Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 297305

Characterization of a FBG strain gage array embedded

in composite structure
Yu Fan, Mojtaba Kahrizi

Electrical and Computer Engineering, Concordia University, 1455 de Maisonneuve, West, S-H-961, Montreal, Que., Canada H3G 1M8
Received 1 October 2004; received in revised form 5 January 2005; accepted 17 January 2005
Available online 23 February 2005
Abstract
In recent researches, ber Bragg grating (FBG) is proven the most promising ber optic strain sensor upon its elaborate strain sensibility.
Numerous efforts have been done in realizing practical FBG strain gage systems, either mounted on the surface, or integrated within the
structure.
Fiber reinforced composite materials are always regarded as the nominated candidate to embed FBG sensors upon the fact that, ber
reinforced lamentary topology enables the integration and effectively protects sensors from hostile attack, therefore a ber optic smart
structure is achievable. However, one must recognize that embedded FBG bers are foreign entities to host structures, mechanical mismatches
may eventually lead to alteration on sensors responsive behaviours, and measurand interpretation becomes complicated.
This work reports a set of experiments on an orthogonal FBG array embedded in graphite/epoxy composite structures. Recurring to
corresponding surface mounted resistance strain gages, the authors tend to provide a comprehensive investigation on strain-optic behaviours
of embedded FBG sensors, and a quantitative discussion on inevitable deviations of the sensors when used as buried strain gages.
2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Fiber optic smart structure; FBG strain gage; Composite materials; Strain optics
1. Introduction
The revolutions in ber optic telecommunications and op-
toelectronic industries have enabled the evolvement of ber
optic sensors, which offer a series of advantages over conven-
tional electrical sensors. This evolvement, in association with
the advances in composite material technology, has opened a
neweld of ber optic smart structures, which offers mechan-
ical and structural engineers the possibility of incorporating
ber optic nervous mechanisms into their designs.
Upon the combination of two elite techniquesber
Bragg grating (FBG) sensors and ber reinforced compos-
ite materials, numbers of ber optic smart structures have
been proposed. [1,2] Among all proposals, orthogonal ar-
ray is of the most convincing solution. According to Fig. 1,

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 514 848 2424x3089;

fax: +1 514 848 2802.
E-mail address: mojtaba@ece.concordia.ca (M. Kahrizi).
wavelength division multiplexed FBG gratings are inscribed
in series along the optical ber. Due to the orthotropic na-
ture of ber reinforced composites, analogical FBG bers
are embedded longitudinally and latitudinally in the mate-
rial, so that any randomly orientated in-plane strain can be
analytically dissolved into two principle directions, hence po-
sitioned and monitored by corresponding FBGsensors based
on gratings elaborate strain sensitivity. Therefore, an embed-
ded FBG strain gage array is achievable. Further, actuation
commands are consequently generated upon abnormal re-
sponses from the gage array, and sent to dedicated reaction
mechanism to drive adaptive behaviours.
Although a primary ber optic smart structure is modeled,
one must recognize that whenever embedded in the material,
optical ber is regarded as foreign entity to the host struc-
ture. As a result, transversely FBG strain gages have to bear
extra stress caused by structural perturbation, [3] which is ini-
tially not supposed to be counted in the measurement, so that
interpretation of sensing responses may be disturbed. Thus
0924-4247/$ see front matter 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.sna.2005.01.021
298 Y. Fan, M. Kahrizi / Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 297305
Fig. 1. Schematic model of orthogonal FBG sensor array.
following concerns must be claried before such a system is
practically applied:
(1) Whether embedded sensors can always survive through-
out the desired measurement range, when the sensors
experience more complicated stress eld?
(2) To what extent the optical behaviours of embedded FBG
strain gages are altered due to additional radial stress?
No matter how complicated the array is, complete study
on a single intersection (i.e. two orthogonally adjacent FBG
sensors) is the starting point to extend the discussion in larger
scale.
2. Theory
Due to the strain-optic nature, FBG bers grating wave-
length is tuneable in terms of in-ber strain. Assuming an
isothermal condition, FBGs grating wavelength shift upon
strain changes can be expressed as [4]

B
= 2
_

n
eff
l
+n
eff

l
_
l (1)
where is FBGs grating period, n
eff
is gratings average
refractive index, l is grating sections length change under
the strain eld, and
B
represents the magnitude of grating
wavelength shift. Eq. (1) reveals that strain-optic effect on
FBG grating corresponds to both grating spacing and refrac-
tive index changes. Although FBG grating is also sensible to
thermal effect, in our research, however ambient temperature
uctuation was always controlled within a neglectable range.
If we dene l as the gauge length of a FBG sensor, given
that the path-integrated longitudinal strain is
z
=
l
l
, [5] and

_
1
(n
eff
)
2
_
=
2n
eff
(n
eff
)
3
(2)
Assuming

l
=

l
, we can rewrite Eq. (1) as

B
= 2
_

n
eff
l
+n
eff

l
_
,
l = 2
_

(n
eff
)
3
2

_
1
(n
eff
)
2
_
_
+2n
eff

z
l

l
(3)
Strain-optic theory predicts that changes in the optical indica-
trix tensor,
_
1
(n
eff
)
2
_
i
, is resulted from applied stress, which
can be given in terms of strain by

_
1
(n
eff
)
2
_
i
=
ij

j
i = 2, 3 j = 1, 2, 3 (4)
where
j
is the block-reduced strain tensor in the ber,
ij
is the contracted strain-optic tensor of the FBG ber with
coefcient p
ij
(Pockels coefcients), where the subscripts i
and j refer to the coordinate axis of the optical ber, as dened
in Fig. 2.
For an optically anisotropic (i.e. birefringence) and elas-
tically isotropic material, i.e. the optical ber, block-reduced
Y. Fan, M. Kahrizi / Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 297305 299
Fig. 2. Coordinates axes of FBG ber.
strain tensor
j
can be expressed as:

j
=
_
_
_

1

2

1

3

2

2

3

3

2

3

3
_
_
_ (5)
However, if we consider only longitudinal stress is applied
alongthe ber andassume zeroadditional radial stress (which
is valid in case of bare FBG ber), strain tensor
j
is further
reduced as:

j
=
_
_
_
1

3
_
_
_
1
(6)
where
1
,
2
and
3
are Poissons ratios of optical ber along
direction 1, 2 and 3, respectively. In Eq. (4), the contracted
orthotropic strain-optic tensor is given by:

ij
=
_
_
_
p
11
p
12
p
13
p
12
p
22
p
23
p
13
p
23
p
33
_
_
_ (7)
Then substitute the expressions of
j
and
ij
into Eqs. (3) and
(4), the longitudinal strain sensitivity can thus be determined
and is expressed in terms of an effective strain-optic constant
p
ei
, so that
_

B
_
i
= (1 p
ei
)
1
, i = 2, 3 (8)
For a low birefringent FBG ber, the strain-optical ten-
sor is approximately isotropic, so that p
11
=p
22
=p
33
,
p =p
12
=p
13
=p
23
, and
2
=
3
=due to optical bers elas-
tically isotropic nature. In this case effective strain-optic con-
stant p
ei
can be degenerated, so that
p
e
= p
e2
= p
e3
=
n
2
eff
2
[p
12
(p
11
+p
12
)] (9)
and

B
= (1 p
e
)
1
=
1

n
2
eff
2
_

1
p
11
+p
12
(
1

1
)
_
(10)
However, whenever additional radial strain eld is applied,
strain-optic performance of the grating is expected no longer
follow the rule presented by Eq. (10), since
2
and
3
will
not be zero in Eq. (5). Through sophisticated mathematical
process, [6,7] we can obtain that under three dimensional
strain elds
1
,
2
and
3
, FBGs grating wavelength shift
becomes

B,2

B
=
1

n
2
eff
2
[p
11

2
+p
12
(
1
+
3
)] (11)

B,3

B
=
1

n
2
eff
2
[p
11

3
+p
12
(
1
+
2
)] (12)
Therefore, two hypotheses are given based on above discus-
sion:
(1) If FBG strain sensor is subject to the stress eld in both
axial and radial directions, its strain-optic behaviour will
be deviated from that when only axial stress is applied.
(2) If radial stresses are remarkably non-uniform along 2
and 3 directions, FBGs grating wavelength shifts will
be perceptibly apart between two polarization states of
entire optical response. Hence one may observe reec-
tion spike or transmission notch split or broadening due
to the induced birefringence.
However, when used as FBG strain gage, it is possible
to follow common gage concept to interpret the erroneous
deviation due to the radial strain sensitivity of the grating, if
temperature effect is neglected [8]. Deriving from Eqs. (11)
and (12), synthetic behaviour of an embedded FBG sensor
can be generalized as
=

B

B
= F
z

f
z
+F
tx

f
x
+F
ty

f
y
(13)
where is the normalized grating wavelength shift; F
z
is sen-
sors axial strain sensitivity in z-direction; F
tx
is sensors ra-
dial strain sensitivity in x-direction; and F
ty
is sensors radial
strain sensitivity in y-direction. For convenience, all sensi-
tivities are normalized by F
x
, so that Eq. (13) is transformed
as:
= F
z
(
f
z
+K
tx

f
x
+K
ty

f
y
) (14)
where K
tx
and K
ty
are the two normalized radial strain sen-
sitivity factors. If one premises an ideal FBG strain gage,
which is assumed (or more precisely, desired) to respond
to axial strain only, it is possible to dene the normalized
grating wavelength shift of the ideal FBG strain gage as

= F
f
z
(15)
where superscript prime indicates an ideal gage and F is its
ideal axial strain sensitivity. One may notice that Eq. (15) is
equivalent to the representation of bare FBG grating. Devi-
ations due to additional radial strains can then be quantied
simply by nding the margin between actual and ideal be-
300 Y. Fan, M. Kahrizi / Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 297305
haviours
=

100%
=
_
_
F
z
F
1
_
+
F
z
F
K
tx

f
x

f
z
+
F
z
F
K
ty

f
y

f
z
_
100% (16)
This expression reveals that FBG strain gages deviation is a
function of:
(1) Difference between actual and ideal axial sensitivity;
(2) Radial strain sensitivity factors, which are resulted from
the strain-optic instinct of FBG grating;
(3) Ratios

f
x

f
z
and

f
y

f
z
, which indicate the extent of undesired
radial stress.
3. Modeling and simulation
Do embedded FBG strain gages really experience addi-
tional radial stress? Actually there are two additional radial
stresses possibly existing after the sensors are buried, named
initial radial stress and lateral response induced radial
stress.
As we have discussed, whenever embedded in materials,
optical bers can be regarded as foreign entities to host struc-
ture, which inevitably perturbs instinct structural morphol-
ogy in local continuum, hence certain lateral stress initially
exists. [9] Somehow, this initial radial stress can be ze-
roed out in practice, and its inuence in gauges sensitivity is
negligible.
However, if mechanical properties mismatch between em-
bedded sensor and host structure, when loading is applied on
the structure along sensors direction, lateral mechanical re-
sponse of the structure may induce further radial stress on
embedded FBG ber, and results in remarkable strain-optic
deviation. In order to prove the hypothesis, as well as to esti-
mate the extent of additional radial stress, we did some me-
chanical simulations with nite element analysis tool.
Table 1
Mechanical properties of structural elements in simulative model
EZ (Msi)
a
PRXZ
b
PRYZ
c
FBG ber 10.58 0.1 0.1
Simulation case I 18.55 0.1983 0.1
Simulation case II 18.55 0.0352 0.1
a
EZ represents elastic modulus along z-direction (loading direction).
b
PRXZ represents major Poissons ratio between x- and z-directions.
c
PRYZ represents major Poissons ratio between y- and z-directions.
Refer to Fig. 3, we modeled an anisotropic structure with
FBG ber embedded. Different mechanical property values
were assigned to the structure while identical strain was
loaded to the structure along embedded ber direction, so
that radial strain evolvement in vicinity of the embedment
can be presented along with structural property changes.
Two typical cases of structural property denition are
listed in Table 1 together with FBG ber. From the table, we
can see that FBG ber was regarded as an isotropic material.
In order to simplify the discussion, property variable was as-
signed to PRXZ of host structure only, while other structural
properties remain unchanged. Further simplication was pre-
sumed by matching structural PRYZ with Poissons ratio of
FBG ber (i.e. 0.1). 2000 tensile strain was applied to
entire entity exclusively along FBG ber direction (i.e. z-
direction) for both cases. A 3-D 20-note hexagonal element
was applied in structural mesh, while smart mesh was used
to secure denser meshing in interface vicinity between em-
bedded ber and surrounding host. Further, ber Polyimide
coating was not counted in modeling. For purpose of simpli-
cation, initial radial stress was zeroed in the simulation.
According to the simulation results (also refer to the two
typical cases in Fig. 4), we can conclude that: due to me-
chanical properties mismatch between FBG ber and host
structure, particularly their Poissons ratios in lateral direc-
tion, embedded sensor did experience additional radial strain
eld when load was applied along sensor direction; and the
more the mismatchexists, the more the additional radial strain
eld is induced.
Fig. 3. Schematic of simulative model.
Y. Fan, M. Kahrizi / Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 297305 301
Fig. 4. Simulation results for two typical cases: (a) simulation case I; (b) simulation case II.
4. Experiment and discussion
Upon above discussion, it is conrmed that embedded
FBG strain gages experience additional radial strain eld in
application, hence may induce strain-optic deviations. There-
fore, once integrated into the structure, every gage has to be
recalibrated, which leads to tremendous workload and makes
the gauge design impracticable. If methodology can be dis-
coveredinrelatinggages strain-optic deviationwithmechan-
ical mismatch between ber and host structure, operation of
the gage system can be dramatically simplied. However,
further experiments become crucial to nd the answer.
In order to carry out a thorough investigation on a single
intersection of entire FBG strain gage array, two orthogo-
302 Y. Fan, M. Kahrizi / Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 297305
Fig. 5. Schematic of two specimens: (a) specimen I; (b) specimen II.
nally geometrized composite specimens were fabricated and
measured. Detailed schematics of two specimens are shown
in Fig. 5. Designated layup sequences of the two specimens
followed (0
8
90
4
)s, thus totally 24 layers of plies stacked in
specimens thickness, in which 16 layers were oriented in 0
direction, and other 8 layers were oriented in 90 direction,
which was expected to present strong orthotropic character-
istics. Although orthogonally patterned, plate size for both
specimens complied 200 mm40 mm. The material used to
fabricate the specimens was NCT-301 carbon ber reinforced
composite prepreg. The thickness of prepreg tape is approx-
imately 125 m, hence total thickness of specimens was ap-
proximately 3 mm. Refer to Fig. 5, sensors embedded along
loading in specimens I and II were numbered with 1/1 and
1/2, respectively. Similarly, sensors embedded perpendicular
to loading in two specimens were numbered with 2/1 and
2/2, respectively. Grating wavelengths of all embedded FBG
sensors were in range of 1550 nm.
Before embedded, strain-optic behaviours of the FBGsen-
sors were characterized in their bare-ber state. Refer to
Fig. 6, in the experiment, Universal Test Machine (UTM)
was used to apply static load to each specimen. Two identical
resistance strain gages were orthogonally mounted on both
sides of each specimen separately. Geometric locations of
two resistance gages coincided with those of embedded FBG
gages in the specimen. Surface mounted resistance gages
were used to recalibrate FBG gages, as well as to evaluate
the applicability and erroneous deviation of embedded FBG
strain gage network.
Although the determination of composite structural me-
chanical properties is not a topic in this work, some brief
structural parameters need to be obtained for the purposes
of FBG gages recalibration and further discussion. These ex-
perimental values are listed in Table 2. One may notice that
Table 2
Experimental mechanical properties two specimens
Elastic modulus (Msi)
a
Poissons ratio
b
Specimen I 12.70 0.1983
Specimen II 6.77 0.0352
a
Elastic modulus of each specimen was oriented along loading.
b
Poissons ratio of each specimen was transverse to loading.
Fig. 6. Test set-up.
Y. Fan, M. Kahrizi / Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 297305 303
Fig. 7. FBG sensors along loading directions in two specimens: (i.e. sensor 1/1 in specimen I and sensor 1/2 in specimen II); ( ) bare FBG sensor; ()
embedded FBG sensor 1/1; ( ), embedded FBG sensor in 1/2.
experimentally obtained Poissons ratios were also used in
preceding simulations. However, composite specimens non-
linear mechanical properties were neglected in experimental
results regression. FBGbers mechanical properties used in
discussion are quoted from manufacturers specications, in
which the elastic modulus is 10.58 Msi, and Poissons ratio
is 0.1. [10,11].
Experimental strain-optic behaviours of embedded FBG
sensors are presented in Figs. 7 and 8, and compared
with their intrinsic behaviours in bare ber states, respec-
tively.
Bringing discussed scenario into experimental result anal-
ysis, a surface mountedresistance straingage arrayis geomet-
rically superposed embedded FBG strain gage array. When
specimens are pulled, considering the gages oriented along
with the loading, readings from resistance strain gages are
used to recalibrate corresponding FBG gages, thereby per-
formances of actual embedded FBGstrain gages are proled.
Deducting practical axial straingrating wavelength shift
relation by that of ideal bare FBG grating (which has been
obtained before embedment), one can quantitatively deter-
mine the degree of the deviation.
Upon test results presented in Fig. 7 and followthe concept
of Eq. (16), for this particular cross-ply structure, one may
work out:
(1) When tensile strain is applied along 0 direction, the
coincidentally oriented FBG sensor (i.e. sensor 1/1)
Fig. 8. FBG sensors perpendicular to loading directions in two specimens: (i.e. sensor 2/1 in specimen I and sensor 2/2 in specimen II); ( ), bare FBG sensor;
() embedded FBG sensor 2/1; ( ), embedded FBG sensor 2/2.
304 Y. Fan, M. Kahrizi / Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 297305
presents a positive axial strain optic deviation:
=

100%
=
1.26 10
3
1.22 10
3
1.22 10
3
100%
3.3% (17)
(2) When tensile stress is applied along 90 direction, coin-
cidentally oriented FBG sensor (i.e. sensor 1/2) presents
a negative axial strain optic deviation:
=

100%
=
1.12 10
3
1.22 10
3
1.22 10
3
100%
8.2% (18)
Upon Fig. 7, one may illusively conclude that FBG strain
gages sensitivity is enhanced or degraded after embed-
ment. In fact, instincts of the sensor are never changed,
supercial up and down of gages strain sensitivity is in-
duced by additional radial stresses eld. This discovery
also reveals the complexity in embedded FBG strain gage
interpretation.
Nevertheless, in case FBG is used as embedded strain
gage, only strain tensor tangent to ber axis is desired, while
radial tensors act as noise interfering the measurand. Recur-
ring to the concept of detection, only if signal is always ob-
trusive to noise, FBG strain gage is said to be practical, oth-
erwise signal will be overwhelmed in noise, so that strain
gage becomes useless, or in the other word, the embedded
FBG sensor would be rather used as pressure gage than
strain gage upon recalibration, in which radial measurand be-
comes dominant. However, this work proves the feasibility
of FBGstrain gage network integrated in arbitrary composite
structure.
Based on the discussion, precept of signal-to-noise ratio
(SNR) in engineering applications can be also a means to
evaluate embedded FBG strain gages usability [12]. Hence,
according to test data in this case, one can calculate SNR of
individual FBG strain gage as:
(1) When tensile strain is applied along 0 direction, the
coincidentally oriented FBG sensor (i.e. sensor 1/1)
presents an axialradial SNR:
SNR = 10 log
_

_
= 10
_

1.22 10
3
1.26 10
3
1.22 10
3

_
= 14.8 dB (19)
(2) When tensile stress is applied along 90 direction, coin-
cidentally oriented FBG sensor (i.e. sensor 1/2) presents
an axialradial SNR:
SNR = 10 log
_

_
= 10
_

1.22 10
3
1.12 10
3
1.22 10
3

_
= 10.9 dB (20)
Meanwhile, Fig. 8 illustrates strain-optic behaviours of em-
bedded FBG strain gages transverse to loadings in two speci-
mens. Unlike their longitudinal partners, these gages experi-
enced axial compression, and presented apparent non-linear
strain-optic performances. The shorter measurement range
presented by embedded sensor 2/2 was caused by the fact that
the transverse Poissons ratio of specimen II was smaller than
that of specimen I, hence induced less transverse compressive
strain.
However, expected reection spike split or broad-
ening was not apparently observed in the experiment,
which shows the fact that vicinal stress elds were not
signicantly differed along embedded ber circumfer-
ence.
5. Conclusion
Neither fraction nor debonding was observed during spec-
imens fabrication and stress measurements, which proved
the survivability of embedded FBG array design. How-
ever, additional radial stress elds and induced axial strain-
optic deviations were observed through simulation and
experiment. The concept of axialradial SNR was intro-
duced to evaluate the applicability of embedded FBG strain
gages. Besides, upon test data analysis, one can conclude
that:
(1) If local Poissons ratio of the host structure is greater
than intrinsic Poissons ratio of embedded FBG ber in
its radial direction, grating will perform positive strain-
optic deviation comparing to its bare ber state due to
the induced radial compression;
(2) If local Poissons ratio of the host structure is smaller
than intrinsic Poissons ratio of embedded FBG ber in
its radial direction, grating will perform negative strain-
optic deviation comparing to its bare ber state due to
the induced radial tension.
Based on above conclusion, certain mechanical property
model between FBG ber and host structure can be estab-
lished, so that strain-optic behaviour of embedded FBGstrain
gages becomes determinable with a simple calculation, and
the applicability of embedded FBG strain gages is further
enhanced.
Y. Fan, M. Kahrizi / Sensors and Actuators A 121 (2005) 297305 305
Acknowledgement
Special thanks must be given to NSERC, and ENCS fac-
ulty of Concordia University Dr. S.V. Hoa, for his permit to
access his lab facilities; Mr. Bao Xiao and Dr. Ming Xie for
their assistance in composite specimen fabrication.
References
[1] K.T.V. Grattan, T. Sun, in: K.T.V. Grattan, B.T. Meggitt (Eds.), Opti-
cal Fiber Sensor Technology: Fundamentals, Kluwer Academic Pub-
lishers, Boston, 2000, pp. 914, Chapter 1.
[2] G.J. Tsamasphyros, G.N. Kenderakis, N.K. Furnarakis, Z.P.M. Riga,
R. Chemama, R. Bartolo, Selection of optical ber paths and sensor
locations for monitoring the integrity of composite patching, Appl.
Comp. Mater. 10 (2003) 331338.
[3] L. Tang, X. Tao, C.L. Choy, Effectiveness and optimization of ber
Bragg grating sensor as embedded strain sensor, Smart Mater. Struct.
8 (1999) 154160.
[4] A. Othonos, K. Kalli, Fiber Bragg Gratings, Fundamentals and
Applications in Telecommunications and Sensing, Artech House,
Boston, 1999, Chapter 3, pp. 9899.
[5] R. Gafsi, M.A. El-Sherif, Analysis of induced-birefringence ef-
fects on ber Bragg grating, Opt. Fiber Technol. 6 (2000) 299
323.
[6] S.M. Melle, K. Liu, R.M. Measures, Practical ber-optic Bragg
grating strain gauge system, Appl. Opt. 32 (19) (1993) 3601
3609.
[7] F. Bosia, P. Giaccari, J. Botsis, M. Facchini, H.G. Limberger, R.P.
Salath, Characterization of the response of ber Bragg grating sen-
sors subjected to a two-dimensional strain eld, Smart Mater. Struct.
12 (2003) 925934.
[8] J.S. Sirkis, A. Dasgupta, in: E. Udd (Ed.), Fiber Optic Smart Struc-
tures, Wiley, New York, 1995, pp. 95101, Chapter 4.
[9] A. Tay, D.A. Wilson, L. Wood, Strain analysis of optical bers em-
bedded in composite materials using nite element modeling, in:
Proceedings of the SPIEInternational Society of Optical Engineer-
ing, vol. 1170, 1990, pp. 521533.
[10] G. Mahlke, P. G ossing, Optical Fiber Cables, Fundamentals Cable
Engineering Systems Planning, 2nd rev. ed., Wiley, Siemens Ak-
tiengesellschaft, 1993, Chapter 3, pp. 20.
[11] Corning

SMF-28e
TM
Photonic Fiber Product Information, Corning
Incorporated, 2003.
[12] Y. Fan, Characterization of Fiber Bragg Grating Array Embedded in
Composite Structures. M.A. Science Thesis, Concordia University,
Montreal, 2004, Chapter 3, pp. 8386.
Biographies
Yu Fan is currently a member of technical staff at Acasia Technologies
(HK) Limited (a TDK subsidiary). His career history also includes Lu-
cent Technologies and EXFO Electro-Optical Co. Ltd., all in ber optics
business sectors. Mr. Fan received his MA Sc and BSc degrees in Elec-
trical and Computer Engineering from Concordia University and Beijing
University, respectively.
Mojtaba Kahrizi received his PhD in applied solid state physics from
Concordia University in Montreal, Canada. After spending 5 years in
STFX University in Nova Scotia, Canada as Research Associate and As-
sistant Professor, he came back to Concordia in Electrical and Computer
Engineering Department. He established the micro devices and micro-
fabrication laboratories in that department. At present as an Associate
Professor, he is involved with teaching and researches focused on funda-
mental issues related to micro- and nano- fabrications, in particular with
devices related to optical communications and health related issues.