29.03.2016 Views

Nonlinear Fiber Optics - 4 ed. Agrawal

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

252 Chapter 7. Cross-Phase Modulation<br />

the XPM-induc<strong>ed</strong> phase shift is less than π because of the birefringence-relat<strong>ed</strong> pulse<br />

walk-off, the technique of cross-splicing can be us<strong>ed</strong> to accumulate it over long lengths<br />

[76]. In this technique, the fiber loop consists of multiple sections of polarizationmaintaining<br />

fibers that are splic<strong>ed</strong> together in such a way that the fast and slow axes<br />

are rotat<strong>ed</strong> by 90 ◦ in successive sections. As a result, the pump and signal pulses<br />

are forc<strong>ed</strong> to pass through each other in each section of the fiber loop, and the XPMinduc<strong>ed</strong><br />

phase shift is enhanc<strong>ed</strong> by a factor equal to the number of sections.<br />

7.5.3 XPM-Induc<strong>ed</strong> Nonreciprocity<br />

XPM also occurs when two beams having the same (or different) wavelengths are propagat<strong>ed</strong><br />

in opposite directions inside a fiber such that the counterpropagating waves interact<br />

with each other through XPM. Such an interaction can lead to new qualitative<br />

features, manifest<strong>ed</strong> through optical bistability and other instabilities when the fiber<br />

is us<strong>ed</strong> to construct a nonlinear ring resonator [84]–[95]. Of particular interest is the<br />

XPM-induc<strong>ed</strong> nonreciprocity that can affect the performance of fiber gyroscopes [96]–<br />

[101].<br />

The origin of nonreciprocity between two counterpropagating waves can be understood<br />

by following the analysis of Section 7.1. If A 1 and A 2 are the amplitudes of the<br />

forward and backward propagating waves, they satisfy the coupl<strong>ed</strong> amplitude equations<br />

similar to Eqs. (7.1.15) and (7.1.16),<br />

± ∂A j<br />

∂z + 1 ∂A j<br />

+ iβ 2 ∂ 2 A j<br />

v g ∂t 2 ∂t 2 + α 2 A j = iγ(|A j | 2 + 2|A 3− j | 2 )A j , (7.5.1)<br />

where the plus or minus sign corresponds to j = 1 or 2, respectively. In the case of<br />

CW beams, this set of two equations is readily solv<strong>ed</strong>. If fiber losses are neglect<strong>ed</strong> for<br />

simplicity, the solution is given as<br />

A j (z)= √ P j exp(±iφ j ), (7.5.2)<br />

where P j is the peak power and the nonlinear phase shift is given by φ j = γz(P j +2P 3− j )<br />

with j = 1,2. If P 1 ≠ P 2 , the phase shifts φ 1 and φ 2 are not the same for the two<br />

counterpropagating waves. This nonreciprocity is due to the presence of the factor of<br />

two in the XPM term in Eq. (7.5.1).<br />

XPM-induc<strong>ed</strong> nonreciprocity can be detrimental for high-precision fiber gyroscopes<br />

us<strong>ed</strong> to measure rotation rates as small as 0.01 ◦ per hour [102]. Figure 7.10 shows the<br />

design of a fiber gyroscope schematically. Its operation is bas<strong>ed</strong> on the Sagnac effect,<br />

known to introduce a rotation-dependent relative phase shift between the counterpropagating<br />

waves [103]. This phase difference is given by<br />

Δφ = φ 1 − φ 2 = γL(P 2 − P 1 )+SΩ, (7.5.3)<br />

where L is the total fiber length, Ω is the rotation rate, and S is a scale factor that<br />

depends on the fiber length L as well as on the radius of the fiber loop [102]. If the<br />

powers P 1 and P 2 were constant, the XPM term in Eq. (7.5.3) would be of little concern.<br />

However, the power levels can fluctuate in practice. Even a power difference of 1 μW

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!