NMiP Coupled Modes

• Coupled modes ECE 6006 Numerical Methods in Photonics
– Derivation
Coupled modes
Motivation
We have found that Fourier propagation in free space,
Bloch modes in multi-layer media and modal propagation
in waveguides are all variations of the eigenmode
expansion method. The only requirement was that we
could solve the wave equation for a set of modes that
propagated into the material with only an eigenvalue e-j β z.
We have shown that these functions must form a complete,
orthogonal set and thus any field can be broken down into
a set of amplitudes (aka “transformed into the eigemode
basis”) and propagated arbitrarily far using the eigenvalue
spectrum, β.
To handle materials which had arbitrary variation in depth,

we used the eigenfunctions of the unperturbed (aka
homogeneous) medium as a basis but we let the
amplitudes vary as a function of z (aka method of
undetermined coefficients). We then assumed that the
perturbation was weak enough to not significantly change
the incident field (aka “Born”, “undepleted pump”, “first-
order perturbation”, “single scattering limit”), resulting in
the k-space technique. Now we will remove that
assumption.
Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 338
– Derivation
Coupled modes
Foundation
Recall the solution for propagation in a homogeneous space
E ( t, x, y, z ) = F −1
txy {F txy ⎡⎣ E ( t, x, y,0 ) ⎤⎦ e
Solutions of Booker quartic
(
− jkz ω ,kx ,ky z )
}
We then let there be a inhomogeneous perturbation:
! ! ! ! ! !
(
D = ε 0ε H ∗t E + PIH ) where
! !
PIH ( t, r ) = ε 0ε IH ( t, r ) ∗t E ( t, r )
resulting in the inhomogeneous wave equation
Unperturbed wave equation Perturbation driving scattering
! 1 ∂2 ! ∂2 !
∇ × ∇ × E + 2 2 ε H ∗E = − µ0 2 PIH (t , x, y, z )
c ∂t ∂t
and we then used the method of “undetermined coefficients” in which the amplitudes
of the unperturbed eigenfunctions are allowed to vary with distance:
ε (ω , k , k , z = 0 ) = F ⎡⎣ E (t, x, y,0 )⎤⎦

x y txy
E ( t, x, y, z ) = F { ε (ω , k , k , z ) e ( }
!
−1 )
− jkz ω , kT z
txy x y
Which yielded an ordinary DE for the variation of these amplitudes with distance z:
dε dε !
{ (t, x, y, z )} e
2 2
k
− 2 jk =− F 0
P jkz z
dz 2
dz εz
0
txy IH

– Derivation
Coupled modes
Set up and notation
To get the k-space (aka “Born”, “undepleted pump”, “first-order perturbation”,
“single scattering limit”) solution, we assumed a) slowly varying envelopes such
that
Envelope of the field (e-j kz z factored out)
d2 ε d
<< 2k z
ε
aka “modal amplitudes” of the plane wave modes.
dz 2 dz
and b) that the incident field was unperturbed such that
! ! !
PIH (t , r ) ≈ ε 0ε IH (t , r )∗t E 0 (t , r )
which allowed us to write the simple DE for the envelope of the diffracted (aka
“scattered”, “first perturbation term”) field
dε1
2 jkz = k02 Ftxy {ε IH ( t, x, y, z ) ∗t E 0 ( t, x, y, z )} e jkz z
dz
Total incident field (has plane-wave carrier)
First, let’s write the FT as a general transform to a set of eigenfunctions of the wave
equation: Amplitudes of modes Eigenfunction of WE, inc bound
E (t , x, y ) = ∫∫∫ε (ω ′, k x′ , k ′y )Ψ (t , x, y;ω ′, k x′ , k ′y )dω ′ dk x′ dk ′y
∫∫∫ E (t , x, y )Ψ (t , x, y;ω , k , k )dtdxdy Mult both sides by Ψ* and integrate

∗
x y
= ∫∫∫∫∫∫ε (ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )Ψ (t , x, y;ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )dω ′ dk ′ dk ′ Ψ (t , x, y;ω , k , k )dtdxdy

x y x y x y
∗
x y
= ∫∫∫ε (ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )[∫∫∫ Ψ (t , x, y;ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )Ψ (t , x, y;ω , k , k )dtdxdy ]dω ′ dk ′ dk ′

x y x y
∗
x y x y
= ∫∫∫ε (ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )δ (ω − ω ′)δ (k − k ′ )δ (k − k ′ )dω ′ dk ′ dk ′

x y x x y y x y
= ε (ω , k , k )
x y
Orthogonality of modes
ε (ω , k , k ) = Ψ (t , x, y;ω , k , k ) E (t , x, y )
x y x y Expansion of E(t,x,y) in modes Ψ

– Derivation
Coupled modes
Typical applications
The functions Ψm(t,x,y) + Ψ(t,x,y;w,kx,ky) are the complete set of
eigenmodes of the “unperturbed” system. Examples:
1) Free space filled with a holographic grating.

The eignemodes and of free space are 2
⎛ω
Ψ (t , x, y;ω , k x , k y ) = e ( )
(
j ωt − j k x x + k y y ) kz = ⎜
⎞
µε ⎟ − k x2 + k y2
⎝c ⎠
and the projection into these modes is the Fourier transform:
Ftxy { E } = Ψ E = ∫∫∫ E ( t, x, y, z ) e (
− jω t+ j kx x+ky y )dtdxdy
2) Waveguides with cross-talk

The eignemodes of the individual, uncoupled waveguides are found with a mode
solver. The eigenvalues, β(w,kx,ky) = N k0 also are found with the mode solver.
The projection into these modes generally has no simple numerical form such as the
FFT
ε m = Ψm (t , x, y ) E and ε (ω, k , k ) = Ψ (t , x, y;ω, k , k ) E
x y x y
1 1
m=0 m=1
N=1.59488 N=1.57961
E [AU]
E [AU]
0 0
-10 -5 0 5 10 -10 -5 0 5 10
x [µm] x [µm]

– Derivation
Coupled modes
Derivation (1)
We can thus rewrite our first-order DE for the amplitudes with the
notation changes
Single subscript m represents the
ε m = Ψm (t , x, y ) E discrete mode numbers plus all of the
the continuous radiation modes.
kz ⇒ β
as Inhomogeneous polarization created
d εm
by total field E and inhomogeneous
εIH projected
2 j βm = −k02 Ψm ε IH E e jβ m z dielectric perturbationinto mode Ψm
dz
There’s no new physics in this yet. Note that the only approx is the
SVEA. The equation states that the amplitude of the mth mode of the
electric field grows in proportion to the polarization field generated by the
total electric field E projected onto the mth mode, Ψm. The trouble is, we
still don’t know the evolution of the total field E. Let’s approximate E as
a discrete sum of a finite number of eigenmodes with amplitudes that are
allowed to vary in z:
E (ω , x, y, z ) ≈ ∑ ε i (z )Ψi (ω , x, y )e − jβ i z
Same method used for k-
space derivation
i
and substitute this into our equation for the envelope of mode m, above
d εm
dz
=−j
k02
∑
2β m i
Ψm ε IH Ψi ε (z )e (
i
j β m − β i )z
ENVELOPE
FORM OF CM
= − j ∑ κ m ,i (z )ε i (z )e j (β m − β i )z
EQUATIONS
i
k02
where the mode coupling constant κ is defined κ m,i (z ) ≡ Ψm ε IH Ψi
2β m
– Derivation
Coupled modes
Derivation (2)
If the perturbation εIH is independent of z then κm,i is a constant. It would
be nice to have only ordinary, constant coefficient differential equations
in this case. Thus, the coupled mode equations are usually written in
terms of the field amplitude with the plane-wave carrier included:
u m ( z ) ≡ ε m ( z ) e − jβ m z
which puts the coupled-mode equations in their FIELD form:

d um k02
= − jβ mum (z ) − j ∑ κ m ,i (z )ui (z ) κ m , i (z ) ≡ Ψm ε IH Ψi
dz i≠m
2β m
Assumes normalized modes

Ψn Ψm = δ n , m
Interpretation of this equation.

d εm
= − j ∑ κ m ,i (z )ε i (z )e j (β m − β i )z ENVELOPE FORM
dz i
•  Each modal envelope is driven by all the others through a complex coupling
coefficient
κ m , i ( z )e
j (β m − β i )z
•  If this coefficient is real and constant in z, the envelope εm will grow linearly
with distance, assuming the envelope εi is undepleted. This is our k-space
solution.
•  For self coupling (κm,m) the coupled field is in quadrature with the incident, so
the amplitude is conserved but the phase changes, essentially changing βm.
•  To be real and constant, the perturbation must be Bragg matched (aka
“conserve momentum”, “phase-matched”)
! ! !
κ m,i ( )
z ∝e − j (β m − β i )z or K = k Diff − k Inc which is Bragg matching
Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado m i 343

– Solutions
Two coupled modes

with uniform coupling
The equations for the field amplitudes u m (z ) ≡ ε (z ) e
m
− jβ m z
are

d
u0 = − jβ 0u0 − jκ u1
dz where
κ = κ1, 2 = κ 2,1
κ

d
u1 = − jβ1u1 − jκ u0
dz
which have simple solutions:

cos 2 (g z ) + γ 2
2
⎛ β − β1 ⎞
I 0 (z ) ≡ u0 (z ) g2 ≡ κ 2 + ⎜ 0
2
= ⎟
1+ γ 2 ⎝ 2 ⎠
where

sin (g z )
2
(β − β ) 2
I1 (z ) ≡ u1 (z ) = γ≡ 0 1
2
1+ γ 2 κ
Coupling vs. distance
1
I0

I / I0(0)
Zc
γ=0

I1
γ=1

0 γ=10

0 1 2 3 π

zg
– Solutions
Specific case: 2 || guides

Problem
Two slab waveguides of 8 µm width, δn = .01, nclad = 1.5, λ0 = 1 µm
k0 Ψ0 (x − 5µm) ε IH (x ) Ψ0 (x + 5µm)
κ (z ) ≡
2 N eff Ψ0 Ψ0
Normalization
1
NA = δε = 0.173
V = 4.36 = .0002329 µm -1 Via numerical
integration
Ψ0 (x )
N eff = 1.50914
π
Zc = = 6.745 mm
2κ
0
-10 -5 0 5 10
x [µm]
Ψ0 (x − 5) cos(κ z ) − Ψ0 (x + 5) sin(κ z )
0
20
20
Slight inaccuracy of
coupled modes:
ε IH (x )
modes isolated
guides are slightly
narrower than those
10
10
of the 2-guide
system, which will
x [μm]

overestimate the
coupling length.
00
Assumption of
coupled modes is
that coupling is -10
-10
weak enough that

modes nearly
unchanged.
-20
-20
00 22 44 66 88 10
10
z [mm]
– Solutions
Coupled mode
vs. BPM
Create two appropriate slab guides in 1+1 D BPM. Let’s assume we
don’t have a general mode solver around, so we’ll use the analytic result
of the variational technique to pick the best Gaussian to launch:
ρ 4
r0 = = = 2.18 µ m
V −1 4.36 − 1
Expect V/(π/2)+1 = 3 modes. Z c ≈ 6.9 mm
“Fuzz” is higher-order excitation.
It’s odd, so excited some m=1.
20
2 10
⎛ x −5 µ m ⎞
−⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
⎝ 2.18 µ m ⎠
e
x [µm]

0
Higher order
modes are more
tightly confined
and thus coupling -10
distance is
predicted to be
longer.
-20
0 2 4 6 8 10
Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado
z [mm] 346
– Solutions
Coupled mode
vs. Eigenmode expansion
Use single slab waveguide solver to find properties of both guides
Lowest antisymmetric Lowest symmetric

3 3.5
NAS =1.50911 NS = 1.50919
E [AU]
E [AU]
0
-3 0
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
x [µm] x [µm]
ΨS (x)e− jk0 NS z + ΨAS (x)e− jk0 N AS z
20
20
k 0 N A Z c − k 0 N AS Z c = π
∴
λ0 10
10
Zc = = 6.651 mm
2 ΔN
x [µm]

This solution is 00
exact. Note
however it
depends on
accuracy of N -10
-10
quite critically.
-20
-20
00 2
2 44 6
6 8
8 10
10
z [mm]
– Solutions
N+1 nearest neighbor-coupled modes

Coupled mode equations:
κ

∂
u 0 = − jβ 0 u 0 − jκ u1
∂z κ
Closed-form solution via
∂ Mathematica which is sum of
u n = − jβ n u n − jκ (u n −1 + u n +1 ) sines and cosines of various
∂z κ

periods.

∂
u N = − jβ N u N − jκ u N −1
∂z κ

•  If this describes Gaussian modes

Coupling vs. distance N+1=5
in Gaussian gradient-index
1
I2
guides, we can use the
variational solutions to give
analytic forms for β and κ.
I/I0
I0,4

•  Similarly, if these coupled modes
I1,3
were plane waves in a volume
0
hologram, we could write for β
0 2 4 6 8 and κ analytically.
z κ



1 1
I3
I4

I/I0
I/I0
I1,5

I0,5
I2,6

I2,4
I3,5
I0,8
I1,7

0 0
0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15
z κ
z κ

These should be periodic on a longer distance scale.

– Solutions
Effect of phase mismatch

Perfect phase matching
60

E(x,z) via BPM
I(x,z=5 mm)
1
Index
x [µm]

I (5 mm)
0

I/I0 , δn
0
-60
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
x [µm]

0 1 2 3 4 5
z [mm]

Imperfect phase matching

60

E(x,z) via BPM I(x,z=5 mm)
1
Index
I (5 mm)
x [µm]

I/I0 , δn
0
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
x [µm]

-60

0 1 2 3 4 5
z [mm]
– Solutions
Two coupled waves in a

volume hologram
x
Consider a thick sinusoidal index grating
uinc
δn + jKy
!
n(r ) = n0 + δn cos Ky = n0 +
2
e (
+ e − jKy )
! !
(
ε r (r ) = ε H + ε IH = n 2 (r ) ≈ n02 + n0 δn e + jKy + e − jKy ) udiff
ε IH ≈ n0 δn e + jKy kx z
The coupling constant for two Bragg matched waves

kinc
is thus
K β

(2π λ0 ) 2
π δn kdiff
κ= (n0 δn ) =
(2π λ0 ) n0 cosθ λ0 cosθ β inc − β diff
Using our two coupled mode solution from previous slide

2
cos (g z ) + γ
2 2 ⎛ β inc − β diff ⎞
I inc (z ) ≡ u inc (z ) = g ≡ κ + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
2 2 2
1+ γ 2 ⎝ 2 ⎠
I diff (z ) ≡ u diff (z )
2
=
sin 2 (g z ) (β inc − β diff ) 2
γ ≡
1+ γ 2 κ
If the coupling is weak (κ << 1) these become
cos 2 (g z ) + γ 2 γ2
I inc (z ) = ⎯κ⎯
⎯→ 2 = 1 Incident is not depleted
1+ γ 2 →0
γ
sin 2 (g z ) (g z ) = (κ z )2
2
Diffracted field grows
I diff (z ) ≡ u1 (z )
2
= ⎯⎯ ⎯
κ →0
→ linearly with z
1+ γ 2 γ2
which is the k-space solution

– Solutions
Four coupled waves in

a volume hologram (1)
Coupled mode equations:
x u-1
∂
u −1 = − jβ −1, 2 u −1 − jκ u 0
∂z κ
u0
∂
u 0 = − jβ 0,1u 0 − jκ u −1 − jκ u1
∂z
κ

∂ u1
u1 = − jβ 0,1u1 − jκ u 0 − jκ u 2
∂z
κ

∂
u 2 = − jβ −1, 2 u 2 − jκ u1 z
∂z ⎛ 2π ⎞ ⎛ λ ⎞ u2
λ0 = 1 µm, Λ = 2 µm, n = 1.5 + .01 cos⎜ x ⎟,θ inc = sin −1 ⎜ ⎟
⎝ Λ ⎠ ⎝ 2Λ ⎠
1 kx
k-1
0.1 ko
K β

I/I0
0.01 k1
k2
0.001
0 100 200 300 400 500
z [µm]

⎛ 2π ⎞ ⎛ λ ⎞
1 ⎝ Λ ⎠ ⎝ 2Λ ⎠
Longer period grating

0.1 causes higher orders to be
less Bragg mismatched.
I/I0
Note lack of 100%

0.01 coupling in +1 order as
depth grows.
0.001
0 100 200 300 400 500
z [µm]

– Solutions
Four coupled waves in

a volume hologram (2)
⎛ 2π ⎞ ⎛ λ ⎞ x u-1
λ0 = 1 µm, Λ = 10 µm, n = 1.5 + .001cos⎜ x ⎟,θ inc = sin −1 ⎜ ⎟
1 ⎝ Λ ⎠ ⎝ 2Λ ⎠
u0
0.1
I/I0
u1
0.01
z
0.001 u2
0 100 200 300 400 500
z [µm]

kx
⎛ 2π ⎞ ⎛ λ ⎞
1 ⎝ Λ ⎠ ⎝ 2Λ ⎠
k-1
ko
0.1 K β

I/I0
k1
0.01 k2
0.001
0 100 200 300 400 500
z [µm]

⎛ 2π ⎞ ⎛ λ ⎞
λ0 = 1 µm, Λ = 10 µm, n = 1.5 + .01 cos⎜ x ⎟, θ inc = sin −1 ⎜ ⎟ As δn increases, coupling
1 ⎝ Λ ⎠ ⎝ 2Λ ⎠
length Zz decreases,
suppressing Bragg
0.1 mismatching of higher
orders. Note breakdown
I/I0
of basic periodicity in δn
0.01 = .01 case, left.
0.001
0 100
200 300 400 500
z [µm]

• Summary ECE 6006 Numerical Methods in Photonics
Finite difference solution

of the coupled mode equations
Let’s try to write a finite-difference version of the field form of the coupled mode
equations:
d um
= − jβ mum (z ) − j ∑ κ m ,i (z )ui (z ) FIELD form of CM equations
dz i≠m
u (z + Δz ) − um (z − Δz ) Centered finite difference

≈ m
2 Δz
⎡ ⎤
um (z + Δz ) ≈ um (z − Δz ) − 2 Δz ⎢ jβ mum (z ) + j ∑ κ m ,i (z )ui (z )⎥ Update equation
⎣ i≠m ⎦
This has a major problem: the mode fields u oscillate with period 2 π / β requiring
step size, Δz be significantly less.
Let’s instead use the envelope form of the equations

d εm
= − j ∑ ε i ( z )κ m,i ( z ) e j( β m −βi )z
dz i≠m
≈
ε ( z + Δz ) − ε ( z − Δz )
m m
2Δz
ε ( z + Δz ) = ε ( z − Δz ) − 2 jΔz∑ ε ( z )κ ( z ) e (
m m i m,i
j β m − β i )z
i≠m
This allows us to advance the envelope of the modal fields in z. We need to keep
at least two space steps (z and z – Δz). Let’s first try this for a small number of
waveguide modes…

– FD solution
Finite difference solution

of the coupled mode equations
∂
∂z
ε −1 = − jκ ε 0 e
j ( β 0 − β −1 )
∂ Envelope version of the field coupled

∂z
ε 0 = − jκ ε 1 − jκ ε −1e
− j ( β 0 − β −1 )
mode equations. Finite difference these
∂ DE’s per the last slide and integrate
∂z
ε 1 = − jκ ε 0 − j κ ε 2 e
− j ( β 0 − β −1 )
forward
∂
∂z
ε 2 = − jκ ε 1e
j ( β 0 − β −1 )
•  Exact solution from previous (solid lines), FD solution with Δz = 1 µm, points.
•  Execution time for 500 iterations in Mathematica = 0.11 seconds
⎛ 2π ⎞ ⎛ λ ⎞
λ0 = 1 µm, Λ = 10 µm, n = 1.5 + .01 cos⎜ x ⎟, θ inc = sin −1 ⎜ ⎟
⎝ Λ ⎠ ⎝ 2Λ ⎠
1
0.1
I/I0
0.01
0.001
0 100 200 300 400 500
z [µm]


• K-space BPM ECE 6006 Numerical Methods in Photonics
K-space beam prop

or “massively coupled modes”
Let the modes be a regularly sampled set of plane waves like we used in Fourier
propagation and FFT BPM. Our <|> will turn back into a Fourier transform:
k02
κ m ,i ( z ) ≡ Ψi ε IH Ψm
2k z , m
k02 ( ) ( )
∫∫ e ε IH (x, y, z )e
− j k x ,i x + k y ,i y j k x ,m x + k y ,m y
= dx dy
2 k z (k x ,m , k y ,m )
k02 ( )
j (k x ,m − k x ,i )x + j k y ,m − k y ,i y
= ∫∫ e ε IH (x, y, z )dx dy
2 k z (k x ,m , k y ,m )
k02
= ε IH (k x ,m − k x ,i , k y ,m − k y ,i , z )
2 k z (k x ,m , k y ,m )
This is an intriguing equation. Let’s compare to the forward k-space equation from
earlier.
! !
ε (k , k , L) = − j
1
x y
k02 L
2 k 2 − kx2 − ky2
ε IH ( kDiff − kInc )ε 0
We see, again, that the object can be decomposed into a set of gratings via the FT.
Each of those gratings scatters the incident field into the diffracted if and only if
momentum is conserved. That is
! ! ! ! ! !
k Obj = kDiff − kInc kDiff = kInc + k Obj
The main difference with the coupled mode approach is that we are letting each
infinitesimal layer z diffract, changing the magnitude of the envelopes
Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado R.K. Kupka, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, V12, N2, Feb 1995, pg 404 355
K-space BPM
Let’s plug this coupling constant for the complete set of Fourier envelopes into the
coupled-mode equations
(
d ε kx,m , ky,m , z ) =−j
dz
∑ ∑ κ (k x,m , ky,m , kx,i , ky,i , z )ε ( k x,i )
, ky,i , z e (
j kz ,m −kz ,i )z
kx ,i ky,i
i≠m
∑ ∑ ε (k )ε ( k )
k02
, ky,i , z e (
j kz ,m −kz ,i )z
=−j − kx,i , ky,m − ky,i , z
(
2kz kx,m , ky,m ) kx ,i ky,i
i≠m
IH x,m x,i
or, if we wrote this for the fields with their carriers u ( kx , ky , z ) ≡ ε ( kx , ky , z ) e− jk z z
(
d u k x,m , k y,m , z ) = − jk ( k )( ) ) ( ) ( )
k02
, k y,m u k x,m , k y,m , z + j ε IH kx , ky , z ∗kx ,ky u kx,i , ky,i , z
dz
z x,m
(
2kz k x,m , k y,m
which now looks remarkably like our k-space equation except the field amplitudes
are allowed to vary in the propagation direction. Note that we can’t quite implement
the entire process as a convolution. If we could, then it would be possible to
transform back to real space and use multiplication.
In summary, we see that every plane wave component i scatters into every other
plane wave component m with a strength proportional to the Fourier transform of the
inhomogeneity evaluated at k x ,m − k x ,i and z.
kx kx
ki ki
ε IH (k x ,1 − k x ,i , z )
kz kz
k1 k1 ε IH (k x , 2 − k x ,i , z )
k2 k2
k z ,i − k z , 2
K-space BPM
Algorithm
For convenience, write the sum on the RHS as a single subscript i. We can then
formulate the equation as a matrix multiply.
!
ε(
d km , z )
dz
=−j
k02
∑
2kz,m i
(
ε IH kx,m − kx,i , ky,m − ky,i , z )ε ( j ⎡ k −k ⎤ z
)
kx,i , ky,i , z e ⎣ z ,m z ,i ⎦
This is our typical transcendental problem. Consider a small step in z such that the
envelopes on the RHS do not significantly change that is, make the Born
approximation but only for a finite step in z. Perform the integral in z and cast it as
a Fourier transform via the same trick used for the k-space derivation:
! ⎧ ⎡ z- ( z ′ + Δz / 2 ) ⎤ ⎫ Assumed constant
( )
ε IH k, z ′ ≡ F xyz ⎨ε IH ( x, y,z ) rect ⎢
⎣ Δz ⎥⎬
⎦
so taken outside FT
⎩ ⎭ integral
! !
ε( ) (
km , z ′ + Δz = ε km , z ′ − j ) k02
2kz,m i
( ) ( )
∑ ε IH kx,m − kx,i , ky,m − ky,i , kz , z′ kz =kz ,m −kz ,i ε kx,i , ky,i , z′
! ! ! ! !
(
= ε km , z ′ − j ) k02
2kz,m i
∑ ( ) ( ) ( )
ε IH km − ki , z ′ ε kx,i , ky,i , z ′ = ε km , z ′ − j κ ε ki , z ′( )
Phase matching for two cases |εIH(Kx,Kz)|
kx kx
! !
km km
Kz [1/µm]
kz kz
! !
km ki
! !
ki km
357
Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado Kx [1/µm]
1+1D Bragg grating

! ⎧ ⎡ z- ( z ′ + Δz / 2 ) ⎤ ⎫
ε IH ( )
k, z ′ ≡ F xyz ⎨ε IH ( x, y,z ) rect ⎢
⎣ Δz ⎥⎬
⎦⎭
⎩
! !
!
nIH ( r ) = δ n cos K ⋅ r( )
! !
!
( ) ( )
!! !!
ε IH ( r ) = 2n0δ n cos K ⋅ r = n0δ n e − jK⋅r
+e jK⋅r
!
( ) ( ) (
ε IH k, z ′ = n0δ n Δz δ ( kx ± K x )δ ky ± K y sinc ( kz ± K z ) Δz2 e ( z z )
j k ±K z ′
)
In BPM implementation using fields, final exp(j kz z) term dropped.
Kz
2π Δz
Kx
k x k0
k z k0
1+1D Bragg unslanted grating

Shape of κ

! ! !
ε( ) ( )
km , z ′ + Δz = ε km , z ′ − j κ ε( ki , z ′ )
Bragg matched Normal incidence
kx kx
K x k0
!
! k +1 !
K x 2k0 k1
K
! !
θ1 K k0
kz kz
θ0
! !
−K x 2k0 k0 ! −K
k −1
− K x k0
K x k0
K x 2k0
− K x k0 K x k0 = 0.213
k x,i / k0
− K x 2k0

K-BPM results
E ( x, z )
Incident beam =
Gaussian with w0
= 200 mirons
E ( kx , z )
λ0 = 532 nm
n0 = 1.5 Diffracted
L = 500 µm
δ n = λ0 cos
2L
θ0
= 5.3066 × 10 −4
Λ = 2.5 µm
θ 0 = sin −1 ( λ0 2n0 Λ ) Incident
δ x ≈ 1µ m
δ z = 2.5 µ m


K-BPM vs. coupled modes
kx
!
k1
!
θ1 K
kz
θ0
!
k0
PInc ≠ 0
Entire beam not Bragg matched.

Coupled modes (2 modes only) over-simplifies.

Coupled mode solution

for unslanted grating
Transmission
⎛ Lκ cosθ i ⎛ Δk ⎞ ⎞
2
⎛ cosθ i ⎛ Δk ⎞ ⎞
2
η = sin 2 ⎜ 1+ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ cosθ ⎜⎝ 2κ ⎟⎠ ⎟
1+
⎝ cosθ i cosθ d cosθ d ⎝ 2κ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ d ⎠
1.0
kL
0.8 cosqi cosqd
2p
0.6 pê2
pê4
h
0.4
0.2
0.0
-10 -5 0 5 10
cosqi Dk
kx
cosqd k
K x 2k0 !
k1
! Z Bragg mismatch for angular tuning
θ1 K
kz Δk = n0 k0 ⎡⎣ cos (θ 0 + δθ ) − cos (θ 0 ) + cos (θ 1 + δθ ) − cos (θ 1 ) ⎤⎦
θ 0
!0
−K x 2k0 k
πδn
κ=
cosθ 1λ0

Coupled mode solution

for unslanted grating
Reflection
1
η=
⎡ cosθ i ⎛ Δk ⎞ ⎤
2 ⎛ Lκ cosθ i ⎛ Δk ⎞ ⎞
2
2
1+ ⎢1− ⎜⎝ ⎟⎠ ⎥ csch ⎜ 1− ⎜ ⎟ ⎟
⎣ cosθ d 2κ ⎦ ⎝ cosθ i cosθ d cosθ d ⎝ 2κ ⎠ ⎠
1.0
kL
0.8 cosqi cosqd
2p
0.6 pê2
pê4
h
0.4
0.2
0.0
-10 -5 0 5 10
cosqi Dk
cosqd k


K-BPM vs. k-space & CM
Matches k-space in
weak limit
k-space still
reasonably
accurate at 100%
efficiency

1+1D Bragg slanted grating

kx !
ε IH ( ) ( ) ( )
k, z ′ = n0δ n Δz δ ( kx ± K x )δ ky ± K y sinc ( kz ± K z ) Δz2 e ( z z )
j k ±K z ′
!
k1
θK
θ 1
! kz
K
!0 θ
0
Bragg matching of tilted grating
tan θ K = K z K x k x,i / k0
⎛ λ ⎞ ⎛K ⎞
θ 0 = − sin −1 ⎜ 0 ⎟ − tan −1 ⎜ z ⎟
⎝ 2nΛ ⎠ ⎝ Kx ⎠
Grating efficiency now correct with grating slant.
⎛ λ ⎞ ⎛K ⎞
θ 1 = + sin −1 ⎜ 0 ⎟ − tan −1 ⎜ z ⎟
⎝ 2nΛ ⎠ ⎝ Kx ⎠
Solves 1/cos(θ) problem of BPM
!
ε IH ( ) (
k, z ′ = n0δ n Δz δ ( kx ± K x )δ ky ± K y sinc ( kz ± K z ) ) (Δz j( kz ±K z )z ′
2 )e
! ⎡ 2π 2π ⎤
K=⎢ , ⎥
⎣ 2.5 µ m 25 µ m ⎦


Energy conservation
δ z = 5.00 µ m
δ z = 2.50 µ m
δ z = 1.25 µ m
! ! ! !
ε( km , z ′ + Δz )=ε( )
km , z ′ − j
k02
(
∑ IH m − ki , z′
2kz,m i
ε k )ε ( k x,i , ky,i , z ′ )
Born approximation
Perturbation series will add power proportional to z step size.
This problem is worse for dense coupling (e.g. waveguide).

NMiP Coupled Modes

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

NMiP Coupled Modes

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

• Coupled modes ECE 6006 Numerical Methods in Photonics

To handle materials which had arbitrary variation in depth,

ε (ω , k , k , z = 0 ) = F ⎡⎣ E (t, x, y,0 )⎤⎦

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 339

∫∫∫ E (t , x, y )Ψ (t , x, y;ω , k , k )dtdxdy Mult both sides by Ψ* and integrate

= ∫∫∫∫∫∫ε (ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )Ψ (t , x, y;ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )dω ′ dk ′ dk ′ Ψ (t , x, y;ω , k , k )dtdxdy

= ∫∫∫ε (ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )[∫∫∫ Ψ (t , x, y;ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )Ψ (t , x, y;ω , k , k )dtdxdy ]dω ′ dk ′ dk ′

= ∫∫∫ε (ω ′, k ′ , k ′ )δ (ω − ω ′)δ (k − k ′ )δ (k − k ′ )dω ′ dk ′ dk ′

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 340

1) Free space filled with a holographic grating.

2) Waveguides with cross-talk

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 341

Assumes normalized modes

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado m i 343

Two coupled modes

Specific case: 2 || guides

weak enough that

Lowest antisymmetric Lowest symmetric

N+1 nearest neighbor-coupled modes

• If this describes Gaussian modes

Coupling vs. distance N+1=7

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 348

Effect of phase mismatch

Imperfect phase matching

Two coupled waves in a

The coupling constant for two Bragg matched waves

Using our two coupled mode solution from previous slide

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 350

Four coupled waves in

Longer period grating

Note lack of 100%

Four coupled waves in

Finite difference solution

u (z + Δz ) − um (z − Δz ) Centered finite difference

Let’s instead use the envelope form of the equations

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 353

Finite difference solution

∂ Envelope version of the field coupled

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 354

K-space beam prop

or, if we wrote this for the fields with their carriers u ( kx , ky , z ) ≡ ε ( kx , ky , z ) e− jk z z

1+1D Bragg grating

1+1D Bragg unslanted grating

1+1D Bragg unslanted grating

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 360

1+1D Bragg unslanted grating

Entire beam not Bragg matched.

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 361

Coupled mode solution

0.8 cosqi cosqd

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 362

Coupled mode solution

0.8 cosqi cosqd

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 363

1+1D Bragg unslanted grating

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 364

1+1D Bragg slanted grating

Bragg matching of tilted grating

Robert R. McLeod, University of Colorado 365

1+1D Bragg unslanted grating

Você também pode gostar

• Coupled modes ECE 6006 Numerical Methods in Photonics

•  If this describes Gaussian modes