Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T01:15:49.998Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Dimensional Stability of Adhesives, Zirconia, and Silica in Optical Connector Ferrules and their Impact on Optical Performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

L.A. Reith ,
O.S. Ebizlioglu ,
M. Koza ,
J. Mann ,
M. Ozgur  and
T. Bowmer
L.A. Reith
Affiliation:
Bellcore, 445 South St., Morristown, NJ 07960, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

In order to achieve the optimum optical performance of fiber optic connectors, it is critical that there be good physical contact at the fiber-to-fiber interface. Loss of physical contact results in increased insertion loss and reflectance. Today's connectors are designed to have mating surfaces with tightly controlled endface geometries to ensure physical contact during temperature variations and repeated matings. However, material degradation of the fiber, ferrule, or the adhesive which holds the fiber into the ferrule, can change the endface geometry and cause eventual failure of the connector. Tests have been developed or are under development to quantify mechanical changes in these materials, including adhesive creep, fiber pistoning, ferrule deformation and roughening, and fiber deterioration. This paper will describe the latest test results acquired from applying these procedures.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 531: Symposium DD – Reliabilty of Photonics Materials & Structures , 1998 , 65
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Bellcore, , “Single-Mode Fiber Connector Technology”, SR-ARH-002744, Issue 1, August (1993).Google Scholar
2. Reith, L.A., Grimado, P.B., and Brickel, J., Proc. NFOEC'95, 635 (1995).Google Scholar
3. Ziebol, R., Roberts, H., and Daniel, B., Proc. NFOEC'92, I, 211 (1992).Google Scholar
4. Reith, L.A., Grimado, P.B., Frantz, R.A., Plitz, I.M., Wood, W.W., and Dolinoy, D.A., Proc. NFOEC'94, 225 (1994).Google Scholar
5. Deeg, E.W. and Bolhaar, T., AMPJ. Tech., 2, 29 (1992).Google Scholar
6. Reith, L A., Frantz, R.A., Grimado, P.B., Plitz, I.M., Gebizlioglu, O.S., and Dolinoy, D.A., Proc. IWCS, 790 (1994).Google Scholar
7. Reith, L.A., Mann, J., Gebizlioglu, O.S., Kurkjian, C.R., Bowmer, T., Scerbo, E., and Armstrong, J., Proc. NFOEC'97, 2, 193 (1997).Google Scholar
8. Reith, L.A., Frantz, R.A., Grimado, P.B., Plitz, I.M., Gebizlioglu, O.S., Vogel, E.M., DeRosa, F., and Beebe, E., Proc. NFOEC'95, 3, 647 (1995).Google Scholar
9. Bianco, S., COST 246 Workshop, October (1996).Google Scholar
10. Makrides-Saravanos, E., Huspeni, P.J., and Saravanos, C., Proc. NFOEC'97, 2, 215 (1997).Google Scholar
11. Gupta, T.K., Bechtold, J.H., Kuznicki, R.C., Cadoff, L. H., and Rossing, B. R., J. Mater. Sci., 12, 2421 (1977).Google Scholar