Optics & Laser Technology 82 (2016) 57–62

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Optics & Laser Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/optlastec

Full length article

Fiber optic sensor for hydrostatic pressure and temperature

measurement in riverbanks monitoring
Luca Schenato a,n, Rajendran Aneesh b, Luca Palmieri b, Andrea Galtarossa b,c,
Alessandro Pasuto a
a
Research Institute for Geo-Hydrological Protection, National Research Council, I-35127 Padova, Italy
b
Department of Information Engineering, University of Padova, I-35131 Padova, Italy
c
IIUSE, Southeast University, Nanjing, China

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An optical fiber sensor for the simultaneous measurement of hydrostatic pressure and temperature in
Received 31 December 2015 soil embankments is presented. It exploits the differential strain induced on a fiber in a dual–chamber
Accepted 16 February 2016 case, constituting the sensor body. The strain, either induced by the pressure or by the temperature, is
optically measured by means of coherent frequency domain reflectometry and variations induced by the
Keywords: two physical phenomena are discriminated because of the different behavior of the two chambers.
Soil Characterization of the sensor is presented and discussed. The prototype shows promising performance:
Riverbank temperature and pressure sensitivities are approximately
7 GHz/°C and
3.2 GHz/kPa, respectively,
Hydrostatic pressure with accuracies of 0.5 °C and 0.3 kPa.
Temperature
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Optical frequency domain reflectometry

1. Introduction technologies lack in ruggedness, long term reliability, stability and

Riverbank stability assessment requires the knowledge of sev-
eral parameters which ultimately drive the mechanics of the riv-
erbank as a system. One of these parameters, directly related to
the stresses exerted by water content within the soil, is the hy-
drostatic pressure. In fact, changes of the hydrostatic pressure
inside foundation soil of river embankments determine significant
seepage forces which may cause progressive removal of soil par-
ticles. The mechanism is at the basis of the backward erosion
piping inside the riverbank, which can eventually lead the struc-
ture to collapse [1]. The characteristic hydrostatic pressures are in
the order of few tens of kPa, a rather small value with respect to
that of other geotechnical applications involving pressure mea-
surements, like oil and gas exploration where the pressures are
orders of magnitude larger.
Different sensors, based on standard technologies, are com-
mercially available for measuring the pressure in riverbanks:
among them the most popular are standpipe piezometers and
pneumatic or electrical sensors based on strain gauges or vibrating
wires. Standard site surveys consist in deploying vertically such
sensors in a borehole drilled in a riverbank. In many cases those
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: luca.schenato@cnr.it (L. Schenato).
capability of being multiplexed.
Hydrostatic pressure has been matter of investigation also of
several papers about fiber optic sensors (FOSs). In particular, sen-
sors proposed so far mostly exploit intensity modulated [2], ex-
trinsic Fabry–Perot interferometer [3] and fiber Bragg grating
(FBG) technologies [4–6]. Some distributed FOSs have also been
proposed [7]. Fiber optic sensors, being easily multiplexed and not
requiring local power source, are particularly suited to monitor
long structures such as riverbanks.
The main effort made when dealing with pressure measure-
ment by means of optical fiber sensors is usually devoted to im-
prove the low pressure sensitivity and to cope with the intrinsic
cross-sensitivity to temperature. It has to be noted that, in mon-
itoring abnormal filtration flows, it is more valuable to measure at
the same time the hydrostatic pressure and the temperature ra-
ther than merely compensating the temperature drift. In fact, a
temperature gradient can take place if water drains at different
temperature; furthermore, precise temperature measurement can
support distributed temperature sensing field surveys and provide
additional information about seepage dynamics. With regard to
that, this paper illustrates the development of a sensor for the
simultaneous measurement of hydrostatic pressure and tempera-
ture in soil to be used in riverbank applications. In the following
sections the sensor principle will be firstly described. Then, results

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2016.02.015
0030-3992/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
58 L. Schenato et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 82 (2016) 57–62
of its characterization and calibration will be presented and
discussed.
2. Sensor description
Pressure sensitivity of optical fibers and fiber Bragg gratings is
indeed small (about
2.2  10
6/MPa for uncoated glass fibers [8]
and
2.05  10
6/MPa for FBGs [9]) and that makes the direct
measurement of hydrostatic pressure not feasible. Thus, in the
majority of sensors proposed so far, the pressure is converted to
longitudinal strain exerted on the fiber. A common approach
consists in attaching an FBG to a deformable part of the sensing
shell constituting the sensor and monitoring the strain induced by
the deflection of such part as a function of the pressure [5,6,10–
16].
Alternatively, it is possible to use different materials, like
polymers, integrated into a smart package or case. With this re-
gard, the simplest approach consists in covering the fiber with a
thick polymer layer, as firstly suggested by Budiansky et al. [8] and
then re-proposed by several others authors [17–23]; in that way, a
pressure applied to the polymer is converted in a longitudinal
strain according to the polymer Poisson's ratio.
About temperature cross-sensitivity, Refs. [12,14,16] propose to
encase two fiber gratings into the sensor, while Refs. [17,19–21]
exploit long FBGs, partially exposed to pressure. In all these ex-
amples, the fiber section for temperature compensation is usually
in strain/pressure free configuration and is sensitive only to tem-
perature fluctuation. Practically, those devices are indeed com-
prising two sensors with separated function. In the sensor pre-
sented hereafter, a two chambers transducer which encases fiber
sections simultaneously sensitive to hydrostatic pressure and
temperature is instead exploited. As in [19,20,23], the Poisson ef-
fect of a polymer, i.e. silicone rubber, has been used to convert
lateral pressure to strain induced in an embedded fiber. The pro-
posed sensor can be multiplexed by cascading and the typical
pressure values it targets are smaller than those of the afore-
mentioned solutions.
Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of the prototype. The ex-
ternal case is made of two cylindric chambers of aluminum (A and
B in the side section) whose dimensions are, respectively, length, L,
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of sensor prototype: side section and top view.
66 and 76 mm, outer diameters 38 and 42 mm, inner diameters 31
and 35 mm. The two cylinders are open at one side and are
screwed together at that side. The lateral surface of cylinder B is
drilled side to side to obtain two rounded windows. Silicone
rubber completely fills this chamber, hermetically sealing it. A
1 mm-thick aluminum disc is attached to the rubber surface, in
between the two chambers; its diameter is 30 mm, smaller than
the chamber inside diameter. Sensing fiber is a polyimide coated
fiber that goes axially through the device and it is cemented at the
ends of the case and at the aluminum disk. A pre-strain is applied
to the fiber before being glued to tune the working point at the
background soil pressure. A prototype has been built for testing
purpose and can be seen in Fig. 2(a).
When the sensor is hosted in an hydrostatic pressure en-
vironment the silicone rubber is squeezed through the lateral
windows and the fiber gets lengthen, according to the Poisson
coefficient of the rubber. The fiber in chamber B is actually pulled
by the metallic disc whose function is indeed to distribute the
central reaction force of the inner fiber over the silicone rubber
surface and vice versa. Thus, when under pressure, fibers in
chambers A and B are shortened and lengthened, respectively.
For a given pressure P exerted on a rubber cylinder embedding
an optical fiber which is clamped at the cylinder ends, the long-
itudinal strain Δε induced on the fiber reads [19]:
νR P
Δε = ,
r2
ER + 2 (EF − ER )
R (1)
where νR is Poisson's ratio of the rubber, R and r are the radius of
the rubber cylinder and of the fiber, respectively, and ER and EF are
Young's modulus of rubber cylinder and silica, respectively. Eq. (1)
can be applied to the sensor to obtain a rough theoretical estimate
of the strain induced on the fiber inside the rubber chamber. In
making this estimate however, the effect of bonding between
rubber and case and the partial exposition of the lateral surface of
the rubber to the pressure are actually not considered. Given that
Ef > ER for any kind of rubber, the smaller the ratio r /R the larger
the induced strain; thus, sensors with large diameter perform
better. Also, rubbers with low Young modulus and large Poisson's
ratio, close as much as possible to 0.5, are preferable. For the
sensor here presented, R¼ 1.55 cm, r ¼62.5 μm and EF ¼70 GPa;
 L. Schenato et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 82 (2016) 57–62
Fig. 2. (a) Prototype fixed on pedestal. (b) Experimental setup.
material parameters of the silicone rubber are only known with
some approximation ( νR = 0.46–0.48 and ER = 1–5 MPa ). The cor-
responding estimated theoretical sensitivity is then in the range
75–225 με/kPa .
As for temperature response of the sensor, three different
concomitant effects take place:
 the thermo-elastic effect on the transducer components, i.e.
rubber and aluminum case;
 the thermo-elastic effect on the silica fiber;
 thermo-optic effect on the silica fiber.
Each of the first two effects, if acting independently, would cause
the thermal expansion of the different parts of the sensor, as both
the transducer (rubber and case) and the fiber elongate for in-
creasing temperature. However, when they act together the be-
havior becomes far more complex because rubber, fiber and alu-
minum case are strongly mechanically interacting with each oth-
ers and the three materials have very different thermal expansion
coefficients and Young modulus. In fact, thermal expansion coef-
ficients of silica, aluminum and silicone rubber are approximately
0.5 × 10−6 /°C , 23 × 10−6 /°C and 275 × 10−6 /°C , respectively. Young
modulus of aluminum is almost the same of silica (70 GPa), but
4 orders of magnitude larger than that of silicone rubber
(1–5 MPa ). The fiber then tends to inhibit the thermal expansion of
the rubber; conversely, the case and the rubber force more than
pure thermal expansion in the fiber [24].
The additional thermo-optic effect acts similarly on the fiber
sections hosted in the two chambers. Corresponding thermo-optic
coefficient is approximately 9.5 × 10−6 /°C for standard fiber, al-
most 20 times larger than the linear thermal expansion coefficient
of the fiber itself [25,24].
A rough evaluation of the overall effect due to temperature
results in a sensitivity of approximately 33 × 10−6 /°C , obtained by
adding the thermal expansion coefficient of the metal case to the
thermo-optic coefficient of the fiber itself.
An Optical Backscatter Reflectometer (OBR) from Luna Tech-
nologies is used here to optically measure strain/temperature in-
side the chambers. In fact, the frequency scan performed by the
OBR allows us to retrieve the spectral response of the fiber with a
sub-centimeter resolution [26] and, as for FBGs, the reflected
spectrum shifts in response to temperature and strain variations.
Therefore, by monitoring this shift (usually by means of correla-
tion analysis) it is possible to measure the local change in tem-
perature or strain.
It is worth mentioning that the inner working mechanism of
the sensor does not depend on the optical technique used to
measure strain and temperature. Among the different options, two
cascaded FBGs, located in correspondence of the two chambers
would be the most simple choice. Here the OBR has been used
59
both for convenience and because it allows an accurate distributed
characterization of the strain/temperature response, which pro-
motes a better understanding of the inner working mechanism of
the sensor and helps in the design process as discussed below.
3. Experimental results
The sensor has been tested in the experimental setup shown in
Fig. 2(b). An L-shape tube, filled with water, hosts the sensor in its
horizontal section: water temperature within the tube is measured
by a 12-bit digital electrical probe while pressure can be changed
by varying water level inside the vertical section of the tube. A
computer controls OBR equipment and the electrical temperature
sensor. Note that OBR conversion factor coefficients for strain
( − 6.67 με/GHz) and temperature ( − 0.801 °C/GHz) are both ne-
gative and, thus, a negative value of spectral shift corresponds to
increased strain or temperature.
An example of the Rayleigh shifts measured along the fiber for
different conditions are shown in Fig. 3(a) and (b). Spectral shift
curves in Fig. 3(a) have been taken at different pressure and
constant temperature, while those in Fig. 3(b) correspond to dif-
ferent temperatures but constant pressure. Green and red shaded
areas correspond to the fiber sections inside the rubber and empty
chambers, respectively. The behavior is generally consistent to
what described above: indeed, spectral shift moves towards op-
posite directions in the two chambers for increasing pressure and
constant temperature and actually an increment of strain is ob-
served in the fiber inside the rubber chamber for increasing
pressure, as the fiber elongates pulled by the squeezed rubber. On
the contrary, spectral shifts are concordant for increasing tem-
perature at constant pressure, as the two chambers and the em-
bedded fiber undergo an elongation. We note also that the fiber in
empty chamber shows a uniform strain, while the strain in the
rubber chamber is not uniform at all. Spikes in the traces mea-
sured for varying temperature (Fig. 3(b)) unveiled by the high
spatial resolution attainable by the OBR correspond to the points
where fiber is cemented to the external case and are likely caused
by the large thermal expansion (85 × 10−6 /°C) of the cement
s
(Araldite 2011). Note that this level of detail in the strain profile
description would not have been possible by means of a single FBG
per each chamber. This is an added value of the distributed sensing
feature enabled by OBR technique, indeed very useful in sensor
prototyping.
The calibration of the sensor has been performed accordingly
the following procedure:
1. the amount of water to fill the tube of Fig. 2(b) and the sensor
itself have been stored at low temperature for several hours;
60 L. Schenato et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 82 (2016) 57–62

Fig. 3. Rayleigh shift measured at (a) different pressures (constant temperature) and (b) different temperatures (constant pressure). Section corresponding to rubber and
empty chambers are highlighted in shaded red and green color, respectively. The reference scatter profile for these spectral shifts was taken at 10.2 °C and 0.98 kPa. (For color
version, please see the online version of this paper.)

this has allowed us to set a starting condition at thermal
equilibrium;
2. the setup of Fig. 2(b) was deployed with the cold water filling
entirely the tube;
3. the water was left to slowly warm up to the wanted tempera-
ture, measured by the electric sensor;
4. once the desired temperature was reached, the tube was emp-
tied rapidly in steps and measurements were taken for different
levels at the given temperature;
5. steps 1–4 were repeated for different water temperatures.
Using the above procedure the sensor response has been mea-
sured at 10.2, 13.2, 15.2 and 17.2 °C and for each of this tempera-
ture the water levels were set to 10 cm (0.98 kPa) and from 20 cm
(1.96 kPa) to 140 cm (13.7 kPa) in steps of 20 cm (1.96 kPa). Each
calibration cycle took one day and a common reference for the
Rayleigh shift was taken at 140 cm (13.7 kPa) and 10.2 °C.
In order to discriminate the effect induced by pressure and
temperature, one single value of spectral shift is needed per each
chamber: thus, the sensor response has been evaluated consider-
ing the mean spectral shifts, 〈Δν〉R and 〈Δν〉E , calculated, respec-
tively, on a central section of 5 cm in the empty chamber and in a
section of 2 cm in the rubber, from its center to the inner disk. The
choice of such averaging window in the rubber chamber, moti-
vated by the presence of the aforementioned abnormal spikes in
the strain profile within the rubber, slightly reduces the pressure
sensitivity but guarantees a controllable temperature response.
Fig. 4 shows the results of the calibration tests where the
parametric plots in (a) and (b) refer to the mean Rayleigh shifts in
the rubber, 〈Δν〉R , and in the empty chamber, 〈Δν〉E , respectively.
The curves correspond to different temperature values and are
represented as a function of pressure. The expected behavior of
the Rayleigh shift is confirmed: the slope of mean Rayleigh shifts
as a function of pressure is negative in the rubber chamber whilst
it is positive in the empty one. Moreover, for a given pressure and
increasing temperature, both mean Rayleigh shifts decrease.
Mean pressure sensitivity, i.e. the mean curves slope, is ap-
proximately
2.18 GHz/kPa in the rubber and 3.17 GHz/kPa in the
empty chamber. By multiplying those values to the standard fiber
conversion factor for strain measurement ( − 6.67 με/GHz),
equivalent sensitivities of 14 με/kPa and −21 με/kPa are obtained,
respectively. Both values are smaller than the expected theoretical
one. Possible explanations are the limited lateral surface exposed
to pressure and the effects of bonding between rubber and case,
not considered in the model.
Temperature sensitivity is around −3.58 GHz/°C in the rubber

Fig. 4. Mean Rayleigh shifts in the rubber (a) and in the empty chamber (b) for different temperature values and varying pressures.
 L. Schenato et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 82 (2016) 57–62
Table 1
Calibration coefficients of the sensor: xi, j refers to the dependence of the x measurand (i.e. normalized pressure, p, or temperature, t) to the i-th power of 〈ΔνR 〉 and the j-th
power of 〈ΔνE 〉 and x0 is the offset of x.
x x0,0 x1,0 (GHz
1) x0,1 (GHz
1)
p 1.0092
0.0258 0.0085
t 1.0035
0.0109
0.0077
chamber and around −7.04 GHz/°C in the empty one. These values
are almost three and six times larger than the temperature sen-
sitivity typical of bare fibers. Equivalent sensitivities in terms of
thermal induced strain are calculated by multiplying the strain
conversion factor by the measured sensitivity and read circa
23.9 × 10−6 /°C and 47 × 10−6 /°C , respectively.
About the rubber chamber, the sensitivity so calculated is 30%
smaller than the theoretical one, while it is approximately 40%
larger than the theoretical one in the empty chamber. Reduced
temperature sensitivity of the fiber embedded in the rubber can be
explained considering the spiky response to temperature shown in
Fig. 3(b) close to the sensor end, which corresponds to a local
negative strain (i.e. contraction) of the fiber. Since it is the thermal
expansion of the entire aluminum case that drives the overall
elongation induced into the fiber, the response in the empty
chamber is boosted to compensate the one in the rubber chamber.
Curves of Fig. 4 also show that the relation between measurand
and spectral shifts is not linear. Therefore, we express the cali-
bration curves as:
x = x 0,0 + x1,0 〈ΔνR 〉 + x 0,1〈ΔνE 〉 + x1,1〈ΔνR 〉〈ΔνE 〉 + x2,0 〈ΔνR 〉2 + x 0,2 〈ΔνE 〉2 , (2)
where x is either P /P0 or T /T0 , P0 and T0 are the temperature and
pressure of the reference measure, respectively, and xn, m are the ca-
libration coefficients determined by least square fitting. Calibration
coefficients are summarized in Table 1. The corresponding tempera-
ture and pressure accuracy, estimated considering the root mean
squared errors of the fitting and the accuracy of electrical temperature
probe are 0.5°C and 0.3 kPa (approximately 3 cm of H2O), respectively.
The sensitivity and accuracy of the actual sensor fit the re-
quirements for pressure and temperature measurement in soil for
riverbank monitoring. The sensor response can however be further
improved by using a different polymer, with smaller Young mod-
ulus and better thermo-elastic properties. Further enhancement in
sensitivity may also come from the optimization of the inner disk
radius [10]. All these issues are currently under investigation with
the aim of boosting the accuracy up to less than 5 mm. An op-
portune removable porous outer case to enable the sole water
pressure measurement is also under development.
4. Conclusion
An optical fiber sensor for the measurement of hydrostatic
pressure and temperature in soil has been developed to the aim of
riverbank monitoring. The sensor exploits a dual chamber system:
a polymer cylinder filling one of the chambers converts the pres-
sure to strain exerted on the embedded fiber; another chamber,
empty, enables the simultaneous temperature measurement. A
prototype, built to validate the working principle, has been tested
and characterized: to this aim, an Optical Backscatter Re-
flectometer from Luna Technologies has been used, although the
implementation by fiber Bragg gratings is recommended for the
definitive sensor design. Eventually, prototype sensitivity and ac-
curacy to pressure and temperature befit the needs for pressure
and temperature measurements in riverbanks.
61
x1,1 (GHz
2) x2,0 (GHz
2) x0,2 (GHz
2)

1.21E
4 1.19E
4
1.56E
5
1.38E
5
3.02E
5 3.0E
6
Acknowledgments
Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Padova e Rovigo, under the
framework of Project of Excellence “Riversafe”, is acknowledged
for partial financial support. University of Padova is acknowledged
for having provided the OBR device under the project “Large
Equipments for Research”.
References
[1] E.W. Lane, Security from under-seepage-masonry dams on earth foundations,
Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 100 (1) (1935) 1235–1272.
[2] L.A. Ribeiro, J.B. Rosolem, D.C. Dini, C. Floridia, E.W. Bezerra, F.A. Cezar, M.D.
Loichate, A.S. Durelli, Optical fiber sensor for pressure measurement based on
elastomeric membrane and macrobending loss, in: Proceedings of SPIE, vol.
8439, 2012, 84390F-9.
[3] C. Rodrigues, D. Inaudi, F. Juneau, E. Pinet, Miniature fiber-optic MOMS pie-
zometer, Geotechn. News 28 (3) (2010) 24.
[4] Z. Zhou, H. Wang, J. Ou, A new kind of FBG-based soil-pressure sensor, in:
Optical Fiber Sensors 2006, Optical Society of America, 2006, Cancun Mexico,
paper ThE90.
[5] R. Correia, J. Li, S. Staines, E. Chehura, S.W. James, J. Kutner, P. Dewhurst, P.
Ferreira, R.P. Tatam, Fibre Bragg grating based effective soil pressure sensor for
geotechnical applications, in: 20th International Conference on Optical Fibre
Sensors, 2009.
[6] F.-Y. Chen, C. Li, E.-K. Chen, X. Xiong, Y.-N. Li, Dual-diaphragm fiber Bragg
grating soil pressure sensor, Yantu Lixue/Rock Soil Mech. 34 (11) (2013)
3340–3345.
[7] A. Méndez, E. Diatzikis, Fiber optic distributed pressure sensor based on
Brillouin scattering, in: Optical Fiber Sensors 2006, Optical Society of America,
2006, Cancun Mexico, paper ThE46.
[8] B. Budiansky, D.C. Drucker, G.S. Kino, J.R. Rice, Pressure sensitivity of a clad
optical fiber, Appl. Opt. 18 (24) (1979) 4085.
[9] M. Xu, L. Reekie, Y. Chow, J. Dakin, Optical in-fibre grating high pressure
sensor, Electron. Lett. 29 (4) (1993) 398–399.
[10] W.T. Zhang, F. Li, Y.L. Liu, L.H. Liu, Ultrathin FBG pressure sensor with enhanced
responsivity, IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 19 (19) (2007) 1553–1555.
[11] H.-J. Sheng, W.-F. Liu, K.-R. Lin, S.-S. Bor, M.-Y. Fu, High-sensitivity tempera-
ture-independent differential pressure sensor using fiber Bragg gratings, Opt.
Express 16 (20) (2008) 16013.
[12] F. Urban, J. Kadlec, R. Vlach, R. Kuchta, Design of a pressure sensor based on
optical fiber Bragg grating lateral deformation, Sensors 10 (12) (2010)
11212–11225.
[13] A.-B. Huang, J.-T. Lee, Y.-T. Ho, Y.-F. Chiu, S.-Y. Cheng, Stability monitoring of
rainfall-induced deep landslides through pore pressure profile measurements,
Soils Found. 52 (4) (2012) 737–747.
[14] W. Zhang, F. Li, Y. Liu, FBG pressure sensor based on the double shell cylinder
with temperature compensation, Measurement 42 (3) (2009) 408–411.
[15] F. Li, Y. Du, W. Zhang, F. Li, Fiber Bragg grating soil-pressure sensor based on
dual L-shaped levers, Opt. Eng. 52 (1) (2013) 014403.
[16] T. Fu, Y. Gong, Y. Wu, Y.-J. Rao, Y.-Y. Ma, W.-Q. Niu, Performance evaluation of
temperature-compensated FBG pressure sensor, in: International Symposium
on Photoelectronic Detection and Imaging 2013: Fiber Optic Sensors and
Optical Coherence Tomography, 2013.
[17] Y. Liu, Z. Guo, Y. Zhang, K.S. Chiang, X. Dong, Simultaneous pressure and
temperature measurement with polymer-coated fibre Bragg grating, Electron.
Lett. 36 (6) (2000) 564.
[18] Y. Zhang, D. Feng, Z. Liu, Z. Guo, X. Dong, K. Chiang, B. Chu, High-sensitivity
pressure sensor using a shielded polymer-coated fiber Bragg grating, IEEE
Photon. Technol. Lett. 13 (6) (2001) 618–619.
[19] H.-J. Sheng, M.-Y. Fu, T.-C. Chen, W.-F. Liu, S.-S. Bor, A lateral pressure sensor
using a fiber Bragg grating, IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 16 (4) (2004)
1146–1148.
[20] S. Zheng, X. Zhang, Simultaneous measurement of pressure and temperature
using a single fiber Bragg grating, PIERS Online 1 (4) (2005) 420–423.
[21] L. Liu, H. Zhang, Q. Zhao, Y. Liu, F. Li, Temperature-independent FBG pressure
sensor with high sensitivity, Opt. Fiber Technol. 13 (1) (2007) 78–80.
[22] Q. Wen, J. Zhu, X. Hua, Fiber grating pressure sensor with enhanced sensitivity
using a novel packaging polymer, in: 6th International Conference on
62 L. Schenato et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 82 (2016) 57–62

Electronic Packaging Technology, 2005. 32 (4) (1993) 762.

[23] P. Vengal Rao, K. Srimannarayana, M. Sai Shankar, P. Kishore, Polymer pack-
aged fiber grating pressure sensor with enhanced sensitivity, Int J. Optoelec-
tron. Eng. 4 (1) (2014) 1–5.
[24] J.S. Sirkis, Unified approach to phase-strain-temperature models for smart
structure interferometric optical fiber sensors: part 2, applications, Opt. Eng.
[25] P.K. Bachmann, D.U. Wiechert, T.P.M. Meeuwsen, Thermal expansion coeffi-
cients of doped and undoped silica prepared by means of PCVD, J. Mater. Sci.
23 (7) (1988) 2584–2588.
[26] L. Palmieri, L. Schenato, Distributed optical fiber sensing based on Rayleigh
scattering, Open Opt. J. 7 (2013) 104–127.