Suppression of Intermodulation Distortion in PhaseModulated Analog Photonic Links

Bryan Haas and Thomas E. Murphy Laboratory for Physical Sciences and University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland USA, 20740. Tel: 301-935-3159, Email:bhaas@umd.edu

Abstract We describe and experimentally demonstrate a technique to suppress the dominant in-band analog distortion in an RF photonic link. The anisotropic electrooptic coefficient of Lithium Niobate is exploited to modulate orthogonally polarized fields. These fields are then combined to null the third-order distortion. This technique uses a single phase modulator, requiring no external bias or control, for a highly linear photonic microwave relay. The link is limited by fifth-order intermodulation distortion (IMD) instead of third-order IMD. For many scenarios the added complexity of heterodyne optical detection may be an appropriate cost to gain simplicity at the remote end. Index Terms distortion, heterodyning, intermodulation distortion, phase modulation, polarization

combining direct and external modulation to suppress IMD [7]. A recent technique using phase modulation relies on digital signal postprocessing to recover the undistorted signal [8]. The work of Johnson and Roussel [9,10] is particularly germane to the technique used here. A single Lithium Niobate (LiNbO3) Mach-Zehnder modulator was employed, but simultaneously using the different modulation efficiencies for TM and TE polarizations effectively created two modulators with different transfer functions that were set to oppose one another in thirdorder power. II. IMD SUPPRESSION USING PHASE MODULATION

I. INTRODUCTION It has been shown that fiber optics can be an attractive technology for transmitting microwave signals in terms of size, weight, power consumption, and power handling capability for relay links as short as fifty meters [1]. Offsetting this potential is the third-order intermodulation distortion (IMD) in a suboctave signal created by the nonlinear modulation transfer functions in direct and external intensity-modulated schemes [1]. Likewise, phase or frequency modulated links create IMD similar to that of their intensity-modulated brethren [2] that is revealed when the signal is mixed with a photonic local oscillator (LO) to produce an intensity modulation that can be received by a photodetector. It follows that an optical transport link that can minimize or eliminate or minimize IMD can be highly advantageous over coaxial transmission. This has been an area of research for over two decades, primarily working with more common intensity-modulated links. There has been very little work with linearizing angle modulated optical links reported in the literature. One advantage of phase modulation is that the process of heterodyne detection automatically downconverts the received signal to an intermediate frequency (IF) without the need of an electrical mixer. Techniques for IMD suppression have included cascading differently biased Mach-Zehnder interferometric modulators in parallel or series to create different transfer functions that cancel IMD in the third order [3,4]. Similar efforts have used Y-branch modulators [5], electrical predistortion [6], or even

LiNbO3 exhibits an electrooptic coefficient r31 on the X (ordinary, or TE) axis which is approximately 1/3 of the r33 coefficient on the Z (extraordinary, or TM) axis. Ultimately this means that a given electric field inducing a phase shift on light polarized along the Z axis will simultaneously impart 1/3 of the phase shift on any light polarized in the X-direction.

Fig. 1. Phase modulator showing orientation of polarization angles at input and output.

Our method leverages this anisotropy in a phase modulator. Given a sinusoidal input microwave signal, the modulator output for a linearly polarized input optical carrier (but not necessarily aligned with either the Z or X axes) for the setup in Fig. 1 can be represented as (1)

where is the polarization angle relative to the TM axis, is the electrooptic ratio (approximately 1/3), is the optical carrier frequency, is the microwave frequency, and m is the TM modulation depth defined as (2) This phase modulation results in an infinite number of sidebands governed by a Bessel function expansion. The electrical signal is then mixed with a local oscillator (LO) that is tuned close to the upper sideband. The electrical bandwidth of the detector limits detection to the upper sideband. The relevant terms in the phase modulated signal can then be described by (3) The nonlinear components of the modulated signal are revealed mathematically by expanding the Bessel functions to the third order:

the linear signal amplitude to decrease by a factor of 2/7, or a power reduction of approximately 11dB. As will be shown, this decrease is more than made up for by the resulting increase in dynamic range. III. THEORETICAL RESULTS Fig. 2 plots the calculated output RF power versus input RF power for the linear and largest IMD signals in a two-tone IMD test. The dashed lines are the expected result for conventional TM-polarized input and output whereas the solid lines are the expected result using the technique described above. Note that the linear signal using this technique is decreased in power but the limiting distortion is now a fifth-order product, increasing the overall range and useable modulation power.

(4) After the microwave signal is modulated onto the two polarizations, the TM and TE fields are combined at the output with a linear polarizer, at an angle such that the fields in the third order are of equal and opposite amplitudes. This causes the third-order portion of the signal to be cancelled while not completely cancelling the linear signal . This polarizer is set at an angle to the TM axis, resulting an a final output of

Fig. 2. Calculated two-tone IMD for conventional TM polarized input and the linearized technique propsed here.

IV. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP (5) One can see that the third order terms can be eliminated when (6) Solving for and gives the polarization angle settings with which third-order IMD can be suppressed. One reasonable solution for this is to maximize the linear signal amplitude, resulting in the solution (7) Increased linearity comes at a cost of decreased modulation efficiency. Most of the optical field will need to be inserted on the TE axis, which is modulated only 1/3 as strongly as light on the TM axis. Choosing the polarization angles in accordance with Eq. (7) causes To access both the TM and TE axes of a single modulator, the modulator must be able to guide both polarizations. This requires a Titanium-indiffused wavguide; Proton-exchanged waveguides do not guide TE light and cannot be used in this application. An adjustable linear polarizer was placed at the input of the modulator to vary the input optical field ratio between the axes. Another adjustable linear polarizer was placed at the modulator output to recombine the two separately modulated polarizations. The modulator itself was a standard Ti-indiffused Zcut LiNbO3 phase modulator designed for digital operation up to 12.5 Gb/s. This was opened to expose the crystal facets and enable freespace optical coupling into and out of the waveguide. The measured V of the modulator at 1GHz was approximately 4.25 and 13.0 volts for TM and TE polarizations, respectively. The ratio was just under 1/3 and optimum polarization input and output angles of approximately +/-78 degrees from

the TM axis were calculated from Eq. 7. Sinusoidal tones of 979.5 and 980.5 MHz were combined and input to the modulator electrodes. The output of this polarizer was heterodyne detected using a LO that was frequency shifted from the signal carrier by 1GHz. In this experiment the source laser power was split to form the signal and LO paths, with the LO frequency generated by an acousto-optic shifter. This provided sufficient phase coherency without necessitating the use of a true optical local oscillator. V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS Fig. 3 shows measured tone and IMD power for increasing input powers for both the TM and mixed polarization cases. For the TM case, IMD power rises 3dB for every 1dB increase in tone power, indicating that 3rd order IMD is the limiting distortion product. The mixed polarization case described here shows an increase of 5dB IMD power for every 1dB increase in tone power. This reveals that 3rd-order IMD is being suppressed and that 5th-order IMD is now the limiting product.

Fig. 4. Experimental result for two-tone IMD test with standard TM polarization. Tone-IMD delta is approximately 38dB.

Fig. 5. Experimental result for two-tone IMD test with mixed polarization technique. Input power is increased 10dB to keep the fundamental tones at the same level, and IMD products have been suppressed to the noise floor.

Fig. 3. Received versus input RF power for both TM (dashed) and mixed (solid) polarizations. The upper points with slope = 1 are the linear signal powers while the lower rd th points are 3 - and 5 -order IMD powers, respectively.

In order to clearly display IMD suppression in Fig. 4 and 5, different input RF powers were used to keep the output tone power constant. The calculated difference in received tone and IMD power for the TM case in Fig. 4 was 38dB, matched by the actual results as shown in the spectrum analyzer trace in the figure. For the mixedpolarization technique in Fig. 5, the IMD products were not detectable above the noise floor even when input RF power was increased to match the original (TM case) tone power. Even though the system is being driven with almost 10dB more input power, this result shows approximately 10dB improvement in dynamic range for this particular case.

The input polarizer angle, as predicted, was approximately 78 degrees. However, optimal IMD suppression was obtained when the output polarizer angle was very close to the TE axis, or almost a full 90 degrees off the TM axis. Any of several factors may contribute to this unexpected discrepancy. These can include unexpected polarization-dependent loss (PDL) or compensation for birefringent phase mismatch between TM and TE polarizations. This will be explored in further experimentation. VI. CONCLUSION We have developed the concept and experimentally shown that a single phase modulator can, with judicious choice of input and output polarizations, suppress thirdorder IMD. This is done by canceling the modulated third-order fields, leaving fifth-order distortion as the dominant IMD product. Advantages to this technique include a very simple and compact modulator with no

requirement for external bias or any sort of processing or control at a remote end. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The authors wish to thank Dr. Timothy Horton of the Laboratory for Physical Sciences for his help in the experimental setup and insightful discussions. REFERENCES [1] W.E. Stevens, and T. R. Joseph, System characteristics of direct modulated and externally modulated RF fiber-optic links, Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. LT-5, no. 3, pp. 380387, March 1987. [2] R. F. Kalman, J. C. Fan, and L.G. Kazovsky, Dynamic range of coherent analog fiber-optic links, JLT, vol.12, no. 7 pp. 1263-1277, July 1994. [3] S. K. Korotky, and R. M. Ridder, Dual parallel modulation schemes for low-distortion analog optical transmission, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 13771381, Sept 1990. [4] W. Bridges, and J. H. Schaffner, Distortion in linearized electrooptic modulators, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory anf Techniques, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 2184-2197, Sept 1995. [5] R. Tavlykaev, and R. Ramaswamy, Highly linear Y-fed directional coupler modulator with low intermodulation distortion, JLT, vol. 17, no. 2, pp.282-291, Feb 1999. [6] M. Nazarathy, J. Berger, A. Ley, I.M. Levi, and Y. Kagan, Progress in externally modulated AM CATV transmission systems, JLT, vol.11, no 1, pp. 82-105, Jan 1993. [7] G. Yabre, Interferometric conversion of laser chirp to IM, IEEE Photonics Technology Letters, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 1388-1390, Oct 1996. [8] T. R. Clark, M. L. Dennis, and R. M. Sova, Digital signal processing assisted coherent optical receiver for high dynamic range fiber optic networks, Avionics Fiber Optics and Photonics 2005, IEEE conference, 20-22 Sept 2005, pp. 69-70. [9] L. M. Johnson, and H. V. Roussell, Reduction of intermodulation distortion in interferometric optical modulators, Optics Letters, vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 928930, Oct 1988. [10] L. M. Johnson, and H. V. Roussell, Linearization of an interferometric modulator at microwave frequencies by polarizarion mixing, IEEE PTL, vol. 2, no. 11, pp. 810-811, Nov 1990.