Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

[10GMMF] Notes from Aug 24 meeting on TP3 definition

1.  Attendees

Aronson, Lew
Babla, Chet
Dawe, Piers
Ewen, John
Fiedler, Jens
George, John
Ghiasi, Ali
Hallemeier, Pete
Hanberg, Jesper
King, Jonathan
Latchman, Ryan
Lawton, Mike
Lindsay, Tom
Peters Weem, Jan
Popescu, Petre
Shanbhag, Abhijit
Sun, Yi
Witt, Kevin
Zona, Bob

1. Questions on Stressed Rx Test E-O and E-O-E linearity

Lew presentd some slides addressing the points raised by Abhijit on this topic.
In these slides 2 questions are addressed:-
        i) With the ISI block before the E to O converteer will there be intramodal dispersion and non linerar ISI after the the PIN (due to the square law detector)
        - the response was that the intramodal dispersion will be negligble due the the very short lengths of fiber
        - for the non linearities arising from the square law detector Lew said he had a colleague who had shown him some references which indicated that the E-O-E process in fact turns out to be linear (cross products average out).

        ii) The impact of non-idealities in the E to O conversion
        - Lew stated that this could be an issue with a slow or non-linear source, and a requirement should be included in the characterisation portion of the test, namely
                o The test signal should be defined optically and measured with a linear reference receiver
                o mismatch between electrical ISI and received ISI should be corrected with either a better source or compensation.

We are awaiting experimental results before we close this agenda item.

2.  Designing the ISI generator for receiver testing

We reviewed the latest set of Petre's slides, dated 24/8/04.

There was some discussion regarding the need for LPF2 on p4. It was felt that this probably was needed in order for the fitting algorithm to be truly comparing like with like.

There were some questions on the pulse shaping on pages 4 and 5. Petre will address these next week.

There was some discussion regarding fitting with a pulse shape with normalised area vs normalised height. Not clear which is best. The approach used currently fits to a normalised height.

There was a discussion on whether a very high speed source could present the test receiver with any problems and hence it should be avoided. No-one presented any concerns on this subject.

Please let me know if you have any comments or corrections.

Next meeting Tuesday August 31st.

Best Regards

Mike