Abstract

The simulation of beam propagation permits examination of the signal degradation in a heterodyne receiver caused by refractive turbulence under general atmospheric conditions and at arbitrary transmitter and receiver configurations. At shorter wavelengths, an understanding of turbulence effects is essential for deciding the optimal telescope parameters, i.e., focal length and aperture diameter, of a practical heterodyne lidar.

© 2003 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |

  1. A. Belmonte and B. J. Rye, �??Heterodyne lidar returns in turbulent atmosphere: performance evaluation of simulated systems,�?? Appl. Opt. 39, 2401-2411 (2000).
    [CrossRef]
  2. S.F. Clifford and S. Wandzura, �??Monostatic heterodyne lidar performance: the effect of the turbulent atmosphere,�?? Appl. Opt. 20, 514-516 (1981).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. A. Belmonte, �??Feasibility study for the simulation of beam propagation: consideration of coherent lidar performance,�?? Appl. Opt. 39, 5426-5445 (2000).
    [CrossRef]
  4. B. J. Rye, �??Antenna parameters for incoherent backscatter heterodyne lidar,�?? Appl. Opt. 18, 1390-1398 (1979).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. B.J. Rye and R.G. Frehlich, �??Optimal truncation and optical efficiency of an apertured coherent lidar focused on an incoherent backscatter target,�?? Appl. Opt. 31, 2891-2899 (1992).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. K. Tanaka and N. Ohta, �??Effects of tilt and offset of signal field on heterodyne efficiency,�?? Appl. Opt. 26, 627-632 (1987).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. R.G. Frehlich and M. J. Kavaya, �??Coherent laser radar performance for general atmospheric refractive turbulence,�?? Appl. Opt. 30, 5325-5352 (1991).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. H. T. Yura, �??Signal-to-noise ratio of heterodyne lidar systems in the presence of atmospheric turbulence,�?? Opt. Acta 26, 627-644 (1979).
    [CrossRef]
  9. L. C. Andrews, R. L. Phillips, C. Y. Hopen, and M. A. Al-Habash, �??Theory of optical scintillation,�?? J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 16, 1417-1429 (1999).
    [CrossRef]
  10. R. L. Fante, �??Electromagnetic beam propagation in turbulent media,�?? Proc. IEEE 63, 1669-1692 (1975).
    [CrossRef]
  11. L. C. Andrews, W. B. Miller, and J. C. Ricklin, �??Spatial coherence of a Gaussian-beam wave in weak and strong optical turbulence,�?? J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 1653-1660 (1994).
    [CrossRef]
  12. A. Belmonte, B. J. Rye, W. A. Brewer, and R. M. Hardesty, �??Coherent lidar returns in turbulent atmosphere from simulation of beam propagation,�?? presented at the Tenth Biennial Coherent Laser Radar Technology and Applications Conference, Mount Hood, Ore., June28�??July 2, 1999.
  13. See papers on device technology presented at the Twelfth Biennial Coherent Laser Radar Technology and Applications Conference, Bar Harbor, Me., June 15�??20, 2003.

Appl. Opt. (7)

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A (2)

Opt. Acta. (1)

H. T. Yura, �??Signal-to-noise ratio of heterodyne lidar systems in the presence of atmospheric turbulence,�?? Opt. Acta 26, 627-644 (1979).
[CrossRef]

Other (3)

A. Belmonte, B. J. Rye, W. A. Brewer, and R. M. Hardesty, �??Coherent lidar returns in turbulent atmosphere from simulation of beam propagation,�?? presented at the Tenth Biennial Coherent Laser Radar Technology and Applications Conference, Mount Hood, Ore., June28�??July 2, 1999.

See papers on device technology presented at the Twelfth Biennial Coherent Laser Radar Technology and Applications Conference, Bar Harbor, Me., June 15�??20, 2003.

R. L. Fante, �??Electromagnetic beam propagation in turbulent media,�?? Proc. IEEE 63, 1669-1692 (1975).
[CrossRef]

Cited By

OSA participates in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (2)

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Coherent solid angle [in decibels, 10 log10 COH )] as a function of range R and different levels of refractive turbulence Cn2 for a 2-µm monostatic, collimated system by use of the simulation of beam propagation in a turbulent atmosphere. The level of refractive turbulence has typical moderate-to-strong daytime values. The initially considered lidar aperture D was 16 cm in diameter, and its performance is compared with that of lidar systems with 8- and 4-cm-diameter apertures. As should be expected (see the text for further details), the performance of a 32-cm aperture lidar system (twice the initial aperture D) is much worse in the near-field ranges, and no improvements can be observed in the aperture’s far field.

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

Coherent solid angle (in decibels) as a function of range R and different levels of refractive turbulence Cn2 for a 2-µm monostatic, focused system with a 16-cm-diameter aperture. F is the focal length. The curves correspond to the collimated system. The levels of refractive turbulence Cn2 are similar to those of Fig. 1. The importance of the refractive turbulence on the performance of the focused systems is pronounced under any typical daytime turbulence condition and any focal length. Just for the shorter focus considered in the analysis (1 km), and at moderate turbulence levels (10-13 m-2/3), focusing the system yields some interesting results in the very near ranges, although not without penalties in the far ranges.

Equations (2)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

SNR ( R ) = C ( R ) A R R 2 η s ( R ) .
Ω COH ( R ) = A R R 2 η s ( R ) = Ω ( R ) η s ( R ) .

Metrics