Journals Articles Conferences News About CLP
Submit a paper Email Alert
Search
Search
Articles
Journals
News
Advanced Search
Top Searches
2D MaterialsTransformation opticsQuantum PhotonicsSmall lasersSemiconductor UV PhotonicsSupersymmetric microring laser arrays

Acta Optica Sinica, Volume. 39, Issue 4, 0406002(2019)

Self-Assessment Technique for Fiber Optic Gyroscope Test Environment Based on Fourier Transform

Yuanyuan Liu*, Yongbin Yang, Wenshuai Feng, and Haicheng Yu
Author Affiliations
  • Beijing Aerospace Times Optical-Electronic Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing 100854, China
    • show less
    AbstractGet PDF(in Chinese)
    Figures&Tables (13)
    Equations (0)
    References (0)
    Cited By (1)
    Tools
    Paper Information
    Topics
    Figures & Tables(13)
    Basic structural diagram of a close-loop FOG

    Fig. 1. Basic structural diagram of a close-loop FOG

    Download full size
    Principal components and mechanisms of FOG affected by temperatures

    Fig. 2. Principal components and mechanisms of FOG affected by temperatures

    Download full size
    Test curves of FOG under environments 1 and 2. (a) Test environment 1; (b) test environment 2

    Fig. 3. Test curves of FOG under environments 1 and 2. (a) Test environment 1; (b) test environment 2

    Download full size
    Forms of Fourier transform

    Fig. 4. Forms of Fourier transform

    Download full size
    Results of Fourier transform of FOG under environments 1 and 2. (a) Test environment 1; (b) test environment 2

    Fig. 5. Results of Fourier transform of FOG under environments 1 and 2. (a) Test environment 1; (b) test environment 2

    Download full size
    FOG test curves and Fourier transform results under environments 3 and 4. (a) Test curves under test environment 3; (b) test curves under test environment 4; (c) Fourier transform result under test environment 3; (d) Fourier transform result under test environment 4

    Fig. 6. FOG test curves and Fourier transform results under environments 3 and 4. (a) Test curves under test environment 3; (b) test curves under test environment 4; (c) Fourier transform result under test environment 3; (d) Fourier transform result under test environment 4

    Download full size
    Test curves and Fourier transform results of pulsed FOG under environments 3 and 4. (a) Test curves under test environment 3; (b) test curves under test environment 4; (c) Fourier transform result under test environment 3; (d) Fourier transform result under test environment 4

    Fig. 7. Test curves and Fourier transform results of pulsed FOG under environments 3 and 4. (a) Test curves under test environment 3; (b) test curves under test environment 4; (c) Fourier transform result under test environment 3; (d) Fourier transform result under test environment 4

    Download full size

    • Table 1. Comparison of test results of FOG under environments 1 and 2

      View table

      Table 1. Comparison of test results of FOG under environments 1 and 2

      FOG test environmentBias stability (100 s, 1σ) /[(°)·h-1]Random walk coefficient /[10-4 (°)·h-1/2)]
      10.00142.1622
      20.00243.0867

    • Table 2. Comparison of mean value and standard deviation about frequency spectrum of FOG under environments 1 and 2

      View table

      Table 2. Comparison of mean value and standard deviation about frequency spectrum of FOG under environments 1 and 2

      FOG test environmentMean valueStandard deviation
      13.41592.6532
      231.727030.4750

    • Table 3. Comparison of test results of FOG under environments 3 and 4

      View table

      Table 3. Comparison of test results of FOG under environments 3 and 4

      FOG test environmentBias stability (100 s, 1σ) /[(°)·h-1]Random walk coefficient /[10-4 (°)·h-1/2)]
      30.00152.1565
      40.00192.8876

    • Table 4. Comparison of mean value and standard deviation about frequency spectrum of FOG under environments 3 and 4

      View table

      Table 4. Comparison of mean value and standard deviation about frequency spectrum of FOG under environments 3 and 4

      FOG test environmentMean valueStandard deviation
      34.3633.468
      410.0746.913

    • Table 5. Comparison of test results of pulsed FOG under environments 3 and 4

      View table

      Table 5. Comparison of test results of pulsed FOG under environments 3 and 4

      FOG test environmentBias stability /[100 s, 1σ, (°)·h-1]Random walk coefficient /[10-4 (°)·h-1/2)]
      30.00133.2654
      40.00213.8605

    • Table 6. Comparison of mean value and standard deviation about frequency spectrum of pulsed FOG under environments 3 and 4

      View table

      Table 6. Comparison of mean value and standard deviation about frequency spectrum of pulsed FOG under environments 3 and 4

      FOG test environmentMean valueStandard deviation
      363.08849.195
      476.21468.322
    Tools

    Get Citation

    Copy Citation Text

    Yuanyuan Liu, Yongbin Yang, Wenshuai Feng, Haicheng Yu. Self-Assessment Technique for Fiber Optic Gyroscope Test Environment Based on Fourier Transform[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2019, 39(4): 0406002

    Download Citation

    EndNote(RIS)BibTexPlain Text
    Set citation alerts for article
    Save article for my favorites
    Paper Information

    Category: Fiber Optics and Optical Communications

    Received: Oct. 14, 2018

    Accepted: Dec. 4, 2018

    Published Online: May. 10, 2019

    The Author Email:

    DOI:10.3788/AOS201939.0406002

    Topics

    laser devices and laser physics
    Lasers and Laser Optics
    Laser physics
    laser manufacturing
    Instrumentation, Measurement and Metrology