OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: J. H. Eberly
  • Vol. 1, Iss. 3 — Aug. 4, 1997
  • pp: 60–67
« Show journal navigation

Modeling heterodyne efficiency for coherent laser radar in the presence of aberrations

Diana M. Chambers  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 1, Issue 3, pp. 60-67 (1997)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.1.000060


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (241 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

Heterodyne efficiency of a coherent lidar system reflects the matching of phase and amplitude between a local oscillator (LO) beam and received signal beam and is, therefore, an indicator of system performance. One aspect of a lidar system that affects heterodyne efficiency is aberrations present in optical components. A method for including aberrations in the determination of heterodyne efficiency is presented. The effect of aberrations on heterodyne efficiency is demonstrated by including Seidel aberrations in the mixing of two perfectly matched gaussian beams. Results for this case are presented as animations that illustrate the behavior of the mixing as a function of time. Extension of this method to propagation through lidar optical systems is discussed.

© Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

An indicator of the performance of a coherent lidar system is its heterodyne efficiency. This parameter reflects the matching between local oscillator (LO) and received signal and is optimized when they are perfectly matched in both amplitude and phase distribution. Evaluation of heterodyne efficiency in coherent systems has been thoroughly examined from a theoretical perspective.[1–8

1 . A. E. Siegman , “ The antenna properties of optical heterodyne receivers ,” Proc. IEEE 51 , 1350 – 1358 ( 1966 ). [CrossRef]

] An exhaustive bibliography may be found in Ref 6

6 . R. G. Frehlich and M. J. Kavaya , “ Coherent laser radar performance for general atmospheric refractive turbulence ,” Appl. Opt. 30 , 5325 – 5352 ( 1991 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

. Aberrations present in the lidar optical system have been studied by considering the receiver as an integral unit or as a single telescope mirror.[5

5 . B. J. Rye , “ Primary aberration contribution to incoherentbackscatter heterodyne lidar returns ,” Appl. Opt. 21 , 839 – 844 ( 1982 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] Calculation of heterodyne efficiency for a specific coherent lidar receiver system, including propagation of measured beam distributions through individual components, has also been presented.[8

8 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 1: Theory ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4111 – 4119 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,9

9 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 2: Applications ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4120 – 4132 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] However, aberrations of the components were not considered in the calculations.

In this paper a method is proposed for including aberrations of individual components in the evaluation of heterodyne efficiency of coherent optical systems, with specific application to lidar receivers. Aberrations imparted to a beam by the components will be quantified by incorporating optical testing data in the model. Both the signal and local oscillator (LO) beams will be propagated through the optical system so that inherent phase contributions of elements will be considered. Examples of intensity distributions for the mixing of deterministic signal and LO fields under the simplification of no propagation will be shown as animations to illustrate the effect of aberration. A simple example of propagation through an afocal telescope will be used to illustrate extension of the technique to lidar optical systems.

2. Formulation for heterodyne efficiency with aberrations

Heterodyne efficiency is a the ratio of averaged effective coherent power to total incoherent power in the system.[8

8 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 1: Theory ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4111 – 4119 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] This is optimized when the signal and LO beams are well matched in both amplitude and phase distribution. Following the procedure given in Ref 8

8 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 1: Theory ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4111 – 4119 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, an analytic expression for heterodyne efficiency is developed in the presence of aberrations. Specific aberrations will then be discussed and the Seidel terms will be used to demonstrate the effect aberrations have on heterodyne efficiency. Uniform quantum efficiency over the area of the detector is assumed.

2.1 Analytic expression for heterodyne efficiency

For a monostatic coherent lidar system with a short transmitted pulse, the heterodyne efficiency may be expressed

ηH=DuS(z,P)uLO*(P)dPDuS*(z,P)uLO(P)dPPSPLO
(1)

where the brackets indicate statistical average, P is a detector coordinate, z is the range to the target, D is the area of the detector, u is the complex amplitude of a received field, P is the power in the received field as measured by the detector and the subscripts S and LO indicate signal and local oscillator, respectively.[8

8 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 1: Theory ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4111 – 4119 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] Heterodyne efficiency directly affects system performance through the signal-to-noise relation

SNR=PShνBηH
(2)

where h is Planck’s constant, v is the optical frequency, and B is the detector bandwidth. Introducing an aberration to a beam contributes an additional term to its phase. This may be represented by

u=u0exp[ikW(r,θ)]
(3)

where u0 represents the electric field without aberrations and W(r,θ) is the aberration function.[10

10 . J. W. Goodman , Introduction to Fourier optics , 2nd ed. ( McGraw-Hill, New York , 1996 ).

] The form of W will be discussed in more detail below.

2.2 Seidel aberrations and their effect on heterodyne efficiency

Wavefront aberrations are a deviation of a beam’s wavefront from an expected, or reference surface, which is typically a sphere. A common method for expressing aberrations in optical systems is as a power series11

W(w)=λ1.n,mW1,m,nη1ρmcosnθ
(4)

where λ is the system transmitted wavelength, W1,m,n is the aberration coefficient expressed as a number of wavelengths, η is a normalized object field coordinate, ρ is a normalized pupil radius and θ is pupil azimuth. Arguments based on rotational symmetry indicate that only specific combinations of the indices l, m and n may occur. The five second order terms are the Seidel, or primary, aberrations denoted as spherical, coma, astigmatism, field curvature and distortion. Of the five Seidel aberrations, spherical, coma and astigmatism will be used in this paper for demonstration of the effect aberrations have on heterodyne efficiency. The effect of tilt, a first order term of the power series, will also be shown since it can be interpreted as an angular misalignment of two planar wavefronts at the detector surface. Examples of the shape of a wavefront containing these aberrations may be found in Ref 12

12 . M. Born and E. Wolf , Principles of Optics , 6 th ed., ( Pergamon , 1987 ).

.

For purposes of illustrating the effect that aberrations have on heterodyne efficiency, consider mixing two ideal gaussian beams which are initially matched in both amplitude and phase. One beam represents signal that has traversed an optical system and, as a result, has aberration added to its wavefront. The other beam will represent the local oscillator, which maintains a planar wavefront. One-way transmission will be used for simplicity in this demonstration, although two-way transmission is typical of lidar systems under consideration. A truncation aperture representative of the optimum matched gaussian profile (OMGP) for an atmospheric lidar system, where the 1/e field radius is 0.87 times the aperture radius, will be used.[5

5 . B. J. Rye , “ Primary aberration contribution to incoherentbackscatter heterodyne lidar returns ,” Appl. Opt. 21 , 839 – 844 ( 1982 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] The result of aberrations in the signal beam can be seen by examining the integrated intensity distribution on a detector as a function of time and comparing that to the integrated intensity which would be detected without aberrations. Mismatching between the signal and LO beams due to the aberrations causes a redistribution of the intensity in the detected beam as a function of time. Consequently, the magnitude of modulation of the integrated intensity is reduced. The effective power measured by the detector is proportional to the square of the modulation depth, so it is apparent that aberrations will cause a reduction in system performance as measured by heterodyne efficiency. This behavior is shown in the four animations of Figure 1, corresponding to the addition of aberrations tilt (W011), spherical(W040), coma(W031), and astigmatism(W022), respectively. Each animation contains a representation of the intensity distribution on the detector as a function of time when aberrations are present and a corresponding intensity distribution for the case of no aberrations. Integrated intensity is also shown as a function of time; two periods of the intermediate frequency are shown. It is seen that tilt is the aberration which has the greatest effect on heterodyne efficiency. Figure 2 illustrates the reduction of heterodyne efficiency as a function of the number of waves of aberration added to one of the beams.

Fig. 1a Heterodyne mixing of two ideal gaussian beams in the presence of tilt, W011, (top left) and no aberration (top right) as a function of time. The detector integrated intensity as a function of time is also shown (bottom). [Media 1]
Fig. 1b Heterodyne mixing of two ideal gaussian beams in the presence of spherical aberration, W040, (top left) and no aberration (top right) as a function of time. The detector integrated intensity as a function of time is also shown (bottom). [Media 2]
Fig. 1c Heterodyne mixing of two ideal gaussian beams in the presence of coma aberration, W031, (top left) and no aberration (top right) as a function of time. The detector integrated intensity as a function of time is also shown (bottom). [Media 3]
Fig. 1d Heterodyne mixing of two ideal gaussian beams in the presence of coma aberration, W022, (top left) and no aberration (top right) as a function of time. The detector integrated intensity as a function of time is also shown (bottom). [Media 4]
Fig. 2 Reduction of heterodyne efficiency as a function of aberration in one of the beams. One way transmission assumed.

3. System modeling

3.1 Theory

Understanding and optimizing the performance of a coherent lidar system is improved by developing a model of the optical layout and applying properties peculiar to that system in the heterodyne detection calculation. The two approaches commonly used to evaluate a coherent lidar system are the back-propagated local oscillator (BPLO) method and the forward propagation method. The BPLO approach was proposed by Siegman1 and involves propagating the LO distribution backward through the optical train beginning at the detector surface and continuing through the system exit aperture to the scattering plane where the resulting field is mixed with the transmitted field. This method has been applied in the analysis of heterodyne efficiency of general lidar systems for various target characteristics and for inclusion of aberrations.[5

5 . B. J. Rye , “ Primary aberration contribution to incoherentbackscatter heterodyne lidar returns ,” Appl. Opt. 21 , 839 – 844 ( 1982 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,8

8 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 1: Theory ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4111 – 4119 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,9

9 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 2: Applications ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4120 – 4132 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] In these studies the lidar receiver was modeled as either a theoretical receiver response function or as a simplified response function addressing a single receiver component.

Detailed analysis of a specific lidar system by Zhao, et. al. develops an expression for the receiver response function using forward propagation of a received signal beam.[8

8 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 1: Theory ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4111 – 4119 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,9

9 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 2: Applications ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4120 – 4132 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] Beginning at the scattering plane, the Huygens-Fresnel principle is applied at each propagation step through the optical train, ending at the detector surface.[10

10 . J. W. Goodman , Introduction to Fourier optics , 2nd ed. ( McGraw-Hill, New York , 1996 ).

] The resulting expression takes the form

K(S,P)=LenshLtLdPLOpticalComponents....hOCtOCdPOCTelescopeSecondaryMirrorhTStTSdPTSTelescopePrimaryMirrorhTPtTPdPTPWindowhWtWU(S,PW)dPW
(5)

where K(S,P) is the receiver response function, P is a point in the plane of the optical element, t is the transfer function of an element and h is the propagation function which is defined using the Fresnel approximation as

ha=ha(r1,r2)=iλzexp[ik2z(r1r2)2]
(6)

where r1 and r2 are coordinates in the two planes defining the boundaries of a propagation step. The transfer function, t, includes transmission or phase factors, such as the quadratic phase associated with focusing elements. The development in Ref. 8

8 . Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 1: Theory ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4111 – 4119 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

continues by translating the expression in Eq. (5) to a comparable expression for the BPLO approach and demonstrates how the ordering of integration permits simplification of the calculation to reduce computation time and complexity.

Aberrations can be accommodated by the expression in Eq. (5) through the transfer function, t. As noted in Eq. (3), aberrations contribute to the phase of a beam and are included using the relation

t=t0exp[ikW(w)]
(7)

where t0 represents the transfer function of the optical element without aberrations. This form does not require W(w) to be expanded as a power series; for example, the Zernike polynomials or rms wavefront designations typically generated during optical testing may be used as an alternative.

3.2 Implementation

An objective in developing a method for evaluating the effect of aberrations on lidar systems was to implement it in a manner that could be extended to optimize design parameters and evaluate system performance under nonideal conditions such as misalignment. A commercial software package developed for physical optics modeling was chosen to implement the propagation in order to minimize the software development time required to establish system performance and provide flexibility in system modeling. Alternative propagation algorithms implemented in the package reduce the computation requirements from forward propagation with the Huygens-Fresnel approach but produce comparable beam distributions. Optical system specifications are similar to those used by optics design software packages where components are defined in terms of physical dimensions, positions and rotations. Aberrations can be applied in numerous forms, including Seidel terms, Zernike polynomials and rms definitions. Forward or backward propagation through a system can be chosen by proper orientation of components and beams.

As an example of the modeling approach, a two-mirror, off-axis beam expanding telescope was considered. The telescope has a 16:1 beam expansion ratio at f/1 using two parabolic mirrors.[13

13 . C. A. DiMarzio and C.E. Harris , “ CAT detection system instrumentation ,” ER81-4147, Raytheon Company, Final report, Contract NAS8-32555 ( 1981 ).

] Again, matched gaussian beams were assumed. Two beams were propagated through the telescope, one without aberrations and one with 0.1 wave rms aberration included at the primary mirror. The phase distribution of the beam propagated without aberrations is shown in Figure 3a. It is seen to remain planar over the area that would be intercepted by a detector, indicating that the telescope contributes negligible aberration. Figure 3b shows the corresponding phase distribution with aberrations. Reduction of heterodyne efficiency due to mixing this beam with a LO beam having no aberrations was calculated to be 31%.

Fig. 3 a) Phase distribution of a beam without aberrations after propagating through 16x telescope; b) Phase distribution of a beam with 0.1 wave rms aberration after propagating through 16x telescope

4. Summary

Heterodyne efficiency is an important indicator of the performance of a coherent lidar system. The effect of aberrations on heterodyne mixing of two ideally matched gaussian beams has been illustrated by visualization of the intensity and integrated intensity on a detector surface. In addition, a method for systematically addressing aberrations of components in a complex lidar optical system has been developed and an example has been shown for a single component.

Acknowledgments

This work was performed under contract NAS8-40836 in support of NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center and the Integrated Program Office, M.J. Kavaya and S.C. Johnson task initiators. I am grateful to F. Amzajerdian and G.D. Spiers for many helpful discussions. I am also grateful to B. J. Rye for his review of this paper and valuable suggestions.

References and links

1 .

A. E. Siegman , “ The antenna properties of optical heterodyne receivers ,” Proc. IEEE 51 , 1350 – 1358 ( 1966 ). [CrossRef]

2 .

S. C. Cohen , “ Heterodyne detection: phase front alignment, beam spot size, and detector uniformity ,” Appl. Opt. 14 , 1953 – 1959 ( 1975 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3 .

H. T. Yura , “ Optical heterodyne signal power obtained from finite sized sources of radiation ,” Appl. Opt. 13 , 150 – 157 ( 1974 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4 .

B. J. Rye , “ Antenna parameters for incoherent backscatter heterodyne lidar ,” Appl. Opt. 18 , 1390 – 1398 ( 1979 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5 .

B. J. Rye , “ Primary aberration contribution to incoherentbackscatter heterodyne lidar returns ,” Appl. Opt. 21 , 839 – 844 ( 1982 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6 .

R. G. Frehlich and M. J. Kavaya , “ Coherent laser radar performance for general atmospheric refractive turbulence ,” Appl. Opt. 30 , 5325 – 5352 ( 1991 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7 .

R. G. Frehlich , “ Heterodyne efficiency for a coherent laser radar with diffuse or aerosol targets ,” J. Mod. Opt. 41 , 2115 – 2129 ( 1994 ). [CrossRef]

8 .

Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 1: Theory ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4111 – 4119 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

9 .

Y. Zhao , M. J. Post , and R. M. Hardesty , “ Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 2: Applications ,” Appl. Opt. 29 , 4120 – 4132 ( 1990 ). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10 .

J. W. Goodman , Introduction to Fourier optics , 2nd ed. ( McGraw-Hill, New York , 1996 ).

11 .

W. Welford , Aberrations of optical systems , ( Adam Hilger, Bristol , 1989 ).

12 .

M. Born and E. Wolf , Principles of Optics , 6 th ed., ( Pergamon , 1987 ).

13 .

C. A. DiMarzio and C.E. Harris , “ CAT detection system instrumentation ,” ER81-4147, Raytheon Company, Final report, Contract NAS8-32555 ( 1981 ).

OCIS Codes
(010.3640) Atmospheric and oceanic optics : Lidar
(280.3340) Remote sensing and sensors : Laser Doppler velocimetry

ToC Category:
Research Papers

History
Original Manuscript: June 25, 1997
Revised Manuscript: June 25, 1997
Published: August 4, 1997

Citation
Diana Chambers, "Modeling of heterodyne efficiency for coherent laser radar in the presence of aberrations," Opt. Express 1, 60-67 (1997)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-1-3-60


Sort:  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. A. E. Siegman, The antenna properties of optical heterodyne receivers, Proc. IEEE 51, 1350-1358 (1966). [CrossRef]
  2. S. C. Cohen, Heterodyne detection: phase front alignment, beam spot size, and detector uniformity, Appl. Opt. 14, 1953-1959 (1975). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. H. T. Yura, Optical heterodyne signal power obtained from finite sized sources of radiation, Appl. Opt. 13, 150-157 (1974). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. B. J. Rye, Antenna parameters for incoherent backscatter heterodyne lidar, Appl. Opt. 18, 1390-1398 (1979). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. B. J. Rye, Primary aberration contribution to incoherent backscatter heterodyne lidar returns, Appl. Opt. 21, 839-844 (1982). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. R. G. Frehlich and M. J. Kavaya, Coherent laser radar performance for general atmospheric refractive turbulence, Appl. Opt. 30, 5325-5352 (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. R. G. Frehlich, Heterodyne efficiency for a coherent laser radar with diffuse or aerosol targets, J. Mod. Opt. 41,2115-2129 (1994). [CrossRef]
  8. Y. Zhao, M. J. Post, and R. M. Hardesty, Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 1: Theory, Appl. Opt. 29, 4111-4119 (1990). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Y. Zhao, M. J. Post, and R. M. Hardesty, Receiving efficiency of pulsed coherent lidars. 2: Applications , Appl. Opt. 29, 4120-4132 (1990). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. J. W. Goodman, Introduction to Fourier optics, 2nd ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1996).
  11. W. Welford, Aberrations of optical systems, (Adam Hilger, Bristol, 1989).
  12. M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics, 6th ed., (Pergamon,1987).
  13. C. A. DiMarzio and C.E. Harris, CAT detection system instrumentation , ER81-4147, Raytheon Company, Final report, Contract NAS8-32555 (1981).

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

Supplementary Material


» Media 1: MOV (1696 KB)     
» Media 2: MOV (1646 KB)     
» Media 3: MOV (1679 KB)     
» Media 4: MOV (1639 KB)     

Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited