| Literature DB >> 30453577 |
Yuxi Ruan1, Bin Liu2, Yanguang Yu3, Jiangtao Xi4, Qinghua Guo5, Jun Tong6.
Abstract
This paper presents a new method for measuring the linewidth enhancement factor (alpha factor) by the relaxation oscillation (RO) frequency of a laser with external optical feedback (EOF). A measurement formula for alpha is derived which shows the alpha can be determined by only using the RO frequencies and no need to know any other parameters related to the internal or external parameters associated to the laser. Unlike the existing EOF based alpha measurement methods which require an external target has a symmetric reciprocate movement. The proposed method only needs to move the target to be in a few different positions along the light beam. Furthermore, this method also suits for the case with alpha less than 1. Both simulation and experiment are performed to verify the proposed method.Entities:
Keywords: external optical feedback; laser sensors; linewidth enhancement factor; relaxation oscillation; self-mixing interferometry
Year: 2018 PMID: 30453577 PMCID: PMC6264022 DOI: 10.3390/s18114004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Schematic configuration of an SMI.
Physical meaning of symbols in Equations (1)–(3).
| Symbol | Physical Meaning | Value |
|---|---|---|
|
| Feedback strength | |
|
| External cavity round trip time, | |
|
| Angular frequency of solitary laser | |
|
| Line-width enhancement factor | |
|
| Injection current density | |
|
| Threshold injection current density | |
|
| Internal cavity round-trip time |
|
|
| Photon life time |
|
|
| Carrier life time |
|
|
| Modal gain coefficient |
|
|
| Carrier density at transparency |
|
|
| Nonlinear gain compression coefficient |
|
|
| Confinement factor |
|
Figure 2Simulation results with , , and . (a): ΔL vs. Time; (b): An SMI signal.
Figure 3Transient waveform of the SL at Case 1 with L0 = 15.0 cm.
Figure 4Relationship between the relative relaxation oscillation (RO) frequency difference and the external cavity length L.
Simulation results with , .
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| 0.50 | 0.52 | 3.8% |
| 1.00 | 1.01 | 0.6% |
| 2.00 | 2.04 | 1.9% |
| 3.00 | 2.94 | 2.0% |
| 4.00 | 3.81 | 4.8% |
| 5.00 | 4.75 | 5.0% |
Simulation results with , .
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| 0.50 | 0.51 | 2.4% |
| 1.00 | 1.04 | 4.2% |
| 2.00 | 2.05 | 2.7% |
| 3.00 | 3.08 | 2.7% |
| 4.00 | 4.01 | 0.2% |
| 5.00 | 4.82 | 3.7% |
Figure 5Experimental set-up. BS: beam splitter; PD: photodiode; SL: semiconductor lasers; PZT: piezoelectric transducer.
Figure 6Experimental self-mixing interferometry (SMI) signal (a) control signal applied on PZT; (b) corresponding SMI signal.
Figure 7Typical laser transient intensity under quasi-continuous wave (QCW) mode.
Experimental results.
| L (cm) | 15.0 | 15.1 | 15.2 | 15.3 | 15.4 | 15.5 |
|
| 4.631 | 4.645 | 4.659 | 4.669 | 4.687 | 4.701 |
|
| 4.697 | 4.702 | 4.708 | 4.709 | 4.717 | 4.725 |
|
| 4.751 | |||||
Figure 8Fitting curves of the experimental results. RO: relaxation oscillation.