Optical
fiber sensing technology IEEE J. Quantum Electronics
18 626-65
Optical fiber sensing technique
[lo] Spillman Jr W B and Fuhr P L 1990 Impact detection
system for smart skins applications Proc. SPIE 1370
308-15
[Ill Jackson D A, Priest R,Dandridge A and TvetenA B 1980
Elimination of drift in a single-mode optical fiber
interferometer using a piezoelectrically stretched coiled
fiber Appl. Opt. 19 2926-9
[12] Claus R 0, Gunther M F. Wang A and Murphy K A 1992
Extrinsic Fabry-Perot sensor for strain and crack
opening displacement measurements from -200 to
900 "C Smart Muter. Strucl. 1 237-42
1131 MurphyKA.GuntherMF:VengsarkarAMandCiausR
0 1991 Quadrature phase-shifted, extrinsic Fabry-
Perot optical fiber sensors Optics Letters 16 213-5
[141 Born M and Wolf E 1985 Principles ofoptics (New York:
Pergamon)
[U] Lee C E, Gibler W N, Atkins R A and Taylor H F 1986In-
line fiber Fabry-Perot interferometer with high
reflectanceintemal mirrors J. Lighrwave Technol. LT-4
382-5
99