Abstract

In a ground-to-satellite communication system with a preset EDFA, the EDFA’s performance will be affected by space environment. With 250 Gy radiation, the EDFA’s gain decreases by 2 dB from 19.97 dB at 20°C. The BER increases by 2.5 orders of magnitude from 10−10, and increases more with more radiation. The situation aggravates when the temperature rises by 73°C. The laser’s divergence-angle and transmitter radius have optimal values to make the lowest BER and increasing receiver diameter makes lower BERs, so setting these parameters with appropriate values will compensate the degradation caused by EDFA.

© 2014 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

In the 1990s, the erbium-doped fiber amplifier (EDFA) was firstly applied into the optical fiber transmission system as a new device. With EDFA’s wide application, the optical fiber communication technology revolutionized rapidly. Thanks to its advantages like low weight, high signal amplification, wide bandwidth, etc, it greatly attracts the industry’s attention. With the development of several important space optical communication programs which are carried out by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the European Space Agency (ESA) [14], many key ground optical communication devices and techniques have been introduced to the field of satellite optical communication. In particular, EDFA is introduced to satellite optical communications to solve the conflict between the input power and modulation rate.

However, during the satellites’ stay in orbit, their components will face a harsh radiation environment meaning that the performance of EDFA will inevitably be affected. Investigations on the characteristics of EDFA in radiation are carried out by several research groups [5]. A. Gusarov’s group found that direct nanoparticle deposition technology allows improving the EDFA’s radiation resistance by increasing the concentration of Er3+ ions [6]. T.S. Rose’s group proposed that the radiation-induced loss determined from amplifier measurements can be substantially less than that determined from passive transmission spectra in certain fibers where the damage is significant [7]. O. Berne’s group demonstrated that the gain of EDFA will reduce about 10 dB at 3000 Gy dose of radiation, as is shown in [8]. However, O. Berne proposed that space radiation has little effect on EDFA because the EDFA is protected by an aluminum plate which means it actually suffers only 60 Gy dose of radiation. But the truth is that aluminum plates only prevent electronic radiation but show little resistance to radiation caused by other high energy particles like Gamma particles. Therefore, the impact of radiation on EDFA still cannot be ignored. What should be clarified is that these published papers on EDFA in radiation only focus on the characteristics of EDFA outside a whole communication system. To make these investigations more practical, it is unavoidable to investigate the EDFA’s effect on a whole communication system. That is what we will do in this paper.

To study the performance of a ground-to-satellite optical communication system, it is not accurate enough to only take the effect of EDFA into account. In a practical laser link, its performance will be significantly affected by the effect of atmospheric turbulence [9, 10]. Here, we take the random wander and scintillation into account to build a real channel from ground to satellites [11].

The main idea of this letter is to use the propagation equations with radiation-induced background losses at pump and signal wavelength to obtain the evolution of the gain of EDFA with increasing radiation dose. It is agreed that the input power of the laser link strongly affects the BER performance, so the influence of the space radiation on EDFA will be reflected. By adding the factor of atmospheric turbulence we may get more accurate performance of the whole system. Here, we only analyze the BER performance of the on-off keying (OOK) modulation scheme. By certain numerical simulation tests, the relationships between BER and laser divergence angle, receiver diameter, and transmitter laser radius are obtained to choose the optimal system parameters and configuration.

2. Theory

People have found that the performance of optical fiber devices will be deteriorated when suffering radiation because of the color center effect. To describe the characteristics of EDFA in radiation, we use the theoretical model proposed in [8]. The model is an improved one based on Jackson’s model [12], which introduces additional radiation-induced background losses for pump and signal. The propagation equations of pump and signal are written as follows [8],

dPs/dz=(αs+gs)N2Ps(αs+αs'+αsRAD)Ps
dPp/dz=αpN2Pp(αp+αp'+αpRAD)Pp
wherePpandPsare pump and signal powers, αp and αsare the pump and signal erbium absorption, αp'and αs'are the background losses for pump and signal, αpRAD and αsRADare the radiation-induced losses for pump and signal, gs is the gain coefficient. N2 is the population of excited state

N2=αpPp/νp+αsPs/νsαpPp/νp+(αs+gs)Ps/νs

To obtain the accurate radiation-induced losses, we use a power law to describe the effects of dose and dose rate on 1310 nm absorption [13]

α1310RAD=cR1fDf
Then, it is possible to predict the radiation-induced losses at pump and signal wavelengths by the equation below [8]
α(λ)RAD=(1310λ0)2(λλ0)2cR1fDf
whereR is the radiation dose rate, D is the total deposited dose, c and f are temperature-dependent parameters, K is a constant and λ0 is a parameter that gives a rough estimation of absorption bands position. This result can be used in Eqs. (1) and (2), and once solved, the equations give the evolution of gain in the fiber as a function of the signal and pump absorption, gain factor, fiber length. Eventually, the evolution of output signal power versus dose of radiation will be obtained.

For an OOK scheme, the BER, with the assumption of equal possibilities of sending “1” and “0”, under the effect of detector noise is [14]

BEROOK0=11/4[erfc((γm1)/2σ1)+erfc((γm0)/2σ0)]
Where erfc is the error function and γopt is the optimal decision threshold obtained with BEROOK/γ=0.

For an avalanche photodiode (APD) detector in the laser link with a preset EDFA in space, the mean values m0, m1 and variances σ02, σ12 of noise can be [15]

m1=GAη(GBIsin+IASE+ηcpGBIb)+Idc
m0=GAη(IASE+ηcpGBIb)+Idc
σ12=2GA2Fη2GBIsinIASEBe/Bo+1/2GA2Fη2IASE2Be(2BoBe)/Bo2+2GA2FeηBe(GBIsin+μIASE+ηcpGBIb)+4kbTBe/RL
σ02=1/2GA2Fη2IASE2Be(2BoBe)/Bo2+2GA2FeηBe(μIASE+ηcpGBIb)+4kbTBe/RL
where GA and GB are respectively the gain of APD and EDFA, η is the quantum efficiency of APD, F is the extra noise factor, e is the electron charge, kb is the Boltzmann constant, ηcp is the coupling efficiency of receiving antenna to optical fiber, μ is a parameter measuring the shot noise contributed by ASE, T and RLare the temperature and load resistance of the receiver. Bo and Be are optical bandwidth of EDFA and electrical bandwidth of APD, respectively. Ib is the current produced by background noise, Idc is the dark current. Isin and IASE are, respectively, the photocurrent of signal without EDFA and noise produced by amplified spontaneous emission (ASE) generated by EDFA, which can be calculated by [15]
Isin=ehνsηcpPinτT2Dr2(θL)2τR
IASE=ehνsPASE
where Pin denotes the output power of the laser, PASE=N0δν is the average power of ASE in δν bandwidth, N0=2nsp(GB1)hνs. h is the Planck constant, τT and τR are the optical transmittance of transmitting antenna and receiving antenna.

Considering the influence of atmospheric turbulence, the actual BER should be the ensemble average of the BER at all values of I. Therefore, the final BER of OOK should be [14]

BEROOK=0BEROOK0Pw(I)dI
where Pw(I) is the PDF of the receiving intensity under the influence of both scintillation and beam wander which is given by [9]
Pw(I)=0P(r)Pr(I)dr
P(r) is the probability density function (PDF) of beam wander at the receiving point following a Rayleigh distribution [16] when a laser beam propagates in the atmosphere, the expression is
P(r)=rσr2exp(r22σr2)
Pr(I) is the PDF of intensity I at the receiving point following a log normal distribution under weak turbulence conditions, which is [11]
Pr(I)=12πσI2(r,L)1Iexp((lnII(0,L)+2r2W2+σI2(r,L)2)22σI2(r,L))
where r is the distance between the beam center and the receiving point, I(0,L)=αPTDr2/2W2 [17] is the mean value of I, where α represents the energy loss of the link, PT=PinτT is the transmitted laser power, Dr is the receiver diameter, and W=W0+θL/2 is the radius of beam at the receiving plane, W0 is the transmitter beam radius. L=(Hh0)sec(ζ) is the length of the laser link, in which H and h0 are heights of the receiver and the emitter, respectively. θ is the divergence -angle and ζ is the zenith angle.

For these two PDFs, σr2 and σI2(r,L) are the respective variances, which are given by [11]

σr2=2.07h0HCn2(z)(Lz)2W1/3(z)dz
σI2(r,L)=8.702μ3k7/6(Hh0)5/6sec11/6(ζ)+14.508μ1Λ5/6k7/6(Hh0)5/6sec11/6(ζ)(r2/W2)
where k=2π/λ is the wave number. Parameters μ1 and μ3 are given by
μ1=h0HCn2(h)ξ5/3dh
μ3=Reh0HCn2(h){ξ5/6[Λξ+i(1(L/Rr)ξ)]5/6Λ5/6ξ5/3}dh
in which ξ=1(zh0)/(Hh0) is the uplink parameter. Here Λ=2L/kW2, and Rr is the radius of curvature of the wavefront. Cn2(h) is a refractive structure parameter based on the Hufnagel-Valley model. The typical values of wind velocity v and C0 are 21m/s and 1.7×1014m2/3 [11].

3. Simulation

Based on the theory introduced above, we start numerical simulation with 1550nm signal and 980nm pump, and other conditions are also mentioned below. Parameters for EDFA are from [8], where αp=2.9dB/m, αs=1.3dB/m, αp'=0.025dB/m, αs'=0.004dB/m, gs=1.134dB/m, and the length of EDF is l=24m. As for the other parts of the laser link, we take the values below, η=0.7, GA=10dB, F=GA0.7, Ib=10nA, Idc=1nA, R=50Ω, T=300K, h=6.626×1034, e=1.602×1019C, kb=1.381×1023, τT=τR=1, nsp=0.75, Bo=10GHz, Be=40MHz, α=1, δν=Bo, Pin=10mW, Pp=2W, Dr=0.2m, ζ=0, θ=30μrad, H=38000km, h0=100m.

In order to get an appropriate output power (about 1 W) of the laser, we modify the parameters in [8]. We use the 2W pump for EDFA, and this does not affect the overall parameters.

The αRAD of 1550nm and 980nm is obtained from Eq. (5) with the αRAD of 1310nm cited from [8], and the gain of EDFA obtained from Eqs. (1) and (2) versus Dose of radiation are shown in Fig. 1. The parameter c in Eq. (4) is variable at different temperature, which is testified in [8] that c=0.19×103 and c=0.30×103 for 20°C and 73°C, respectively. And, the parameter f and the dose rate R are given by f=0.77, R=269Gy/h [8].

 

Fig. 1 αRAD of 1550nm and 980nm, and GB(gain of EDFA) versus dose of radiation at 20°C and 73°C.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

The radiation-induced losses of 1550nm and 980nm grow with the increasing dose of radiation, leading to degradation of the gain of EDFA. The gain of EDFA with 250Gy radiation is 2dB lower than that with no radiation when the temperature is 20°C. In addition, the radiation-induced loss of 1550nm at 73°Cis always higher than that at 20°Cand achieves the largest gap, 0.14dB/m, when the radiation dose reaches 3000Gy. For the radiation-induced loss of 980nm, the largest gap is 0.42dB/m at the dose of 3000Gy. Hence, the gain of EDFA also degrades for about 4.65dB. This figure shows that the rise of temperature will aggravate the negative impact of radiation on EDFA.

In Fig 2. the impacts of radiation and temperature on BER performance are clearly illustrated. At 20°C, the BER rises constantly when the dose of radiation rises, and it increases 2.5 orders of magnitude with 250Gy radiation than that with no radiation. Due to the rising temperature, BER at 73°C increases much more with the increasing dose than that at 20°C. Particularly, the largest gap between the two conditions appears at the dose of 1250Gy, reaching 2 orders of magnitude. And the gap gradually decreases after that mainly because the influence of radiation on EDFA has reached the saturation.

 

Fig 2 BER performance versus dose of radiation at 20°C and 73°C.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

To find an optimal configuration for the laser link in radiation environment, we investigate some of the most relevant parameters in different dose of radiation.

Figure 3 shows the evolution of the BER performance with the rising divergence-angle which ranges from 5μrad to 80μrad. Analyze the curve which is produced with no radiation, we find that the BER decreases firstly, reaches the minimum value at the point of 23.75μradand then increases constantly. Similar results are obtained in other conditions, indicating that there is always an optimal value for the divergence-angle that makes the laser link the best BER performance. However, the optimal value is variable. It decreases by 7.5μradfrom 23.75μrad to 16.25μradwhen the dose increases from 0Gy to 1000Gy. It enlightens us that, to obtain a better BER performance, we should low down the divergence-angle a little when the space radiation increases.

 

Fig. 3 BER performance versus divergence-angle with different dose of radiation, the corresponding GB(gain of EDFA) is shown in the legend.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Figure 4 suggests that the increasing receiver diameter can decrease BER. With different dose of radiation, the trends of BER versus divergence-angle are the same. And the gap of adjacent curves almost keeps invariable when the divergence-angle increases. In an uplink, the receiver is installed at the satellite, so its diameter cannot be too large. However, BER is quite sensitive to the variation of the receiver diameter. So increasing the diameter is also helpful for BER improvement in radiation environment.

 

Fig. 4 BER performance versus divergence-angle with different dose of radiation.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Figure 5 indicates that there are minimum values of BER for optimal W0with different dose of radiation. Therefore, by choosing an optimal W0, the BER performance can be enhanced. And, it is shown that the value of the optimal W0 decreases 0.0575m from 0.14425m to 0.08675m when the dose increases from 0Gy to 1000Gy. In order to reduce the aggravation caused by increasing radiation dose, W0 should be appropriately reduced.

 

Fig. 5 BER performance versus W0 with different dose of radiation.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, we can see that the BER performance is greatly influenced by space radiation with the numerical simulations. Particularly, the rise of temperature will aggravate the impact of radiation on the BER performance which suggests that the EDFA cannot work at high temperature and a system of heat dissipation is essential. Besides, the BER performance is greatly sensitive to the receiver diameter. And, it is noticeable that the divergence-angle and the transmitter laser radius respectively have optimal values to get the minimum value of BER. In addition, the optimal values decline with the increasing dose of radiation.

Based on these conclusions, it is possible to set an optimal configuration for the laser link. On the premise that the basic parameters are invariable, the BER will increase when the dose of radiation increases. To minimize the value of BER, we can firstly choose the receiver of large diameter, then select the laser with optimal divergence-angle and optimal transmitter laser radius. Although the operations expounded above cannot be dynamically realized in space, they offer a guidance for selection of lasers and receivers that adapt to certain dose of radiation. Even more, several configurations of lasers and receivers corresponding to different doses of radiation can be set up, and a quasi self-adaptive system will be built eventually.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61205045, Jiangsu Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant BK2011555, Suzhou Province Science and Technology development Program of China under Grant SYG201307, National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61377086, National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) under Grant 2010CB327803.

References and links

1. J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000). [CrossRef]  

2. A. Biswas, M. W. Wright, J. Kovalik, and S. Piazzolla, “Uplink beacon laser for Mars laser communication demonstration (MLCD),” Proc. SPIE 5712, 93–100 (2005). [CrossRef]  

3. B. Laurent and O. Duchmann, “The Silex Project: The first European optical intersatellite link experiment,” Proc. SPIE 1417, 2–12 (1991). [CrossRef]  

4. M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002). [CrossRef]  

5. S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013). [CrossRef]  

6. A. Gusarov, M. V. Uffelen, M. Hotoleanu, H. Thienpont, and F. Berghmans, “Radiation sensitivity of EDFAs based on highly er-doped fibers,” J. Lightwave Technol. 27(11), 1540–1545 (2009). [CrossRef]  

7. T. S. Rose, D. Gunn, and G. C. Valley, “Gamma and proton radiation effects in erbium-doped fiber amplifiers: active and passive measurements,” J. Lightwave Technol. 19(12), 1918–1923 (2001). [CrossRef]  

8. O. Berné, M. Caussanel, and O. Gilard, “A model for the prediction of EDFA gain in a space radiation environment,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 16(10), 2227–2229 (2004). [CrossRef]  

9. J. Ma, Y. J. Jiang, L. Y. Tan, S. Y. Yu, and W. H. Du, “Influence of beam wander on bit-error rate in a ground-to-satellite laser uplink communication system,” Opt. Lett. 33(22), 2611–2613 (2008). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

10. H. Guo, B. Luo, Y. Ren, S. Zhao, and A. Dang, “Influence of beam wander on uplink of ground-to-satellite laser communication and optimization for transmitter beam radius,” Opt. Lett. 35(12), 1977–1979 (2010). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

11. L. C. Andrews and R. L. Phillips, “Laser beam propagation through random media,” (SPIE Optical Engineering Press, 1998).

12. M. K. Jackson and M. Movassaghi, “An accurate compact EDFA model,” (Eur. Conf. Optical Communication, Munich, Germany, 2000).

13. G. M. Williams, B. M. Wright, W. D. Mack, and E. J. Friebele, “Projecting the performance of erbium-doped fiber devices in a space radiation environment,” Proc. SPIE 3848, 271–280 (1999). [CrossRef]  

14. J. C. Ding, M. Li, M. H. Tang, Y. Li, and Y. J. Song, “BER performance of MSK in ground-to-satellite uplink optical communication under the influence of atmospheric turbulence and detector noise,” Opt. Lett. 38(18), 3488–3491 (2013). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

15. P. C. Becker, N. A. Olsson, and J. R. Simpson, Erbium-Doped Fiber Amplifiers: Fundamentals and Technology (San Diego, CD: Academic Press, 1999).

16. A. Rodriguez-Gomez, F. Dios, J. A. Rubio, and A. Comerón, “Temporal statistics of the beam-wander contribution to scintillation in ground-to-satellite optical links: an analytical approach,” Appl. Opt. 44(21), 4574–4581 (2005). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

17. M. Toyoshima, T. Jono, K. Nakagawa, and A. Yamamoto, “Optimum divergence angle of a Gaussian beam wave in the presence of random jitter in free-space laser communication systems,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19(3), 567–571 (2002). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
    [Crossref]
  2. A. Biswas, M. W. Wright, J. Kovalik, and S. Piazzolla, “Uplink beacon laser for Mars laser communication demonstration (MLCD),” Proc. SPIE 5712, 93–100 (2005).
    [Crossref]
  3. B. Laurent and O. Duchmann, “The Silex Project: The first European optical intersatellite link experiment,” Proc. SPIE 1417, 2–12 (1991).
    [Crossref]
  4. M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002).
    [Crossref]
  5. S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
    [Crossref]
  6. A. Gusarov, M. V. Uffelen, M. Hotoleanu, H. Thienpont, and F. Berghmans, “Radiation sensitivity of EDFAs based on highly er-doped fibers,” J. Lightwave Technol. 27(11), 1540–1545 (2009).
    [Crossref]
  7. T. S. Rose, D. Gunn, and G. C. Valley, “Gamma and proton radiation effects in erbium-doped fiber amplifiers: active and passive measurements,” J. Lightwave Technol. 19(12), 1918–1923 (2001).
    [Crossref]
  8. O. Berné, M. Caussanel, and O. Gilard, “A model for the prediction of EDFA gain in a space radiation environment,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 16(10), 2227–2229 (2004).
    [Crossref]
  9. J. Ma, Y. J. Jiang, L. Y. Tan, S. Y. Yu, and W. H. Du, “Influence of beam wander on bit-error rate in a ground-to-satellite laser uplink communication system,” Opt. Lett. 33(22), 2611–2613 (2008).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  10. H. Guo, B. Luo, Y. Ren, S. Zhao, and A. Dang, “Influence of beam wander on uplink of ground-to-satellite laser communication and optimization for transmitter beam radius,” Opt. Lett. 35(12), 1977–1979 (2010).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  11. L. C. Andrews and R. L. Phillips, “Laser beam propagation through random media,” (SPIE Optical Engineering Press, 1998).
  12. M. K. Jackson and M. Movassaghi, “An accurate compact EDFA model,” (Eur. Conf. Optical Communication, Munich, Germany, 2000).
  13. G. M. Williams, B. M. Wright, W. D. Mack, and E. J. Friebele, “Projecting the performance of erbium-doped fiber devices in a space radiation environment,” Proc. SPIE 3848, 271–280 (1999).
    [Crossref]
  14. J. C. Ding, M. Li, M. H. Tang, Y. Li, and Y. J. Song, “BER performance of MSK in ground-to-satellite uplink optical communication under the influence of atmospheric turbulence and detector noise,” Opt. Lett. 38(18), 3488–3491 (2013).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  15. P. C. Becker, N. A. Olsson, and J. R. Simpson, Erbium-Doped Fiber Amplifiers: Fundamentals and Technology (San Diego, CD: Academic Press, 1999).
  16. A. Rodriguez-Gomez, F. Dios, J. A. Rubio, and A. Comerón, “Temporal statistics of the beam-wander contribution to scintillation in ground-to-satellite optical links: an analytical approach,” Appl. Opt. 44(21), 4574–4581 (2005).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  17. M. Toyoshima, T. Jono, K. Nakagawa, and A. Yamamoto, “Optimum divergence angle of a Gaussian beam wave in the presence of random jitter in free-space laser communication systems,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19(3), 567–571 (2002).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]

2013 (2)

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

J. C. Ding, M. Li, M. H. Tang, Y. Li, and Y. J. Song, “BER performance of MSK in ground-to-satellite uplink optical communication under the influence of atmospheric turbulence and detector noise,” Opt. Lett. 38(18), 3488–3491 (2013).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

2010 (1)

2009 (1)

2008 (1)

2005 (2)

2004 (1)

O. Berné, M. Caussanel, and O. Gilard, “A model for the prediction of EDFA gain in a space radiation environment,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 16(10), 2227–2229 (2004).
[Crossref]

2002 (2)

M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002).
[Crossref]

M. Toyoshima, T. Jono, K. Nakagawa, and A. Yamamoto, “Optimum divergence angle of a Gaussian beam wave in the presence of random jitter in free-space laser communication systems,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19(3), 567–571 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

2001 (1)

2000 (1)

J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
[Crossref]

1999 (1)

G. M. Williams, B. M. Wright, W. D. Mack, and E. J. Friebele, “Projecting the performance of erbium-doped fiber devices in a space radiation environment,” Proc. SPIE 3848, 271–280 (1999).
[Crossref]

1991 (1)

B. Laurent and O. Duchmann, “The Silex Project: The first European optical intersatellite link experiment,” Proc. SPIE 1417, 2–12 (1991).
[Crossref]

Alonso, A.

M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002).
[Crossref]

Arnold, G.

J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
[Crossref]

Berghmans, F.

Berné, O.

O. Berné, M. Caussanel, and O. Gilard, “A model for the prediction of EDFA gain in a space radiation environment,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 16(10), 2227–2229 (2004).
[Crossref]

Biswas, A.

A. Biswas, M. W. Wright, J. Kovalik, and S. Piazzolla, “Uplink beacon laser for Mars laser communication demonstration (MLCD),” Proc. SPIE 5712, 93–100 (2005).
[Crossref]

Boukenter, A.

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

Brichard, B.

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

Brooks, P.

J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
[Crossref]

Caussanel, M.

O. Berné, M. Caussanel, and O. Gilard, “A model for the prediction of EDFA gain in a space radiation environment,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 16(10), 2227–2229 (2004).
[Crossref]

Comerón, A.

Dang, A.

Das, A.

J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
[Crossref]

Ding, J. C.

Dios, F.

Du, W. H.

Duchmann, O.

B. Laurent and O. Duchmann, “The Silex Project: The first European optical intersatellite link experiment,” Proc. SPIE 1417, 2–12 (1991).
[Crossref]

Friebele, E. J.

G. M. Williams, B. M. Wright, W. D. Mack, and E. J. Friebele, “Projecting the performance of erbium-doped fiber devices in a space radiation environment,” Proc. SPIE 3848, 271–280 (1999).
[Crossref]

Gilard, O.

O. Berné, M. Caussanel, and O. Gilard, “A model for the prediction of EDFA gain in a space radiation environment,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 16(10), 2227–2229 (2004).
[Crossref]

Girard, S.

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

Gunn, D.

Guo, H.

Gusarov, A.

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

A. Gusarov, M. V. Uffelen, M. Hotoleanu, H. Thienpont, and F. Berghmans, “Radiation sensitivity of EDFAs based on highly er-doped fibers,” J. Lightwave Technol. 27(11), 1540–1545 (2009).
[Crossref]

Hay, R. G.

J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
[Crossref]

Hotoleanu, M.

Jiang, Y. J.

Jono, T.

Korevaar, E.

J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
[Crossref]

Kovalik, J.

A. Biswas, M. W. Wright, J. Kovalik, and S. Piazzolla, “Uplink beacon laser for Mars laser communication demonstration (MLCD),” Proc. SPIE 5712, 93–100 (2005).
[Crossref]

Kuhnhenn, J.

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

Laurent, B.

B. Laurent and O. Duchmann, “The Silex Project: The first European optical intersatellite link experiment,” Proc. SPIE 1417, 2–12 (1991).
[Crossref]

Li, M.

Li, Y.

Lopez, P.

M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002).
[Crossref]

Luo, B.

Ma, J.

Mack, W. D.

G. M. Williams, B. M. Wright, W. D. Mack, and E. J. Friebele, “Projecting the performance of erbium-doped fiber devices in a space radiation environment,” Proc. SPIE 3848, 271–280 (1999).
[Crossref]

Marcandella, C.

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

Nakagawa, K.

Oppenhauser, G.

M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002).
[Crossref]

Ouerdane, Y.

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

Piazzolla, S.

A. Biswas, M. W. Wright, J. Kovalik, and S. Piazzolla, “Uplink beacon laser for Mars laser communication demonstration (MLCD),” Proc. SPIE 5712, 93–100 (2005).
[Crossref]

Ren, Y.

Reyes, M.

M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002).
[Crossref]

Rodriguez-Gomez, A.

Rose, T. S.

Rubio, J. A.

Shoemaker, J.

J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
[Crossref]

Sodnik, Z.

M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002).
[Crossref]

Song, Y. J.

Stubstad, J.

J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
[Crossref]

Tan, L. Y.

Tang, M. H.

Thienpont, H.

Toyoshima, M.

Uffelen, M. V.

Valley, G. C.

Van Uffelen, M.

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

Viera, T.

M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002).
[Crossref]

Williams, G. M.

G. M. Williams, B. M. Wright, W. D. Mack, and E. J. Friebele, “Projecting the performance of erbium-doped fiber devices in a space radiation environment,” Proc. SPIE 3848, 271–280 (1999).
[Crossref]

Wright, B. M.

G. M. Williams, B. M. Wright, W. D. Mack, and E. J. Friebele, “Projecting the performance of erbium-doped fiber devices in a space radiation environment,” Proc. SPIE 3848, 271–280 (1999).
[Crossref]

Wright, M. W.

A. Biswas, M. W. Wright, J. Kovalik, and S. Piazzolla, “Uplink beacon laser for Mars laser communication demonstration (MLCD),” Proc. SPIE 5712, 93–100 (2005).
[Crossref]

Yamamoto, A.

Yu, S. Y.

Zhao, S.

Appl. Opt. (1)

IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. (1)

O. Berné, M. Caussanel, and O. Gilard, “A model for the prediction of EDFA gain in a space radiation environment,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 16(10), 2227–2229 (2004).
[Crossref]

IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. (1)

S. Girard, J. Kuhnhenn, A. Gusarov, B. Brichard, M. Van Uffelen, Y. Ouerdane, A. Boukenter, and C. Marcandella, “Radiation effects on silica-based optical fibers: recent advances and future challenges,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 60(3), 2015–2036 (2013).
[Crossref]

J. Lightwave Technol. (2)

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A (1)

Opt. Lett. (3)

Proc. SPIE (5)

J. Shoemaker, P. Brooks, E. Korevaar, G. Arnold, A. Das, J. Stubstad, and R. G. Hay, “The space technology research vehicle (STRV) −2 program,” Proc. SPIE 4136, 36–47 (2000).
[Crossref]

A. Biswas, M. W. Wright, J. Kovalik, and S. Piazzolla, “Uplink beacon laser for Mars laser communication demonstration (MLCD),” Proc. SPIE 5712, 93–100 (2005).
[Crossref]

B. Laurent and O. Duchmann, “The Silex Project: The first European optical intersatellite link experiment,” Proc. SPIE 1417, 2–12 (1991).
[Crossref]

M. Reyes, Z. Sodnik, P. Lopez, A. Alonso, T. Viera, and G. Oppenhauser, “Preliminary results of the in-orbit test of ARTEMIS with the optical ground station,” Proc. SPIE 4635, 38–49 (2002).
[Crossref]

G. M. Williams, B. M. Wright, W. D. Mack, and E. J. Friebele, “Projecting the performance of erbium-doped fiber devices in a space radiation environment,” Proc. SPIE 3848, 271–280 (1999).
[Crossref]

Other (3)

P. C. Becker, N. A. Olsson, and J. R. Simpson, Erbium-Doped Fiber Amplifiers: Fundamentals and Technology (San Diego, CD: Academic Press, 1999).

L. C. Andrews and R. L. Phillips, “Laser beam propagation through random media,” (SPIE Optical Engineering Press, 1998).

M. K. Jackson and M. Movassaghi, “An accurate compact EDFA model,” (Eur. Conf. Optical Communication, Munich, Germany, 2000).

Cited By

OSA participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (5)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1 α R A D of 1550nm and 980nm, and G B (gain of EDFA) versus dose of radiation at 20 ° C and 73 ° C .
Fig 2
Fig 2 BER performance versus dose of radiation at 20 ° C and 73 ° C .
Fig. 3
Fig. 3 BER performance versus divergence-angle with different dose of radiation, the corresponding G B (gain of EDFA) is shown in the legend.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4 BER performance versus divergence-angle with different dose of radiation.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5 BER performance versus W 0 with different dose of radiation.

Equations (20)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

d P s / d z = ( α s + g s ) N 2 P s ( α s + α s ' + α s R A D ) P s
d P p / d z = α p N 2 P p ( α p + α p ' + α p R A D ) P p
N 2 = α p P p / ν p + α s P s / ν s α p P p / ν p + ( α s + g s ) P s / ν s
α 1310 R A D = c R 1 f D f
α ( λ ) R A D = ( 1310 λ 0 ) 2 ( λ λ 0 ) 2 c R 1 f D f
B E R O O K 0 = 1 1 / 4 [ e r f c ( ( γ m 1 ) / 2 σ 1 ) + e r f c ( ( γ m 0 ) / 2 σ 0 ) ]
m 1 = G A η ( G B I s i n + I A S E + η c p G B I b ) + I d c
m 0 = G A η ( I A S E + η c p G B I b ) + I d c
σ 1 2 = 2 G A 2 F η 2 G B I s i n I A S E B e / B o + 1 / 2 G A 2 F η 2 I A S E 2 B e ( 2 B o B e ) / B o 2 + 2 G A 2 F e η B e ( G B I s i n + μ I A S E + η c p G B I b ) + 4 k b T B e / R L
σ 0 2 = 1 / 2 G A 2 F η 2 I A S E 2 B e ( 2 B o B e ) / B o 2 + 2 G A 2 F e η B e ( μ I A S E + η c p G B I b ) + 4 k b T B e / R L
I s i n = e h ν s η c p P i n τ T 2 D r 2 ( θ L ) 2 τ R
I A S E = e h ν s P A S E
B E R O O K = 0 B E R O O K 0 P w ( I ) d I
P w ( I ) = 0 P ( r ) P r ( I ) d r
P ( r ) = r σ r 2 exp ( r 2 2 σ r 2 )
P r ( I ) = 1 2 π σ I 2 ( r , L ) 1 I exp ( ( ln I I ( 0 , L ) + 2 r 2 W 2 + σ I 2 ( r , L ) 2 ) 2 2 σ I 2 ( r , L ) )
σ r 2 = 2.07 h 0 H C n 2 ( z ) ( L z ) 2 W 1 / 3 ( z ) d z
σ I 2 ( r , L ) = 8.702 μ 3 k 7 / 6 ( H h 0 ) 5 / 6 sec 11 / 6 ( ζ ) + 14.508 μ 1 Λ 5 / 6 k 7 / 6 ( H h 0 ) 5 / 6 sec 11 / 6 ( ζ ) ( r 2 / W 2 )
μ 1 = h 0 H C n 2 ( h ) ξ 5 / 3 d h
μ 3 = Re h 0 H C n 2 ( h ) { ξ 5 / 6 [ Λ ξ + i ( 1 ( L / R r ) ξ ) ] 5 / 6 Λ 5 / 6 ξ 5 / 3 } d h

Metrics