Fiber Connector ONE - INEMI

0

Fiber Connector End-face Inspection Project

Dr. Tatiana Berdinskikh, Dr. Sun-Yuan Huang

Douglas H. Wilson March 26, 07

1

Project participants, 2004Project participants, 2004--20072007

• Tatiana Berdinskikh, Celestica• Jose Garcia, JDS Uniphase• Steve Lytle, Westover Scientific• Randy Manning, Tyco Electronics• David Fisher, Tyco Electronics• Brian J. Roche, Cisco Systems• Tom Mitcheltree, Cisco Systems• Mike Hughes, USConec• Thomas Ronan, Aerotech• Heather Tkalec, Alcatel • Frank (Yi) Zhang, Avanex• Denis Gignac, Nortel Networks• Doug Wilson, PVI Systems• Dr. Chip Kilmer, Sagitta• Dr. Sun-Yuan Huang, Intel• Carla Gleason, ExceLight

Communications Inc/ Sumitomo Electric

• Harvey Stone, Microcare• John Culbert, Megladon Mfg• Yutaka Sadohara, Sumitomo Electric

2

Past participants, 2002Past participants, 2002--20042004

• Tatiana Berdinskikh, N. AlbeanuCelestica

• Jennifer Nguyen, Solectron• Yves Pradieu, Solectron-Iphotonics• Randy Manning, Tyco Electronics• Dave Silmser/Heather Tkalec, Alcatel• Tom Mitcheltree, Cisco Systems• Thomas Ronan, Ingrid Levy, Aerotech• Frank (Yi) Zhang, Avanex• Denis Gignac, Nortel Networks• Carla Gleason, ExceLight

Communications Inc/ Sumitomo Electric

• Les Aseere, Sanmina• Matt Brown, USCONEC• Steve Lytle, Westover Scientific• Susan Grant, Corning• Arnaud Nicolas, FCI• Mark Vogel, Trace Labs• David Horat, Diamond

3

Presentation Outline Presentation Outline

• Introduction• Experimental Methodology• The Influence of Contamination on Optical

Performance • Particle and Occluded Area Analysis using Images• Gaussian Weighted % Occluded Area Analysis• Inspection Criteria• Conclusions and Recommendations

4

IntroductionIntroduction

• iNEMI (International Electronics Manufacturing Initiative) research to develop a cleanliness specification for fiber optic connectors

– Based on correlation with optical performance metrics– Insertion Loss (IL) and Return Loss (RL) for this study

• Well known that contamination results in degraded performance, but existing company specific standards lacked scientific basis

• Fiber optic connector end-face cleaning recognized as a necessity• Quantitative experiments conducted to evaluate the impact that

contamination has on 2.5 mm and 1.25 mm ferrule based connector’s performance.

• Contamination within 25 um of the core has most influence on theoptical performance of SC connectors.

• Research used in the development of IPC-8497-1 “Cleaning Methods and Contamination Assessment of Optical Assembly”standard.

5

ProjectsProjects

• The Fiber Connector End-Face Inspection Specifications is a follow-on initiative to the NEMI Fiber Optics Signal Performance Project – Optical Signal Performance Project ( Dec, 02- Oct, 04)– The Fiber Connector End-Face Inspection ( Oct, 04- Jan, 07)

• A Project Chair- Tatiana Berdinskikh, Celestica, Inc.• A Project Co-Chair- Heather Tkalec, Alcatel-Lucent

6

Fiber Optic Signal Performance ProjectFiber Optic Signal Performance Project

7

35

4045

50

5560

65

D44

D54

D55

D56

D57

D601

D614

D621

D625

D30

D262

D320

D45

D603

D604

D613

D615

D616

D617

D626

D050

D728

D323

Connector Number Launch cable & DUTs defects-free

Launch cable defects-free, CUTs S/N D44 to D320 scratches applied to thecaldding area, DUTs S/n D45 to D323 scratches applied to the fiber MFD

Graph shows impact of scratches on Return Loss- Most scratches in this study have minor impact on Return Loss


Published by Journal of SMTA, 2003

8

a) Particles on Ferrule and Cladding Area

00.20.40.60.8

11.2

JSC

1

JSC

3

JSC

5

LSC

4

TSC

152

TSC

153

Conn. ID

IL (d

B)

B-IL(1550)B-IL (1310)A-IL(1550)A- IL (1310)

b) Particles on Ferrule and Cladding

020406080

JSC

1

JSC

3

JSC

5

LSC

4

TSC

152

TSC

153

Conn. ID

RL(

dB) B- RL (1550)

B- RL (1310)A RL (1550) A RL (1310)

•IL-1550nm/1310nm(clean)=0.24/0.25dB;

•IL-1550nm/1310nm(contaminated)=0.92/1.07dB;

•RL-1550nm/1310nm (clean)=57.3/55.5dB;

•RL-1550/1310nm (contaminated)=56.5dB/55.6dB

Particle is on the cladding layer

Published by Journal of SMTA, 2003


The impact of Carbon Particles

9

The Factors Affecting the Optical PerformanceThe Factors Affecting the Optical Performance

Delta IL vs Distance from Core

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Distance From Core (micron)

Del

ta IL

Delta IL

Published by APEX 2004

10

The Factors Affecting on Optical PerformanceThe Factors Affecting on Optical Performance

Delta RL vs Distance From Core

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Distance from Core (micron)

Del

ta R

L

Delta RL


11


)cos21()cos2( 212

22

1212

22

1 δδ rrrrrrrrR ++++=

hnnnnnr

nnnnr 2

12

122

20

201

4,,λπδ =

+−

=+−

=

no non1

dn2, High index layer due to polishing

⎥⎦

⎤⎢⎣

⎡⎟⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛−= dnRdBRL

λπ 14cos12log10)(

Connection/contact layer

Return Loss Modeling


12

RL Modeling DataRL Modeling Data

0 10 20 30 40 50 600

50

100

150

200

250

Sample Connector Number

Laye

r Thi

ckne

ss [n

m]

p y

Arizona dust contaminated connectors: estimated contamination layer thickness at 1550 nmParticles trapped in between two endfaces result in air gap


13

Fiber Connector EndFiber Connector End--face Inspectionface Inspection

Our Objectives:• Develop cleanliness criteria for SMF Pigtail and Patchcord

Connectors based on quantitative data• Collaborate with IPC on development of IPC-8497-1 • Contamination assessment of optical assembly• Harmonize our recommendations across all

vendors/CMs/OEMs to achieve a true international standard• Update the criteria in IEC doc “61300-3-35: Basic test and

measurement procedures”• Develop a recommendation for singlemode connector

pass/fail criteria for consideration by the members ofWG6 and WG4 for possible inclusion into an IEC SC86B standards document on fiber optic connector end face requirements.

The project started in Oct, 04

14

Design of the ExperimentDesign of the Experiment

• Repeatability experiment– Mate/demate clean test fiber and clean reference fiber 10 times– Measure IL/RL– Save the fiberscopic images after each mating/de-mating operation

• Data analysis ( IL & RL)– Calculate STDEV for clean fiber :SDTDEV (IL) and STDEV (RL)– Calculate Delta (IL)= Mean(IL(contaminated)-IL(clean))– Calculate Delta (RL)=Mean(RL(clean)-RL (contaminated))– Compare Delta (IL) with 3SDTDEV(IL)– Compare Delta (RL) with 3SDTDEV(RL)– Failed criteria: Delta (IL)> 3*SDTDEV(IL) or Delta (RL)>3*SDTDEV(RL)

• The second approach for the data analysis was based on the hypothesis testing

15

Experiment ProcedureExperiment Procedure

Procedure

• Measure Geometry for test and reference connectors• Clean connectors, both DUT and reference• Mate, demate, measure IL/RL and record images (10x)• Apply Arizona dust powder

– Two grades used 1-5 um and 6-25 um• Mate, demate, measure IL/RL and record images (5x)• Reference cable replaced after each 5 mating/ de-

mating operations• Analyze results

16

Cleaning and Measurement MethodsCleaning and Measurement Methods

• All DUTs and reference connectors cleaned– Cleaning cassette (Cletop or Optipop)

• End-face inspected and images were saved– Westover Scientific Probe 1 and FiberChek™ software

• Interferometer data (radius of curvature, apex offset and fiber undercut) were recorded for each DUT and reference– Norland interferometer (NC-3000).

• IL and RL were measured– Agilent 8164A

• Measured the number of particles, size, and locations on and measured Occluded Area– FiberQA™ software from PVI Systems

17

Experimental Block DiagramExperimental Block Diagram

18

IL & RL Measurement DiagramIL & RL Measurement Diagram

Return Loss (dB)= 10 log (Pincident/ Preflected)=P0-P2-1.0

Note: During return loss test , the DUT jumper must be terminated by bending.

Inserion Loss (dB)= 10 log (Pincident/ Pout)=P0-P1

19

Clean Fiber

Area near the core, d<25um

Cladding, 25um<d<120um

Epoxy Ring Zone, 120um<d<130um

Contact Diameter130um<d<250um

Ferrule Diameter250um<d<400um

Zone Definitions for Fiber Surface AnalysisZone Definitions for Fiber Surface Analysis

20

Connectors Tested SummaryConnectors Tested Summary

• SC connectors >80 SMF cables• FC connectors 5 DUTs• LC connectors 12 DUTs• MU connectors 5 DUTs

• Total of > 550 experimental points including IL, RL and fiberscopic images for the test cable and reference cable before and after contamination

21

FC01-5th Mating Reference Cable

Initial IL: 0.04dBInitial RL: 54dB

IL after contamination: 0.04dBRL after contamination: 55dB

Passed: Within 3 Standard Deviations of Clean Fiber

3 x Standard Deviation of IL: 0.02dB3 x Standard Deviation of RL: 3dB

FC ConnectorsFC Connectors-- FC01 5th MatingFC01 5th Mating

22

FC04- 2nd mating Reference Cable



Failed: Not Within 3 Standard Deviations of Clean Fiber

3 x Standard Deviation of IL: 0.03dB3 x Standard Deviation of RL: 1.4dB

FC ConnectorsFC Connectors-- FC04 2nd MatingFC04 2nd Mating

23

LC07-1st Mating Reference Cable T07




Passed: Within 3 Standard Deviations of Clean Fiber

LC ConnectorsLC Connectors-- LC07 1st MatingLC07 1st Mating

24

LC07-3rd mating Reference cable T07





LC ConnectorsLC Connectors-- LC07 3rd MatingLC07 3rd Mating

25



LC07- 5th mating Reference Cable T07

3 x Standard Deviation of IL: 0.02dB3 x Standard Deviation of RL: 1 dB


LC ConnectorsLC Connectors-- LC07 5th MatingLC07 5th Mating

26

MU connector (DUT)-5th matingMU connector (DUT)- 1st mating

IL1 after contamination: 0.12dBRL1after contamination=51dB

IL5 after contamination: 1.23dBRL5 after contamination: 15dB

Initial IL: 0.11dB Initial RL: 52dB 3 x Standard Deviation of IL: 0.03dB3 x Standard Deviation of RL: 1dB

FailedPassed

MU ConnectorsMU Connectors-- DUT 1st MatingDUT 1st Mating

27

T05 (reference)- 5th matingT05 (reference)-1st mating

IL1 after contamination: 0.12dBRL1 after contamination: 51dB

IL5 after contamination: 1.23dBRL after contamination: 15dB

Fifth Mating: FailedFirst Mating: Passed

MU ConnectorsMU Connectors-- Ref 1st & 5th MatingRef 1st & 5th Mating

28

Image AnalysisImage Analysis

• Over 270 images were processed using FiberQA• All particles within the cladding and core area

detected and measured• Particle area, feret diameter and location cataloged• Occluded area computed using a fine set of annular

rings (2.5 µm spacing)• Occluded area data used to compute various

normalized metrics• Quantitative, detailed data provides means of

objectively comparing particle blockage to insertion loss and return loss data

• Particle counts, sizes and locations can be examined for all images and all particles

29

Particle Detection OverlaysParticle Detection Overlays

Raw Cropped Image

Detected Particle Overlay• The raw image (left) was processed to detect and quantify the

particles on the surface, shown in overlay (right).• Scratch processing was disabled for purposes of this analysis.

30

Labeled Detected Particles with 5 µm annular rings.Black area is ferrule and grey is fiber.

Raw image for LC07-WD-5M taken with Westover Microscope

Occluded Area OverlayOccluded Area Overlay

31

Occluded Area ImagesOccluded Area Images--More DetailMore Detail

Labeled Detected Particles(color coded by annular ring)

Labeled with rings

32

Incremental occluded area vs radius

Occluded Area GraphsOccluded Area Graphs

Cumulative occluded area vs radius

Data for connector LC07

For comparison, core exclusion zone area is about 491 µm2

33

Normalized Occluded AreaNormalized Occluded Area

• Occluded area within each ring is normalized by the area of that ring

• Plotted as percentage of incremental area

• Emphasizes occlusions closer to the fiber center

• This was first attempt at normalizing data that lead to weighting by intensity distribution vs radius

% Cumulative Occluded Area vs Ra

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

50.00%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Radius (um

LC07 LC07-WD LC07-WD-1MLC07-WD-2M LC07-WD-3M LC07-WD-4MLC07-WD-5M

34

Occluded Area Increased by MatingOccluded Area Increased by Mating

• The sample LC07 exhibited movement of contamination towards the core over a series of mating/demating cycles– Before mating core clean– 1st mating 1.4% occluded– 2nd mating 11.6% occluded– 4th mating 32.9% occluded

• The particle movement resulted in significant degradation of optical performance (delta IL=0.46dB and delta RL=24dB) over the mating cycles

35

Gaussian Weighting FactorGaussian Weighting Factor

• Dr. Sun-Yuan Huang of Intel, suggested a valuable improvement that takes into account the Gaussian distribution ofthe fundamental mode of the fiber.

• The intensity distribution of fundamental fiber mode is expressed as I0 exp(-2r2/ωf

2), where I0 is the peak intensity, r is the radial position and ωf is the mode-field radius of fiber mode.

• To account the effect of intensity profile on the insertion loss we introduce the Gaussian weighting factor Γ = exp(-2r2/ωf

2).• The Gaussian weighted % occluded area is defined as

where ai is the size of particle at ith ring, Γi is the Gaussian weighting factor for the ith ring, and Ai is the area of the ith ring. For i = 0 it denotes the initial circle.

100(%)

0

0 •Γ

Γ=

∑

∑N

ii

N

ii

A

af

36

Fiber Intensity DistributionFiber Intensity Distribution

13.5%2 ωf

I(r) = Io exp(-2r2/ωf2)

Mode field diameter of SMF-28 is 9.2 µm at 1310 nm and 10.4 µm at 1550 nm.

37

ExampleExample

4

0

123

0: Initial circle with radius of 2.5 µm1: 1st ring with 2.5 µm width2: 2nd ring with 2.5 µm width3: 3rd ring with 2.5 µm width4: 4th ring with 2.5 µm width

The Gaussian weighted % occluded area isf(%) = (a1Γ1+a2Γ2+a4Γ4)/ (A0Γ0+A1Γ1+A2Γ2+A3Γ3+A4Γ4)

3.56f (%) =

0.000100.023351.1710411.9596216.44723AΓ (µm2) =

0.000000.000000.058550.996630aΓ (µm2) =

176.71137.4498.1758.9019.63A (µm2) =

4.910.004.914.910a (µm2) =

0.000000.000170.011930.203030.83765Γ =

11.258.756.253.751.25r (µm) =

43210i =

Three non-removable particlesat the end-face of fiber stub:

38

Delta IL Delta IL vsvs Gaussian Weighted % Occluded AreaGaussian Weighted % Occluded Area

The Delta IL for the worse-case defects and scratches based on inspection criteria is less than 0.03 dB

Delta IL vs Gaussian Weighted % Occluded Area

y = 0.0009x 2 - 0.0065x + 0.0239

R 2 = 0.8166

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

0 10 20 30 40

GWpOA

delta ILPoly. (delta IL)

39

Inspection Criteria for SMF EndInspection Criteria for SMF End--faceface

anynone > 10 microns130 to 250 microns2 — Contact Zone

anyany120 to 130 micronsAdhesive Zone

none > 3 micronsany < 2 microns

5 from 2 - 5 micronsnone > 5 microns

25 to 120 microns1b — Cladding Zone

nonenone0 to 25 microns1a — Core Zone

Scratches (width)Defects (diameter)DiameterZone/Description

Allowable Defects and Scratches

40

Worst Case for SMF EndWorst Case for SMF End--face Defectsface Defects

15 um

12.5 um

17.5 um

5 Defectswith 5 um diameter

31 Defectswith 2 um diameter

41

Gaussian Weighted % Occluded Area Gaussian Weighted % Occluded Area for Worstfor Worst--case Defects per Inspection Criteriacase Defects per Inspection Criteria

0.00028f(%)=4411310Sum(um2)

00001.24E-108922.841.34E-11158.756057.5

00002.04E-99883.572.31E-10256.2557.555

00001.33E-90844.301.57E-9353.755552.5

00003.42E-82805.034.25E-8551.2552.550

00003.49E-74765.764.56E-7748.755047.5

00001.04E-12333.793.12E-1521.2522.520

00001.50E-09294.525.09E-1218.752017.5

1.62E-0749.09558.41E-07255.253.29E-0916.2517.515

4.15E-0549.09551.83E-04215.988.45E-0713.751512.5

8.23E-0597.392311.83E-04215.988.45E-0713.751512.5

1b –Cladding

00001.52E-02176.718.60E-0511.2512.510

00000.48137.443.47E-038.75107.5

00005.4698.170.066.257.55

000020.8258.900.353.7552.5

000017.4919.630.891.252.50

1a - Core

GWF*ai(um2)

DefectArea

(um2)

DefectDiameter

(um)N of

DefectGWF*Ai(um2)

Ai(um2)GWFi

MidRadius(um)

OuterRadius(um)

InnerRadius(um)Zone

42

Worst Case for SMF EndWorst Case for SMF End--face Scratchesface Scratches

3 um scratch width

15.5 um

12.5 um

Scratched area

43

Gaussian Weighted % Occluded Area Gaussian Weighted % Occluded Area for Worstfor Worst--case Scratches per Inspection Criteriacase Scratches per Inspection Criteria

0.00017f(%)=4411310Sum(um2)

00001.24E-108922.841.34E-11158.756057.5

00002.04E-99883.572.31E-10256.2557.555

00001.33E-90844.301.57E-9353.755552.5

00003.42E-82805.034.25E-8551.2552.550

00003.49E-74765.764.56E-7748.755047.5

00002.84E-16373.067.60E-1923.752522.5

00001.04E-12333.793.12E-1521.2522.520

00001.50E-09294.525.09E-1218.752017.5

00008.41E-07255.253.29E-0916.2517.515

7.57E-05149.74341.33E-04263.895.06E-071415.512.5

1b –Cladding

00001.52E-02176.718.60E-0511.2512.510

00000.48137.443.47E-038.75107.5

00005.4698.170.066.257.55

000020.8258.900.353.7552.5

000017.4919.630.891.252.50

1a - Core

GWF*ai(um2)

ScratchArea

(um2)

ScratchWidth(um)

N ofScratch

GWF*Ai(um2)

Ai(um2)GWFi

MidRadius(um)

OuterRadius(um)

InnerRadius(um)Zone

44

Inspection Criteria for SMF EndInspection Criteria for SMF End--faceface

anynone > 10 microns130 to 250 microns2 — Contact Zone

anyany120 to 130 micronsAdhesive Zone

none > 3 micronsany < 2 microns

5 from 2 - 5 micronsnone > 5 microns

25 to 120 microns1b — Cladding Zone

nonenone0 to 25 microns1a — Core Zone

Scratches (width)Defects (diameter)DiameterZone/Description

Allowable Defects and Scratches

Inspection Criteria for SMF Pigtail and Patchcord Connectors

45

Inspection Criteria Table NotesInspection Criteria Table Notes

• Any contaminants that are removable must be cleaned from the endface.

• Any contaminants that fall across multiple zones are subject to the most stringent criteria.

• Always use the largest (major) diameter when measuring the size of contaminants.

• Non-Removable contaminants (NRs) are defined as “permanent non-linear features”. This is equivalent to the IEC definition of “pits”.

• Scratches are defined as “permanent linear surface features”.

46

Sumitomo/ExceLight experiment for Receptacle Modules

Published by Photonics North 2006 conference

Receptacles ModulesReceptacles Modules

47

ESD Effects From CleaningESD Effects From Cleaning

• The increased accumulation of particles near the core during a series of mating/de-mating operations was investigated. One cause for this accumulation was ESD (electrostatic discharge) effects from cleaning. Methods to prevent this phenomenon were studied.

The paper “Accumulation of Particles Near the Core during Repetitive Fiber Connector Matings and De-matings “ will be

presented at NFOEC 2007, Anaheim, Mar, 07

48

ESD Effects from CleaningESD Effects from Cleaning

• The dust particle distribution on the connector end faces can be described by a single parameter Rc, which is called the center of particles. ∑

∑= N

i

N

ii

c

a

arR

0

0

y = 166.18x

R2 = 0.9073

0

50

100

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Charge (nC)

Relationship between the particle center moving speed and the charge

49

Sample MT Endface DataSample MT Endface Data

Clean DUT Contaminated DUT (Arizona Road Dust)

Zone A – 25 micron

Core – 10 micron

611-23 Ref – 604B DUT; F6 D1 IL (dB) RL (dB)average (10X) 0.098 69.4std deviation 0.013 0.7average + 3X std dev 0.137 67.4

0.430 33.4

clean

Contaminated

US Conec Research

50

Leading the IndustryLeading the Industry

Collaboration with TIA, IEC and IPC• The Project is collaborating with International Electrotechnical

Committee (IEC), Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) and IPC to develop a cleanliness standard.

iNEMI presentations:• OMI conference, Ottawa, Apr-29-May 1, 2003• IEC meeting, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Oct 6-13, 2003 (presented by T.

Berdinskikh, Celestica)• APEX2004, Anaheim, California, Feb 19-Feb 26, 2004• IEC meeting, Locarno, Switzerland, Apr, 04 (presented by T. Mitcheltree,

Cisco)• IEC meeting, Warsaw, Poland, Sep, 04 (presented by R. Manning, Tyco)• APEX2005, Anaheim, California, Feb, 05 • IEC meeting, Charlotte, NC, Apr, 05 (presented by R. Manning, Tyco)• A draft of IPC-8497-01 “ Cleaning Methods and Contamination Assessment for Optical

Assembly” has been submitted to IPC (June, 04)

• OFC2006, Anaheim, California, Feb, 06 • IEC meeting, Quebec City, Canada, Oct, 06 ( presented by T. Berdinskikh and

Heather Tkalec)

51

PublicationsPublications“Optical Connector Contamination/ Scratches and its Influence on Optical Signal Performance’, Journal of SMTA, V. 16, issue 3, 2003, pp.40-49“ At the Core:How Scratches, Dust, and Fingerprints Affect Optical Signal Performance’, Connector Specifier, January 2004, pp.10-11“ Degradation of Optical Performance of Fiber Optics Connectors in a Manufacturing Environment’, Proceedings of APEX2004, Anaheim, California, Feb 19-Feb 26, 2004, pp.PS-08-1-PS-08-4“Cleaning Standard for Fiber Optics Connectors Promises to Save Time and Money”, Photonics Spectra, June 2004, pp.66-68“Development of Cleanliness Specification for Single- Mode Connectors”, Proceedings of APEX2005, Anaheim, California, Feb 21-26, 2005, pp. S04-3-1- S04-3-16.“Keeping it clean: A cleanliness specification for single-mode connectors”, Connector Specifier, Aug, 05, pp.8-10.“Contamination Influence on Receptacle Type Optical Data Links”, Photonics North, 2005, Toronto, Canada, Sep, 05.“Development of Cleanliness Specifications for 2.5 mm and 1.25 mmferrules Single- Mode Connectors” – Proceedings of OFC/NFOEC, Anaheim, California, Mar 5-10, 06“ Standardizing cleanliness for fiber optic connectors cuts costs, improves quality” Global SMT & Packaging, June/July 2006, pp10-12.

9 Papers published by the Project Team

52

ConclusionsConclusions

• The iNEMI team conducted experiments to compare the effects of specific contamination on the optical performance of fiber optic connectors

• The similarities and some differences in optical performance of contaminated 2.5 mm ferrule (SC, FC) and 1.25mm ferrule (LC, MU) connectors were found.

• The zone of 25 µm diameter was identified as critical zone in terms of the contamination influence on optical signal performance for all types of investigated connectors

• In 60 % of all examined LC and MU connectors, a series of five repeated matings/demating operations resulted in an increase of IL of 0.5 to 1.1 dB due to particle movement from the ferrule and cladding areas towards the core

53

ConclusionsConclusions

• Developed empirical model between IL and the Gaussian Weighted % Occluded Area.

• The cleanliness specification for SMF Pigtail and Patchcord Connectors has been developed

• The acceptance of industry standard for SM connectors will result in significant cost savings by:– elimination of insufficient cleaning and over cleaning– reduction of contaminated non-conforming material.

• The standard IPC -8497-1” Cleaning Methods and Contamination Assessment’ for Optical Assembly”was been published in Feb 2006

54

Further ResearchFurther Research

• Development a cleanliness specification for multimode (MM) fiber, MTP connectors and receptacle type of devices

• SM connectors– Measure the particles thickness in order to correlate the

RL changes with the size of the air gap • Correlate the changes of IL & RL of contaminated

connectors with the signal integrity ( Bit Error Rate)

Fiber Connector ONE - INEMI

Documents

Transcript of Fiber Connector ONE - INEMI