15 Dec 2004IEEE802.3aq Channel model ad hoc Task 2: Time-varying study & modal noise 1 Teleconference notes, 5Jan, 2005

15 Dec 2004IEEE802.3aq Channel model ad hoc Task 2: Time-varying study & modal noise 2 Agenda 1)Attendees 2)Agree last meetings minutes 3)Task 2 a)no agenda items 4)Launch study, joint task 2 & task 4 a)OM3 measurements, Lew Aronson b)Vortex launch, Jim Morris ( Jim will give the talk on next call, Jan 12 th ) 5)other business 6)next meeting date/time

15 Dec 2004IEEE802.3aq Channel model ad hoc Task 2: Time-varying study & modal noise 3 1) Attendees Ali Ghiasi, BroadCom John Jaeger, Big Bear Networks Jim Morris, DOC Lew Aronson, Finisar Joerg Kropp, Infinion Yu Sun, Optium Pete Hallemeier, Optium Al Brunsting, Panduit Petre Popescu, Quake Paul Kolesar, Systimax

15 Dec 2004IEEE802.3aq Channel model ad hoc Task 2: Time-varying study & modal noise 4 2) Last meetings minutes agreed No issues raised 3) Task 2 - no agenda items

15 Dec 2004IEEE802.3aq Channel model ad hoc Task 2: Time-varying study & modal noise 5 4) Launch study, joint activity task 2 & 4 a)IPR/PIE measurements on OM1 and OM2, offset, center and vortex launches – Lew Aronson Commentary on OM1 Measurements (relative PIE-D) 1.Center Launch Generally Best Choice Without Connectors, ignoring other issues (e.g. polarization) 2. Offset and Vortex Launch Generally Vary Less with Connectors 3. Vortex Compares Favorably to Offset Launch in Virtually All Cases 4.Examination of Impulse Responses (following pages) suggests Vortex Launch is Particularly Commentary on OM3 Measurements (relative PIE-D) 1. Center Launch Best for No Connectors and Intermediate (two 4 um offset) Connector Case. 2. Offset Launch (50/125 MCP) Results in Worst PIE-D Values with Worst Connectors (two 7 um) 3. Single Vortex Launch Usually Better than Offset Launch 4. Vortex Launch Has Significantly Different IPR Shape than Offset– Worst Vortex Values compare favorably to the worst center launch cases

15 Dec 2004IEEE802.3aq Channel model ad hoc Task 2: Time-varying study & modal noise 6 4) Task 2 & 4: joint activity on launch study - 2 Conclusions Vortex Launch Performs Equal to or Better than Offset Launch in Most All Cases. Single Mode Center Launch is Clearly Best for OM3 Offset Launch (at least standard 50 um MCP) is Probably Unacceptable for OM3 Vortex Launch for OM3 is Not As Good as Center Launch But May Be Good Enough Of the Launches Tested, Vortex Launch Appears the Best for a Single Integrated Launch for both OM1 and OM3, and May Be Good Enough to Meet Needs Care Should Be Taken Before Ruling Out the Vortex Launch As An Alternative for OM3 More Work is Needed on Experimental Verification of Vortex Tolerance Issues and Sensitivity to Polarization / Manipulation Discussions: 1.The dependency of the radium of the ring of Vortex launch Vortex launch is not as sensitive to the ring radium as to its phase function. When the radius changes a relatively large range, the change of PIE is small 2.The sensitivity of the alignment of Vortex lens to the fiber The worst case misalignment can be from 5 to 7 um 3.The study of Vortex launch has not covered the OM2 fiber yet, since the fiber set of OM2 is not available.

15 Dec 2004IEEE802.3aq Channel model ad hoc Task 2: Time-varying study & modal noise 7 4) Task 2 & 4: joint activity on launch study - 3 Discussions con’t: 4.The output intensity distribution of Vortex launch used in measurement shows several low intensity rings. They are due to the lens design and are possible to be further optimized. Highlights: The experimental result of encircle flux is in need. Encircle flux analysis software is highly appreciated. Please contact Lew Aronson

15 Dec 2004IEEE802.3aq Channel model ad hoc Task 2: Time-varying study & modal noise 8 5) Next meeting Wednesday 12th January am PST 4) Other business - no issues raised