3702 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 58, NO.

10, OCTOBER 2009

Digital Measuring System for Monitoring

Motor Shaft Parameters on Ships
Hrvoje Džapo, Member, IEEE, Zoran Stare, Member, IEEE, and Nenad Bobanac

Abstract—The robust measuring system for the continuous

monitoring of the ship motor shaft average torque, power, and
rotational speed was developed and tested. The system was de-
signed for permanent installation in ships under realistic working
conditions. The strain gage sensor is employed to measure the
torque, whereas the shaft rotational speed is measured by the
inductive proximity switch. The strain gage signal conditioning
circuit design was highly simplified by using a high-resolution
ΣΔ A/D converter (ADC). Such an approach minimizes the
overall number of analog components and the input measuring
chain errors. A contactless power transmission subsystem was
Fig. 1. Classical approach to strain gage signal conditioning circuit design.
developed based on the specifically designed rotary transformer
operating at low frequency. Strain measurement results are trans-
mitted over the near-field low-frequency capacitive link by us- Wheatstone bridge circuit [2]. Torque can also be measured by
ing a specifically designed communication protocol based on the magnetic [3]–[6], capacitive [7], [8], and optical [9] sensors.
digital modulation principle. The receiver microprocessor-based However, resistive strain gage sensors are the preferred choice
unit processes the measured data and transmits the results to for many applications due to their higher accuracy, linearity,
the monitoring human–machine interface over some commonly
used industrial analog and digital communication protocols. The repeatability, etc. The full-bridge configuration is the most com-
principal advantages of the novel measuring system design over mon choice, because it provides the highest sensor sensitivity,
some state-of-the-art commercial solutions are simplicity, higher good temperature compensation, and linearity. The power can
accuracy, stability, reliability, simplified calibration procedure, be calculated from the measured torque and rotational speed by
and contactless signal transmission and processing completely in means of
a digital form, which, hence, reduces the most common shortcom-
ings of similar analog-based systems.
P = 2 · π · M · n. (1)
Index Terms—Digital measurements, marine electronic equip-
ment, mechanical variables measurement, strain measurement, The shaft under load is subject to the biaxial stress condition
torque measurement.
with principal normal stresses at angles of ±45◦ to the lon-
gitudinal axis of the shaft [2]. For the full-bridge strain gage
I. I NTRODUCTION configuration, the analytical formula for torque calculation is
given by
M ODERN SHIP control and monitoring systems regularly
include a subsystem for measuring the most important
mechanical parameters on revolving motor shafts, namely, M=
π G · D3
· ·
um
(2)
torque, power, and rotational speed. The measurement of these 8 Kt UREF
mechanical quantities provides important information about the
where G is the shear modulus, D is the shaft diameter, Kt is the
motor behavior under realistic working conditions and serves
strain gage factor, UREF is the strain gage supply voltage, and
as an input for the closed-loop control system. The shaft torque
um is the voltage measured at the bridge diagonal.
M is determined by measuring the strain ε on the shaft surface,
In practical applications, all measuring circuitry, along with
whereas the shaft rotational speed n is measured by the induc-
the strain gage sensor, must be attached to the revolving shaft
tive proximity switch. Although it is possible to measure the
surface. This means that two principal problems must be solved,
strain by a few different techniques [1], the industry standard
namely, wireless power and data transmission between the
approach is to use resistive strain gage sensors connected in a
stator and rotor parts of a measuring system. The classical
approach [2] to strain gage signal conditioning circuit design
Manuscript received June 29, 2008; revised March 3, 2009. Current version
published September 16, 2009. The Associate Editor coordinating the review
is shown in Fig. 1. Such a configuration typically comprises an
process for this paper was Dr. Izzet Kale. input stage instrumentation amplifier (with adjustable zero and
H. Džapo and Z. Stare are with the Faculty of Electrical Engineering and gain), a low-pass antialiasing filter (usually realized as a higher-
Computing, University of Zagreb, Zagreb 10000, Croatia (e-mail: hrvoje.
dzapo@fer.hr). order analog active filter), and an A/D converter (ADC). In 12-
N. Bobanac is with BOBLab d.o.o., Zagreb 10020, Croatia (e-mail: nenad. to 16-bit ADC systems, the zero level and the amplifier gain
bobanac@zg.t-com.hr). must carefully be adjusted to cover the full input range of the
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. ADC for the maximum expected torque deflection to achieve
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIM.2009.2019316 acceptable resolution of the measuring system. The Wheatstone
0018-9456/$26.00 © 2009 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
DŽAPO et al.: DIGITAL MEASURING SYSTEM FOR MONITORING MOTOR SHAFT PARAMETERS ON SHIPS
bridge in Fig. 1 is balanced by means of the potentiometer
R0 , whereas the instrumentation amplifier gain is adjusted with
the resistor Rg . The precision shunt resistor Rc is used to
unbalance the bridge to simulate the load in a process of gain
calibration [2].
Such an approach to the input measuring chain design has
a few inherent shortcomings. First, the calibration procedure is
rather complex due to the need for an iterative adjustment of
potentiometers R0 and Rg to achieve the maximum ADC input
dynamic range. Moreover, the careful calculation of torque
values expected under realistic working conditions must be
conducted in advance to correctly predict the voltage levels
at the strain gage sensor output. Furthermore, the calibration
potentiometer’s aging effects may compromise the long-term
input chain stability, which may introduce problems in per-
manent shaft monitoring installations. Finally, it should be
emphasized that the complete analog measuring chain before
ADC (adjustable instrumentation amplifier, resistors, and ana-
log anti-aliasing low-pass filter) significantly contributes to
the overall measuring uncertainty primarily due to component
aging effects and temperature drift. Another important problem
inherent to the described input measuring chain solution is
the possibility of ADC input saturation due to the excessive
long-term strain gage sensor zero creep on the shaft under
permanent mechanical load, which cannot be compensated by
the autocalibration procedures in the embedded software alone.
Our solution adopts a different approach to input measuring
chain realization by interfacing the strain gage sensor to the
integrated circuit with high-resolution ΣΔ ADC (the approach
previously proposed in [10]). The goal of this paper is to prove
that such an approach may yield a simpler, more efficient, and
accurate shaft monitoring system. Our shaft monitoring system
design was particularly optimized for permanent installations
with an emphasis on high measuring accuracy, simplicity, re-
liability, and robust behavior in harsh environments. The main
advantage of this design is that no zero and gain adjustment po-
tentiometers are needed on the rotor side, and that all calibration
procedures can be performed on the stator side by means of the
embedded software. Furthermore, in our design, the strain gage
imbalance cannot lead the ADC inputs into saturation under any
circumstances. These advantages are very important in practice.
Moreover, we developed a digital contactless data transmission
subsystem particularly suited for such applications, which is
less sensitive to the interferences present in noisy environments
than classical analog data transmission solutions, which are
usually realized by means of carrier-frequency amplifier and
FM modulation [13]. High-precision analog systems are con-
siderably more difficult to implement to meet the accuracy of
digital systems. It was also necessary to develop a continuous
contactless power supply transmission system to accommodate
the solution for permanent installations in ships. Our research
showed that it is possible to build a highly sophisticated torque
monitoring system by such an approach by only using off-the-
shelf components, with the overall measuring system charac-
teristics comparable with or better than most of the present
commercial solutions. This paper extends the description [16]
of our approach to the overall measuring system design with
an emphasis on the detailed uncertainty analysis of the realized
Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3703
Fig. 2. Three-dimensional view of the assembled and connected shaft moni-
toring system.
measuring system under laboratory and realistic working envi-
ronment test conditions.
II. D ESCRIPTION OF THE N OVEL S HAFT
M ONITORING S YSTEM
Nowadays, there are numerous commercial shaft monitor-
ing systems that employ the classical approach to the strain
measuring system design (e.g., [22] and [23]). Our previous
research in this area yielded some solutions [17]–[20] that
were based on the classical measuring principle described in
Fig. 1. They revealed numerous shortcomings of the classical
approach in practical long-term shaft monitoring applications,
such as complex installation and calibration procedure, tem-
perature stability problems, complex and costly circuit design,
ADC input saturation due to long-term zero-creep effects under
permanent mechanical load, etc. An alternative approach to
the strain gage signal conditioning circuit design based on the
sigma–delta modulator has already been proposed [10], [11],
[14], [15]. Such an approach to sensor interfacing nowadays
becomes popular not only with resistive strain gage sensors
but also with other types of passive sensors, e.g., capacitive
sensors [12]. In particular, the availability of modern precision
off-the-shelf integrated high-resolution ΣΔ ADCs now allows
easy interfacing of the strain gage sensors without the need
for complex analog signal conditioning circuitry. In such an
approach, the analog input chain measuring uncertainty is
primarily determined by the characteristics of the chosen ADC
and the quality of the strain gage sensor.
The mechanical design of our ship shaft monitoring system
is shown in Fig. 2. The system consists of specifically designed
rotor and stator parts. A block diagram of the electronic part
of the system is depicted in Fig. 3. The rotor part includes
the strain gage sensor, the measuring transmitter module, and
the contactless power reception coils, which are all embedded
into the compact protective husk. The stator part of the system
contains the ac power supply filter, the receiver data-processing
module, the tensometer signal pickup, the inductive proximity
switch, and the power transmission coils.
3704
Fig. 3. Shaft monitoring system block diagram.
Fig. 4. Torque input measuring channel structure.
A block diagram of the shaft monitoring system input mea-
suring chain is shown in Fig. 4. In this configuration, the strain
gage sensor is powered by the accurate reference voltage source
UREF , whereas the bridge diagonal voltage is fed to the input
differential stage of the integrated circuit. The influence of the
reference voltage UREF variations is eliminated in the conver-
sion results due to the ratiometric measurement approach. The
adjustable external instrumentation amplifier, similar to the one
shown in Fig. 1, is not necessary because the acceptable mea-
suring resolution of the strain gage signal can automatically be
achieved due to the high resolution of the ADC. The reasoning
for going from 16- to 24-bit ADC can be explained as follows:
In the 16-bit ADC system, it is necessary to set the zero level
and the gain of the input amplifier by potentiometers in such
a manner that the whole input analog range of the ADC is
covered. However, if the output amplifier span is too close to
Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 58, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009
the ADC input range limits, then the long-term zero creep may
cause signal clipping for large torque values. This problem is
avoided in high-resolution systems (> 20 bits), because the
input signal is fed to the ADC with small or no amplification
at all. Although the full 24-bit resolution is not achieved, the
effective resolution of the measuring system, which depends on
the ratio between the maximum sensor output voltage UFS and
the reference voltage UREF , is comparable to 16-bit systems
that utilize the whole ADC input range. For example, for
the sensor with full-scale (FS) voltage output UFS = 10 mV
and bridge excitation UREF = 4.096 V, the best theoretical
effective resolution of the measurement system (which takes
into account the ADC quantization error only) is
 
UFS
Nef = log2 = 15.3 bit (3)
(UREF /224 )
under the ideal conditions and without input signal amplifica-
tion, which is comparable to classical 16-bit systems (Nef in (3)
does not take into account any other errors, such as noise, zero
and gain drifts, nonlinearity, etc.). The measurement system
effective resolution [see (3)] is smaller for sensors with a lower
maximum output voltage (e.g., Nef = 12 bit for sensor with
FS output voltage UFS = 1 mV). In that case, the measurement
system effective resolution may be improved by using a fixed-
gain input instrumentation amplifier without compromising the
input ADC span for larger zero creeps under the assumption
that the amplifier gain is sufficiently low.
Another major practical improvement of the 24-bit system
is that potentiometers R0 , Rg , and Rc can be left out, thus
eliminating the need for both manual zero and gain calibration
on the rotor side and the influence of these components’ aging
and thermal effects. The system zero need not be manually
calibrated, unlike in the case of the classical input measuring
chain design: it is sufficient to only store the zero output for
the unloaded shaft in the embedded software, whereas the gain
calibration is avoided by employing the precision integrated
reference voltage UREF for ratiometric bridge and ADC supply.
The classical gain calibration procedure, like for the system
shown in Fig. 1, is not necessary in this case because the
voltage um across the bridge diagonal can directly be deduced
from the ADC readouts. Hardware offset nulling of the bridge
output during the zero calibration procedure is not necessary
because the initial bridge imbalance cannot lead the ADC input
into saturation. However, the inclusion of the resistor Rc in
the application circuit might still be beneficial in a process
of quick verification of the sensor installation. An active anti-
aliasing filter can be left out in this configuration due to the
high oversampling frequency of the ΔΣ ADC (a simple passive
RC low-pass filter for eliminating the high-frequency noise
is sufficient). The power supply coupling noise (50/60 Hz) is
filtered out by means of digital filtering.
The input measuring chain uncertainty mostly depends on
the chosen ADC, which determines the overall measuring
characteristics of the system. Design can easily be adapted for
different applications by choosing the most appropriate ADC
for each particular case. In this design, the most important
electrical characteristics of the electronic components in the
DŽAPO et al.: DIGITAL MEASURING SYSTEM FOR MONITORING MOTOR SHAFT PARAMETERS ON SHIPS
input measuring chain are the following: 24-bit resolution,
2 ppm of FS IN L, 2.5 ppm of FS gain error, 0.5-μV offset
error, 0.03 ppm of UREF /◦ C gain drift, and 10-nV/◦ C zero
drift. The results of the measuring system experimental eval-
uation and the measurement uncertainty analysis are presented
in Sections III and IV, respectively.
The power transmission subsystem was designed as a low-
frequency rotary transformer. The primary transmission coils
on the stator side are powered by a standard alternating-current
source (230 VAC, 50–60 Hz), which delivers approximately
1 W to the secondary rotor side, under the assumption of
6-mm air gap. The secondary coils are compactly embedded
into the protective husk, which is attached to the revolving
shaft. The transmitter measuring module power consumption
requirements were optimized to only 20% of the delivered
power, including the 350-Ω sensor consumption. The low-
frequency power transmission approach was chosen due to the
simplicity of implementation, robustness, and elimination of
possible electromagnetic compatibility issues.
The problem of contactless measuring data transmission can
be solved by a few different approaches, e.g., by means of
inductive coupling, capacitive link, infrared communication,
RF transmission, etc. Most of the existing commercial shaft
monitoring systems predominately rely on the analog FM mod-
ulation approach for contactless measuring result transmission
over the near-field coupling media (e.g., carrier-frequency am-
plifier [13]). The analog FM modulation approach can have
a significant impact on the overall measuring uncertainty, re-
gardless of the basic coupling principle and the carrier fre-
quency choice, due to the frequency temperature drift in the
analog communication chain, the electronic components’ aging
effects, and sensitivity to noise. The near-field low-frequency
data transmission link for torque measurements is a typical
choice for permanent industrial installations because the RF
communication may be susceptible to interferences caused by
other devices operating at the same license-free industrial,
scientific and medical band.
To avoid the typical problems related to the analog FM
modulation approach, we implemented a specifically designed
low-frequency data transmission link based on the digital
frequency-shift-keying (FSK) modulation principle. The digital
transmission approach is less sensitive to external influences
and noise sources that may be present in realistic industrial
environments. The modulated signal is transmitted from the
rotor to the stator part of the system by means of near-field
capacitive coupling through the small linkage capacitance of
an order of magnitude of 0.1–1 pF. Digital modulation is
performed by the microprocessor in real time without use of
any external analog electronic components. The FSK signal is
demodulated in the microcontroller unit at the receiver side by
measuring the time between two consecutive voltage level tran-
sitions in the interrupt-driven procedure. Only valid transitions
that correspond to T1 = 1/f1 or T0 = 1/f0 are accepted, which
thus eliminates false transitions that might be present due to
electromagnetic interference and noise. We repeat a few periods
of the logical-level signal frequency to minimize the impact of
false signal edges, which thus provides a slower but more robust
data communication link.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3705
The receiver module microprocessor unit handles a few
different real-time tasks: digital signal demodulation, rotational
speed measurement, calculation of torque, power, and rota-
tional speed, digital and analog data transmission to the remote
control unit, automatic zero calibration, and receiver module
system self-monitoring.
The rotational speed is measured by counting the pulses
received from the inductive proximity switch (see Fig. 3)
in the adaptive time window. The time window bounds are
synchronized with the incoming pulses and measured with
high precision by using the method described in [17]. It is
implemented by an interrupt-driven approach and a 24-bit
software timer, which is necessary for longer averaging time
windows. The rotational speed measuring uncertainty is mostly
determined by the stability of the temperature uncompensated
quartz oscillator. The speed measurement resolution of 1/30 s−1
is determined by the number of marks on the rotor husk.
The lowest priority microprocessor real-time task is dedi-
cated to the calculation of torque, power, and rotational speed
by means of (2). A floating-point arithmetic was employed to
preserve the final calculation result accuracy. The real-time rou-
tines running at the same priority level transmit the processed
measuring results to the remote ship management system. Our
shaft monitoring system provides means for communication by
the most common analog and digital industrial protocols. The
high-accuracy current-loop transmission (4–20 mA) is realized
by using 16-bit current-mode integrated D/A converters. Al-
though the analog transmission deteriorates the overall measur-
ing system uncertainty, it may be useful in practice, particularly
for complex supervisory control and data acquisition control
systems with a large number of analog inputs for monitoring
different quantities. The RS-232 link is suitable for the easy
connection with the local PC for measuring system configuring,
monitoring, and logging purposes. Remote connection using
RS-485 provides a robust digital link to the remote control
system without measuring data quality loss.
All of the digital and analog outputs to the remote ship man-
agement system are galvanically isolated from the electronics
around the main processor in the receiver module (see Fig. 3).
This provides higher noise immunity of transmitted data and
better safety characteristics of the system. The results of torque,
power, and rotational speed measurements are transmitted to
the secondary output side of the galvanically isolated interface
in digital form.
Automatic zero compensation is important for long-term
measuring system stability due to the possible zero creep as
a result of residual stress in the shaft under variable load
conditions. Zero compensation is performed when the shaft is
stopped, which is checked at the end of the main task loop cycle.
The conditions for starting the zero compensation procedure
are satisfied if no pulses from the proximity switch sensor are
received for a certain amount of time.
III. R ESULTS
The system was subjected to laboratory tests to experimen-
tally determine the most important technical characteristics and
the measuring uncertainty. The results of laboratory tests are
3706
OVERVIEW OF THE SHAFT MONITORING SYSTEM TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Fig. 5. Block diagram of the test setup.
summarized in Table I. We designed a configurable measuring
setup that very accurately simulates the behavior of the strain
gage sensor (output voltage and bridge impedance) and allows
fine control of the differential voltage applied to the measur-
ing input. Finally, we tested the measuring system behavior
under realistic working conditions on the ship shaft during the
sea trial.
A block diagram of the test setup is shown in Fig. 5. The
measuring system modules were placed into the temperature
test chamber. The floating adjustable battery-powered dc volt-
age source was used to simulate the signal at the strain gage
bridge diagonal seen from the transmitter module measuring
input. The actual voltage value for each test point was mon-
itored by the high-accuracy multimeter (HP 3457), whereas
the measuring results were logged on a PC over the RS-232
debug interface. The shaft rotational speed measuring accuracy
was tested by the square waveform fed from the high-accuracy
signal generator (Agilent 33250 A).
The torque measuring channel input was modeled by the
equivalent resistive network and the floating voltage source.
The Wheatstone bridge has an equivalent impedance R/2 seen
from each measurement input, whereas the bridge diagonal
voltage can be represented by common-mode UCM and differ-
ential ud components. Two 175-Ω resistors in the test circuit
are connected in series to simulate the realistic load for the
onboard voltage reference UREF and to provide the common-
mode voltage UCM = UREF /2 to achieve optimal conditions at
Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 58, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009
TABLE I
the differential measuring input. Two additional 87-Ω resistors
were added to complete the circuit that models the strain gage
output resistance seen from the transmitter module measuring
inputs (R+IN = R−IN = R/2, where R = 350 Ω is the nomi-
nal bridge resistance). The differential voltage ug was fed from
the floating dc voltage source to simulate the bridge imbal-
ance. The floating voltage source was used to prevent ground
loops that would deteriorate measurements by introducing the
influence of external noise. The applied test voltage ug value
was furthermore verified by the high-accuracy digital voltmeter
(DVM) with high common-mode rejection ratio (140 dB). The
bipolar test range ug = ±10 mV was chosen to simulate the
voltage on a strain gage sensor that can be expected under
realistic working conditions. Digital readings were transmitted
over the isolated capacitive near-field data link to the receiver
module and logged on a PC over the serial debug interface.
The accuracy of optional analog outputs (4–20-mA current
loops for torque, power, and rotational speed) was indepen-
dently tested by measuring the current in several points over
the whole working temperature range. The ideal output cur-
rent in each test point was defined by a numerical value for
D/A conversion. The analog outputs were not the subject of
detailed uncertainty analysis of the measuring system because
the current loop introduces errors that are an order of magnitude
higher than the accuracy of the digital measuring chain. The
rotational speed input was tested in the frequency range of
1–500 Hz, which corresponds to the bandwidth of the chosen
proximity switch sensor and relates to rotational speeds of up
to approximately 1000 min−1 (in case of 30 marks on the rotor
husk).
The most important part of the test procedure was the de-
termination of the torque input channel measuring uncertainty.
The measuring system characteristics were tested in the tem-
perature range from −10 ◦ C to 60 ◦ C by repeating the identical
test sequence four times. Each test sequence contains a series
of individual measurements at three characteristic temperatures
(−10 ◦ C, 25 ◦ C, and 60 ◦ C). The test voltage ug that simulates
the output of the strain gage bridge diagonal was applied in
21 points over the ±10-mV nominal input range (in 1-mV
steps) by means of the adjustable floating dc voltage source.
The voltage ug in each test point was controlled by DVM, the
accuracy of which was at least an order of magnitude better than
the system under test. Furthermore, the DVM readings ug for
each test point were averaged after repeating ten measurements
DŽAPO et al.: DIGITAL MEASURING SYSTEM FOR MONITORING MOTOR SHAFT PARAMETERS ON SHIPS
Fig. 6. Recorded digital waveform um (t) for the test point ug = −5 mV.
(the averaged voltage measured by DVM in some test point
will simply be denoted as ug ). The voltage um measured by
a transmitter module in each test point represents the A/D con-
version result integrated over the 1-s time period and sent to the
receiver module in digital form over the galvanically isolated
data link. The voltage um in each test point was measured
60 times to estimate the measurement repeatability. The aver-
aged measured result in a single test point after 60 measure-
ments will be denoted as ūm . An example of the recorded
digital waveform um for a single test point is shown in Fig. 6.
The absolute total error ea normalized on the FS range in
each test point was calculated by means of
ūm − ug
ea = (4)
UFS
where UFS = 10 mV is the nominal FS range. The nominal FS
sensor output of 10 mV for error analysis was chosen as a good
representative value for most practical situations. However, the
input measuring chain can easily handle larger sensor outputs
without saturation (see the explanation in Section II).
Zero calibration of the torque input measuring channel for
each test sequence was performed at 25 ◦ C, which corresponds
to the middle of the working temperature range. Input channel
zero calibration was not performed again at −10 ◦ C and 60 ◦ C
for the same test sequence to measure the zero drift effects
over the working temperature range and to more accurately
model the realistic working conditions. Raw measuring results
um include the influence of all uncertainty sources (zero and
gain drifts, nonlinearity, random noise, etc.). We performed the
following least-square linearization of the averaged measuring
results ūm,k for each temperature (separately for every test
sequence) to accurately estimate the zero and gain drift errors
by minimizing the influence of random noise in each test point:

Np
(ūm,k − f (ug,k , a, b))2 → min,
k=1
um,k,lin = f (ug,k , a, b) = a · ug,k + b (5)
where NP = 21 is the number of points in a test sequence at
fixed temperature, ūm,k is the averaged measuring result in
Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3707
Fig. 7. Total absolute error of the input measuring chain for raw and linearized
measurements.
each test point, ug,k is the average voltage measured by DVM
in each point, {a, b} are the linear regression coefficients, and
um,k,lin are the linearized measuring results. The normalized
absolute total error of the torque input measuring channel ea
is depicted in Fig. 7 for a single test sequence (at temperatures
of −10 ◦ C, 25 ◦ C, and 60 ◦ C). The figure shows the observed
absolute error ea for both raw averaged measurements ūm and
linear least-square fitted data um,lin . The influence of zero drift,
gain error, and nonlinearity can clearly be noticed in Fig. 7. The
total absolute error due to nonlinearity, zero, and gain errors
does not exceed approximately ±350 ppm of the nominal FS
over the whole working temperature range. This result was
obtained without any kind of gain calibration.
The zero and gain drift errors were calculated from the
linearized measuring results. The maximum observed zero drift
does not exceed 2.5 μV (250 ppm of the nominal FS), which
corresponds to the change of 36 nV/◦ C (3.6 ppm of the nominal
FS/◦ C). The contribution of zero drift to the total error is
minimal when zero calibration is performed at the middle of the
working temperature range. The gain error behavior is shown in
Fig. 8 by plotting the error of the linear least-square-fitted data
at three different temperatures for a single test sequence with
removed influence of the zero drift (we get highly repeatable
results for the other three test sequences). The maximum total
gain error is about 250 ppm of the FS (which includes static
gain error and temperature drift), whereas the temperature gain
drift alone is about 2.5 ppm/◦ C of the FS.
The torque measuring channel nonlinearity was estimated
from the raw measuring curve ūm after removing the offset and
gain errors. The input measuring channel nonlinearity charac-
teristic for a single test sequence at temperatures of −10 ◦ C,
25 ◦ C, and 60 ◦ C is shown in Fig. 9. One may notice the similar
behavior of the nonlinearity error at all test temperatures. The
maximum observed nonlinearity in the four test sequences was
about 200 ppm of the nominal FS.
All the measurement errors discussed so far were based on
the analysis of averaged results ūm calculated from 60 raw
measurements um in a single test point. The measurement
repeatability can be analyzed by plotting standard deviations
3708
Fig. 8. Input measuring chain gain error.
Fig. 9. Input measuring chain nonlinearity.
of each series of 60 individual measurements um for every
test point. The standard deviation for one test sequence at
temperatures of −10 ◦ C and 60 ◦ C is shown in Fig. 10. We
determined the expected standard deviation of the individual
measurements um from all the available measuring results (in
four test sequences) and calculated the value of about σum =
1.2 μV (120 ppm of the nominal FS).
The results presented in Figs. 7–10 and Table I are obtained
for the nominal FS sensor output of 10 mV. However, if the FS
output voltage is smaller the given error figures will increase
in proportion with the ratio between the nominal and actual
FS sensor outputs. This applies to zero drift, nonlinearity, and
repeatability errors, but the gain error does not depend on the FS
sensor output. A more detailed measuring uncertainty analysis
is provided in Section IV.
The measuring system was installed and subjected to the
test in realistic working environment during the sea trial of
the car carrier ship “Grande Angola” in “Uljanik” shipyard,
Pula, Croatia. The installation of the measuring system is shown
in Fig. 11. We compared the measuring results of the shaft-
transmitted power measured by our system and the reference
Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 58, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009
Fig. 10. Standard deviation of raw measurements for each test point in a single
test sequence at two different temperatures.
Fig. 11. Installation of the shaft monitoring system for the sea trial test.
measuring system in a few test points. The observed differences
were within the 0.5% error limits. Reference measurements
and system comparison were conducted and confirmed by
an independent accredited institution (“Brodarski Institute,”
Croatia). The results show excellent agreement between our
and the reference measuring systems, because the achievable
accuracy in the field test was limited by both strain gage
sensor parameter uncertainties and errors related to the sensor
installation procedure (strain gage factor uncertainty, angular
positional errors during each sensor installation, etc.). The
power readout error result takes into account the accuracy of the
whole digital measuring chain (sensor, torque, and rotational
speed measuring channel) and the uncertainty of the reference
measuring system.
IV. T ORQUE M EASUREMENT U NCERTAINTY A NALYSIS
The value of the shaft torque is calculated by means of
(2) from the measured bridge diagonal voltage um and the
DŽAPO et al.: DIGITAL MEASURING SYSTEM FOR MONITORING MOTOR SHAFT PARAMETERS ON SHIPS 3709

user-provided system constants. The torque measurement σum = 1.2 μV). All the other error sources in (6) will be treated
uncertainty analysis will be divided into two parts: 1) the as Type-B uncertainty components with uniform probability
measuring uncertainty analysis of the electronic part of the density distribution. If we denote the observed extremal values
measuring system (including the sensor) and 2) the analysis of some error quantity X by a+ (X) and a− (X) and assume
of the influence of user-provided constant uncertainties in the that the interval [a+ (X), a− (X)] represents 100% containment
torque calculation formula [see (2)]. limits with equal probability of obtaining the value X within
The measuring uncertainty of the electronic part of the these limits, then the Type-B uncertainty u(X) can be calcu-
system is associated with errors arising from the strain gage lated as
sensor and the input measuring chain electronics. The most
a(X) a+ (X) − a− (X)
important error sources related to the strain gage sensor are u(X) = √ , a(X) = (7)
the following: sensor thermal drift, thermocouple effects of 3 2
connecting wires, angular sensor position misalignment errors, where a(X) is a half-width of the uniform probability distri-
output voltage nonlinearity, transverse strain gage sensitivity, bution definition interval. The half-widths of the containment
etc. Some of these error sources can be neglected in the full- intervals for each Type-B error source in (6) were determined
bridge strain gage configuration, namely, sensor thermal drift by measurement:
and nonlinearity, under the assumption of proper sensor in-
stallation. Although the thermocouple effects of the connecting a(Gacc ) = 250 ppm, a(GT ) = 2.5 ppm/◦ C
wires may be significant in some applications [2], the possible
1 ΔZmax 1 2.5 μV
thermal gradients in our design were minimized by placing the a(ZT ) = · = · = 18 nV/◦ C
whole electronic circuitry, along with the sensor, inside a closed 2 ΔT 2 70 ◦ C
thick metal enclosure. In such a design, the complex ac bridge a(IN L) = 2 μV
precision excitation for canceling out the thermocouple effects 1 UREF 1 4.096 V
is not necessary, and a much simpler dc reference voltage a(Q) = · 24 = · = 0.12 μV. (8)
2 2 2 224
supply can be used. Under the assumption that the strain gage
sensor is carefully and properly placed on the shaft surface The estimated standard uncertainties for Type-B error sources
along the biaxial stress principal directions, the sensor angular in (6) were calculated by means of (7) from interval half-widths
misalignment errors [2] can be neglected in most practical given by (8) as
applications. The influence of the uncertainty of the tensometer
u(Gacc ) = 144.3 ppm u(GT ) = 1.44 ppm/◦ C
constant Kt will be covered in the second part of the uncertainty
analysis. The transverse strain gage sensitivity was not taken u(ZT ) = 10.4 nV/◦ C u(IN L) = 1.16 μV
into account in this analysis.
u(Q) = 70.5 nV. (9)
The ADC contribution to the measurement uncertainty can
be analyzed by taking into account the quantization error, zero We do not take into account the absolute zero accuracy of the
temperature drift, gain accuracy, gain temperature drift, noise, input measuring chain because the reference input zero level
and nonlinearity. The contribution of each uncertainty source is determined before measurement by means of the software
can be described by the following error model: zero calibration. The sensitivity coefficients for the calculation
of the combined standard uncertainty can be derived from the
um = (1+Gacc +GT ·ΔT )·um,id +ZT ·ΔT +IN L+Q+N
error model [see (6)] as
(6)
∂um ∂um
where um is the measured voltage, um,id is the ideal voltage cGacc = = um,id cGT = = ΔT · um,id
∂Gacc ∂GT
at the bridge diagonal, Gacc is the gain error, GT is the gain
temperature drift, ZT is the zero offset temperature drift, IN L ∂um ∂um
cZT = = ΔT cIN L = =1
is the integral nonlinearity, Q is the quantization error, and N ∂ZT ∂IN L
is the random noise. All the error coefficients in (6) (except Q) ∂um ∂um
were determined from laboratory test results. The error sources cQ = =1 cN = = 1. (10)
∂Q ∂N
in the analytical error model [see (6)] can be expressed as
Type-A and Type-B uncertainties [21]. The repeatability error The combined standard uncertainty uc (um ) of the readout
N was determined by the statistical analysis of a series of result um over the whole working temperature range can be
observations and represents the Type-A uncertainty component. calculated by means of (11), shown at the bottom of the
The uncertainty due to the measurement nonrepeatability u(N ) page. We assume that all the uncertainty sources in model (6)
was calculated as a standard deviation of voltage values um are uncorrelated. For the strain gage sensor with maximum
measured in the procedure described in Section III (u(N ) = output voltage UFS = 10 mV and working temperature change


uc (um ) = c2Gacc · u2 (Gacc ) + c2GT · u2 (GT ) + c2ZT · u2 (ZT ) + c2IN L · u2 (IN L) + c2Q · u2 (Q) + c2N · u2 (N ) (11)

Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3710 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 58, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009

ΔT = 70 ◦ C, the combined standard uncertainty given by (11) drift, nonlinearity, quantization, and nonrepeatability errors in-
yields uc (um ) ≈ 2.53 μV (253 ppm of nominal FS). creases the relative standard uncertainty because their absolute
The strain gage sensor was directly interfaced to the values (in microvolts) are unchanged, and their contribution to
24-bit ΣΔ ADC to achieve good measuring system effective the relative readout error becomes very significant for small
resolution [see (3)] without using an amplifier in the input values of um . For very small values of the measured voltage
stage. However, the input measuring chain noise should be um , the relative standard uncertainty given by (13) can be
considered to estimate the number of significant bits of such approximated by (14), shown at the bottom of the page. In the
high-resolution ADC. The effective number of bits (ENOB) first approximation, the nominator of uc,r (um ) does not depend
provides a convenient measure that represents the number of on the voltage um,id for small measuring values.
bits of an ideal (noise-free) ADC that would exactly produce The combined standard uncertainty uc (M ) of the torque
the same RMS quantization noise as experimentally observed readout value can be calculated by taking into account the con-
by measurements of the system under test. ENOB can be tribution of each parameter uncertainty in the torque calculation
calculated by means of formula [see (2)] and the combined standard uncertainty of the
bridge diagonal voltage measurement uc (um ) as follows:
uc,n (um )
ENOB = Nid − log2  2  2
uQ ∂M ∂M
u2c (M ) = u2 (G) + u2 (D)
1.67 μV ∂G ∂D
= 24 − log2 = 19.4 bit (12)  2  2
70.5 nV ∂M ∂M
+ u (Kt ) +
2
u2c (um ). (15)
where Nid is the ideal number of bits of the ADC, uc,n (um ) is ∂Kt ∂um
the combined measuring uncertainty calculated by (11) without
It should be noted that the uncertainty analysis of UREF in (15)
taking into account linearity errors (zero and gain), and uQ is
is not necessary due to the ratiometric approach to the mea-
the theoretical RMS quantization error of the 24-bit ADC [as
suring chain design. The sensitivity coefficients in (15) for the
calculated in (9)]. The factor uc,n (um ) in (12) corresponds to
estimation of standard uncertainty uc (M ) can be determined
the measured RMS noise of the input measuring chain.
from the torque calculation formula [see (2)]:
It is also interesting to consider the relative standard un-
certainty of the measured bridge diagonal voltage uc,r (um ) ∂M M ∂M 3M
defined as cG = = cD = =
∂G G ∂D D
uc (um ) ∂M M ∂M M
uc,r (um ) = . (13) cKt = =− cum = = . (16)
um ∂Kt Kt ∂um um

For um = UFS , the normalized absolute and relative standard
uncertainties are identical. For smaller bridge diagonal voltages
um , the contribution of gain accuracy and drift factors Gacc and
GT in (13) is unchanged, because the relative gain errors do not
depend on a readout value. However, the influence of zero offset
The combined standard uncertainty uc (M ) of the torque read-
out result M can be calculated by means of (17), shown at the
bottom of the page. The combined relative standard uncertainty
uc,r (M ) can easily be derived from (17) as (18), shown at the
bottom of the page.

1  2
uc,r (um ) ≈ cZT · u2 (ZT ) + c2IN L · u2 (IN L) + c2Q · u2 (Q) + c2N · u2 (N ) (14)
um


uc (M ) = c2G · u2 (G) + c2D · u2 (D) + c2Kt · u2 (Kt ) + c2um · u2c (um ) =
   2  2
2
1 3 1
= |M | · · u2 (G) + · u2 (D) + · u2 (Kt ) + u2c,r (um ) (17)
G D Kt

 2  2  2
uc (M ) 1 3 1
uc,r (M ) = = · u2 (G) + · u2 (D) + · u2 (Kt ) + u2c,r (um ) (18)
|M | G D Kt

Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
DŽAPO et al.: DIGITAL MEASURING SYSTEM FOR MONITORING MOTOR SHAFT PARAMETERS ON SHIPS
The shear modulus uncertainty u(G) depends on the supplied
manufacturer’s data, and the tolerance of this parameter is
usually less than ±0.1%, whereas the shaft diameter uncertainty
depends on the manufacturing process tolerances (for example,
for shaft diameter D = 500 mm with ±0.1-mm manufacturing
tolerance, the relative error is ±0.02%). The strain gage factor
Kt tolerance (typically ±0.25–0.5%) is known from the sup-
plied manufacturer’s data and represents the significant source
of torque readout relative error. The experimental determination
of the true value Kt for the strain gage sensor installed on
a ship shaft is not possible because the sensor is typically
installed on a large diameter shaft, and the application of the
reference calibration moment is not possible. The last error term
in (18) corresponds to the relative standard uncertainty of the
measured bridge diagonal voltage uc,r (um ) given by (13). The
user-provided parameters G, D, and Kt in (18) can be treated
as Type-B uncertainty components with uniform probability
density distribution. The corresponding standard uncertainties
can be calculated from the estimated parameter tolerances by
means of
u(G) 0.1%
= √ = 0.058%
G 3
u(D) 0.02%
= √ = 0.0115%
D 3
u(Kt ) 0.25%
= √ = 0.1443.
Kt 3 V. C ONCLUSION
The torque readout relative combined standard uncertainty
uc,r (M ) was calculated from (18) by taking the user-provided
parameter standard uncertainties [see (19)] and the voltage
measurement relative standard uncertainty uc,r (um ). For large
torque values (um ≈ UFS ), the relative standard uncertainty
uc,r (M ) can be estimated by means of (20), shown at the
bottom of the page, where the relative standard uncertainty
uc,r (um ) is approximated by the normalized absolute uncer-
tainty uc (um ) for the FS sensor output. However, for small
torque values, the contribution of the uc,r (um ) uncertainty
term must take into account the value of the measured bridge
diagonal voltage um . For example, for um = 10% UFS , the
torque readout relative standard uncertainty is
c,r (M )
u10%
 
2.53 μV
= 3.36·10−7 +1.19·10−7 +2.08·10−6 +
1 mV
= 2.54 · 10−6 + 6.4 · 10−6 ≈ 0.30%.
uc,r (M ) = (0.058%)2 + 9 · (0.0115%)2 + (0.1443%)2 + (253 ppm)2 =
= 3.36 · 10−7 + 1.19 · 10−7 + 2.08 · 10−6 + 6.4 · 10−8 ≈ 0.16%
Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3711
For a very small torque and a bridge diagonal voltage um =
1% UFS , the relative standard uncertainty is
c,r (M )
u1%
  2
2.53 μV
= 3.36·10−7 +1.19·10−7 +2.08·10−6 +
0.1 mV
= 2.54 · 10−6 + 6.4 · 10−4 ≈ 2.54%.
The results of the torque readout relative standard uncertainty
analysis show that the principal sources of total uncertainty
for large torque values are the user-provided constants in (2).
The highest contribution comes from the parameter Kt , even
under the assumption of high-quality sensor (e.g., a(Kt ) =
±0.25%), whereas the contribution of the electronic part of
the measuring system is negligible. The torque readout relative
standard uncertainty for small load values primarily increases
due to the uncertainties introduced by the input measuring
chain electronics. Our results are comparable to or better than
similar existing state-of-the-art commercial solutions to the
authors’ best knowledge (e.g., [22] and [23]), which usually do
not provide such clear figures for relative torque measurement
uncertainty over the whole working temperature range and the
full input measuring span (usually, only FS error figures and
measuring characteristics such as repeatability or linearity are
provided).
(19)
The novel shaft mechanical parameters monitoring system
for permanent installation in ships has been described. The
torque input measuring channel was realized by directly inter-
facing the strain gage sensor to the high-resolution ΣΔ ADC.
Outstanding accuracy and stability of the input measuring chain
were accomplished by a particular design approach, on-shaft
digital signal processing, and contactless data transmission in
digital form. The observed input measuring chain uncertainty
was about 250 ppm of the FS over the full working temperature
range for a ±10-mV FS sensor output. The evaluation under
realistic working conditions showed excellent agreement of the
designed system with the reference shaft torque measuring sys-
tem. The software-based input measuring chain calibration, the
saturation-free ADC operation (regardless of the initial bridge
imbalance), and the exceptional long-term measuring system
stability are some of the most important practical benefits
achieved by the proposed measuring system design. It should
2 be pointed out that excellent measuring system characteristics
were achieved by a very simple design based only on a small
number of off-the-shelf components.
The relative uncertainty of torque and power readouts
depends both on measuring chain characteristics and the
(20)
3712 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 58, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009
user-provided system constants, which are necessary to calcu-
late the actual value of the physical quantity from the mea-
sured strain gage sensor output voltage. The influence of the
electronic measuring chain on the torque and power readout
accuracy is negligible when compared with the impact of user-
provided constants over most of the measurement ranges. The
input chain measuring uncertainty has a significant impact on
torque and power readouts only when measuring very small
torque values.
R EFERENCES
[1] I. J. Garshelis, “Torque and power measurement,” Measurement, Instru-
mentation, and Sensors Handbook CRCnetBase 1999, CRC Press LLC,
1999.
[2] K. Hoffmann, An Introduction to Measurements Using Strain Gages.
Darmstadt: Hottinger Baldwin Messtechnik GmbH, 1989.
[3] I. Sasada, Y. Etoh, and K. Kato, “A figure-of-eight flexible pickup coil
for a magnetostrictive torque sensor,” IEEE Trans. on Magnetics, vol. 42,
pp. 3309–3311, 2006.
[4] I. Sasada and M. Akinaga, “High sensitivity magnetic head for a shaft
torque sensor,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 91, pp. 7792–7794, 2002.
[5] H. Ruser, U. Troltzsch, and M. Horn, “Low-cost magnetic torque sensor
principle,” in Proc. of IEEE Sensors 2002, 2002, vol. 2, pp. 901–904.
[6] J. Zakrzewski, “Combined magnetoelastic transducer for torque and force
measurement,” IEEE Trans. Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 46,
pp. 807–810, 1997.
[7] A. Falkner, “A capacitor-based device for the measurement of shaft
torque,” IEEE Trans. Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 45, pp. 835–
838, 1996.
[8] R. F. Wolffenbuttel and J. A. Foerster, “Noncontact capacitive torque
sensor for use on a rotating axle,” IEEE Trans. Instrumentation and
Measurement, vol. 39, pp. 1008–1013, 1990.
[9] W. Y. Li, C. C. Cheng, and Y. L. Lo, “Investigation of strain transmission
of surface-bonded FBGs used as strain sensors,” Sensors and Actuators
A: Physical, vol. 149, pp. 201–207, 2009.
[10] D. A. Kerth and D. S. Piasecki, “An oversampling converter for strain
gauge transducers,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 27, pp. 1689–1696,
1992.
[11] “Resistive bridge basics: Part two,” in Application Note 3545. Maxim
Integrated Products, Inc., 2005.
[12] J. O’Dowd, A. Callanan, G. Banarie, and E. Company-Bosch, “Capacitive
sensor interfacing using sigma–delta techniques,” in Proc. Sensors, 2005
IEEE, 2005, p. 4.
[13] S. Kuhn, “High precision torque measurement system,” in Proc. SENSOR
Conference 2007, Nürnberg, Germany, 2007, vol. 2, pp. 51–56.
[14] F. M. L. van der Goes and G. C. M. Meijer, “A simple accurate bridge–
transducer interface with continuous autocalibration,” IEEE Trans. Instru-
mentation and Measurement, vol. 46, pp. 704–710, 1997.
[15] D. McCartney, A. Sherry, J. O’Dowd, and P. Hickey, “A low-noise low-
drift transducer ADC,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 32, pp. 959–967,
1997.
[16] H. Dzapo, Z. Stare, and N. Bobanac, “Digital measuring system for
monitoring motor shaft parameters on ships,” in Proc. 2008 IEEE In-
ternational Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference,
Victoria, Canada, 2008, pp. 2079–2084.
[17] H. Dzapo, Z. Stare, and N. Bobanac, “Portable wireless measuring sys-
tem for monitoring motor shaft parameters,” in Proc. 21th IEEE Instru-
mentation and Measurement Technology Conference, Como, Italy, 2004,
pp. 901–906.
[18] M. Ivancic, R. Magjarevic, and Z. Stare, “Analysis and optimization
of multichannel measurements at navigable objects,” Elektrotehnika
ELTHB2, vol. 36, no. 4–5, pp. 197–206, 1993.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Praveenraja SN. Downloaded on December 11, 2009 at 01:04 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[19] A. Santic, Z. Stare, R. Magjarevic, B. Banovic, M. Saban, and V. Bilas,
“Multichannel telemetry system for measurements on the rotating shaft,”
in Proc. 37th International Annual Gathering KoREMA, Zagreb, Croatia,
1992, pp. 360–363.
[20] A. Santic, B. Banovic, Z. Stare, R. Magjarevic, and M. Cifrek, “A teleme-
try system with microprocessor for measurement of relevant data from the
rotating shaft,” in Proc. 34. Jugoslavenska konferencija ETAN-a, Zagreb,
Croatia, Jun. 4–8, 1990, pp. 177–184.
[21] Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement. Geneva,
Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 1995.
[22] McNab Wireless Rotary Shaft Horsepower/Torque Meter SHP 62000.
Mount Vernon, NY: McNab Corporation.
[23] The Palco (R) Torque Measuring System, VAF Instruments B.V..
Dordrecht, Netherlands.
Hrvoje Džapo (M’04) was born in Zagreb, Croatia,
in 1975. He received the Dipl.-Eng. and Ph.D. de-
grees in electrical engineering from the University of
Zagreb, Zagreb, in 1999 and 2007, respectively.
He is currently a Senior Research Assistant with
the Department of Electronic Systems and Informa-
tion Processing, Faculty of Electrical Engineering
and Computing, University of Zagreb. His research
interests are focused on electronic instrumentation,
smart sensors, embedded systems design, and imple-
mentation of computational inverse techniques for
nondestructive inspection.
Zoran Stare (M’77) was born in Zagreb, Croatia, in
1944. He received the Dipl.-Eng., M.Sc., and Ph.D.
degrees in electrical engineering from the Univer-
sity of Zagreb, Zagreb, in 1967, 1978, and 1997,
respectively.
He is currently an Associate Professor with the
Department of Electronic Systems and Information
Processing, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and
Computing, University of Zagreb. His teaching and
research interests are focused on electronic instru-
mentation, measurement techniques, industrial elec-
tronics, embedded systems, and biomedical engineering.
Nenad Bobanac was born in Zagreb, Croatia,
in 1951. He received the Dipl.-Eng., M.Sc., and
Ph.D. degrees in naval architecture from the Uni-
versity of Zagreb, Zagreb, in 1976, 1986, and 1996,
respectively.
In 1978, he was with the Brodarski Institute,
Marine Research and Special Technologies, Zagreb,
where he was the Head of the R&D Vibration and
Shocks Laboratory from 1995 to 2000 and the CEO
from 2000 to 2004. In 2006, he founded BOBLab
d.o.o., Zagreb, where he is currently the CEO. He has
been a national representative in the international standardization organization
ISO/TC108 on mechanical shock and vibration since 1986, a convener of
the national standardization committee DZNM TO108 on mechanical shock
and vibration, and a convener of the ISO working group for standardization
(ISO/TC108/SC2/WG2 vibration of ships) since 2003. His research interests
are focused on the different aspects of structure vibration and human suscepti-
bility to vibration.