The present application is a National Phase entry of PCT Application No. PCT/EP2018/069502, filed Jul. 18, 2018, which claims priority from EP Patent Application No. 17182399.0, filed Jul. 20, 2017, which is hereby fully incorporated herein by reference.
The disclosure relates to optical communications in general and to an optical fiber for improved loss measurement.
Fiber to the Premises (FTTP) provides optical fiber all the way from the exchange or switching center to a customer's premises. At the customer end of the fiber, which is commonly cut to length at the customer premises, an optical connector is required to terminate the fiber in order to facilitate connection into the customer's premises equipment. The desire to quickly connect the customer's premises equipment has led to the introduction of a field-fit connector, which involves a mechanical method of placing a connector on the freshly cut end of the fiber. As the name suggests, the connectors are fitted in-situ, so quality assurance of the connection is problematic when compared to, say, optical assemblies created in a manufacturing facility. Field-fit connectors (also known as field-installable connectors or field-assembly connectors) are mechanical in nature and can be prone to faults relating to fitting of the connectors to the fiber and the finishing of the fiber itself that can adversely affect service. For example, quality issues with field-fit connectors can introduce excessive losses leading either to no service continuity necessitating rework or to a degradation of the service provided to the customer over time leading to the need for restorative work during the lifetime of the connection. Unlike factory-fitted fusion-splice connections, the lack of a reliable confirmation system for field-fit connecters, means that faults with them can be difficult to detect. There is therefore a need for an improved method for reliably checking that a field-fit connector has been properly fitted to the fiber.
Field-fit connector loss relates to losses arising from the quality of the fiber joint created when the field-fit connectors is mated with a second optical fiber, e.g. through a second connector. Losses may be caused by several factors, including gaps between the cut end of the and the end of an optical fiber in a mating connector, misalignment of the fiber within the connector and where the cut end of the fiber is not properly cleaned and polished. One way to detect a quality issue with field-fit connecters, is to measure the optical loss through the connector after fitting to the fiber. However, it can be difficult to get an accurate measurement of the optical loss of the connector in the field, i.e. once fitted to the fiber at the customer's premises. One way to do this is to take readings of optical power in light received from the network with a view to quantifying the loss introduced by the connector. This works by taking a first reading at the distribution point of optical power in light received from the network without the drop fiber and then taking a second reading at the customer premises of optical power in light received from the network taken after the drop fiber and connector has been fitted. From a comparison of the two optical power readings, the loss introduced by fitting the connector can then be estimated (e.g. as the loss in the drop fiber will also contribute to the second power reading). However, this requires action at both the distribution point and the customer premises and can be time-consuming, especially where the distribution point is located remote from the customer premises.
Current techniques for fitting and testing a fiber from a connectorized distribution point to the customer's premises in FTTP are represented in
Once the power measurement is complete, the patch cord and power meter can be disconnected and the drop fiber 122 is connected (as shown in
As shown in
According to a first aspect of the disclosure, there is provided a method of quantifying loss associated with an optical connector that is connected to an end of an optical fiber; in which the optical fiber comprises a plurality of embedded optical reflectors distributed periodically along the length of the fiber, in which the method comprises: inserting an optical signal into the fiber through the optical connector; measuring a component of the optical signal reflected by at least one of the plurality of embedded optical reflectors, in which the component is received through the optical connector; calculating the difference in power level between the inserted and reflected signals; and quantifying, based on the calculated power level difference and the reflectivity of the embedded optical reflector, the loss associated with the optical connector.
In this way, embodiments of the disclosure provide a method of calculating losses more accurately and more conveniently allowing field engineers to verify the correct installation of the field-fit connector quickly with more effectively. Embodiments of the disclosure reduce process steps for installing a drop fiber to customer premises, for example, by not requiring any action at the exchange or at any intermediate location along the fiber.
According to an embodiment, the optical fiber connects a switching center and a customer premises; in which the end of the optical fiber to which the optical connector is connected is located at the customer premises.
According to an embodiment, the method comprises cutting the optical fiber to length at a point located between the at least one of the plurality of embedded optical reflectors and a second one of the plurality of embedded optical reflectors and fitting the connector to the end of the fiber.
According to an embodiment, the plurality of embedded optical reflectors is configured to reflect light at the same wavelength.
According to an embodiment, the at least one of the plurality of embedded optical reflectors comprises the optical reflector closest along the fiber to the optical connector.
According to an embodiment, each embedded optical reflector comprises a fiber Bragg grating.
According to an embodiment, the method comprises attaching a test equipment to the optical connector; in which the test equipment comprises a source of the optical signal, an interface configured to insert the optical signal into the fiber through the optical connector and configured to receive the component of the optical signal from the fiber through the optical connector, and a detector to detect the power of the received component of the optical signal.
According to an embodiment, the method comprises: attaching to the test equipment, in place of the optical connector, a calibration component with a reflectivity similar to the reflectivity of the at least one embedded optical reflector located closest to the optical connector along the fiber; carrying out a calibration measurement; in which the calibration measurement comprises operating the test equipment to: insert an optical signal into the calibration component; measure a component of the optical signal reflected by the calibration component; calculate the difference in power level between the inserted and reflected signals; and quantify, based on the calculated power level difference and the reflectivity of the calibration component, the loss associated with the test equipment when connected to the calibration component.
According to a second aspect of the disclosure, there is provided an optical fiber comprising a plurality of embedded optical reflectors distributed periodically along the length of the fiber.
In this way, embodiments of the disclosure provide an optical fiber that enables a simplified and more efficient method of measuring losses, allowing field engineers to verify the correct installation of a field-fit connector quickly with more effectively. The optical fiber reduces process steps for installing a drop fiber to customer premises, for example, by not requiring any action at the exchange or at any intermediate location along the fiber.
According to an embodiment, the embedded optical reflectors are fiber Bragg gratings. According to an embodiment, the plurality of embedded optical reflectors is configured to reflect light at the same wavelength. According to an embodiment, the location along the fiber of each of the plurality of embedded optical reflectors is marked externally.
The optical connector and/or optical fiber may be for use in the field of optical telecommunications.
The fiber may contain 10 or more reflectors, may contain 20 or more reflectors and for example may contain 30 or more reflectors. Reflectors may be present along more than half of the length of the fiber. Reflectors may be present along substantially the whole length of the fiber. The separation of the reflectors may be more than 5 m. The separation of the reflectors may be between greater than or equal to 10 meters and less than or equal to 20 meters. The separation of the reflectors can be greater than or equal to 14 meters and less than or equal to 16 meters.
According to a third aspect of the disclosure there is provided a drop cable for supply of communication services to a customer; in which the drop cable comprises the optical fiber. According to an embodiment, the cable connects a switching center and a customer premises.
In order that the present disclosure may be better understood, embodiments thereof will now be described, by way of example only, with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:
As shown in
By keeping the distance along the fiber from the cut end to the closest FBG within limits by use of embedded gratings, the accuracy of loss measurements is increased while, as will be described later, the use of embedded optical reflectors reduces the number of steps required to check a field-fit connector.
FBGs 424 are passive components which can be fabricated by changing the refractive index of a fiber in multiple, periodic bands (schematically represented by the vertical black bars in the Figures). The pitch and width of these bands allows the FBG to be “tuned” to reflect a specific wavelength of light (the “FBG wavelength”) and to reflect a certain proportion of the power at that wavelength. The width of the grating determines the bandwidth (also known as the full-width-half-maximum (FWHM)) of the reflector, centered on the central “Bragg wavelength”. A bandwidth of 0.6 nm has been found to be acceptable, although other values may be preferred, depending on the circumstances applying in a particular network. This is a trade-off, as the narrower the grating bandwidth, the more precisely the test signal light source has to be controlled leading to higher costs, while a looser spec results in more spectrum being consumed. A variation in the test signal wavelength of ±10 nm has been found to be acceptable, although higher precision may be desirable, depending on the circumstances applying in a particular network.
That is, the FBGs 424 send the optical power (or a proportion of the optical power) at a specific wavelength back towards the source, rather than allowing forward transmission. The FBGs 424 can be designed to reflect a specific wavelength (e.g. that does not interfere with data transmission). A FBG can be inscribed into a fiber very efficiently as the fiber is pulled from the preform in conventional optical fiber manufacture. According to an embodiment, the plurality of FBGs is configured to reflect light at the same wavelength. There is a need to avoid any wavelengths used in normal operation of the fiber. According to an embodiment, the preferred wavelength will correspond to the ITU reserved monitoring bands of 1625 nm-1650 nm. In cases where 1625 nm is used by engineers to test the network from the customer premises, 1650 nm would be a preferred wavelength, although other wavelengths may be used on a particular network, depending on the circumstances applying to that particular network.
The reflectivity of the FBGs 424 is set during the manufacturing process and may be checked to ensure that the grating conforms to the required reflectivity. The fiber 110 is connected at the distribution point 102 (e.g. using a reliable fusion splicing technique) by direct termination onto the drop cable 422 or (as shown in the Figure) by a factory-fitted connector 414 (i.e. by a connector whose fitting, was carried out under optimum conditions at a manufacturing facility, and has been checked, e.g. by the manufacturer—either at the manufacturing facility or at a suitable test facility).
The test equipment 600 may be constructed from standard optical components such as may be used to make a bidirectional optical transceiver. According to an embodiment, these components could consist of the diplexer, a receiver optical sub assembly (ROSA) and a transmitter optical sub assembly (TOSA). The ROSA could comprise an avalanche or PIN photodiode photodetector, trans-impedance amplifier and limiting amplifier. The TOSA could comprise a laser diode with back facet monitor and driver circuit. The whole may be controlled by a programmable microcontroller or equivalent electronic logic circuitry 640 configured to detect the difference between the power level of the light 630 sent by the source 610 and the power level of the light 632 received at the receiver 612. A suitable display 642 may be used to provide the result to the field engineer.
A small component (typically no more than 5% for FBGs), of the test optical signal will be passed by the closest FBG and will reach the next-closest (or “second”) FBG. A sub-component of the test optical signal, reflected at the second FBG will return to the closest FBG and will experience a large degree (typically at least 95% for FBGs) of reflection, with only a very small sub-sub-component (i.e. no more than 0.25%) of the test optical signal passing the closest FBG again and arriving at the test equipment. Reflected sub-components of the test optical signal from any third or subsequent FBGs will be correspondingly smaller. While all references to the power levels of reflections from the closest FBG are understood to include reflected sub-components from any second, third or subsequent FBGs, the effect of such reflected sub-components on the power readings will be so small as not to materially affect the outcome.
Use of test equipment 600 allows measurement of the power level of the light that is introduced into the drop fiber 422 through the field-fit connector 116 and the power level of the light reflected back from the drop fiber FBG 424 through the field-fit connector 116. The reflectivity of the FBG is also known and we can therefore calculate the loss introduced by the field-fit connector, as follows:
For example, where the power level of the source transmitted light (tx_pwr) is −4 dBm, the reflectivity of the grating is −3 dB and the power level of the received light (Rx_pwr) is −8 dBm, then the loss is given by:
The embodiment may be implemented with an additional operation involving a calibration plug, as shown in
Although of particular benefit in testing field-fit connectors, the embodiments have application in testing the performance of other types of optical fiber connector.
The disclosure relates to an optical fiber comprising a plurality of embedded optical reflectors distributed periodically along the length of the fiber. The invention also relates to a method of quantifying loss associated with an optical connector that is connected to optical fiber comprising a plurality of embedded optical reflectors distributed periodically along the length of the fiber. The method comprises: inserting an optical signal into the fiber through the optical connector; measuring a component of the optical signal reflected by at least one of the plurality of embedded optical reflectors, in which the component is received through the optical connector; calculating the difference in power level between the inserted and reflected signals; and quantifying, based on the calculated power level difference and the reflectivity of the embedded optical reflector, the loss associated with the optical connector.
It will be understood by those skilled in the art that, although the present disclosure has been described in relation to the above described example embodiments, the invention is not limited thereto and that there are many possible variations and modifications which fall within the scope of the invention.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
17182399 | Jul 2017 | EP | regional |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP2018/069502 | 7/18/2018 | WO | 00 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2019/016263 | 1/24/2019 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5142606 | Carney et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5375185 | Hermsen et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5596670 | Debortoli et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5625450 | Ikeno | Apr 1997 | A |
5832011 | Kashyap | Nov 1998 | A |
6075628 | Fisher et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6134363 | Hinson et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6249633 | Wittmeier, II et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6323981 | Jensen | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6327060 | Otani et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6370309 | Daoud | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6388741 | Beller | May 2002 | B1 |
6418266 | Vitantonio | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6424443 | Brindel et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6434313 | Clapp, Jr. et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6534997 | Horishita et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6539160 | Battey et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6587974 | Majd et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
7049523 | Shuman et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7489835 | Xia | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7711267 | Wellbrock et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7817891 | Lavenne et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
8189983 | Brunet et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8655135 | Barker et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
9271058 | Lord | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9560429 | Lord | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9654248 | Wright et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9693123 | Lord | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9748021 | Warren et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9860012 | Wright et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
9905989 | Johnson | Feb 2018 | B1 |
10432302 | Delgado et al. | Oct 2019 | B1 |
20030194167 | Wang | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030202765 | Franklin et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030223725 | Laporte et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040113056 | Everall | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040173733 | Korn | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040240833 | Stegall | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050174563 | Evans et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060263029 | Mudd et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060263039 | Chiang | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070041006 | Abbott | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070076884 | Wellbrock et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070098342 | Temple Jr. et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070183732 | Wittmeier et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070212063 | Meli et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080232795 | Klar et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20100008631 | Herbst | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100150547 | Xia et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20110081125 | Barker et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20120195428 | Wellbrock et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120217061 | Runzel, IV et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120224846 | Swanson et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20140050451 | Reagan et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140133844 | Dahlfort et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140133845 | Dahlfort et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140140669 | Islam et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140147086 | Chapman et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140216782 | Erlendsson | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140260638 | Hood et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140341575 | Choi et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20150326955 | Lord et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20160013864 | Rafel Porti et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160057515 | Lord | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160269115 | Brown | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160344470 | Reddy Bovilla et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1726664 | Jan 2006 | CN |
101292455 | Oct 2008 | CN |
202093214 | Dec 2011 | CN |
102661755 | Sep 2012 | CN |
103154795 | Jun 2013 | CN |
103929251 | Jul 2014 | CN |
104092538 | Oct 2014 | CN |
104238057 | Dec 2014 | CN |
205484963 | Aug 2016 | CN |
105954831 | Sep 2016 | CN |
107465502 | Dec 2017 | CN |
29518024 | Jan 1996 | DE |
0108590 | May 1984 | EP |
0215668 | Mar 1987 | EP |
0428931 | May 1991 | EP |
0562770 | Sep 1993 | EP |
0812078 | Dec 1997 | EP |
0859257 | Aug 1998 | EP |
0926479 | Jun 1999 | EP |
1063656 | Dec 2000 | EP |
1432149 | Jun 2004 | EP |
1774695 | Apr 2007 | EP |
2131123 | Dec 2009 | EP |
2266250 | Dec 2010 | EP |
2450728 | May 2012 | EP |
2161614 | Jan 1986 | GB |
2179145 | Feb 1987 | GB |
2187305 | Sep 1987 | GB |
2472178 | Mar 2013 | GB |
2514134 | Nov 2014 | GB |
2514134 | May 2016 | GB |
S5589721 | Jul 1980 | JP |
2537950 | Sep 1996 | JP |
H09159841 | Jun 1997 | JP |
2001057115 | Feb 2001 | JP |
WO-9938042 | Jul 1999 | WO |
WO-2006014298 | Feb 2006 | WO |
WO-2008033997 | Mar 2008 | WO |
WO-2008059187 | May 2008 | WO |
WO-2009112286 | Sep 2009 | WO |
WO-2012071490 | May 2012 | WO |
WO-2013063041 | May 2013 | WO |
WO-2018060530 | Apr 2018 | WO |
WO-2018141681 | Aug 2018 | WO |
WO-2018166920 | Sep 2018 | WO |
WO-2019016263 | Jan 2019 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Great Britain Examination Report, Application No. GB1711705.2, dated Jan. 15, 2018, 7 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion, Application No. PCT/EP2018/069502, dated Aug. 23, 2018, 2 pages. |
Aleksic S., et al., “Impairment Evaluation toward QKD Integration in a Conventional 20-Channel Metro Network,” Optical Society of America, Mar. 22-26, 2015, 3 pages. |
Aleksic S., et al., “Towards a Smooth Integration of Quantum Key Distribution in Metro Networks,” Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Transparent Optical Networks, Jul. 6-10, 2014, pp. 1-4. |
Brewer D.A., et al., “Modular Optical Plant and Access Network: Operational Aspects,” Proc. EFOC & N (Technology and Infrastructure), 1995, pp. 164-167. |
Chapuran T.E., et al., “Optical Networking for Quantum Key Distribution and Quantum Communications,” New Journal of Physics, vol. 11, Oct. 7, 2009, pp. 1-19. |
Combined Search and Examination Report under Sections 17 and 18(3) for Great Britain Application No. 1704178.1, dated Sep. 14, 2017, 6 pages. |
Extended European Search Report for Application No. 17154281.4, dated Jul. 20, 2017, 12 pages. |
Extended European Search Report for Application No. 17161330.0, dated Aug. 30, 2017, 10 pages. |
First Office Action dated Jun. 2, 2020 for Chinese Application No. 201880018103.7, 17 pages. |
Great Britain Combined Search and Examination Report under Sections 17 and 18(3) for Application No. GB1701682.5, dated Jul. 25, 2017, 2 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/EP2017/075023, dated Apr. 11, 2019, 9 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/EP2018/052108, dated Aug. 15, 2019, 12 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/EP2018/055948, dated Sep. 26, 2019, 9 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/GB2015/051707, dated Sep. 20, 2016, 13 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentabilityfor Application No. PCT/EP2018/069502, dated Jan. 30, 2020, 8 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/EP2017/075023, dated Feb. 1, 2018, 10 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/EP2018/052108, dated Mar. 27, 2018, 13 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/EP2018/055948, dated Jun. 8, 2018, 11 pages. |
International Search Report for Application No. PCT/GB2009/001409, dated Dec. 4, 2009, 6 pages. |
International Search Report for Application No. PCT/GB2009/001416, dated Sep. 22, 2009, 6 pages. |
International Search Report for Application No. PCT/GB2015/051707, dated Aug. 21, 2015, 4 pages. |
Mittal, Packet Delay, University of California Berkeley, All Document, Sep. 2014. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: https://inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/-cs 168/fa 14/discussion/slides1.pdf. |
Examination Report for Great Britain Application No. GB1616607.6, dated Mar. 6, 2017, 5 pages. |
Nweke N.I., et al., “EDFA bypass and filtering architecture enabling QKD+WDM coexistence on mid-span amplified links,” Technical Digest CD-ROM/conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, Quantum Electronics and Laser Science Conference, Conference On Photonic Applications, Systems and Technologies, May 21, 2006, 2 pages. |
Office Action dated Feb. 14, 2017 for Korean Application No. 10-2016-7036681 filed Jun. 10, 2015, 4 pages. |
Prysmian Cables and Systems, “Rack & Cabinets,” Issued, Feb. 1, 2010, 4 pages. |
Prysmian Cables and Systems, Racks, “Optical Consolidation Rack (OCR),” Retreived from: www.prysmiangroup.com, Apr. 2012, Issue 5, 3 pages. |
Rohde H., et al., “Quantum Key Distribution Integrated into Commercial WDM Systems,” IEEE, Fiber Optics Communications, Quantum Communications, Feb. 24, 2008, 3 pages. |
Runser R J., et al., “Demonstration of 1.3 μm Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) Compatibility with 1.5 μm Metropolitan Wavelength Division Multiplexed (WDM) Systems,” Fiber Optics Communications, Quantum Detectors, vol. 3, Mar. 6, 2005, 3 pages. |
Search Report dated Dec. 15, 2012 for Great Britain Application No. GB1020663.9, filed Jun. 5, 2009,1 page. |
Search Report dated Nov. 22, 2012 for Great Britain Application No. GB1020657.1 filed Jun. 5, 2009, 1 page. |
Search Report dated Mar. 26, 2012 for Great Britain Application No. GB1020657.1 filed Jun. 5, 2009, 1 page. |
Search Report dated Dec. 8, 2014 for Great Britain Application No. GB1411408.6 filed Jun. 26, 2014, 5 pages. |
Second Office Action dated Sep. 10, 2020 for Chinese Application No. 201780067271.0, 14 pages. |
Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2015/051707, dated Aug. 21, 2015, 5 pages. |
Office Action For Chinese Application No. 201880057762.1, dated Apr. 22, 2021, 15 pages. |
Office Action For Chinese Application No. 201880057762.1, dated Oct. 21, 2021, 7 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200209106 A1 | Jul 2020 | US |