Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Next Article in Journal
Generalized Design, Modeling and Control Methodology for a Snake-like Aerial Robot
Next Article in Special Issue
Traffic Vibration Signal Analysis of DAS Fiber Optic Cables with Different Coupling Based on an Improved Wavelet Thresholding Method
Previous Article in Journal
Development of Deep Belief Network for Tool Faults Recognition
Previous Article in Special Issue
Ultra-High-Sensitivity, Miniaturized Fabry-Perot Interferometric Fiber-Optic Microphone for Weak Acoustic Signals Detection
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sensors
Volume 23
Issue 4
10.3390/s23041877
sensors-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Marine Structural Health Monitoring with Optical Fiber Sensors: A Review

by
Shimeng Chen
1,
Jiahui Wang
1,
Chao Zhang
1,
Mengqi Li
1,
Na Li
1,
Haojun Wu
1,
Yun Liu
2,
Wei Peng
2 and
Yongxin Song
1,*
1
Department of Marine Engineering, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026, China
2
School of Physics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2023, 23(4), 1877; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23041877
Submission received: 31 December 2022 / Revised: 1 February 2023 / Accepted: 4 February 2023 / Published: 7 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Optical Fiber Sensors: Challenges, Opportunities and Future Trends)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Real-time monitoring of large marine structures’ health, including drilling platforms, submarine pipelines, dams, and ship hulls, is greatly needed. Among the various kinds of monitoring methods, optical fiber sensors (OFS) have gained a lot of concerns and showed several distinct advantages, such as small size, high flexibility and durability, anti-electromagnetic interference, and high transmission rate. In this paper, three types of OFS used for marine structural health monitoring (SHM), including point sensing, quasi-distributed sensing, and distributed sensing, are reviewed. Emphases are given to the applicability of each type of the sensors by analyzing the operating principles and characteristics of the OFSs. The merits and demerits of different sensing schemes are discussed, as well as the challenges and future developments in OFSs for the marine SHM field.

1. Introduction

With the growing development of ocean resource exploitation, more and more marine infrastructure facilities and large structures, such as dams, bridges, submarine tunnels, oil and gas pipelines, and drilling platforms are being built. These facilities typically should have a lifespan of decades or even centuries. Due to the harsh marine environment, real-time structural health monitoring (SHM) and automatic data transmission are greatly needed towards eliminating potential hazards, improving the service life, and reducing maintenance costs. Hundreds and even thousands of sensors are usually needed to enable full-scale detection because of their huge sizes and super long spans (hm to km level) [1,2,3]. In addition, corrosion resistance, high pressure resistance, and extreme temperature variations are also the major issues to be considered for the monitoring systems in marine environments [4]. Traditionally, nondestructive SHM can be achieved by using the radioscope method [5], eddy current method [6], and Lamb wave method [7]. However, these methods require the use of expensive and large equipment. Recently, some other types of economical and light-based sensors, such as resistive strain gauges [8], piezoelectric elements [9,10], and optical fiber sensors (OFSs) [11,12,13,14,15,16,17], have been used for SHM.
As regards to the OFSs, they are advantageous on the aspects of small size, light weight, low power loss, anti-electromagnetic interference, corrosion resistance, extreme temperature resistance, and easy embedding [18,19,20,21] and thus show great potential for SHM in marine environments. This paper reviews the latest development and status of OFSs in the marine SHM field within the last ten years. It should be noted that while there are some review papers on optical fiber sensing, they are focused on marine environment detection, ocean observation, and ocean engineering [22,23,24]. For this review paper, emphases are given to the analysis, the characteristics, and applicable application scenarios in the marine SHM field of different types of OFSs. This review is organized into four sections. Following the introduction, Section 2 describes the classifications and principles of marine OFSs. Section 3 is narrowed down to the three most common typical marine OFSs (point sensing, quasi-distributed sensing, and distributed sensing). In this section, the working principles and latest applications of the different types of OFSs are summarized and reviewed in three sub-sections. In the Section 4, we give a conclusion and discuss a few market barriers associated with the OFSs’ application. Some future development proposals of OFSs in the marine SHM field are also put forward.

2. Classifications and Principles of Marine OFSs

Since the development of fiber optic technology by Charles Kao [25], fiber optic communication has developed at an amazing speed and has been widely applied. With the development of optoelectronic components, OFS has gradually attracted extensive attentions. The optical fiber is a kind of optical waveguide, which is made of silica or plastic with a large refractive index inside and a small refractive index outside that can be used as a light conduction tool. To provide mechanical protection for optical fibers, they are usually wrapped in a plastic coating. External perturbations will change the behavior of the light transmitted in the fiber core. For fiber optic communications, this external perturbation effect should be minimized. In contrast, the external induced effects are intentionally amplified for optical fiber sensing technology. The characteristic parameters of light (wavelength, intensity, phase, or polarization state) change as light travels through the fiber. As a variety of sensors such as temperature, pressure, displacement, strain, acceleration, and gyro, OFSs have been applied in many fields such as biomedicine [26], aerospace [27], the petrochemical industry [28], and so on.
Any marine sensor must be resistant to high pressure and extreme temperatures. Commercial optical fiber made of silica material can withstand pressures of approximately 2 × 105 Psi and can withstand extreme temperatures ranging from −170 °C to 900 °C, approximately [29,30,31]. In addition, the single-ended OFS operation makes it ideal for conducting on-site marine inspections. Despite all these advantages, OFSs still have challenges in oceanography. Bio-fouling and corrosion must be considered for underwater sensors. In order to protect the optical fiber from environmental damage and interference, marine OFSs are usually packaged with materials such as steel and carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic [32].
In the SHM field, OFSs are usually classified by the spatial distribution of the measured objects, as shown in Figure 1. OFSs can be classified as:
(i)
Optical fiber point sensors, used for measuring the discrete points, that mainly include fiber Bragg grating (FBG) sensors [33,34] and interferometric sensors [35,36,37] in marine health monitoring. Since FBG sensors can present multiplexing capabilities for quasi-distributed sensors, its principle is described separately in Section 3.2. In Section 3.1, we mainly introduce the principle of interference sensors in detail.
(ii)
The quasi-distributed sensor used for measuring is a set of regularly distributed spatial discrete points. As mentioned above, FBG is a point-like sensor with a small gauge length and can be used for single-point sensing. The FBG sensor has developed rapidly ever since the basic physics effect of FBG sensing was discovered. FBG based on the wavelength division multiplex (WDM) principle could realize the multiplexed arrays due to ultra-narrow spectral bandwidth. The quasi-distributed FBG sensing network connects multiple FBGs together using signal transmission fibers. It is one of the most popular wavelength-modulated sensors [38].
(iii)
The distributed sensor is used to be continuously monitored in space. Different from point or quasi-distributed sensing, the distributed optical fiber sensors (DOFSs) can realize the detection of thousands of sensing points and offer the possibility of measuring variations along the entire optical fiber. DOFS can obtain test data in the spatial domain across a large distance by optical signal processing of backscattered light induced at any point located on the sensing fiber. DOFS mainly includes reflection, wavelength scanning, and interference methods. The reflection method is one of the most popular methods to measure the backscattering light in the process of optical fiber transmission, mainly including two different types: optical frequency domain reflectometry (OFDR) [39,40] and optical time domain reflectometry (OTDR) [41,42].
Sensors 23 01877 g001 550
Figure 1. Overview of optical fiber sensing technologies for the SHM.
Figure 1. Overview of optical fiber sensing technologies for the SHM.
Sensors 23 01877 g001
Among them, the optical fiber interferometer, FBG sensor, and DOFS are the most widely applied in the marine SHM field. The following sections focus on these OFSs in the SHM of marine infrastructure and geomorphology.

3. Typical Applications of OFSs for Marine SHM

3.1. Point Sensing (Interferometer)

The optical fiber interference sensor is one of the most sensitive fiber sensors, mainly including the Fabry–Perot interferometer (FPI) [43], Mach Zehnder interferometer (MZI) [44], Michelson interferometer [45], and Sagnac interferometers [46,47]. MZI and FPI are the most used in the marine SHM field.

3.1.1. Working Principles

MZI is an optical device used to detect the relative phase-shift changes between two collimating beams produced by splitting light from a source using the beam splitter. For typical optical fiber MZI, there are normally two independent fiber arms including the measuring arm and the reference arm [48,49,50], as shown in Figure 2a. Owing to the new technology of optical fiber micromachining, many in-line MZI configurations have been used [51,52,53,54,55]. The in-line optical fiber MZI could be based on a variety of micro-structured fiber sensing elements, as shown in Figure 2b [37,44,55]. This in-line approach allows the interferometer to be miniaturized and integrated. FPI is an interference cavity, and it is possible obtain the multiple superpositions of reflected and transmitted beams from the two reflectors. Common optical fiber FPIs are formed by making reflectors inside or outside of the fiber depending on the structure of the interferometric cavity [56,57]. They are usually classified into extrinsic FPIs (EFPI) or intrinsic FPIs (IFPI) [58,59], as shown in Figure 2c. In addition, the reflecting surface can also be the interfaces between two dielectrics or even Bragg gratings [60,61,62].

3.1.2. Applications

Optical fiber interferometers have been successfully used in applications by measuring changes of the optical cavity’s parameters. The optical cavity can be active (integrating a fiber laser sensor) [63,64,65] or passive (detecting the external parameters) [51,66,67,68,69,70]. As shown in Figure 3, commercial optical fiber MZI can be found from some companies, such as Optiphase Inc. (Berkeley, California, United States) and Thorlabs Inc. (Newton, New Jersey, United States) [71,72]. Many companies can offer commercial optical fiber FPI, such as Luna Inc. (Roanoke, Virginia, United States) and Fiso Inc. (Quebec, Canada) [73,74]. Many applications for measuring various types of parameters (strain, pressure, vibration, temperature, etc.) have been proposed using optical fiber interferometers due to their high sensitivity. However, this review paper is focused on marine SHM applications.
Through the detection of deep-sea pressure, underwater temperature, seabed sound waves, and so on, the optical fiber interferometer can realize the SHM of marine geomorphology (such as tsunamis and earthquakes) [75,76,77,78,79,80], submarine cables [81,82,83,84], offshore platforms [85,86,87], and other marine structures.
Marra et al. [75] produced a laser based on FP cavities, which is an ultralow expansion cavity. The light from the FP laser was injected at one end of the submarine link with an optical fiber pair. Different optical fibers correspond to different propagation directions, as shown in Figure 4. At the far end of the submarine link, two optical fibers are connected to form a loop so that the light returns to the transmitter. By measuring the phase difference of the returned optical signals and injected light source using a photodetector, the authors realized the detection of local and remote earthquakes. Furthermore, monitoring the seawater pressure also can detect tsunamis and earthquakes [88]. Qi et al. [76] proposed a small-size marine pressure measuring system including an ultra-high pressure optical fiber FP interferometer and miniaturized phase demodulating system. Pressure fatigue and hydrostatic pressure were tested in order to meet the requirements of marine pressure-testing applications. The experimental results showed that this sensor can steadily work in the range of 2–120 MPa for a long time. This sensing system can meet the requirements of pressure measurements throughout the ocean and can be applied to the ocean-profiling measurement program named the Argo plan. Duraibabu et al. [77] reported a novel miniature extrinsic FP interferometer for accurate measurement of marine pressure, which was mechanically robust, corrosion resistant, and suitable for underwater detection. This FP sensing system was mounted on a remotely operated underwater vehicle (ROV) to detect the pressure variation by online monitoring the reflected optical spectrum. The operating performances of this sensor exceed those of commercial ROV-mounted sensors, such as accuracy (25 mm) and resolution (5 mm). In addition, fiber optic hydrophones based on the interference principle can be used for SHM through acoustic sensing. It is very suitable for SHM with the slot type damage, such as underwater earthquake and pipeline leakage [89,90,91]. For example, Jin et al. [79] discussed and validated a fiber optic vector hydrophone based on FP interferometry. This vector hydrophone combined the advantages of small size, low cost, and high reliability.
With the continuous development of global communications, gigameters of submarine cables encircle the global seabed. As an important infrastructure, it is very important to monitor the damage and temperature of submarine cable. At present, the submarine cables are typically submerged to a depth of several kilometers in the deep sea [92,93]. The submarine optical fiber composite cable unit has been developed rapidly because it can realize cable monitoring while transmitting power without increasing the cost [94]. Gao et al. [81] designed an online monitoring system based on a bidirectional MZ interferometer for submarine cable. Different optical fibers inside the submarine cable were selected as the sensing arms of the MZ interferometer. During the vibration positioning tests, the submarine cable was placed in the cable pool, as shown in Figure 5. The authors knocked on different locations of submarine cable at different depths and real-time monitored the sensing response signals. The experimental results showed that this MZ interferometric sensor system can effectively monitor the vibration events of submarine cables, and the average positioning error was 13.23 m. Wang et al. [84] reported a double MZ distributed optical fiber sensing technology for monitoring submarine cables. The MZ vibration sensing system is designed both in software and hardware. An optimized measuring scheme was put forward in anticipation of the possible problem of false alarm in the future application of the monitoring system.
For the past few decades, the OFS application in the gas and oil industry has grown substantially. It has been used for monitoring offshore platforms (such as pipelines and downholes) by detecting the temperature, the pressure, and so on. Among them, optical fiber interferometers have been widely applied for the detection of pipeline leakage and downhole pressure [85,86,87]. However, they have become commercialized on drilling platforms without revolutionary technological innovations in the past ten years.
Due to the local single-point sensing characteristics, optical fiber FP interferometers are mainly focused on submarine earthquakes, and optical fiber MZ interferometers are mainly focused on submarine cables. The OFSs based on interferometers and corresponding main marine monitoring contents are presented in Table 1.

3.2. Quasi-Distributed Sensing (WDM-FBG)

Quasi-distributed sensing technology can realize multi-point simultaneous detection. In the optical fiber sensing field, the quasi-distributed sensing usually refers to WDM-FBG technology.

3.2.1. Working Principle

FBG is formed by inducing a periodic RI perturbation along the length of the fiber core [95,96]. As a selective optical filter, FBG could reflect a part of the incident with the selected wavelength while the rest of the incident light passes through. The Bragg wavelength is related to the grating period, which is altered by tension or compression (such as mechanical or thermal loads). In general, the quasi-distributed optical fiber sensing system is actually a multiplexing system of multiple discrete OFSs, including WDM, time division multiplexing, frequency division multiplexing, and space division multiplexing. The WDM-FBG sensing system can be realized by writing several FBGs with different periods and/or effective RI in the same fiber. Figure 6 shows that the WDM-FBG sensor can clearly distinguish different Bragg wavelengths using the same optical fiber line. The in-line optical connection property of FBG makes it feasible to build up fiber optic sensing networks [97].

3.2.2. Applications

Unlike the local point sensors, quasi-distributed sensors are suitable for monitoring large structures because there is no need to install transmission fibers at each test site separately [98]. Due to its reliability and robustness, the WDM-FBG sensor has revealed great application potential at quasi-distributed sensing fields of temperature, strain, pressure, and ultrasound detection [99,100,101,102]. As shown in Figure 7, FBG is one of the most mature OFSs at present, and many companies sell photoelectric products or transducers based on FBG sensing technology, such as Roctest Inc. (Saint-Lambert, Canada) and HBM Fibersensing Inc. (Darmsdart, Germany) [103,104]. At present, the quasi-distributed FBG sensors have already been applied in a wide range of industries. SHM is the most active area of application for quasi-distributed FBG sensors [105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113]. Several FBG sensing elements could be embedded or attached to the monitoring structures and connected to an optical fiber sensing network. At present, more than half of the SHM-OFS projects have opted for quasi-distributed FBG sensors [114]. This paper focuses on the marine SHM field. FBG sensors have demonstrated superior performance in the long-term real-time health monitoring of marine areas.
Due to its characteristics of multi-point monitoring, a quasi-distributed FBG sensor can realize the health monitoring of marine structures such as drilling platforms [112,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124], submarine pipelines [116,125,126,127], bridges [3,128,129,130,131,132,133], dams [134,135,136,137], and hulls [15,138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145].
Compared with the traditional sensors, FBG sensors offer the possibility of strain and temperature measurements under some harsh conditions, for example, of 20–200 °C temperature [146,147] and 0.1–100 MPa pressure [148,149]. Therefore, FBG sensors with good stability and large operating range can be used for long-term downhole monitoring. Xu et al. [115] developed an FBG-based bundle-structure riser stress-monitoring sensor to meet the requirements of riser safety monitoring in offshore oil fields. A 49-day marine test in water depths of 1365 m and 1252 m was carried out on the “HYSY-981” ocean oil drilling platform. This sensor was installed on the risers without welding and pasting, making the installation convenient, reliable, and harmless to the risers. The testing results agreed basically with the mechanical simulation results. Wang et al. [119] explored different FBG packaging materials applied in the offshore drilling platform in the salt-fog environment. Authors chose corrosion-resistant packaging materials (FR-4 epoxy board, sheet molding compound, and sheet molding compound) for the FBG sensing element and realized the improvement of corrosion resistance and sensitivity of the sensing system. This work offered useful information for OFS development in the marine SHM field. The dynamic response of the submarine oil pipeline under external force or seismic excitation is a coupled vibration of liquid and solid interaction. Due to its advantages of being explosion proof and having high accuracy, the FBG sensor is suitable for monitoring the response caused submarine pipeline leakage. Cabral et al. [127] demonstrated an approach to monitoring a pipeline’s bonded joints during assembly and operation using FBG sensors embedded into the joints’ adhesive layer. This approach was shown to be adequate to monitor the assembly of the joints and the pipelines, effectively covering all stages of the pipeline’s lifecycle. This work can find wide use for monitoring plastic and composite pipelines that make use of adhesive-bonded joints. Zhou et al. [125] experimentally studied the dynamic characteristics of FBG sensors and commercial strain gauges fixed to the underwater pipeline. The theoretical and experimental results showed that the FBG sensor was superior to a commercial strain gauge and satisfied the dynamic monitoring requirements of submarine pipeline.
FBG sensors have shown good performance for marine SHM of civil engineering composite structures, ensuring their structural reliability, durability, and integrity. The real-time SHM of long-span bridges is one of the most representative applications for FBG sensors [150,151]. Yan et al. [3] designed the SHM system for the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge. In total, 277 sensors were installed on the section of the Qingzhou Shipping Channel Bridge, with the largest including a lot of FBG temperature sensors and FBG strain sensors in different locations. For this monitoring system, the FBG sensors possessed good time-frequency resolution compared with other types of sensors. Hu et al. [131] developed an FBG vibration sensor for online monitoring of the cable vibration characteristics of Tongwamen Bridge. The monitored vibration frequency was converted into cable force according to the string vibration theory. The FBG arrays were mounted symmetrically on 8 of 19 cables to achieve an indirect measurement of bridge cable force. In addition, an FBG liquid-level system as the SHM-OFS has been used in large infrastructures [152]. For example, Rodrigues et al. [128] applied FBG liquid-level sensors to concrete bridges. This methodology is based on a hydrostatic leveling system and the application of the communicating vessels principle to an internal hydraulic system, which is installed along the structure and reaches the relevant points wherein the relative vertical displacement is going to be measured. This sensing system with a total of 30 optical-based strain transducers was successfully applied for the Lezíria Bridge.
Similar to bridges, dams are also the common application area for FBG sensors due to their enormous size. In recent years, many hydro power plants were operated by pumped storage, which requires additional equipment available for monitoring. An FBG-based monitoring system was reported by Monsberger et al. [134] and successfully installed inside a hydro power dam. This FBG sensing system possessed a very high spatial resolution (millimeter level) by using an optical backscatter reflectometer. As shown in Figure 8a, there were 15 concrete joints with FBG sensing elements in one of the maintenance corridors, and the whole measuring chain was divided into three separate chains. The FBG sensing unit for each link was mounted above the manual measurement bolt and can be measured individually (Figure 8b). The experimental results demonstrate that the optical backscatter reflectance method is suitable for analyzing FBG networks. Regina et al. [137] designed an FBG-based inclinometer for landslide monitoring in dams. By detecting lateral displacements, the cubic spline interpolation method was used to reconstruct the tube profile. The testing results showed a good agreement between the curve reconstruction and the plotted data of field measurements.
The military, such as the United States Navy, has shown great interest in the OFS application for ships [153,154]. Among the OFSs, the FBG sensor has received a lot of attention because it can be used for SHM in composite-hulled crafts. Komoriyama et al. [138] used FBG pressure sensors for hull structural strength evaluation. The towing tank test was carried out with an elastic ship model to investigate the FBG reliability for strength evaluation. By installing FBG sensors outside and inside the hull, the authors obtained actual water pressure. Furthermore, the vertical bending moment was obtained by interpolation algorithm and finite element analysis. The interpolation algorithm for pressure on the hull’s surface illustrated that point A was interpolated by using that of points 1 to 4 in Figure 9. The test results verified that the water pressure measurement based on the FBG sensor was effective in evaluating the strength of hull structural strength. Temperature monitoring is very important to evaluate the thermodynamic performance of the auxiliary machinery, piping, and chillers of traditional ships or hydrogen and natural gas storage tanks of new energy ships. The FBG sensor has promoted the development of the hull safety monitoring system for the past few years. Han et al. [139] employed FBG sensing technology to monitor the temperature of a cryogenic storage tank, pipeline, and water chiller. Through a series of experiments in a wide temperature range, the FBG sensors with temperature-sensitive metal coating materials were proved to have better reliability for long-term temperature measurements and higher safety than those of the traditional thermistors. In addition, other interference parameters, such as humidity and vibration, had little impact on the temperature response of FBG. This work provided supports and references for the safety performance test platform of the ship.
Considering quasi-distributed sensing characteristics, the above examples demonstrated that FBG sensors are particularly suitable for the large-size marine SHM of offshore platforms, bridges, dams, hulls, etc. OFSs based on the WDM-FBG and corresponding main marine monitoring contents are presented in Table 2.

3.3. Distributed Sensing (DOFS)

For distributed sensing systems, scattered signals can be used for monitoring along the entire length of the fiber. DOFS serves as both a transmission fiber and transducer in the sensing system, which is one of the best potential applications of optical fiber sensing technology.

3.3.1. Working Principle

When a ray, which could be of any wavelength, is emitted into an optical fiber, most of the light travels through the fiber, while a small fraction is backscattered. The property information of the optical fiber affected by the environment can be provided by the backscattered light. There are three different basic scattering theories for DOFS: linear Rayleigh scattering [155], nonlinear Raman scattering [156], or Brillouin scattering [157]. The scattered light can be categorized into the three wave bands, and the schematic spectra are shown in Figure 10. Rayleigh scattered light possesses the same wavelength as the light source, whereas wavelengths of scattered light shift for Brillouin and Raman. Rayleigh scattering in DOFS technology is primarily employed to test propagation effects (such as attenuation and gain, polarization variation, or phase interference). So, Rayleigh scattered light in optical fiber is sensitive to fiber deformation and variation of temperature or magnetic field. DOFS-based Rayleigh scattering is widely applied in strain [158] and temperature [159] measurement. Raman scattering induces a frequency shift interrelated with the stretching modes between atoms, which depends on the temperature variation [160]. The temperature dependencies of Stokes and anti-Stokes Raman scattering are described in Figure 10 [161]. This makes DOFS sensitive to temperature change. DOFS based on Raman scattering is usually applied in distributed temperature sensing (DTS) using the OTDR or OFDR method [162,163,164,165]. Brillouin scattering is intrinsically dependent on the fiber density, which in turn depends on temperature and strain, since Brillouin scattering can be applied for temperature and strain DOFSs [166,167].

3.3.2. Applications

In addition to the advantages of optical fiber sensing, an additional benefit associated with DOFS is that it requires only a single connected optical cable to communicate data, in contrast to the large number of optical cables required for discrete OFSs. DOFS serves as a unique single-ended monitoring technique that uses the backscattered light of the fiber to feed back the performance of the fiber. It can provide a global behavior of the large-scale structure, rather than extrapolation from a finite number of measurement points. Several companies have realized the commercialization of DOFS, such as Sensornet Inc. (Watford, United Kingdom), Neubrex Inc. (Kobe, Japan), OZ Optics Inc. (Ottawa, ON, Canada), and Smartec Inc. (Manno, Switzerland), as shown in Figure 11 [168,169,170,171]. DOFS has been widely applied in the measurement of temperature, strain, and vibration, especially in the field of marine structural health monitoring.
Because DOFSs can realize remote and continuous sensing, they can most commonly realize the SHM of underwater cables [172,173,174,175,176,177,178,179], oil and gas pipelines [176,180,181,182,183,184], and dams and tunnels [185,186,187,188,189].
Recent developments of DOFS allow the monitoring of up to 300 km by using optical amplifiers. This means DOFSs are well suited for detecting long-distance submarine cables. Chen et al. [172,173] established a Brillouin optical time domain analysis (BOTDA) distributed optical fiber monitoring system for monitoring the temperature of high-pressure oil-filled submarine cables by bundling the optical cables and power cables together. The sensing system setup and installation method are shown in Figure 12. The special sealing and joint structures were designed to meet the accuracy calculation method and monitoring system based on the onshore simulation platform. In addition, the optimized sensing system was used on the 500 kV submarine cable of the Hainan networking system to monitor sudden temperature changes caused by instantaneous overload and external losses. Huang et al. [174] established the all-fiber BOTDA monitoring system to monitor the surface temperature of submarine cables. Authors measured the conductor current by using an optical fiber current transducer and calculated the conductor temperature of the submarine cable. Compared to traditional current sensors, the optical fiber current transducer only monitored the cable conductor current, which can eliminate the effects caused by long-distance overhead lines and compensating reactor. This is a good way to achieve performance optimization that was used in the Hainan interconnection project. For monitoring shock events of submarine cables, Fouda et al. [175] used phase-sensitive OTDR to detect vibration signals from the optical fiber on cables. The vibrational pattern recognition of optical fibers was implemented by using time-frequency domain features and a support vector machine to determine the magnitude of the event. A lot of experimental data showed that this method can effectively identify the disturbance events of submarine cables. DOFS applications in temperature and vibration monitoring of submarine cables are important for the reliability of submarine cable operation.
Similarly, the application of DOFS to long-distance pipelines in the oil and gas industry is of great interest and has therefore seen a substantial increase. Feo et al. [180] presented pioneering investigation in the DOFS application for monitoring risers. This team conducted well-level experiments by simulating an offshore riser environment. The downhole distributed sensor involving optical fiber DTS and distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) was instrumented on the experimental setup by using metallic clamps. For flexible riser monitoring, DOFS could be installed on one of the metal rods to form an umbilical. DOFS can provide real-time and accurate monitoring data for the sake of effective well control. In order to implement subsea pipeline (1.3 km long) installation inspection, Cementys company [181] designed a SensoluxTM sensor based on Raman and Brillouin OTDR. This sensor cable contains four optical fibers to measure the Raman scatterings (temperature) and the Brillouin scatterings (strain and temperature). For protecting the optical cables, they were glued into grooves in the concrete surrounding the metallic pipe. By measuring the strain conditions of the pipeline during different steps (such as lay or tow), the pipeline could be certificated. In addition, Inaudi and Glisic [182] proposed a successful application of DOFS monitoring of a gas pipeline near Rimini, Italy. DOFS could measure thousands of points along a single fiber and possesses unique features compared with traditional technology. It is great for monitoring oil and gas pipelines and optimizing oil production.
SHM systems based on DOFS are also very valuable in dams and subsea tunnels. Imai et al. [185] installed the Brillouin optical correlation domain analysis (BOCDA) around the interior circumference of the aqueduct tunnel and real-time monitored strain distribution. Figure 13 shows the aqueduct tunnel of a hydropower plant and the DOFS installed in the retrofitted tunnel. The fiber cable was attached in the trench of concrete lining by use of epoxy adhesive. The fiber cable was wired out to the end of the tunnel and connected to an optical analyzer. By calculating the cross-section deformation, continuous monitoring of tunnel convergence could be realized. This method avoided power outages and drainage operations. Similarly, Wang et al. [186] monitored Nanjing Yangtze Shield Tunnel for 55 days using optimized DOFS. The sensing elements installed on the 90-m-long tunnel ring successfully monitored temperature and strain. Pumped-storage power stations are subject to external forces and environmental erosion. It is necessary to perform long-term SHM for avoiding economic loss and safety hazards. Liang et al. [187] installed the DOFS on the dam construction site of the Liaoning Qingyuan pumped storage station to monitor the temperature during the concrete curing process. The monitoring results successfully revealed the temperature variation of the concrete curing process.
Based on the intrinsic characteristics of DOFS, it is well-suited to detect the determinants with large spatial size and large span, especially the submarine cables, pipelines, and tunnels. OFSs based on the DOFSs and corresponding main marine monitoring contents are presented in Table 3.

4. Conclusions and Outlooks

Three types of typical OFSs (optical fiber interferometers, WDM-FBG sensors, and DOFSs) for marine SHM are discussed in this paper. Compared to other marine SHM methods, OFSs show superior performances in monitoring structural strain, stress, vibration, temperature, displacement, etc. It should be noted that the applications of OFSs in the marine field are still under-developed and have some challenges and great potential, from both theoretical and engineering aspects.
(a)
Novel optical fiber sensing structures and new smart materials are greatly needed for continually improving the detection sensitivity. They are the main avenues of designing new optical fiber sensing structures or fabricating optical fibers using new materials or technologies to be increased. Furthermore, combining machine-learning algorithms to improve the performance of optical fiber sensing systems is a major current approach.
(b)
Artificial intelligence should be paid more and more attention to for solving the cross-talking problems, such as solving the multi-parameter cross-sensitivity by combining artificial intelligence and machine learning. Traditionally, these problems were solved by using additional sensing elements to measure the interference parameter. Using artificial intelligence, the effective signal could be separated from the mixed optical signals more cheaply and efficiently.
(c)
Development on the installation techniques is greatly desired. The installation of OFSs for deep-sea marine structures is very difficult due to the inapproachable deep-sea environment for human beings. For optical fiber point sensors, the combination of OFSs and ROV for measurement will be the trend in the marine SHM field; for quasi-distributed and distributed fiber sensors, seismo-acoustic sensors using existing fiber optic seafloor telecom cables have great potential. Combining FOSs with existing submarine cables is a growing trend.
(d)
There are also many perturbations in the harsh ocean environment, especially the external damage caused from different sources. How to protect the fragile fibers from damage while bettering transfer deformation, vibration, and other information requires further improvements in fiber packaging technology.
It is believed that with the continued development of the optical fiber sensing technologies, OFSs are expected to play more and more important roles in marine SHM in the near future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.S.; methodology, S.C.; investigation, J.W., C.Z., N.L. and H.W.; writing—original draft preparation, S.C.; writing—review and editing, M.L., Y.L. and Y.S.; funding acquisition, S.C. and W.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 62205044) and the Dalian Science and Technology Talent Innovation Support Project (grant number 2022RQ009).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sielski, R.A. Ship Structural Health Monitoring Research at the Office of Naval Research. JOM 2012, 64, 823–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Cheung, M.S.; Tadros, G.S.; Brown, T.; Dilger, W.H.; Ghali, A.; Lau, D.T. Field Monitoring and Research on Performance of the Confederation Bridge. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 1997, 24, 951–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Yan, Y.; Mao, X.; Wang, X.; Yu, X.; Fang, L. Design and Implementation of a Structural Health Monitoring System for a Large Sea-Crossing Project with Bridges and Tunnel. Shock Vib. 2019, 2019, 2832089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Prabowo, A.R.; Tuswan, T.; Ridwan, R. Advanced Development of Sensors’ Roles in Maritime-based Industry and Research: From Field Monitoring to High-risk Phenomenon Measurement. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Demetgul, M.; Senyurek, V.Y.; Uyandik, R.; Tansel, I.N.; Yazicioglu, O. Evaluation of the Health of Riveted Joints with Active and Passive Structural Health Monitoring Techniques. Measurement 2015, 69, 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Arjun, V.; Sasi, B.; Rao, B.P.C.; Mukhopadhyay, C.K.; Jayakumar, T. Optimisation of Pulsed Eddy Current Probe for Detection of Sub-Surface Defects in Stainless Steel Plates. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2015, 226, 69–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Li, F.; Peng, H.; Meng, G. Quantitative Damage Image Construction in Plate Structures Using a Circular PZT Array and Lamb Waves. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2014, 214, 66–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Li, X.D.; Li, S.L.; Zhong, S.L.; Ge, S. Comparison Analysis of Fiber Bragg Grating and Resistance Strain Gauge Used in Quayside Container Crane Structural Health Monitoring. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2013, 330, 485–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Qing, X.P.; Chan, H.L.; Beard, S.J.; Ooi, T.K.; Marotta, S.A. Effect of Adhesive on the Performance of Piezoelectric Elements Used to Monitor Structural Health. Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 2006, 26, 622–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zou, F.; Benedetti, I.; Aliabadi, M.H. A Boundary Element Model for Structural Health Monitoring Using Piezoelectric Transducers. Smart Mater. Struct. 2014, 23, 015022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Leung, C.K.Y.; Wan, K.T.; Inaudi, D.; Bao, X.; Habel, W.; Zhou, Z.; Ou, J.; Ghandehari, M.; Wu, H.C.; Imai, M. Review: Optical Fiber Sensors for Civil Engineering Applications. Mater. Struct. Constr. 2015, 48, 871–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Rajeev, P.; Kodikara, J.; Chiu, W.K.; Kuen, T. Distributed Optical Fibre Sensors and Their Applications in Pipeline Monitoring. Key Eng. Mater. 2013, 558, 424–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. García, I.; Zubia, J.; Durana, G.; Aldabaldetreku, G.; Illarramendi, M.A.; Villatoro, J. Optical Fiber Sensors for Aircraft Structural Health Monitoring. Sensors 2015, 15, 15494–15519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Wang, C.; Shang, Y.; Liu, X.-H.; Wang, C.; Yu, H.-H.; Jiang, D.-S.; Peng, G.-D. Distributed OTDR-Interferometric Sensing Network with Identical Ultra-Weak Fiber Bragg Gratings. Opt. Express 2015, 23, 29038–29046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Tan, C.H.; Shee, Y.G.; Yap, B.K.; Adikan, F.R.M. Fiber Bragg Grating Based Sensing System: Early Corrosion Detection for Structural Health Monitoring. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2016, 246, 123–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hong, C.Y.; Zhang, Y.F.; Li, G.W.; Zhang, M.X.; Liu, Z.X. Recent Progress of Using Brillouin Distributed Fiber Optic Sensors for Geotechnical Health Monitoring. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2017, 258, 131–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Pei, H.-F.; Yin, J.-H.; Jin, W. Development of Novel Optical Fiber Sensors for Measuring Tilts and Displacements of Geotechnical Structures. Meas. Sci. Technol. 2013, 24, 095202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Villalba, S.; Casas, J.R. Application of Optical Fiber Distributed Sensing to Health Monitoring of Concrete Structures. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2013, 39, 441–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Di Sante, R. Fibre Optic Sensors for Structural Health Monitoring of Aircraft Composite Structures: Recent Advances and Applications. Sensors 2015, 15, 18666–18713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ye, X.W.; Su, Y.H.; Han, J.P. Structural Health Monitoring of Civil Infrastructure Using Optical Fiber Sensing Technology: A Comprehensive Review. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 652329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Rodríguez, G.; Casas, J.R.; Villalba, S. SHM by DOFS in Civil Engineering: A Review. Struct. Monit. Maint. 2015, 2, 357–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kumari, C.R.U.; Samiappan, D.; Kumar, R.; Sudhakar, T. Fiber Optic Sensors in Ocean Observation: A Comprehensive Review. Optik 2019, 179, 351–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Cui, H.; Yu, M.; Chang, T.; Chen, J.; Zhao, E.; Zheng, Y.; Liu, Y.; Zhou, T. Fiber Optic Sensing Technology for Applications in Marine Environment and Marine Engineering. Jilin Daxue Xuebao (Diqiu Kexue Ban)/J. Jilin Univ. (Earth Sci. Ed.) 2017, 47, 279–293. [Google Scholar]
  24. Min, R.; Liu, Z.; Pereira, L.; Yang, C.; Sui, Q.; Marques, C. Optical Fiber Sensing for Marine Environment and Marine Structural Health Monitoring: A Review. Opt. Laser Technol. 2021, 140, 107082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hecht, J. The Remarkable Fiber Optic Vision of Charles Kao. Opt. Photonics News 2019, 30, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhao, Y.; Tong, R.; Xia, F.; Peng, Y. Current Status of Optical Fiber Biosensor Based on Surface Plasmon Resonance. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2019, 142, 111505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Minakuchi, S.; Takeda, N. Recent Advancement in Optical Fiber Sensing for Aerospace Composite Structures. Photonic Sensors 2013, 3, 345–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhang, Y.; Keiser, G.; Marzinsky, C.; Schilowitz, A.M.; Song, L.; Herhold, A.B. Applications of Optical Fiber Sensors in the Oil Refining and Petrochemical Industries. In Proceedings of the IEEE Sensors, Limerick, Ireland, 28–31 October 2011; pp. 246–249. [Google Scholar]
  29. Teague, J.; Allen, M.J.; Scott, T.B. The Potential of Low-Cost ROV for Use in Deep-Sea Mineral, Ore Prospecting and Monitoring. Ocean Eng. 2018, 147, 333–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Roriz, P.; Frazão, O.; Lobo-Ribeiro, A.B.; Santos, J.L.; Simões, J.A. Review of Fiber-Optic Pressure Sensors for Biomedical and Biomechanical Applications. J. Biomed. Opt. 2013, 18, 050903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gupta, S.; Mizunami, T.; Yamao, T.; Shimomura, T. Fiber Bragg Grating Cryogenic Temperature Sensors. Appl. Opt. 1996, 35, 5202–5205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wang, H.; Jiang, L.; Xiang, P. Improving the Durability of the Optical Fiber Sensor Based on Strain Transfer Analysis. Opt. Fiber Technol. 2018, 42, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hong, C.-Y.; Zhang, Y.-F.; Zhang, M.-X.; Leung, L.M.G.; Liu, L.-Q. Application of FBG Sensors for Geotechnical Health Monitoring, a Review of Sensor Design, Implementation Methods and Packaging Techniques. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2016, 244, 184–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Riza, M.A.; Go, Y.I.; Harun, S.W.; Maier, R.R.J. FBG Sensors for Environmental and Biochemical Applications—A Review. IEEE Sens. J. 2020, 20, 7614–7627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhu, T.; Wu, D.; Liu, M.; Duan, D.W. In-Line Fiber Optic Interferometric Sensors in Single-Mode Fibers. Sensors 2012, 12, 10430–10449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Huang, Y.W.; Tao, J.; Huang, X.G. Research Progress on F-P Interference-Based Fiber-Optic Sensors. Sensors 2016, 16, 1424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zhao, Y.; Zhao, H.; Lv, R.Q.; Zhao, J. Review of Optical Fiber Mach–Zehnder Interferometers with Micro-Cavity Fabricated by Femtosecond Laser and Sensing Applications. Opt. Lasers Eng. 2019, 117, 7–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kersey, A.D.; Davis, M.A.; Berkoff, T.A.; Bellemore, D.G.; Koo, K.P.; Jones, R.T. Progress toward the Development of Practical Fiber Bragg Grating Instrumentation Systems. Fiber Opt. Laser Sensors XIV 1996, 2839, 40–63. [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhou, D.-P.; Qin, Z.; Li, W.; Chen, L.; Bao, X. Distributed Vibration Sensing with Time-Resolved Optical Frequency-Domain Reflectometry. Opt. Express 2012, 20, 13138–13145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Soller, B.J.; Gifford, D.K.; Wolfe, M.S.; Froggatt, M.E. High Resolution Optical Frequency Domain Reflectometry for Characterization of Components and Assemblies. Opt. Express 2005, 13, 666–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Rogers, A.J. Polarisation Optical Time Domain Reflectometry. Electron. Lett. 1980, 16, 489–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Liokumovich, L.B.; Ushakov, N.A.; Kotov, O.I.; Bisyarin, M.A.; Hartog, A.H. Fundamentals of Optical Fiber Sensing Schemes Based on Coherent Optical Time Domain Reflectometry: Signal Model under Static Fiber Conditions. J. Light. Technol. 2015, 33, 3660–3671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Li, J.; Li, Z.; Yang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Ren, C. Microfiber Fabry-Perot Interferometer Used as a Temperature Sensor and an Optical Modulator. Opt. Laser Technol. 2020, 129, 106296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Gao, S.; Ji, C.; Ning, Q.; Chen, W.; Li, J. High-Sensitive Mach-Zehnder Interferometric Temperature Fiber-Optic Sensor Based on Core-Offset Splicing Technique. Opt. Fiber Technol. 2020, 56, 102202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Osaka, K.; Kaku, K.; Kosaka, T.; Sawada, Y. 2505 Health Monitoring for FRP Adhesively Bonded Joints with Michelson Optical Fiber Interferometer Sensor. Proc. JSME Annu. Meet. 2007, 2007.6, 211–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Gan, J.; Shen, L.; Ye, Q.; Pan, Z.; Cai, H.; Qu, R. Orientation-Free Pressure Sensor Based on π-Shifted Single-Mode-Fiber Sagnac Interferometer. Appl. Opt. 2010, 49, 5043–5048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Culshaw, B. The Optical Fibre Sagnac Interferometer: An Overview of Its Principles and Applications. Meas. Sci. Technol. 2006, 17, R1–R16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Her, S.C.; Yang, C.M. Dynamic Strain Measured by Mach-Zehnder Interferometric Optical Fiber Sensors. Sensors 2012, 12, 3314–3326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yuan, D.; Dong, Y.; Liu, Y.; Li, T. Mach-Zehnder Interferometer Biochemical Sensor Based on Silicon-on-Insulator Rib Waveguide with Large Cross Section. Sensors 2015, 15, 21500–21517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, T.; Pang, F.; Liu, H.; Cheng, J.; Lv, L.; Zhang, X.; Chen, N.; Wang, T. A Fiber-Optic Sensor for Acoustic Emission Detection in a High Voltage Cable System. Sensors 2016, 16, 2026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Tian, Z.; Yam, S.S.H.; Barnes, J.; Bock, W.; Greig, P.; Fraser, J.M.; Loock, H.P.; Oleschuk, R.D. Refractive Index Sensing with Mach-Zehnder Interferometer Based on Concatenating Two Single-Mode Fiber Tapers. IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 2008, 20, 626–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Mathew, J.; Semenova, Y.; Farrell, G. Relative Humidity Sensor Based on an Agarose-Infiltrated Photonic Crystal Fiber Interferometer. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 2012, 18, 1553–1559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Soltanian, M.R.K.; Sharbirin, A.S.; Ariannejad, M.M.; Amiri, I.S.; De La Rue, R.M.; Brambilla, G.; Rahman, B.M.A.; Grattan, K.T.V.; Ahmad, H. Variable Waist-Diameter Mach-Zehnder Tapered-Fiber Interferometer as Humidity and Temperature Sensor. IEEE Sens. J. 2016, 16, 5987–5992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Talataisong, W.; Wang, D.N.; Chitaree, R.; Liao, C.R.; Wang, C. Fiber In-Line Mach–Zehnder Interferometer Based on an Inner Air-Cavity for High-Pressure Sensing. Opt. Lett. 2015, 40, 1220–1222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Liu, T.; Wang, J.; Liao, Y.; Wang, X.; Wang, S. All-Fiber Mach–Zehnder Interferometer for Tunable Two Quasi-Continuous Points’ Temperature Sensing in Seawater. Opt. Express 2018, 26, 12277–12290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Zhao, J.-h.; Shi, Y.-k.; Shan, N.; Yuan, X.-q. Stabilized Fiber-Optic Extrinsic Fabry-Perot Sensor System for Acoustic Emission Measurement. Opt. Laser Technol. 2008, 40, 874–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Tran, T.A.; Miller, W.V.; Murphy, K.A.; Vengsarkar, A.M.; Claus, R.O. Stabilized Extrinsic Fiber-Optic Fizeau Sensor for Surface Acoustic Wave Detection. J. Light. Technol. 1992, 10, 1499–1506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ma, W.; Jiang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, L.; Hu, J.; Jiang, L. Miniature On-Fiber Extrinsic Fabry-Perot Interferometric Vibration Sensors Based on Micro-Cantilever Beam. Nanotechnol. Rev. 2019, 8, 293–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Chen, Z.; Yuan, L.; Hefferman, G.; Wei, T. Ultraweak Intrinsic Fabry-Perot Cavity Array for Distributed Sensing. Opt. Lett. 2015, 40, 320–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kim, D.H.; Koo, B.Y.; Kim, C.G.; Hong, C.S. Damage Detection of Composite Structures Using a Stabilized Extrinsic Fabry-Perot Interferometric Sensor System. Smart Mater. Struct. 2004, 13, 593–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Zhang, Q.; Zhu, Y.; Luo, X.; Liu, G.; Han, M. Acoustic Emission Sensor System Using a Chirped Fiber-Bragg-Grating Fabry-Perot Interferometer and Smart Feedback Control. Opt. Lett. 2017, 42, 631–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Wang, Z.; Shen, F.; Song, L.; Wang, X.; Wang, A. Multiplexed Fiber Fabry-Pérot Interferometer Sensors Based on Ultrashort Bragg Gratings. IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 2007, 19, 622–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Woodward, S.L.; Stayt, J.W.; Romero, D.M.; Freund, J.M.; Przybylek, G.J. A Study of Optical Beat Interference between Fabry-Perot Lasers. IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 1998, 10, 731–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Mandel, P.; Georgiou, M.; Otsuka, K.; Pieroux, D. Transient and Modulation Dynamics of a Multimode Fabry-Pérot Laser. Opt. Commun. 1993, 100, 341–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Xu, Z.; Wen, Y.J.; Zhong, W.-D.; Chae, C.-J.; Cheng, X.-F.; Wang, Y.; Lu, C.; Shankar, J. High-Speed WDM-PON Using CW Injection-Locked Fabry-Pérot Laser Diodes. Opt. Express 2007, 15, 2953–2962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Kersey, A.D.; Jackson, D.A.; Corke, M. A Simple Fibre Fabry-Perot Sensor. Opt. Commun. 1983, 45, 71–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Pevec, S.; Donlagic, D. All-Fiber, Long-Active-Length Fabry-Perot Strain Sensor. Opt. Express 2011, 19, 15641–15651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Yoshino, T.; Ose, T.; Kurosawa, K.; Itoh, K. Fiber-Optic Fabry–Perot Interferometer and Its Sensor Applications. IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech. 1982, 30, 1612–1621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Lu, P.; Men, L.; Sooley, K.; Chen, Q. Tapered Fiber Mach–Zehnder Interferometer for Simultaneous Measurement of Refractive Index and Temperature. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009, 94, 131110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Sun, Q.; Liu, D.; Wang, J.; Liu, H. Distributed Fiber-Optic Vibration Sensor Using a Ring Mach-Zehnder Interferometer. Opt. Commun. 2008, 281, 1538–1544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Available online: http://www.optiphase.com/ (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  72. Available online: https://www.thorlabschina.cn/ (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  73. Available online: www.lunainc.com (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  74. Available online: https://fiso.com/en/service/life-sciences/ (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  75. Marra, G.; Clivati, C.; Luckett, R.; Tampellini, A.; Kronjäger, J.; Wright, L.; Mura, A.; Levi, F.; Robinson, S.; Xuereb, A.; et al. Ultrastable Laser Interferometry for Earthquake Detection with Terrestrial and Submarine Cables. Science 2018, 361, 486–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Qi, X.; Wu, W.; Wang, S.; Jiang, J.; Jia, W.; Che, Y.; Li, R.; Liu, T. Miniaturized Fiber Optic Fabry-Perot Pressure Measuring System Used for Marine Pressure Measurement. In Advanced Sensor Systems and Applications IX; SPIE: Hangzhou, China, 2019; Volume 11191, pp. 33–38. [Google Scholar]
  77. Duraibabu, D.B.; Poeggel, S.; Omerdic, E.; Kalli, K.; Capocci, R.; Lacraz, A.; Dooly, G.; Lewis, E.; Newe, T.; Leen, G.; et al. Novel Miniature Pressure and Temperature Optical Fibre Sensor Based on an Extrinsic Fabry-Perot Interferometer (EFPI) and Fibre Bragg Gratings (FBG) for the Ocean Environment. In Proceedings of the SENSORS, 2014 IEEE, Valencia, Spain, 2–5 November 2014; pp. 394–397. [Google Scholar]
  78. Liu, Z.; Zeng, L.; Xu, K.; Wu, Q.; Shu, Y.; Liao, X.; Li, Z.; Chen, H.; Qiao, Z.; Qu, Y.; et al. Structure Design of Disposable Ocean Temperature Depth Sensing Probe Based on F-P Cavity and FBG. J. Appl. Math. Phys. 2021, 09, 2947–2953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Jin, M.; Ge, H.; Li, D.; Ni, C. Three-Component Homovibrational Vector Hydrophone Based on Fiber Bragg Grating F-P Interferometry. Appl. Opt. 2018, 57, 9195–9202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Kilic, O.; Digonnet, M.; Kino, G.; Solgaard, O. Photonic-Crystal-Diaphragm-Based Fiber-Tip Hydrophone Optimized for Ocean Acoustics. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Optical Fibre Sensors, Perth, Australia, 15–18 April 2008; Volume 7004, pp. 37–40. [Google Scholar]
  81. Gao, F.; Zhang, H.; Li, Y.; Wei, J.; Wang, M. Research on Online Monitoring System of Submarine Cable Based on Bidirectional Mach Zehnder Interferometer. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Optoelectronic and Microelectronic Technology and Application, Nanjing, China, 20–22 October 2020; pp. 584–589. [Google Scholar]
  82. Xie, S.; Zhang, M.; Lai, S.; Liao, Y. Positioning Method for Dual Mach-Zehnder Interferometric Submarine Cable Security System. Fiber Opt. Sensors Appl. VII 2010, 7677, 80–83. [Google Scholar]
  83. Fan, X.M.; Wang, Y.J.; Wang, G.L.; Shu, C.; Li, C.G. Foresight on Real-Time Monitoring System for Submarine Optical Fiber Cables Based on Fiber Sensing Technology. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2013, 341–342, 1089–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Wang, Y.J.; Fan, X.M.; Yuan, F.; Hao, H.B. The Research and Design of Monitoring System for Submarine Cables. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2015, 713–715, 534–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Huang, S.C.; Lin, W.W.; Tsai, M.T.; Chen, M.H. Fiber Optic In-Line Distributed Sensor for Detection and Localization of the Pipeline Leaks. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2007, 135, 570–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Aref, S.H.; Latifi, H.; Zibaii, M.I.; Afshari, M. Fiber Optic Fabry-Perot Pressure Sensor with Low Sensitivity to Temperature Changes for Downhole Application. Opt. Commun. 2007, 269, 322–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Aref, S.H.; Zibaii, M.I.; Latifi, H. An Improved Fiber Optic Pressure and Temperature Sensor for Downhole Application. Meas. Sci. Technol. 2009, 20, 034009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Mizutani, A.; Yomogida, K.; Tanioka, Y. Early Tsunami Detection with Near-Fault Ocean-Bottom Pressure Gauge Records Based on the Comparison with Seismic Data. J. Geophys. Res. Ocean. 2020, 125, e2020JC016275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Ismail, N.; Hafizi, Z.M.; Ooi, C.-W.; Bin Zaini, M.K.A.; Nizwan, C.K.E.; Lim, K.-S.; Ahmad, H. Fiber Bragg Grating-Based Fabry-Perot Interferometer Sensor for Damage Detection on Thin Aluminum Plate. IEEE Sens. J. 2020, 20, 3564–3571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Xu, C.; Sharif Khodaei, Z. A Novel Fabry-Pérot Optical Sensor for Guided Wave Signal Acquisition. Sensors 2020, 20, 1728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Kringlebotn, J.T.; Nakstad, H.; Eriksrud, M. Fibre Optic Ocean Bottom Seismic Cable System: From Innovation to Commercial Success. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Optical Fibre Sensors, Edinburgh, UK, 5–9 October 2009; Volume 7503, p. 75037U. [Google Scholar]
  92. Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/submarine_power_cable (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  93. Available online: https://www.admie.gr/en/nea/deltia-typoy/crete-peloponnese-record-breaking-interconnection-completed (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  94. Worzyk, T. Submarine Power Cables: Design, Installation, Repair, Environmental Aspects; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  95. Meltz, G.; Morey, W.W.; Glenn, W.H. Formation of Bragg Gratings in Optical Fibers by a Transverse Holographic Method. Opt. Lett. 1989, 14, 823–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Kashyap, R.; Lopez-Higuera, J.M. Fiber Grating Technology: Theory, Photosensitivity, Fabrication and Characterization. In Handbook of Optical Fibre Sensing Technology; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 2002; pp. 349–374. [Google Scholar]
  97. Lopez-Amo, M.; Lopez-Higuera, J.M. Multiplexing Techniques for FBG Sensors. In Fiber Bragg Grating Sensors: Recent Advancements, Industrial Applications and Market Exploitation; Bentham Science Publishers: Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, 2011; pp. 99–115. [Google Scholar]
  98. Chaoui, F.; Aghzout, O.; Chakkour, M.; El Yakhloufi, M. Apodization Optimization of FBG Strain Sensor for Quasi-Distributed Sensing Measurement Applications. Act. Passiv. Electron. Components 2016, 2016, 6523046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Davis, M.A.; Kersey, A.D. All-Fibre Bragg Grating Strain-Sensor Demodulation Technique Using a Wavelength Division Coupler. Electron. Lett. 1994, 30, 75–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Morey, W.W.; Meltz, G.; Glenn, W.H. Fiber Optic Bragg Grating Sensors. In Fiber Optic and Laser Sensors VII; SPIE: Boston, MA, USA, 1990; Volume 1169, pp. 98–107. [Google Scholar]
  101. Melle, S.; Liu, K.; Measures, R.M. Strain Sensing Using a Fiber-Optic Bragg Grating. In Fiber Optic Smart Structures and Skins IV; SPIE: Boston, MA, USA, 1991; Volume 1588, pp. 255–263. [Google Scholar]
  102. Huang, S.; LeBlanc, M.; Ohn, M.M.; Measures, R.M. Bragg Intragrating Structural Sensing. Appl. Opt. 1995, 34, 5003–5009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Available online: https://roctest.com/en/products/ (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  104. Available online: www.hbm.com/cn (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  105. Torres, B.; Payá-Zaforteza Ignacio, I.; Calderón, P.A.; Adam, J.M. Analysis of the Strain Transfer in a New FBG Sensor for Structural Health Monitoring. Eng. Struct. 2011, 33, 539–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Lau, K.T. Structural Health Monitoring for Smart Composites Using Embedded FBG Sensor Technology. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2014, 30, 1642–1654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Čápová, K.; Velebil, L.; Včelák, J.; Dvořák, M.; Šašek, L. Environmental Testing of a FBG Sensor System for Structural Health Monitoring of Building and Transport Structures. Procedia Struct. Integr. 2019, 17, 726–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Shimada, Y.; Nishimura, A. Development of Optical Fiber Bragg Grating Sensors for Structural Health Monitoring. J. Laser Micro Nanoeng. 2013, 8, 110–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Zhao, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Yuan, M.; Wang, J.; Zhu, S. A Laser-Based Fiber Bragg Grating Ultrasonic Sensing System for Structural Health Monitoring. IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 2016, 28, 2573–2576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Zhang, X.; Wang, P.; Liang, D.; Fan, C.; Li, C. A Soft Self-Repairing for FBG Sensor Network in SHM System Based on PSO-SVR Model Reconstruction. Opt. Commun. 2015, 343, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Mieloszyk, M.; Ostachowicz, W. An Application of Structural Health Monitoring System Based on FBG Sensors to Offshore Wind Turbine Support Structure Model. Mar. Struct. 2017, 51, 65–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Tosi, D. Review of Chirped Fiber Bragg Grating (CFBG) Fiber-Optic Sensors and Their Applications. Sensors 2018, 18, 2147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Čápová, K.; Velebil, L.; Včelák, J. Laboratory and In-Situ Testing of Integrated FBG Sensors for SHM for Concrete and Timber Structures. Sensors 2020, 20, 1661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Ferdinand, P. The Evolution of Optical Fiber Sensors Technologies during the 35 Last Years and Their Applications in Structural Health Monitoring. In Proceedings of the 7th European Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring, EWSHM 2014—2nd European Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) Society, Nantes, France, 8–11 June 2014; pp. 914–929. [Google Scholar]
  115. Xu, J.; Yang, D.; Qin, C.; Jiang, Y.; Sheng, L.; Jia, X.; Bai, Y.; Shen, X.; Wang, H.; Deng, X. Study and Test of a New Bundle-Structure Riser Stress Monitoring Sensor Based on FBG. Sensors 2015, 15, 29648–29660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Kumar, S.; Bedi, A.; Kothari, V. Design and Analysis of FBG Based Sensor for Detection of Damage in Oil and Gas Pipelines for Safety of Marine Life. In Optical Fibers and Sensors for Medical Diagnostics and Treatment Applications XVIII; SPIE: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2018; pp. 146–151. [Google Scholar]
  117. Jiang, C.L.; Yan, T.J.; Song, M.C.; Shi, J.L. Application of Fiber Bragg Grating Sensing Technology in Key Equipment Monitoring of Offshore Platform. In Proceedings of the 2020 2nd International Conference on Industrial Artificial Intelligence (IAI), Shenyang, China, 23–25 October 2020; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  118. Ren, L. Health Monitoring System for Offshore Platform with Fiber Bragg Grating Sensors. Opt. Eng. 2006, 45, 084401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Wang, T.; Yuan, Z.; Gong, Y.; Wu, Y.; Rao, Y.; Wei, L.; Guo, P.; Wang, J.; Wan, F. Fiber Bragg Grating Strain Sensors for Marine Engineering. Photonic Sensors 2013, 3, 267–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Qiao, X.; Fiddy, M.A. Distributed Optical Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor for Simultaneous Measurement of Pressure and Temperature in the Oil and Gas Downhole. In Active and Passive Optical Components for WDM Communications II; SPIE: Boston, MA, USA, 2002; Volume 4870, pp. 554–558. [Google Scholar]
  121. Butov, O.V.; Golant, K.M.; Grifer, V.I.; Gusev, Y.V.; Kholodkov, A.V.; Lanin, A.V.; Maksutov, R.A.; Orlov, G.I. Versatile In-Fiber Bragg Grating Pressure Sensor for Oil and Gas Industry. In Optical Fiber Sensors; OSA: Washington, DC, USA, 2006; p. TuB6. [Google Scholar]
  122. Zhang, Y.Z.; Xiao, L.Z.; Wang, J.Y. Oil Well Real-Time Monitoring with Downhole Permanent FBG Sensor Network. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Control and Automation, Guangzhou, China, 30 May–1 June 2007; pp. 2591–2594. [Google Scholar]
  123. Li, D.; Li, H.; Ren, L.; Sun, L.; Zhou, J. Experiments on an Offshore Platform Model by FBG Sensors. In Proceedings of the Smart Structures and Materials 2004: Sensors and Smart Structures Technologies for Civil, Mechanical, and Aerospace Systems, San Diego, CA, USA, 15–18 March 2004; Volume 5391, pp. 100–106. [Google Scholar]
  124. Li, H.C.H.; Herszberg, I.; Davis, C.E.; Mouritz, A.P.; Galea, S.C. Health Monitoring of Marine Composite Structural Joints Using Fibre Optic Sensors. Compos. Struct. 2006, 75, 321–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Zhou, J.; Sun, L.; Li, H. Study on Dynamic Response Measurement of the Submarine Pipeline by Full-Term FBG Sensors. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 808075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Razali, N.F.; Abu Bakar, M.H.; Tamchek, N.; Yaacob, M.H.; Latif, A.A.; Zakaria, K.; Mahdi, M.A. Fiber Bragg Grating for Pressure Monitoring of Full Composite Lightweight Epoxy Sleeve Strengthening System for Submarine Pipeline. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2015, 26, 135–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Cabral, T.D.; Zimmermann, A.C.; Willemann, D.P.; Gonçalves, A.A., Jr. Pipeline Bonded Joints Assembly and Operation Health Monitoring with Embedded FBG Sensors. Eng. Proc. 2020, 2, 5. [Google Scholar]
  128. Rodrigues, C.; Félix, C.; Lage, A.; Figueiras, J. Development of a Long-Term Monitoring System Based on FBG Sensors Applied to Concrete Bridges. Eng. Struct. 2010, 32, 1993–2002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Lin, Y.B.; Chen, J.C.; Chang, K.C.; Chern, J.C.; Lai, J.S. Real-Time Monitoring of Local Scour by Using Fiber Bragg Grating Sensors. Smart Mater. Struct. 2005, 14, 664–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Lin, Y.B.; Lai, J.S.; Chang, K.C.; Li, L.S. Flood Scour Monitoring System Using Fiber Bragg Grating Sensors. Smart Mater. Struct. 2006, 15, 1950–1959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Hu, D.; Guo, Y.; Chen, X.; Zhang, C. Cable Force Health Monitoring of Tongwamen Bridge Based on Fiber Bragg Grating. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Schulz, W.L.; Conte, J.P.; Udd, E.; Seim, J.M. Static and Dynamic Testing of Bridges and Highways Using Long-Gage Fiber Bragg Grating Based Strain Sensors. In Industrial Sensing Systems; SPIE: Boston, MA, USA, 2000; Volume 4202, pp. 79–86. [Google Scholar]
  133. Inaudi, D.; Ruefenacht, A.; von Arx, B.; Noher, H.P.; Vurpillot, S.; Glisic, B. Monitoring of a Concrete Arch Bridge during Construction. In Proceedings of the Smart Structures and Materials 2002: Smart Systems for Bridges, Structures, and Highways, San Diego, CA, USA, 28 June 2002; Volume 4696, pp. 146–153. [Google Scholar]
  134. Monsberger, C.; Klug, F.; Lienhart, W. Performance Assessment of a Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor Network inside a Hydro Power Dam Using Optical Backscatter Reflectometry. In Fiber Optic Sensors and Applications XIV; SPIE: Anaheim, CA, USA, 2017; Volume 10208, pp. 183–194. [Google Scholar]
  135. Fan, S.; Ren, L.; Chen, J. Investigation of Fiber Bragg Grating Strain Sensor in Dynamic Tests of Small-Scale Dam Model. Struct. Control Health Monit. 2015, 22, 1282–1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Luo, Y.X. Study of Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor in Dam Safety Monitoring. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2013, 312, 736–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Allil, R.C.S.B.; Lima, L.A.C.; Allil, A.S.; Werneck, M.M. Fbg-Based Inclinometer for Landslide Monitoring in Tailings Dams. IEEE Sens. J. 2021, 21, 16670–16680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Komoriyama, Y.; Ota, D.; Ma, C.; Sawada, H.; Oka, M.; Matsui, S.; Houtani, H. Hull Structural Strength Evaluation Based on Fiber Bragg Gratings Pressure Sensors to Measure Spatial Pressure Distribution on Ship’s Hull in Waves. In Proceedings of the Volume 2A: Structures, Safety, and Reliability, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Online, New York, NY, USA, 18 December 2020; Volume 2A-2020, p. V02AT02A023. [Google Scholar]
  139. Han, F.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, H.; Wang, D.; Li, W.; Cai, W. Experimental Study of Large-Temperature-Range and Long-Period Monitoring for LNG Marine Auxiliary Based on Fiber Bragg Grating Temperature Measurement. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Mercuri, A.; Fanelli, P.; Falcucci, G.; Ubertini, S.; Jannelli, E.; Biscarini, C. Analysis of Deformation in an Aluminium Hull Impacting Water Free Surface. Fluids 2022, 7, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Wang, W.; Qiao, L.; Li, Y.; Yang, J.; Liu, C. A Hinged Fiber Grating Sensor for Hull Roll and Pitch Motion Measurement. In Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering; Springer: Singapore, 2020; Volume 571, pp. 66–74. [Google Scholar]
  142. Zhang, H.H.; Feng, G.Q.; Ren, H.L.; Wang, Y.Z. Research on the Fatigue Health Monitoring System of the Hull Structure. In Proceedings of the International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA, 25–30 June 2017; pp. 973–980. [Google Scholar]
  143. Shen, W.; Yan, R.; Xu, L.; Tang, G.; Chen, X. Application Study on FBG Sensor Applied to Hull Structural Health Monitoring. Optik 2015, 126, 1499–1504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Sun, A.; Farrell, G.; Semenova, Y.; Chen, B.; Li, G.; Lin, Z. The Distributed Dynamic Combined-Stresses Measurement of Ship Thruster Inner-Skin Using Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor Rosette Array. Optik 2011, 122, 1779–1781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Herszberg, I.; Li, H.C.H.; Dharmawan, F.; Mouritz, A.P.; Nguyen, M.; Bayandor, J. Damage Assessment and Monitoring of Composite Ship Joints. Compos. Struct. 2005, 67, 205–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Available online: https://fbgs.com/solutions/temperature-sensing/ (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  147. Available online: https://micronor.com/product/fisens-fbg-sensor-chains/ (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  148. Li, X.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Wang, Z.; Yuan, Y.; Hu, H.; Xu, D. An FBG Pressure Sensor Based on Spring-Diaphragm Elastic Structure for Ultimate Pressure Detection. IEEE Sens. J. 2022, 22, 2213–2220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. El-Gammal, H.M.; Ismail, N.E.; Rizk, M.R.M.; Aly, M.H. Strain Sensing in Underwater Acoustics with a Hybrid π-Shifted FBG and Different Interrogation Methods. Opt. Quantum Electron. 2022, 54, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Ansari, F. State-of-the-Art in the Applications of Fiber-Optic Sensors to Cementitious Composites. Cem. Concr. Compos. 1997, 19, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Tennyson, R.C.; Mufti, A.A.; Rizkalla, S.; Tadros, G.; Benmokrane, B. Structural Health Monitoring of Innovative Bridges in Canada with Fiber Optic Sensors. Smart Mater. Struct. 2001, 10, 560–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Lee, Z.-K.; Bonopera, M.; Hsu, C.-C.; Lee, B.-H.; Yeh, F.-Y. Long-Term Deflection Monitoring of a Box Girder Bridge with an Optical-Fiber, Liquid-Level System. Structures 2022, 44, 904–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Johnson, G.A.; Pran, K.; Sagvolden, G.; Farsund, O.; Havsgard, G.B.; Wang, G.; Jensen, A.E. Surface Effect Ship Vibro-Impact Monitoring with Distributed Arrays of Fiber Bragg Gratings. Proc. Int. Modal Anal. Conf.-IMAC 2000, 2, 1406–1411. [Google Scholar]
  154. Wang, Q.B.; Chen, J.A.; Fu, G.Y.; Duan, D.P. An Approach for Shape Optimization of Stratosphere Airships Based on Multidisciplinary Design Optimization. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A 2009, 10, 1609–1616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Young, A.T. Rayleigh scattering. Appl. Opt. 1981, 20, 533–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Hellwarth, R.W. Theory of Stimulated Raman Scattering. Phys. Rev. 1963, 130, 1850–1852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Bao, X.; Dhliwayo, J.; Heron, N.; Webb, D.J.; Jackson, D.A. Experimental and Theoretical Studies on a Distributed Temperature Sensor Based on Brillouin Scattering. J. Light. Technol. 1995, 13, 1340–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Li, J.; Gan, J.; Zhang, Z.; Heng, X.; Yang, C.; Qian, Q.; Xu, S.; Yang, Z. High Spatial Resolution Distributed Fiber Strain Sensor Based on Phase-OFDR. Opt. Express 2017, 25, 27913–27922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  159. Koyamada, Y.; Imahama, M.; Kubota, K.; Hogari, K. Fiber-Optic Distributed Strain and Temperature Sensing with Very High Measurand Resolution over Long Range Using Coherent OTDR. J. Light. Technol. 2009, 27, 1142–1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Muanenda, Y.; Oton, C.J.; Di Pasquale, F. Application of Raman and Brillouin Scattering Phenomena in Distributed Optical Fiber Sensing. Front. Phys. 2019, 7, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Fujimori, H.; Kakihana, M.; Ioku, K.; Goto, S.; Yoshimura, M. Advantage of Anti-Stokes Raman Scattering for High-Temperature Measurements. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2001, 79, 937–939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Liu, Y.; Li, X.; Li, H.; Fan, X. Global Temperature Sensing for an Operating Power Transformer Based on Raman Scattering. Sensors 2020, 20, 4903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Xu, Z.; Liu, D.; Liu, H.; Sun, Q.; Sun, Z.; Zhang, X.; Wang, W. Design of Distributed Raman Temperature Sensing System Based on Single-Mode Optical Fiber. Front. Optoelectron. China 2009, 2, 215–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Olbrycht, R. Distributed Temperature Sensing in Optical Fibers Based on Raman Scattering: Theory and Applications. Meas. Autom. Monit. 2017, 63, 41–44. [Google Scholar]
  165. Keller, C.A.; Huwald, H.; Vollmer, M.K.; Wenger, A.; Hill, M.; Parlange, M.B.; Reimann, S. Fiber Optic Distributed Temperature Sensing for the Determination of the Nocturnal Atmospheric Boundary Layer Height. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2011, 4, 143–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Bao, X.; DeMerchant, M.; Brown, A.; Bremner, T. Tensile and Compressive Strain Measurement in the Lab and Field with the Distributed Brillouin Scattering Sensor. J. Light. Technol. 2001, 19, 1698–1704. [Google Scholar]
  167. Kurashima, T.; Horiguchi, T.; Tateda, M. Distributed-Temperature Sensing Using Stimulated Brillouin Scattering in Optical Silica Fibers. Opt. Lett. 1990, 15, 1038–1040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  168. Available online: www.sensornet.co.uk (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  169. Available online: https://www.cn.neubrex.com/htm/technology/kouseido.htm (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  170. Available online: https://www.ozoptics.com/products/fiber_optic_distributed.html (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  171. Available online: https://smartec.ch/en/product/ditest-botdr-sr-5-km/ (accessed on 31 December 2022).
  172. Chen, Y.; Wang, S.; Hao, Y.; Yao, K.; Li, H.; Jia, F.; Yue, D.; Shi, Q.; Cheng, Y.; Huang, X. Temperature Monitoring for 500 KV Oil-Filled Submarine Cable Based on BOTDA Distributed Optical Fiber Sensing Technology: Method and Application. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2022, 71, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Chen, Y.; Wang, S.; Hao, Y.; Yao, K.; Li, H.; Jia, F.; Shi, Q.; Yue, D.; Cheng, Y. The 500 kV Oil-Filled Submarine Cable Temperature Monitoring System Based on BOTDA Distributed Optical Fiber Sensing Technology. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Sensing, Measurement & Data Analytics in the era of Artificial Intelligence (ICSMD), Xi’an, China, 15–17 October 2020; pp. 180–183. [Google Scholar]
  174. Huang, X.; Li, Y.; Wu, C.; Lin, D.; Liu, Z.; Chen, Y.; Li, X.; Zhang, W.; Cai, C. Temperature Online Monitoring of Submarine Cable Based on BOTDA and FOCT. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 3rd International Electrical and Energy Conference (CIEEC), Beijing, China, 7–9 September 2019; pp. 1229–1233. [Google Scholar]
  175. Fouda, B.M.T.; Yang, B.; Han, D.; An, B. Pattern Recognition of Optical Fiber Vibration Signal of the Submarine Cable for Its Safety. IEEE Sens. J. 2021, 21, 6510–6519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Feng, X.; Wu, W.; Li, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhou, J. Experimental Investigations on Detecting Lateral Buckling for Subsea Pipelines with Distributed Fiber Optic Sensors. Smart Struct. Syst. 2015, 15, 245–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Zhao, L.; Li, Y.; Xu, Z.; Yang, Z.; Lü, A. On-Line Monitoring System of 110kV Submarine Cable Based on BOTDR. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2014, 216, 28–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Fromme, M.; Christiansen, W.; Kjær, S.V.; Hill, W. Distributed Temperature Monitoring of Long Distance Submarine Cables. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Optical Fiber Sensors, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 15–19 May 2011; Volume 7753, pp. 440–443. [Google Scholar]
  179. Jiang, Q.; Sui, Q. Technological Study on Distributed Fiber Sensor Monitoring of High Voltage Power Cable in Seafloor. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Automation and Logistics, Shenyang, China, 5–7 August 2009; pp. 1154–1157. [Google Scholar]
  180. Feo, G.; Sharma, J.; Kortukov, D.; Williams, W.; Ogunsanwo, T. Distributed Fiber Optic Sensing for Real-Time Monitoring of Gas in Riser during Offshore Drilling. Sensors 2020, 20, 267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Michelin, F.; De Lacaze, P.; Lamour, V. Shape Monitoring of Subsea Pipelines through Optical Fiber Sensors: Slay Process Case Study. In Proceedings of the 22nd Offshore Symposium 2017—Redefining Offshore Development: Technologies and Solutions, Houston, TX, USA, 2 February 2017; pp. 187–193. [Google Scholar]
  182. Inaudi, D.; Glisic, B. Part 39: Civil Structural Health Monitoring. In Advances in Bridge Maintenance, Safety Management, and Life-Cycle Performance, Set of Book & CD-ROM; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2015; pp. 999–1000. [Google Scholar]
  183. Pnev, A.B.; Zhirnov, A.A.; Stepanov, K.V.; Nesterov, E.T.; Shelestov, D.A.; Karasik, V.E. Mathematical Analysis of Marine Pipeline Leakage Monitoring System Based on Coherent OTDR with Improved Sensor Length and Sampling Frequency. In Proceedings of the International Scientific Seminars on Fundamental and Applied Problems of Photonics and Condensed Matter Physics, Moscow, Russia, 30 May–27 June 2014; Volume 584, p. 012016. [Google Scholar]
  184. Lim, K.; Wong, L.; Chiu, W.K.; Kodikara, J. Distributed Fiber Optic Sensors for Monitoring Pressure and Stiffness Changes in Out-of-Round Pipes. Struct. Control Health Monit. 2016, 23, 303–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Imai, M.; Mizuno, S. Aqueduct Tunnel Convergence Measurement Using a Distributed Optical Fiber Sensor. In Optical Fiber Sensors Conference 2020 Special Edition; OSA: Washington, DC, USA, 2021; p. T3.22. [Google Scholar]
  186. Wang, T.; Shi, B.; Zhu, Y. Structural Monitoring and Performance Assessment of Shield Tunnels during the Operation Period, Based on Distributed Optical-Fiber Sensors. Symmetry 2019, 11, 940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Liang, R.; Mei, Y.; Yang, X.; Xu, J.; Zhang, J.; Qin, Q. Distributed Temperature Monitoring of a Pumped-Storage Power Station Rockfill Dam Using Optical Fiber Sensors. In Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on Novel Photoelectronic Detection Technology and Applications, Kunming, China, 27 March 2022; pp. 828–833. [Google Scholar]
  188. Henault, J.-M.; Moreau, G.; Blairon, S.; Salin, J.; Courivaud, J.-R.; Taillade, F.; Merliot, E.; Dubois, J.-P.; Bertrand, J.; Buschaert, S.; et al. Truly Distributed Optical Fiber Sensors for Structural Health Monitoring: From the Telecommunication Optical Fiber Drawling Tower to Water Leakage Detection in Dikes and Concrete Structure Strain Monitoring. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2010, 2010, 930796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Inaudi, D. Photonic Sensing Technology in Civil Engineering Applications. In Handbook of Optical Fibre Sensing Technology; Lopez-higuera, J.M., Ed.; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2002; pp. 517–542. [Google Scholar]
Sensors 23 01877 g002 550
Figure 2. (a) Configurations of typical optical fiber MZI; (b) configurations of various types of in-line optical fiber MZIs. (b) Configuration of extrinsic (c) and intrinsic (d) FPI based on optical fiber.
Figure 2. (a) Configurations of typical optical fiber MZI; (b) configurations of various types of in-line optical fiber MZIs. (b) Configuration of extrinsic (c) and intrinsic (d) FPI based on optical fiber.
Sensors 23 01877 g002
Sensors 23 01877 g003 550
Figure 3. Several commercial optical fiber MZIs [12,13] (a) and FPIs [14,15] (b).
Figure 3. Several commercial optical fiber MZIs [12,13] (a) and FPIs [14,15] (b).
Sensors 23 01877 g003
Sensors 23 01877 g004 550
Figure 4. Detection of local and remote earthquakes using a laser based on FP cavities. Reprinted with permission from [75].
Figure 4. Detection of local and remote earthquakes using a laser based on FP cavities. Reprinted with permission from [75].
Sensors 23 01877 g004
Sensors 23 01877 g005 550
Figure 5. Online submarine cable monitoring system using bidirectional MZ interferometer. Reprinted with permission from [81].
Figure 5. Online submarine cable monitoring system using bidirectional MZ interferometer. Reprinted with permission from [81].
Sensors 23 01877 g005
Sensors 23 01877 g006 550
Figure 6. Operating principle of quasi-distributed FBG sensor.
Figure 6. Operating principle of quasi-distributed FBG sensor.
Sensors 23 01877 g006
Sensors 23 01877 g007 550
Figure 7. Several commercial FBG sensing elements and units [103,104].
Figure 7. Several commercial FBG sensing elements and units [103,104].
Sensors 23 01877 g007
Sensors 23 01877 g008 550
Figure 8. SHM within the hydro power dam using quasi-distributed FBG sensor. (a) Layout scheme; (b) one of the installed FBG sensors within the maintenance corridors of the dam. Reprinted with permission from [134].
Figure 8. SHM within the hydro power dam using quasi-distributed FBG sensor. (a) Layout scheme; (b) one of the installed FBG sensors within the maintenance corridors of the dam. Reprinted with permission from [134].
Sensors 23 01877 g008
Sensors 23 01877 g009 550
Figure 9. Hull structural strength evaluation using FBG pressure sensors. Reprinted with permission from [138].
Figure 9. Hull structural strength evaluation using FBG pressure sensors. Reprinted with permission from [138].
Sensors 23 01877 g009
Sensors 23 01877 g010 550
Figure 10. Light emission from Rayleigh, Raman, and Brillouin scattering.
Figure 10. Light emission from Rayleigh, Raman, and Brillouin scattering.
Sensors 23 01877 g010
Sensors 23 01877 g011 550
Figure 11. Several commercial DOFS optoelectronic devices [168,169,170,171].
Figure 11. Several commercial DOFS optoelectronic devices [168,169,170,171].
Sensors 23 01877 g011
Sensors 23 01877 g012 550
Figure 12. Submarine cable temperature monitoring in China’s southern coast using BOTDA sensing system. Reprinted with permission from [172].
Figure 12. Submarine cable temperature monitoring in China’s southern coast using BOTDA sensing system. Reprinted with permission from [172].
Sensors 23 01877 g012
Sensors 23 01877 g013 550
Figure 13. Real-time strain monitoring of the aqueduct tunnel using DOFS. (a) The end of the subject aqueduct tunnel. (b) Embedded optical fiber cable in the retrofitted tunnel. Reprinted with permission from [185].
Figure 13. Real-time strain monitoring of the aqueduct tunnel using DOFS. (a) The end of the subject aqueduct tunnel. (b) Embedded optical fiber cable in the retrofitted tunnel. Reprinted with permission from [185].
Sensors 23 01877 g013
Table
Table 1. Interferometric OFSs for SHM.
Table 1. Interferometric OFSs for SHM.
Monitoring ItemSensors and ConfigurationVariablesAuthorsYear
Submarine earthquakeFP laser based on ultralow expansion cavityPhase differenceMarra et al. [75]2018
Miniaturized FP pressure measuring systemPressureQi et al. [76]2019
Fiber vector hydrophone based on FP interferometryAcousticJin et al. [79]2018
Damage of submarine cableBidirectional MZ interferometerVibrationGao et al. [81]2020
Double MZ distributed optical fiber sensing systemVibrationWang et al. [84]2014
Table
Table 2. WDM-FBG-based OFSs for SHM.
Table 2. WDM-FBG-based OFSs for SHM.
Monitoring ItemSensors and ConfigurationVariablesAuthorsYear
Drilling platformsFBG-based bundle-structure riser stress monitoring sensorStressXu et al. [115]2015
FBG sensors embedded into the joints’ adhesive layerStrainCabral et al. [127]2020
BridgesFBG-based temperature and strain sensing arraysTemperature/
Strain		Yan et al. [3]2019
FBG arrays based the theory of string vibrationVibrationHu et al. [131]2017
DamsFBG monitoring system using an optical backscatter reflectometerStrainMonsberger et al. [134]2017
FBG-based inclinometer arrays fixed along a flexible tubeDisplacementRegina et al. [137]2021
HullsFBG sensors based on finite element analysisPressure/
Strain		Komoriyama et al. [138]2020
FBG sensors with temperature-sensitive metal coating materialsTemperatureHan et al. [139]2021
Table
Table 3. DOFSs for SHM.
Table 3. DOFSs for SHM.
Monitoring ItemSensors and ConfigurationVariablesAuthorsYear
Submarine cablesBOTDA distributed optical fiber monitoring systemTemperatureChen et al. [172,173]2022
All-fiber BOTDA monitoring systemTemperatureHuang et al. [174]2019
Phase-sensitive OTDR to detect vibrationVibrationFouda et al. [175]2021
Oil and gas pipelinesDOFSs involving DTS and DASTemperature/
Acoustic		Feo et al. [180]2020
SensoluxTM sensor based on Raman and Brillouin OTDRStrain/
Temperature		Cementys company
[181]		2017
TunnelsBOCDA-based optical fiber strain sensorStrainImai et al. [185]2021
DOFSs based on Brillouin frequency shiftDisplacementWang et al. [186]2019
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, S.; Wang, J.; Zhang, C.; Li, M.; Li, N.; Wu, H.; Liu, Y.; Peng, W.; Song, Y. Marine Structural Health Monitoring with Optical Fiber Sensors: A Review. Sensors 2023, 23, 1877. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23041877

AMA Style

Chen S, Wang J, Zhang C, Li M, Li N, Wu H, Liu Y, Peng W, Song Y. Marine Structural Health Monitoring with Optical Fiber Sensors: A Review. Sensors. 2023; 23(4):1877. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23041877

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Shimeng, Jiahui Wang, Chao Zhang, Mengqi Li, Na Li, Haojun Wu, Yun Liu, Wei Peng, and Yongxin Song. 2023. "Marine Structural Health Monitoring with Optical Fiber Sensors: A Review" Sensors 23, no. 4: 1877. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23041877

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop