PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF XPM-

INDUCED CROSSTALK WITH HIGHER

ORDER DISPERSION IN SCM–WDM
OPTICAL TRANSMISSION LINKS

AUTHORS OF PAPERS
Naresh Kumar

AjayK.Sharma

Vinod Kapoor
 MOTIVATION
 Internet data traffic growing exponentially every year

 Optical network are the candidate to provide required

capacity and flexibility for high speed network

 In order to meet the needs of improving information

quantity, SCM-WDM has become the main research
area in optical fiber communication

 With the increase of optical power, transmission rate

and distance, XPM has become the main limiting
factor
 FOURTH GENERATION SYSTEMS
Opportunity:
 Development of erbium-doped fiber amplifiers (EDFA)

Technology (deployment began in 1994):

 1.55 µm single-mode, narrow-band semiconductor lasers
 Single-mode, low-attenuation, dispersion-shifted silica fibers
 Wavelength-division multiplexing

Nonlinear effects limit the following system parameters:

 Signal launch power
 Propagation distance without regeneration/re-clocking
 WDM channel separation
 Maximum number of WDM channels per fiber
ATTENUATION/LOSS IN OPTICAL FIBER
3.0
First
Window Second
2.5
Window
ATTENUATION (dB/km)

2.0

1.5 Third
Window

1.0

0.5

800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

WAVELENGTH (nm)

850nm 1310nm 1550nm

 First Window @ 850nm

First window, second
 High loss; First-gen. semiconductor diodes (GaAs)
window, third window
correspond (roughly) to  Second Window @ 1310nm
first, second and third  Lower Loss; good dispersion; second gen. InGaAsP
generation optic network  Third Window @ 1550nm
technology  Lowest Loss; Erbium Amplification possible
Dispersion Characteristics*
Third
3.0 Second
Window
Window
DISPERSION COEFF, D (ps/km-nm)

0
First
Window
-30

-60

-90

-120

800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

WAVELENGTH (nm)
850nm 1310nm 1550nm
• Standard SMF has zero dispersion at 1310nm
– Low Dispersion => Pulses don’t spread in time
• Dispersion compensation needed at 1550nm
– Limits data transmission rate due to ISI (inter-
* Modal dispersion symbol interference)
not included • Dispersion not so important at 850nm
– Loss usually dominates
A BASIC CONFIGURATION OF AN SCM/WDM
OPTICAL SYSTEM
 SUB CARRIER MULTIPLEXING

 Eachmodulating RF carrier will look like a

sub-carrier

 Unmodulated optical signal is the main carrier

Wavelength Division Multiplexed (WDM)
Long-Haul Optical Fiber Transmission System

Transmitter l1 Receiver
D
l2 M E
Transmitter U M Receiver
X U
l3 Optical Amplifier X

Transmitter Receiver

WDM “Routers” Erbium/Raman Optical Amplifier

OPTICAL AMPLIFIER & EDFA

Continuous Wave
(Constant)

 An optical amplifier amplifies the light signal

without converting to electrical
 Very useful is WDM systems

 Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifier (EDFA) works

in 1550 nm band
FIBER NONLINEARITIES
 As long as optical power within an optical
fiber is small, the fiber can be treated as a
linear medium; that is the loss and
refractive index are independent of the
signal power

 When optical power level gets fairly high,

the fiber becomes a nonlinear medium;
that is the loss and refractive index
depend on the optical power
 Limitations : Short List Of Fibre
Nonlinearities
Single-channel Multi-Channel/WDM
Kerr effect
P(t)
n = n(w) + n2
Aeff

Self-phase modulation (SPM) Cross-phase modulation (XPM)

signal optical phase modulated Signal optical phase modulated
proportionally to signal power; proportionally to power of neighboring
conversion to intensity «noise» by channels; conversion to intensity
GVD. «noise» by GVD.

Four-wave mixing (FWM)

Generation of new spectral components;
crosstalk when overlap with other
channels.
Other interactions with medium
Stimulated Brillouin scattering Stimulated Raman scattering
(SBS) (SRS)
Retro diffusion of energy; Energy transfer from lower-
increases fibre loss. wavelength channels to higher-
wavelength ones.
EFFECTS OF NON-LINEARTIES
 NON LINEAR EFFECTS:
FOUR WAVE MIXING (FWM)
 Third order nonlinearity in silica fibers-

 Consider the 3 waves  1,  2 and  3 Combine to

generate a fourth wave at frequency  1 +  2 -  3 This
phenomenon is called FWM
NON LINEAR EFFECTS:
CROSS PHASE MODULATION (XPM)
 Depends upon intensity of light and refractive
index

 Occurs when two or more signals propagate

 XPM acts as a crosstalk penalty, which increases

with increasing channel power level and system
length and with decreasing channel spacing

 XPM causes a spectral broadening of the optical

pulses and thus reduces the dispersion tolerance of
the system
COMPARISON OF NONLINEAR
REFRACTIVE EFFECTS
Nonlinear Phenomenon’s SPM XPM FWM

Bit rate Dependent Dependent Independent

Origin Nonlinear susceptibility Nonlinear susceptibility Nonlinear susceptibility

Effects Phase shift due to pulse Phase shift is due to co- New waves are generated
itself only propagating pulses

Shape of broadening Symmetric May be symmetric or ---------

asymmetric

Channel Spacing No effect Increases on decreasing the Increases on decreasing the

spacing spacing
CROSS PHASE MODULATION(CONTD..)
 Nonlinear wave propagation equation

Aj  t , z   1 Aj  t , z  i  2  Aj  t , z  i 3  Aj  t , z 
2 3

 Aj  t , z    
z 2 Vj z 2 z 2 6 z 3
i  4  Aj  t , z  i  5  Aj  t , z  i  6  Aj  t , z 
4 5 6

    i  2 Pk  t  d jk z , z   Aj  t , z 
24 z 4 120 z 5 720 z 6

 Translating this propagation equation into the

frequency domain
Aj  , z    1  i 2  2 i 3 3 i 4  2 i 5 5
       
z  
 2 Vj  2 6 24 120

i j  2 Pk  , 0  e jk e z  Aj  , z 
i zd
CROSS PHASE MODULATION(CONTD..)
 Total intensity noise at the end of the fib z = L.
 i 2  2 L /2   i d jk  L  ( i 2  2 L /2)   i d jk  L 
 e  e e  e 
Aj  , L   Pj  L  e 2 j Pk  , 0   
( i /V j ) L
 
  i   i d jk    i 2  2 / 2   i   i d jk    i 2  2 / 2   
    
 e  (i 36 L /6)  e   i d jk  L ei 3 L /2  e
3   i d jk  L 
 
  
  jk      jk    
i    i d  i 3
 3 / 6  i    i  d  i 3
 3 / 6 

 ei 4 L /24  e
4   i d jk  L
e  (i 4 L /24)  e
4   i d jk  L 
 
  
 
i     i d jk    i 4
 4 / 24  
  i    i d jk    i  4
 4 / 24  
 
 ei 6 L /720  e
6   i d jk  L
e  (i 6 L /720)  e
6   i d jk  L 
  
   
  jk      jk     
i    i d  i  6
 6 / 720  i    i d  i 6
 6 / 720 
CROSS PHASE MODULATION(CONTD..)
 Relative amplitude fluctuation induced by XPM
 ei 2 L /2  e
2   i d jk  L
e  (i 2 L /2)  e
2   i d jk  L 
 
Pj  , L   2 j Pk  , 0  [   
 
i     i  d jk    i 2
 2 / 2  
  i    i d jk    i 2
 2 / 2  
 
 e  (i 36 L /6)  e   i d jk  L i 3 3 L /2
e
  i d jk  L 
 e 
  
  jk      jk    
i    i d  i  3
 3 / 6  i    i  d  i 3
 3 / 6 

 ei 4 L /24  e
4   i d jk  L
e  (i 4 L /24)  e
4   i d jk  L 
 
  
 i   i d jk    i  4 / 24   i   i d jk    i  4 / 24   
   
4 4

 ei 6 L /720  e
6   i d jk  L
e  (i 6 L /720)  e
6   i d jk  L 
 

2
 
  jk      jk    
i    i d  i  6
 6 / 720  i    i d  i 6
 6 / 720 
DISPERSION PARAMETERS
 Second-order dispersion parameter
l2
2  D
2 c
 Third-order dispersion parameter
l2
3  
2 
l 2
D1  2l D 
(2 c)
 Fourth-order dispersion parameter
l3
4  
3 
l 3
D  6l 2
D1  6l D 
(2 c)
2

 Fifth-order dispersion parameter

l4
5  
4 
l 4
D  12l 3
D  36l 2
D1  24l D 
(2 c)
3 2

 Sixth-order dispersion parameter

l5
6  
5 
l 5
D  20l 4
D  120l 3
D  240l 2
D1  120l D 
(2 c)
4 3 2
 THE GRAPH BETWEEN XPM CROSSTALK
VERSUS TRANSMISSION LENGTH AT VARIED
HIGHER ORDER DISPERSION
Induced XPM Crosstalk vs. Transmission Length
0
2OD 2OD (-45to-
-50
3OD 24)dBm
4OD

3OD (-125to-
5OD
Induced XPM Crosstalk (dB)

-100 6OD
106)dBm
-150
4OD (-210to-
-200 189)dBm

-250
5OD (-292to-
-300
271)dBm

-350
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
6OD (-320to-
Transmission Length (km) 319)dBm
 THE GRAPH BETWEEN XPM CROSSTALK
VERSUS TRANSMISSION LENGTH AT
DIFFERENT COMBINED DISPERSION

0
Induced XPM Crosstalk vs. Transmission Length 2OD+3OD (-45to-
2OD+3OD 24)dBm
3OD+4OD
-50
4OD+5OD
3OD+4OD (-125to-
5OD+6OD
106)dBm
Induced XPM Crosstalk (dB)

-100

-150
4OD+5OD (-210to-
189)dBm
-200

-250 5OD+6OD (-292to-

271)dBm
-300

-350
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Transmission Length (km)
 THE GRAPH BETWEEN XPM CROSSTALK
VERSUS OPTICAL POWER AT VARIED HIGHER
ORDER DISPERSION

Induced XPM Crosstalk vs. Optical Power 2OD (-24to

0
2OD
-4)dBm
3OD
-50
4OD 3OD (-112to-
5OD 86)dBm
Induced XPM Crosstalk (dB)

-100 6OD

-150 4OD (-180to-

165)dBm
-200

5OD (-275to-
-250
252)dBm
-300

6OD (-320to-
-350
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
319)dBm
Optical Power (mW)
 THE GRAPH BETWEEN XPM CROSSTALK
VERSUS OPTICAL POWER AT DIFFERENT
COMBINED DISPERSION ORDER
Induced XPM Crosstalk vs. Optical Power
0
2OD+3OD 2OD+3OD (-25to-
-50
3OD+4OD
4OD+5OD
4)dBm
5OD+6OD
3OD+4OD (-106to-
Induced XPM Crosstalk (dB)

-100 86)dBm

-150 4OD+5OD (-189to-

169)dBm
-200

5OD+6OD (-271to-
-250 251)dBm

-300
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Optical Power (mW)
 THE GRAPH BETWEEN INDUCED XPM
CROSSTALK VERSUS MODULATION
FREQUENCY AT DIFFERENT DISPERSION
ORDER
Induced XPM Crosstalk vs. Modulation Frequency
-40
2OD (-77to
-60 -43)dBm

-80 3OD (-120to-

Induced XPM Crosstalk (dB)

2OD 75)dBm
3OD
-100
4OD
5OD 4OD (-177to-
-120
118)dBm
-140
5OD (-198to-
-160
159)dBm
-180

-200
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Modulation Freqency (GHz) 9
x 10
 THE GRAPH BETWEEN INDUCED XPM
CROSSTALK VERSUS MODULATION
FREQUENCY AT DIFFERENT COMBINED
DISPERSION ORDER

Induced XPM Crosstalk vs. Modulation Frequency

-40
2OD+3OD (-77to-
43)dBm
-60
3OD+4OD (-120to-
75)dBm
Induced XPM Crosstalk (dB)

-80
2OD+3OD
3OD+4OD
-100
4OD+5OD 4OD+5OD (-198to-
118)dBm
-120

-140

-160

-180
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Modulation Freqency (GHz) 9
x 10
 THE GRAPH BETWEEN INDUCED XPM
CROSSTALK VERSUS MODULATION
FREQUENCY AT ALL COMBINED DISPERSION
ORDER

Induced XPM Crosstalk vs. Modulation Frequency

-40

-50
3OD+4OD (-76to-
+5OD 46)dBm
-60 3OD+4OD+5OD
2OD+3OD+ (-120to-
Induced XPM Crosstalk (dB)

2OD+3OD+4OD+5OD
-70
4OD+5OD 76)dBm
-80

-90

-100

-110

-120

-130
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Modulation Freqency (GHz) 9
x 10
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
 The impact of XPM decreases as the order of
dispersion term increases

 The impact of 3OD, 4OD, 5OD and 6OD is small

as compared to 2OD

 The XPM-induced crosstalk more effective in the

first 15 km of optical fiber

 The effect of XPM-induced crosstalk increases

exponentially with optical power
DISPERSION COMPENSATION

 Optical Phase Conjugation (OPC)

 Non-Linear Amplifying Loop Mirror (NALM)

 Electronic Dispersion Compensation (EDC)

REFERENCES
 Shamini Subramanian, F.M. Abbou, H.T. Chuah, and K.D. Dambul, “Performance evaluation of
SCM-WDM microcellular communication systems in the presence of XPM,” IEICE Electron.
Express 2 (6) (2005), pp. 199–197.
 R Hui, B. Zhu, R. Huang, C. Allen, K. Demarest, and D. Roberts, “10 Gb/s SCM systems using
optical single side band modulation,” Paper MM4, OFC’ 2001, Anaheim, CA, March 2001.
 R. Hui, K. Demarest, and C. Allen, “Cross phase modulation in multi-span WDM optical fiber
systems,” IEEE J. Light Wave Technol. 17 (June (7)) (1999) 1018.

 K.P. Ho and J.M. Kahn, “Method for crosstalk measurement and reduction in dense WDM
systems,” J. Light Wave Technol. 14 (June 1996) 1127–1135.
 Chen W.H. Winston and I. Way, “Multichannel single-side band SCM/DWDM transmission
systems,” J. Light Wave Technol. 22 (7) (2004) 1679–1693.
 G. Goeger, M. Wrage, and W. Fischler, “Cross-phase modulation in multispan WDM systems with
arbitrary modulation formats,” IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 16 (8) (2004)1858–1860.
 Hai-Han Lu, Wen-Jen Wang, and Wen-Shing Tsai, “CSO/CTB performances improvement in a Bi-
directional DWDM CATV system,” IEEE Trans. Broadcast 50 (4) (2004) 377–381.
 Keang-Po Ho and Hsi-Cheng Wang, “Cross-phase modulation-induced crosstalk for RZ-DPSK
signals in dispersive transmission systems,” J. Light Wave Technol. 24 (1) (2006)396–403.
 F.S. Yang, M.E. Marhic, L.G. Kazovsky, “Nonlinear crosstalk and two countermeasures in SCM–
WDM optical communication systems,” J. Light Wave Technol. 18 (4) (2000)512–520.
 S.K. Arya, A.K. Sharma, and R.A. Agarwala, “Impact of 2OD and 3OD on SRS and XPM-induced
crosstalk in SCM-WDM optical transmission link,” Optik 120 (2009) 364–
THANK YOU