This disclosure relates generally to beam steering of light and more particularly to large scale optical phased arrays (OPA) that steer coherent light.
Recent advancements in silicon photonics fabrication technologies has precipitated the development of nanophotonic optical arrays that have proven useful in a number of contemporary applications including light detection and ranging (LiDAR), free space communications and holographic displays. Given their utility, further development and/or improvement of nanophotonic optical arrays would represent a welcome addition to the art.
An advance in the art is made according to aspects of the present disclosure directed to large scale steerable optical switched arrays that may be advantageously fabricated on a common substrate and include many thousands or more emitters.
In illustrative embodiments the emitters may be arranged in a curved pattern at the focal plane of a lens thereby allowing the directional control of emitted light and selective reception of reflected light suitable for use in imaging, ranging, and sensing applications including accident avoidance.
A more complete understanding of the present disclosure may be realized by reference to the accompanying drawing in which:
The illustrative embodiments are described more fully by the Figures and detailed description. Embodiments according to this disclosure may, however, be embodied in various forms and are not limited to specific or illustrative embodiments described in the drawing and detailed description.
The following merely illustrates the principles of the disclosure. It will thus be appreciated that those skilled in the art will be able to devise various arrangements which, although not explicitly described or shown herein, embody the principles of the disclosure and are included within its spirit and scope.
Furthermore, all examples and conditional language recited herein are intended to be only for pedagogical purposes to aid the reader in understanding the principles of the disclosure and the concepts contributed by the inventor(s) to furthering the art and are to be construed as being without limitation to such specifically recited examples and conditions.
Moreover, all statements herein reciting principles, aspects, and embodiments of the disclosure, as well as specific examples thereof, are intended to encompass both structural and functional equivalents thereof. Additionally, it is intended that such equivalents include both currently known equivalents as well as equivalents developed in the future, i.e., any elements developed that perform the same function, regardless of structure.
Thus, for example, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that any block diagrams herein represent conceptual views of illustrative circuitry embodying the principles of the disclosure.
Unless otherwise explicitly specified herein, the FIGs comprising the drawing are not drawn to scale.
By way of further background and it is noted that—in general—an “ideal” single lens imaging plane is not flat. Such a principle was noted as early as the 19th century by Joseph Petzval—among others—and is used by photographers to capture images having an in-focus central portion and a sharply out-of-focus periphery. As a more specific example, the image sensor array of state-of-the-art, modern telescopes—such as the Kepler space observatory—is curved.
As will be known and appreciated by those skilled in the art—based on time reversal symmetry—if an array of light emitters is positioned on a curved focal plane of a lens, light beams emitting from all the emitters are imaged to infinite distance (and therefore are collimated) but at different angles.
Such principle is shown in
With these principles in mind, turning now to
Operationally, each illustrative individual switch in the tree of switches is controlled by the application of a suitable voltage. Accordingly, the three-level tree of switches shown illustratively in
At this point it is noted that while we have shown and described this illustrative configuration as employing a switched array tree having 1×2 switches, our disclosure is not to be considered so limiting. More specifically, any configuration of switches are contemplated (i.e., 1×3, 1×4, . . . , 2×2, 2×3, . . . etc). The tree illustrated is a topology known in the art, that is there are no circular paths between nodes (switches). As we shall show and describe further, the switch type(s) in a particular switched array tree need not all be of the same type, or technology (i.e., thermos-optic, electro-optic, etc.).
Worth noting further at this point is that the emitters employed may likewise be a variety of those known in the art. Optical emitters that may advantageously be employed according to the present disclosure include—for example—an optical grating, end-fire facet, plasmonic emitter, metal antennae, and mirror facet—among others.
Starting from the laser, the very first switch (SW1-1—first level—controlled by V1) directs light output by the laser to the upper or lower half of the switch array tree. Accordingly, at the second level, only one of the two switches (SW2-1, SW2-2)—both of which are controlled by V2—receive light output from first level switch depending on how the first level switch is controlled by V1. Even though in an ideal case the switches controlled by V2 are identical and the voltage required to control them is equal, in a practical system these will be slightly different from each other—and from V1 as well.
The same is true for the third level switches. All four of them are identical by design but will have slightly different voltage requirements for perfect (0%-100%) power switching between its two output ports. It is noteworthy that even though these switches require a voltage which is slightly different from their neighbor, they do not require a separate wiring. This is due to the fact that in this illustrative example only one of the switches at a given level is receiving light at any moment in time. Accordingly, the state(s) of the other switch(es) at that level are of no consequence.
Turning now to
As may be observed and understood, in first half period (0-T/2), the first switch directs light to the upper half of the array i.e., to SW-2-1. From the discussion above we know that during that first half period of time, the uppermost second level switch (SW-2-1) goes between the values optimized for that switch and drives the other, lower second level switch (SW-2-2) with it redundantly.
As will be readily appreciated by those skilled in the art, this simple, illustrative scheme—while not being the most power efficient method to drive the switched array tree—greatly simplifies the overall system with respect to the number of I/O pads and control signals required to control the switch tree. More specifically, an array tree of N elements—when configured in this simple manner—requires only log 2(N) control signals rather than N-1 control signals if each switch had its individual wiring and I/O pad. As will be further appreciated by those skilled in the art, this simple illustrative configuration results in at least half of the switches in the tree consuming power while only log 2(N) of them are switching (directing) light at any given time.
Note, however, that if overall power consumption and current delivery of the switch tree array is more important than the number of I/O pads required, a smaller number of the switches can advantageously be wired in parallel. With reference now to
For example, as can be seen in
As will be readily appreciated by those skilled in the art, a design tradeoff results from these illustrative, alternative configurations. Extra I/O pad(s) and interconnecting circuits are required to provide this improved, reduced power consumption. Such design tradeoff's may be advantageously made on a case-by-case basis.
Note that a large area switch tree array and corresponding phased array (several millimeters or larger across) with elements spaced near (or smaller than half wavelength) apart, will contain thousands of elements. Such a switched array tree will have ten or more levels of switching before light reaches an emitter. Accordingly, a necessary design tradeoff must be made in such a situation between the number of I/O signals employed—which is at least 10-20 and can reach thousands if each switch is addressed individually—and the power consumption that can scale inversely with the number of I/O signals/pads employed.
As we shall now describe, another aspect of a switched array architecture according to the present disclosure is that the time scale and the power consumption of different switch layers in the array is not necessarily the same.
As may be observed from that
Advantageously, and as will be readily understood and appreciated by those skilled in the art, physical mechanisms employed for lower and higher levels of switches can be different. Note that with respect to the above discussion, first level(s) of switches only transition between on/off/up/down states a few times per total array scan but hold each state for extended periods of time (as long as T/2 for the first level switch). On the other hand, the later or last level(s) of switches (i.e., final branches of the switch tree) can be in transition each time a far field point of view changes. Consequently, initial levels (stages) of the tree can utilize switches that consume more power in the transition state (like reverse biased pn junction based electrooptic phase shifter Mach-Zehnder switches), while end branch levels of the tree can utilize switches that consume power only when they are in a switching mode (i.e., on/off or up/down transition) and not in the rest state (e.g., thermooptic or electrooptic switches).
At this point we may now describe how systems, methods and structures according to the present disclosure may operate in illustrative applications. With simultaneous reference now to
Accordingly, and as shown schematically in the figures, the switched array, operates as a transmit and receive component of a LiDAR or a free space communications system. Illustratively, a frequency-modulated continuous wave laser detection and ranging (FMCW) LiDAR system is illustratively shown wherein the same array simultaneously functions as a send and receive element due to the time symmetry of nonmagnetic optical systems.
As will be readily understood and appreciated by those skilled in the art, light travelling along a certain path—when scattered and/or reflected by an object—will have a portion of that scattered light travel the exact same path—in reverse—where it may be detected at the origin.
With reference to that
Shown interposed between the laser source and the switch array, is an illustrative 2×2 switch (
Operationally—and by way of specific illustrative example only using
As noted further previously, a portion of that reflected light will travel the same path traversed after emission—in reverse. That reflected light so traveling the reverse path will be collected by a same emitter as transmitted, directed back through the switched tree array to the 2×2 switch (redirector), where it is directed to the coherent detector for detection. In this way, the same path through the switched tree array distribution network is bidirectional—that is provides both transmit and receive path(s). As noted above, such a configuration may be known as monostatic.
We note at this point that as shown schematically in
In particular, while we generally have shown the array of emitters as arranged along a curved arc substantially at a focal point of the external lens, our disclosure is not so limited. More particularly, with an appropriate choice of lens—i.e., a double convex lens—the focal plane will flatten. As such, the array of emitters may be positioned along a line that is not curved—provided additional, appropriate optical element(s) (lenses) are interposed in an optical path after the emitters (distal).
As will be understood, the configuration shown in
As will be readily appreciated by those skilled in the art, such pulsed LiDAR systems and methods enable practitioners to sweep or scan large areas while collecting billions of data points, each with precise latitude, longitude, and elevation (x, y, z) values within a local (relative) coordinate system. This aggregation of the billions of data points is oftentimes referred to as a point cloud data set. Practitioners subsequently extract object locations from the point cloud data set and use that location information for subsequent decision making.
Known further by those skilled in the art, point cloud data sets may be collected by a Geiger Mode Avalanche Photo Diode (GmAPD_-based LiDAR systems—a number of which are known in the art. Operationally, GmAPD-based LiDAR systems generally comprises a transmitter including laser transmitter(s) and transmitting optics, receiver including receiving optics and photo-detector(s), and processing system(s) (not specifically shown in
When installed or otherwise mounted on movable platforms such as an automobile, such LiDAR system(s) may be configured or individually combined to sweep or scan over a large volume such that a full 360-degree environmental view may be made.
Accordingly, the transmitter periodically transmits interrogating signal(s) into a detection region from which they may be reflected back as return signal(s). Generally, the interrogating signal(s) are a train of optical-pulses exhibiting a period and a wavelength and intensity suitable for interrogating the detection region. The wavelength(s) of the interrogating signal(s) are oftentimes in the range of 900 nm to 2000 nm however, other usable wavelengths are known in the art.
In an illustrative GmAPD-based LiDAR system embodiment such as that illustrated in the figure, the transmitter will include a laser source—such as a diode laser—which emits an optical pulse train of interrogating signal(s) in response to drive signal(s) from—for example—a processing system (not specifically shown). As each optical pulse of interrogating signal propagates through the detection region, objects reflect a portion of a pulse's optical energy back toward system as reflected optical pulse(s) in receive (returned) signal(s) which may be detected by a receiver.
In contemporary embodiments, the receiver may include an array of GmAPD detector pixels. As will be readily appreciated and understood by those skilled in the art, one particular advantage of GmAPDs is that they quickly produce an electrical pulse in response to the detection of even a single photon—allowing for sub-nsec-precision photon-flight-time measurements. When each pixel is armed, it may detect a low-intensity reflection of an interrogation signal (return signal) and output a signal to be detected and subsequently used by the processing system. As shown illustratively in the figure, the array of detectors is positioned substantially at the focal plane of another (receiver) lens.
At this point we note that while we have used the terms emitter and receiver, such structures may exhibit the same—or different—structural characteristics. For example, an “emitter” may comprise an end facet while a receiver may likewise comprise an end facet. That is to say, such emitters and receivers may be any suitable optical “antenna”. Note further that while such receivers may be constructed like any emitter such as those identified earlier, a given emitter/receiver complementary pair do not have to be of the same construction. That is to say, an emitter may comprise a grating while a receiver may comprise an end facet—or any other combination.
Continuing with our discussion of
As shown in this illustrative configuration, light emitted from a particular emitter—in this scenario the 7th emitter—will be reflected/scattered from an object and received by a corresponding 7th emitter/detector. As will be further understood by those skilled in the art, since the two switched tree distribution networks correspond to one another, a common set of control signals applied to each network will activate appropriate corresponding switches in each network for complementary emission/reception.
We note that such configurations that include two lenses (or multiple lens configurations or combinations thereof), or two lenses and two trees, advantageously do not generally suffer from reflection effects of the single transmit tree (monostatic) configurations described previously. In the illustrative example shown in the figure, the receive tree will receive the reflected/detected signal(s) and direct same to the coherent detector. As illustrated, the coherent detector receives a portion of the laser power as a local oscillator thereby permitting information determination from/about time of flight data. Note that as illustrated a beat signal may be generated at a root of the receiving switched tree by one coherent detector or at an end of the tree by multiple local oscillators each receiving the local oscillator laser power in turn by a switching tree.
As will now be readily understood and appreciated by those skilled in the art, one feature of such two lens systems is the misalignment of the send and receive beams. Turning now to
We note that for a one-dimensional integrated optics switched array the terminated end of the waveguides can function as a perfect, broadband emitter without requiring a grating or any other sophisticated radiation mechanism. On the other hand, as the waveguides are placed a few micrometers apart from each other, far field operation of the array becomes more discrete (discretized) with the angular resolution being dependent on the focal length.
One approach to improve this resolution is to change the wavelength of the laser slightly. With reference to
At this point, while we have presented this disclosure using some specific examples, those skilled in the art will recognize that our teachings are not so limited. In particular, while we have shown and described various illustrative configurations employing switched binary tree distribution networks optically connecting a source to a plurality of emitters, this disclosure is not so limited. In particular, a selectively, switchable distribution network of any size and topology between laser and emitter is contemplated and included in this disclosure. Accordingly, this disclosure should be only limited by the scope of the claims attached hereto.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/475,417 filed Sep. 15, 2021, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/994,234 filed Aug. 14, 2020, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/457,158 filed Jun. 28, 2019, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/927,037 filed Mar. 20, 2018, which claims the benefit of United States Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/473,689 filed Mar. 20, 2017, each of which are incorporated by reference as if set forth at length herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5000567 | Fleshner | Mar 1991 | A |
6097859 | Solgaard et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6538780 | Murphy et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6795655 | Sidorovich et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
7440084 | Kane | Oct 2008 | B2 |
10338321 | Hosseini et al. | Jul 2019 | B2 |
20040086220 | Mino et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20060062514 | Agranat | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20170350964 | Kaneda | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20180341066 | Han et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20190265574 | Skirlo | Aug 2019 | A1 |
20190296517 | Lealman | Sep 2019 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Hulme et al., “Fully integrated hybrid silicon two dimensional beam scanner”, OSA, 2015. |
Yue Tang et al., “Single transceiver-based time division multiplexing multiple-input-multiple-output digital beamforming radar system: concepts and experiments”, IET Radar Sonar Navig., 2014, vol. 8, Iss. 4, pp. 368-375 (Year: 2014). |
Patel et al., Plasmonic nanoantennas: enhancing light-matter interactions at the nanoscale, arxiv.org, 2015, 34 pages. |
Yoo et al., “Optical phased array using high contrast gratings for two dimensional beamforming and beamsteering”, Optics Express, vol. 21, No. 10, 12238-12248, May 20, 2013. |
Yoo et al., “A 32 × 32 optical phased array using polysilicon sub-wavelength high-contrast-grating mirrors”, Optics Express, vol. 22, No. 16, 19029-19039, Aug. 11, 2014. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20230152525 A1 | May 2023 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62473689 | Mar 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 17475417 | Sep 2021 | US |
Child | 18093649 | US | |
Parent | 16994234 | Aug 2020 | US |
Child | 17475417 | US | |
Parent | 16457158 | Jun 2019 | US |
Child | 16994234 | US | |
Parent | 15927037 | Mar 2018 | US |
Child | 16457158 | US |