Optical Fibres: Spectral Width Calculation

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 2K views
Master1022
Messages
590
Reaction score
116
Homework Statement
A pulsed GaAlAs laser operates at 850 nm wavelength. Under pulsed conditions there are several lasing modes present separated in frequency by ## \Delta f = c/2nl ## where typically ## l ## = 300 ## \micro m ## (the length of the laser cavity), and ##n## = 3.5 is the refractive index of the laser cavity. By assuming that three modes are lasing, calculate the spectral width ## \Delta \lambda## of the emitted light.
Relevant Equations
## v = f \lambda ##
Hi,

I was working on this problem that I think should be quite simple, but I cannot seem to get the correct answer.

Question:
A pulsed laser operates at 850 nm wavelength. Under pulsed conditions there are several lasing modes present separated in frequency by ## \Delta f = c/2nl ## where typically ## l ## = 300 ## \mu m ## (the length of the laser cavity), and ##n## = 3.5 is the refractive index of the laser cavity. By assuming that three modes are lasing, calculate the spectral width ## \Delta \lambda## of the emitted light.

Attempt:
Three modes means that there are two frequency spacings, ## \Delta f ##, between the lower and upper frequencies. Thus:
[tex]2 \Delta f = \frac{c}{nl} = \frac{3 \times 10^{8}}{3.5 \cdot 300 \times 10^{-6}} = 2.867... \times 10^{11}[/tex]
Therefore, I thought that:
[tex]\text{Spectral width} = \Delta \lambda = \frac{c/n}{2 \Delta f} = 3 \times 10^{-4} \text{m}[/tex]

However, the answer is 0.6 nm which is quite a bit smaller than what I have... I do not really understand what approach I should be using instead.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Master1022 said:
I thought that
Thinking is one thing. Writing an equation is something else --- and in this case, better :smile:

What is ##\ {d\lambda\over df}\ ## if ##\ \lambda = {c/n\over f} ## ?

##\ ##
 
Thanks for the reply @BvU

BvU said:
Thinking is one thing. Writing an equation is something else --- and in this case, better :smile:

What is ##\ {d\lambda\over df}\ ## if ##\ \lambda = {c/n\over f} ## ?
##\ ##

So ## \frac{d\lambda}{df} = -\frac{c/n}{f^2} ##

I am then slightly confused how to proceed from there. Would I calculate ## f ## from the 850 nm we are given? If so, then I could do:
[tex]d\lambda = \frac{c/n}{(c/n\lambda)^2} \cdot df = \frac{\lambda^2}{c/n} \cdot 2 \Delta f[/tex]
[tex]= \frac{\lambda^2}{c/n} \cdot \frac{c}{nl} = \frac{\lambda^2}{l}[/tex]
but I am still making an error as that does not give me the right answer.
 
Master1022 said:
If so, then I could do
I mislead you to think ##f = c/(n\lambda)\ \ ## (not on purpose, I'm afraid o:) )

The 850 nm is in vacuo, so ##\ f\ ## should be ##\ f = c/\lambda ##

Numerically I still don't get the 0.6 nm but 0.68 nm for ##2\Delta f##.

##\ ##
 
BvU said:
I mislead you to think ##f = c/(n\lambda)\ \ ## (not on purpose, I'm afraid o:) )

The 850 nm is in vacuo, so ##\ f\ ## should be ##\ f = c/\lambda ##

Numerically I still don't get the 0.6 nm but 0.68 nm for ##2\Delta f##.

##\ ##
Thank you very much once again for your reply @BvU !

Using that, then I get:
[tex]\lambda = \frac{c/n}{f} \rightarrow \frac{d\lambda}{df} = -\frac{c/n}{f^2}[/tex]
[tex]= \frac{-c/n}{\left( \frac{c}{\lambda} \right)^2 } = \frac{-c/n}{c^2 / \lambda^2} = \frac{\lambda^2}{nc}[/tex]
Then we can multiply by ## 2\Delta f ## to get ## \frac{\lambda^2}{n^2 l} ##. However, I think I need to have just a factor of ## n ## in the denominator (instead of ##n^2 ##) to get the same answer as you. Could you see how I can reconcile this difference

[EDIT]: Nevermind, I have just realized that if I start with ## \lambda = \frac{c}{f} ##, then I get the same answer as you
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU