Research Article Vol. 3, No.

6 / 15 June 2020 / OSA Continuum 1650

Simple method for the characterization of

birefringence of single-mode optical fibers
A. R OJAS -S ANCHEZ * AND D. T ENTORI
Division de Física Aplicada, Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada,
Baja California, Carretera Ensenada-Tijuana No. 3918, Fraccionamiento Zona Playitas, Ensenada, C. P.
22860, Mexico
* arojas@cicese.edu.mx

Abstract: Over the past few decades, various laboratories have worked on non-destructive
methods for the evaluation of residual birefringence of single-mode optical fibers. Among
them, polarimetric methods allowing the measurement of polarization eigenmodes represent
the best option when it is necessary either to understand or to control the evolution of the
state of polarization of light along the fiber. In this work, we present a polarimetric technique
based on the use of Mueller calculus and the Poincaré sphere. This is a simple, precise, and
non-destructive method allowing the measurement of the azimuth and ellipticity angles of the
polarization eigenmode, as well as the total retardation angle modulus-π.

© 2020 Optical Society of America under the terms of the OSA Open Access Publishing Agreement

1. Introduction
For years, manufacturers of optical fibers have tried to improve the manufacturing processes
of optical fibers, to avoid imperfections in them [1–3]. However, the fibers exhibit internal
disturbances such as core ellipticity and internal stress, producing unwanted birefringence. Fiber
data sheets do not include the value of this residual birefringence. Therefore, it must be evaluated,
since it introduces differences in the propagation constants of the orthogonal polarization modes,
whose dispersion limits the performance of high bit rate communication systems [4], and modifies
the state of polarization (SOP) of the signal, deteriorating the measurement accuracy of optical
fiber sensors [5,6]. Moreover, in recent applications involving biological or medicine sensing
based on the use of polarization effects, the internal architecture of single-mode fibers is modified
[7,8]. Here again, their final birefringence requires to be measured using procedures adapted to
each specific case.
Due to the vector nature of light, to study the physical effects that modify the performance
of fiber devices, it is necessary to define a reference framework to be able to control and
evaluate the SOP of the signals that intervene in an optical system. Moreover, to develop an
accurate description of the problem, we should use a set of relationships coherent with each
other. Concerning optical fibers, this set of equations relate the magnitudes and phases of the
electric field components, the Jones vector, coherency matrix, Stokes parameters, Poincaré
sphere, polarization ratio, and the azimuth and ellipticity of the polarization ellipse. This set of
mathematical relations consistent with each other was developed in 1979 (Nebraska Convention)
[9], and using them; we can describe the alignment between the fiber birefringence and the state
of polarization of light.
Techniques developed to evaluate the birefringence of these low-birefringence fibers must
consider that the characterization of the ellipticity change of the output radiation alone does
not supply enough information on the birefringence parameters of the sample [10]. Therefore,
these methods should take into account the evolution of polarization under real conditions. In
the beginning, to describe the fiber birefringence, it was considered that linear birefringence
was the dominant contribution, and they included circular birefringence only for twisted fibers.
Another rarely mentioned contribution is of fast-axis rotation [1], a sort of low residual torsion

#383249 https://doi.org/10.1364/OSAC.383249
Journal © 2020 Received 15 Nov 2019; revised 18 Apr 2020; accepted 29 Apr 2020; published 12 Jun 2020
 Research Article Vol. 3, No. 6 / 15 June 2020 / OSA Continuum 1651

[11,12]. Following these ideas, measurement techniques typically assumed the samples presented
a residual linear birefringence. However, some authors proposed the fiber birefringence could be
described as a hybrid (non-homogeneous) combination [13] of a linear retarder and a circular
retarder [3] or as a homogeneous combination of linear and circular birefringence (elliptical
retarder, [14,15]).
To select the type of birefringence to be used, using classical polarization optics, we find
that for a short fiber length, attenuation can be considered negligible, and under this hypothesis,
the birefringence matrix should be unitary; i.e., the fiber behaves as a retarder [15]. According
to polarization optics, homogeneous retarders are the most straightforward description for
polarization retardation. Using Mueller matrix description and the Cartesian coordinate system
associated to Stokes vectors S1, S2, S3, these matrices correspond to rotation operators whose
rotation axis would be located, using the Cartesian coordinate system associated to Stokes vectors
S1, S2, S3, with its axis lying on 1) the S1-S2 plane, 2) the S3 axis, or 3) the rotation axis
could form an angle different from 0° or 90° with the S1-S2 plane. Using the Poincaré sphere
representation, it is easy to understand that the first rotation axis describes a linear birefringence,
the second one, a circular birefringence, and the third one, an elliptical birefringence, being
elliptical birefringence the general case of homogeneous retarders.
In 2005 Treviño et al. proposed an evaluation procedure allowing to verify if the fiber
retardation corresponded to a homogeneous retarder [16]. It is possible to determine if the type
of retardation presented by the fiber under study corresponds to a homogeneous retarder, using
this method, avoiding to assume apriori knowledge of the fiber birefringence, as is usually done.
In this work, we verified that the fiber exhibited an elliptical birefringence. Under this scope,
we present a simplification of the methods used to determine the polarization eigenmodes [14
and 17] of an elliptical retarder. In both references, to measure the elliptical angle of fiber
birefringence, it is necessary at first to determine the azimuthal angle of the fast polarization
axis. This critical step allows eliminating the effect of birefringence axes orientation on the
measurement [6]. Furthermore, the evaluation of the ellipticity angle required an additional
experiment based on the knowledge of the polarization eigenmode azimuth. The method we
propose allows the simultaneous estimation of the angles related to the polarization eigenmode
(ellipticity and azimuth) and the total retardation angle modulus-π using a single experiment,
reducing experimental complexity and improving measurement precision.
Typically, birefringence evaluation is limited to the measurement of polarization beat length
[18–20], an estimation of the distance over which the orthogonal polarization modes experience
one complete cycle of change. Generally, to evaluate this fiber length, researchers use complex
optical systems, involving various optical devices. So without a well-defined frame of reference,
they cannot tell if the measurement is being affected by the additional optical devices. Furthermore,
using these techniques, the orientation of the fast axis of the birefringence of the fiber is not
known.

2. Method
The experiment consists in measuring the output SOP in an SMF-28e fiber sample by varying the
azimuth angle of the linear input SOP from 0 to 180° (0.5° increments). As mentioned above, it
is necessary to generate an SOP to control the input SOP to the fiber sample; to achieve this, we
have the following components. In Section 1a), a tunable Hewlett Packard 8168C laser diode
was used as a light source and following this, a polarization controller was placed. The ears of
the controller were manipulated to generate a circular SOP. Behind, a polarizing prism (calcite
crystal) was aligned with the system to modify the circular SOP into a linear SOP with constant
power. In the experimental setup, both the prism polarizer and the coupler between the prism
and the optical fiber (C2) are automatically controlled by mechanical assemblies that allow us
to remove and reposition them in order to create the reference frame used by the polarization
 Research Article Vol. 3, No. 6 / 15 June 2020 / OSA Continuum 1652

analyzer, keeping the alignment. Furthermore, the polarizing prism is fixed to an automatically
operated rotation mount that controls the prism axis orientation, in order to define the azimuth
angle of the input linear SOP. In Fig. 1, the dotted line indicates that light is coupled by air to the
helically wound fiber optic sample shown in Section 2. Finally, the output SOP is measured with
an Agilent 8509C polarization analyzer.

Fig. 1. Experimental configuration used to characterize a helically wound SMF-28e sample.

Two samples of SMF-28e fiber of ∼1 m long with different jackets (0.9 Kevlar and 3 mm
yellow cable), the SMF-28e fiber attenuation is <0.18 dB/km at a wavelength of 1550 nm. The
fiber samples were wound helically, sample 1 in a coil of 5.2 cm in diameter and sample 2 in a
coil of 7.3 cm, so that the birefringence throughout each fiber was uniform. To guarantee that
the contribution of the polarization introduced by the torsion was negligible, we used a helix
pitch equal to the diameter of the fiber cable [21]. Sample 1 and 2 were measured using two
wavelengths; 1550 nm and 1560 nm. In all measurements the signal power was −32.2 dBm
(power at the fiber input), it is worth mentioning that for each measurement, a reference frame
was generated to ensure that the input SOP was linear.

2.1. Mathematical analysis

Assuming the fiber behaves as an elliptic homogeneous retarder and using Mueller calculus, the
output state of polarization (SOP) is
Sout = Mret Sin , (1)
where Mret is the matrix describing the homogeneous retarder. Using Mueller formalism
(following Nebraska convention [9,22]), Mret is given by
 
 1 0 0 0 
 
 0 1 − 2sin2 (2µ)sin2 δ2 sin2 δ2 sin(4µ)



sin(δ) sin(2µ)
Mret = 

  , (2)

 0 − sin(δ) sin(2µ) cos(δ) sin(δ) cos(2µ) 
 
sin2 δ2 sen(4µ) − sin(δ) cos(2µ) 1 − 2cos2 (2µ) sin2 δ2 



 0
 
and Sin is the Stokes vector of the input linear SOP and is given by
 
 1 
 
 
 cos(2α) 
Sin (α) =  .
 (3)
 sin(2α) 
 
 
 0 
 
In general, the azimuth angle of the fast birefringence axis of the retarder forms an angle θ
with the laboratory reference system, a consideration not included in Refs [14] and [17] that
 Research Article Vol. 3, No. 6 / 15 June 2020 / OSA Continuum 1653

simplifies our measuring procedure. Therefore, Eq. (1) must be

Sout 0 = R(−θ)Mret R(θ)Sin 0, (4)

where R(θ) is a rotation matrix, and is given by

 
 1 0 0  0
 
 
0 cos(2θ) sin(2θ) 0 
R(θ) = 

. (5)

 0 − sin(2θ) cos(2θ) 0 
 
 
 0 0 0 1 
 
Then output SOP is given by Eq. (6),

 1 

sen(2α) cos2 (2µ) sin2 δ2 sin(4θ) + sin(δ) sin(2µ) + cos(2α) cos(δ) sin2 (2θ) + cos2 (2θ) 1 − 2 sin2 δ2 sin2 (2µ)
 h   i h    i 
 
Sout 0 = 
 
, (6)
 cos(2α) cos2 (2µ) sin2 δ2 sin(4θ) − sin(δ) sin(2µ) + sin(2α) cos(δ)cos2 (2θ) + sin2 (2θ) 1 − 2 sin2 δ2 sin2 (2µ)
h   i h    i 

 
cos[2(α − θ)] sin2 δ2 sin(4µ) − cos(2µ) sin(δ) sin[2(α − θ)]
   
 
 

where δ is the total retardation, µ is the ellipticity angle of the retarder, θ is the azimuth angle of
the retarder fast birefringence axis, and α is the azimuth angle of the input linearly polarized SOP.

3. Measuring procedure
This article analyzes the evolution of the output SOP [Eq. (6)] when plotting Stokes vectors in
the Poincaré sphere. When the azimuth angle of the linear input SOP varies from 0 to 180 °, the
output SOP draws a great circle in the Poincaré sphere (Figs. 2–3), which intersects at two points
the equator of the sphere of Poincaré. These crossing points correspond to linear output SOPs.
The main objective of this work is to determine with a single experiment θ, µ, and δ. As in Refs
[14,17], the first parameter to be calculated is θ (azimuthal angle of the fast birefringence axis),
which is calculated through the following equation

(αout − 2αin )
2θ = 2αin + , (7)
2
where θ is the azimuthal angle of the fast birefringence axis, αin is the angle of the linear input
polarization state and αout is the azimuthal angle of the first output signal corresponding to a
linear SOP(S3out = 0).  
S2
αout = a tan . (8)
S1
We must consider the quadrant in which αout is located to avoid an incorrect result, e.g.
S2 / S1 = −S2 / −S1 , but they correspond to different values of the azimuth angle. Also, the angle
sign (positive or negative) should be taken into account. If the angle evolves counterclockwise, it
is considered as positive.
To obtain µ and δ with data collected from the same experiment used to determine θ, we use
some specific points of the measured great circle.
 Research Article Vol. 3, No. 6 / 15 June 2020 / OSA Continuum 1654

To determine µ, we use the point at which α = θ. For this point, Eq. (6) is reduced to the
following expression,
 
 1 
 
 cos(2θ) cos 2 + cos(4µ)sin2 δ2 + sin(δ) sin(2µ) sin(2θ)
  2 δ

 
Sout 0 = 

. (9)
 − cos(2θ) sin(δ) sin(2µ) + sin(2θ) cos2 δ2 + cos(4µ)sin2 δ2


 

 
sin2 δ2 sin(4µ)


 
 
From Eq. (9) it follows that,

1 − S1out cos(2θ) − S2out sin(2θ)

tan(2µ) = , (10)
S3out
where S1out , S2out and S3out correspond to Stokes parameters associated with the point where
α = θ.
Finally, to determine δ, we use a linear Sout 0, i.e. S3out = 0, and from Eq. (6),

δ
 
cos[2(α − θ)]sin2 sin(4µ) − cos(2µ) sin(δ) sin[2(α − θ)] = 0 (11)
2

Based on Eq. (11) it can be deduced that,

δ tan[2(α − θ)]
 
tan = (12)
2 sin(2µ)

4. Results
The fiber samples (∼1 m long) used in this work were standard fibers (SMF-28e) with different
jackets (0.9 µm Kevlar and 3 mm yellow cable). The output SOP for both fiber samples was
measured for two different wavelengths (1550 nm, and 1560 nm) varying the azimuth of the
input linear SOP from 0 to 180° (0.5° increment). Representing the output SOP on the Poincaré
sphere, we obtained a circular path whose position depends on the value of the input azimuth
angle (see Figs. 2 and 3). In all cases, these paths are major circles, since to obtain them, we
applied a rotation operator [Eq. (1)] to the circle corresponding to the Poincaré sphere equator.
In Figs. 2–3, the comparison between the experimental results and those calculated using the
values determined for θ, µ, and δ modulus-π in Eq. (6) are shown. In the figures shown below,
subscript E indicates experimental results and subscript S, theoretical results.
The birefringence parameters measured for sample 1 (900 µm jacket) were: for 1550 nm, θ
=-3.99°, µ=1.51° and δ =-143.19°, and for 1560 nm, θ =-4.45°, µ = 2.08° and δ =-142.58°.
While for sample 2 (3 mm jacket), the birefringence parameters were: for 1550 nm, θ =-8.49°,
µ=10.28° and δ = 95°; for 1560 nm, θ =-8.63°, µ = 10.73° and δ = 93.49°.
Based on the results shown in Figs. 2 and 3, we can see that the coincidence between the
experimental results and the simulation is excellent for the two signal wavelengths used. For
samples 1 and 2, the azimuth angle of the fast birefringence axis, ellipticity, and retardation angle
differ by less than 1° for both wavelengths. As expected, in both cases, these values are similar
due to the low polarization mode dispersion of this type of fiber. However, we observe that using
a larger diameter coil, the fluctuation of the signal decreases.
 Research Article Vol. 3, No. 6 / 15 June 2020 / OSA Continuum 1655

Fig. 2. Comparison between the simulation and the experimental result of the evolution of
the output SOP in a SMF-28e fiber sample (900 µm jacket) using a linear input SOP. The
sub-index E indicates experimental results, and sub-index S designates theoretical results.

Fig. 3. Comparison between the simulation and the experimental result of the evolution
of the output SOP in a SMF-28e fiber sample (3 mm jacket) using a linear input SOP. The
sub-index E indicates experimental results, and sub-index S designates theoretical results.

5. Conclusions
The non-destructive measurement procedure here proposed is simple and allows an accurate
determination of the parameters required to characterize the birefringence of the fiber. Using the
same set of data produced by an azimuthal scanning of the linear SOP of the input signal, it is
possible to calculate the azimuth angle of the fast axis, ellipticity angle, and total retardation
angle modulus-π. This outcome results from our theoretical description based on considering the
misalignment of the retarder fast birefringence axis with the laboratory reference system, using
relations that satisfy the Nebraska convention. The experimental verification performed for two
commercial optical fiber samples, SMF-28e, proves the accuracy of this technique.

Funding
Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada, Baja California
(F0F142).

Disclosures
The authors declare that there no conflict of interest related to this article.

References
1. A. M. Smith, “Automated birefringence measurement system,” J. Phys. E: Sci. Instrum. 12(10), 927–930 (1979).
 Research Article Vol. 3, No. 6 / 15 June 2020 / OSA Continuum 1656

2. S. C. Rashleigh, “Measurement of fiber birefringence by wavelength scanning effect of dispersion,” Opt. Lett. 8(6),
336–338 (1983).
3. A. J. Barlow, “Optical-fiber birefringence measurement using a photo-elastic modulator,” J. Lightwave Technol. 3(1),
135–145 (1985).
4. S. Singh and S. Singh, “Limitations on Hybrid WDM/OTDM Multicast Overlay System Imposed by Nonlinear
Polarization Effect and its Mitigation,” IEEE Photonics J. 9(6), 1–11 (2017).
5. E. Wolf, “Unified theory of coherence and polarization of random electromagnetic beams,” Phys. Lett. A 312(5-6),
263–267 (2003).
6. S. Xu, H. Shao, C. Li, F. Xing, Y. Wang, and W. Li, “A Linear Birefringence Measurement Method for an Optical
Fiber Current Sensor,” Sensors 17(7), 1556 (2017).
7. T. T. Nguyen, E. C. Lee, and H. Ju, “Bimetal coated optical fiber sensors based on surface plasmon resonance induced
change in birefringence and intensity,” Opt. Express 22(5), 5590–5598 (2014).
8. E. Klantsataya, P. Jia, H. Ebendorff-Heidepriem, T. Monro, A. François, S. Sukhbi, and S. Surinder, “Plasmonic fiber
optic refractometric sensors: from conventional architectures to recent design trends,” Sensors 17(1), 12 (2016).
9. P. S. Hauge, R. H. Muller, and C. G. Smith, “Conventions and formulas for using the Mueller-Stokes calculus in
ellipsometry,” Surf. Sci. 96(1-3), 81–107 (1980).
10. V. Ramaswamy, R. D. Standley, D. Sze, and W. G. French, “Polarization effects in short length, single mode fibers,”
Bell Syst. Tech. J. 57(3), 635–651 (1978).
11. D. Tentori, C. Ayala-Díaz, E. Ledezma-Sillas, F. Treviño-Martínez, and A. Garcia-Weidner, “Birefringence matrix
for a twisted single-mode fiber: Geometrical contribution,” Opt. Commun. 282(5), 830–834 (2009).
12. D. Tentori and A. Garcia-Weidner, “Right- and left-handed twist in optical fibers,” Rev. mex. fis. 60(1), 69–74 (2014).
13. S. Y. Lu and R. A. Chipman, “Homogeneous and inhomogeneous Jones matrices,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11(2), 766–773
(1994).
14. T. Chartier, A. Hideur, C. Özkul, F. Sanchez, and G. M. Stéphan, “Measurement of the elliptical birefringence of
single-mode optical fibers,” Appl. Opt. 40(30), 5343–5353 (2001).
15. D. S. Kliger, J. W. Lewis, and C. E. Randall, Polarized light in optics and spectroscopy (Academic Press, 1990).
16. F. Treviño-Martínez, D. Tentori, C. Ayala-Díaz, and F. J. Mendieta-Jiménez, “Birefringence assessment of single-mode
optical fibers,” Opt. Express 13(7), 2556–2563 (2005).
17. D. Tentori, C. Ayala-Díaz, F. Treviño-Martínez, and F. J. Mendieta-Jiménez, “Evaluation of the residual birefringence
of single-mode erbium-doped silica fibers,” Opt. Commun. 271(1), 73–80 (2007).
18. B. Huttner, J. Reecht, N. Gisin, R. Passy, and J. P. Von der Weid, “Local birefringence measurements in single-mode
fibers with coherent optical frequency-domain reflectometry,” IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 10(10), 1458–1460
(1998).
19. E. A. Kuzin, J. E. Ayala, B. I. Escamilla, and J. W. Haus, “Measurements of beat length in short low-birefringence
fibers,” Opt. Lett. 26(15), 1134–1136 (2001).
20. Y. Yang, W. Duan, and M. Ye, “High precision measurement technology for beat length of birefringence optical
fiber,” Meas. Sci. Technol. 24(2), 025201 (2013).
21. D. Tentori, C. Ayala-Díaz, and A. García-Weidner, “Birefringence Matrix for a Twisted Single-Mode Fiber:
Photoelastic and Geometrical Contributions,” Opt. Fiber Technol. 18(1), 14–20 (2012).
22. D. Tentori, A. Garcia-Weidner, and E. Kuzin, “On the birefringence evaluation of single-mode fibers,” Rev. mex. fis.
62(4), 381–392 (2016).