4.6 Article

Limits on the performance of RF-over-fiber links and their impact on device design

期刊

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TMTT.2005.863818

关键词

future development; microwave photonics; reviews; technological forecasting

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper is divided into two major parts. Following a brief introduction that establishes some definitions and assumptions, Section II updates our earlier study on the limits of the RF performance of optical links. Section III reviews progress since our 1997 review paper in the development of devices enabling link performance closer to these limits, including (but not limited to): 1) cascade lasers that permit broad-band direct modulation links with gain > 0 dB; 2) injection-locked edge- and surface-emitting lasers at 1300 and 1550 run with modulation frequency responses as great as 40 GHz; 3) modulators with improved performance, especially electroabsorption modulators that now have switching voltages as low as 0.36 V, or handle optical powers as great as 60 mW, or have bandwidths as great as 50 GHz (but not all three of these in one device yet); and 4) high-speed photodetectors with high saturation currents, e.g., a 20-GHz device with a saturation current of 90 mA and a 55-GHz device with saturation at 50 mA. We conclude in Section IV by summarizing the component developments necessary for higher performance RF-over-fiber links, i.e.: 1) semiconductor lasers (for direct modulation) that have higher slope efficiency and bandwidth and lower relative intensity noise (RIN) at reasonable bias current levels; 2) continuous wave (CW) lasers (for external modulation) with higher fiber-coupled power and lower RIN; 3) higher frequency lower loss external modulators with more linear transfer functions and lower V, that can withstand larger CW optical powers; and 4) photodetectors with higher responsivity and bandwidth that respond linearly even when illuminated by greater average optical powers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据