- This topic has 15 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by alistu.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
August 22, 2015 at 2:52 pm #23960MUKESH KUMAR GUPTAParticipant
I have attached a simple network to analyse the sensitivity APD or PIN photodetector. here at particular Q value (6 ) i am getting receiver sensitivity respectively APD (-40.92) or PIN (-48.97). but as general theory APD sensitivity should be more compare to PIN . also can see journal “Optimization of long-reach TDM/WDM passive optical networks”
-
August 23, 2015 at 1:41 am #23963alistuParticipant
Hi Mukesh, Have a look at the report at the link below:
As you can see from the figures, Q-factor and sensitivity are related to some other factors and one can’t assume that APD always has better sensitivity than PIN.
-
August 23, 2015 at 2:16 am #23965MUKESH KUMAR GUPTAParticipant
thanks for response
this attached file form optiwave sample folder ..they show that APD is better than PIN but actully not like this. i try to take data from suggested paper but not able to find result . always finding that PIN has better performance . can u help me further that which data help to improve APD sensivity compare to PIN.-
August 23, 2015 at 3:02 am #23966alistuParticipant
I lengthened the bit sequence in your simulation (to reduce Q-factor inflation every time the simulation is run) and then made changes to the attenuation for PIN so that Q-factors for both become almost the same. As you can see, the attenuation for APD is more than the attenuation for PIN, which implies that APD in here has better sensitivity (by giving the same Q-factor while receiving less power). I have attached the osd file with the changes.
Cheers!
-
-
August 23, 2015 at 11:03 pm #23998MUKESH KUMAR GUPTAParticipant
this file is not open in optisystem 13. please suggest any idea so i can open this…
-
August 24, 2015 at 6:36 am #24011MUKESH KUMAR GUPTAParticipant
till now our institute didnt receive the latest version. we already recevied mail that it is dispatched …form side of optiwave
-
August 24, 2015 at 6:38 am #24012MUKESH KUMAR GUPTAParticipant
can i upgrade from optiwave website
-
August 24, 2015 at 6:47 am #24014alistuParticipant
The 30-day trial is available in the website. I don’t know if you can upgrade or not, and for these issues you’d better contact Optiwave at info@optiwave.com . However, in the screenshot attached I have shown the aforementioned changes I have made to your system so you would do the same in your simulation.
Cheers!
-
-
August 24, 2015 at 6:40 am #24013MUKESH KUMAR GUPTAParticipant
can i get evolution licence software till we get upgraded software pack .. @ optiwave technical support
-
August 24, 2015 at 7:22 am #24020MUKESH KUMAR GUPTAParticipant
According ur snapshot data i am getting two different values of Q factor PIN (60.11) or APD (4.71) not same …after changing PRBS sequence 4096. Q factor value should be same …
-
August 24, 2015 at 7:48 am #24025alistuParticipant
Here I have attached a screenshot which shows the results obtained for both photodetectors. You can see Q-factors are very close to each other. I assume you might have made a mistake using the attenuation values I have given in my screenshot in your simulation, or you might have forgotten to lengthen the bit sequence in global parameters as much as I have.
-
-
August 24, 2015 at 7:30 am #24022Amit GargParticipant
Dear Alistu
I am also facing the same problem of receiver sensitivity if APD and PIN. in many papers and books. I have studied that sensitivity of APD is better then PIN. plz give us some more standard reference paper on which we can rely.-
August 24, 2015 at 8:08 am #24029alistuParticipant
Dear Amit, I don’t know any more reliable paper doing comparison between these two by simulation but in case you are referring to the same problrm as Mukesh is facing, if you manage to open the file I have attached or simulate it using the screenshot, you will see APD has better sensitivity than PIN photodetector.
-
-
August 24, 2015 at 8:17 am #24030Amit GargParticipant
Dear Alistu
the document attached by you is showing an error ” failed to load the documents” i am having the 13.0 version of optisystem. so plz upload the which is compatible with it.-
August 24, 2015 at 8:50 am #24033alistuParticipant
Dear Amit, Since I am using version 13.0.3, there is no way I can a compatible file with your version of Optisystem which is older than mine. However, you might be able to implement the system by using the screenshot and my explanations in this topic and get the results more or less like the one shown on this page.
-
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.