Meep Tutorial/Optical forces

From AbInitio

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 10:02, 1 October 2012 (edit)
Ardavan (Talk | contribs)

← Previous diff
Revision as of 10:09, 1 October 2012 (edit)
Ardavan (Talk | contribs)

Next diff →
Line 40: Line 40:
(set! k-point (vector3 0 0 beta)) (set! k-point (vector3 0 0 beta))
-Since we do not know apriori what the eigenmode frequency will be at any given separation distance, we first excite a spectrum of frequencies using a broadband point-dipole source positioned in the middle of each waveguides and then determine the resonant mode frequency using <code>harminv</code>. Since we are using a Bloch periodic boundary condition in the <code>z</code> direction, the excited mode (if any) will propagate indefinitely in time which is why we stop the simulation at a fixed <code>runtime</code> after the Gaussian sources have turned off.+Since we do not know apriori what the eigenmode frequency will be at any given separation distance, we first excite a spectrum of frequencies using a broadband point-dipole source positioned in the middle of each waveguides and then determine the resonant mode frequency using <code>harminv</code>. Since we are using a Bloch periodic boundary condition in the <code>z</code> direction, the excited mode (if any) will propagate indefinitely in time which is why we stop the simulation at a fixed <code>runtime</code> after the Gaussian sources have turned off (choosing a suitable <code>runtime</code> requires some care since larger values will in turn lead to larger fields which might cause instabilities in the floating-point arithmetic).
(define-param fcen 0.22) (define-param fcen 0.22)
Line 49: Line 49:
(make source (src (make gaussian-src (frequency fcen) (fwidth df))) (make source (src (make gaussian-src (frequency fcen) (fwidth df)))
(component Ey) (center (* 0.5 (+ s sw)) 0) (amplitude (if xodd? -1.0 1.0))))) (component Ey) (center (* 0.5 (+ s sw)) 0) (amplitude (if xodd? -1.0 1.0)))))
- (define-param runtime 300)+ (define-param runtime 200)
(run-sources+ runtime (run-sources+ runtime
(after-sources (harminv Ey (vector3 (* 0.5 (+ s sw)) 0) fcen df))) (after-sources (harminv Ey (vector3 (* 0.5 (+ s sw)) 0) fcen df)))
Line 91: Line 91:
Note that we have defined a single flux plane (spanning an area slightly larger than both waveguides) rather than two separate flux planes, one for each waveguide. This is because in the limit of small separation, two flux planes will overlap thus complicating the analysis whereas the total power through a single flux plane need, by symmetry, only be halved in order to determine the value for just one of the two waveguides. Also note that instead of defining a closed, four-sided box surrounding the waveguide for computing the MST, we chose instead to compute the MST along <i>two</i> <code>y</code>-oriented lines (with different <code>weight</code>s to correctly sum the total force), one on each side of the waveguide since by symmetry we need not consider the force in the <code>y</code> direction. Note that we have defined a single flux plane (spanning an area slightly larger than both waveguides) rather than two separate flux planes, one for each waveguide. This is because in the limit of small separation, two flux planes will overlap thus complicating the analysis whereas the total power through a single flux plane need, by symmetry, only be halved in order to determine the value for just one of the two waveguides. Also note that instead of defining a closed, four-sided box surrounding the waveguide for computing the MST, we chose instead to compute the MST along <i>two</i> <code>y</code>-oriented lines (with different <code>weight</code>s to correctly sum the total force), one on each side of the waveguide since by symmetry we need not consider the force in the <code>y</code> direction.
-We run this simulation over a range of separation distances and compare the result to that obtained from MPB which shows good agreement between the two methods. Note the presence of mainly repulsive forces for the anti-symmetric mode and mainly attractive forces for the symmetric mode.+We run this simulation over a range of separation distances and compare the result to that obtained from MPB which shows good agreement. Note the presence of mainly repulsive forces for the anti-symmetric mode and mainly attractive forces for the symmetric mode.
[[Image:Waveguide_forces.png|center|Normalized force per unit length and input power versus waveguide separation of two parallel waveguides.]] [[Image:Waveguide_forces.png|center|Normalized force per unit length and input power versus waveguide separation of two parallel waveguides.]]

Revision as of 10:09, 1 October 2012

Here we will demonstrate Meep's ability to compute classical forces using the Maxwell stress tensor (MST) as well as the eigenmode source feature which integrates the frequency-domain functionality of our other open-source tool MPB (note that this will require Meep 1.2 or greater). Our example consists of two identical dielectric waveguides (made of non-lossy silicon with a square cross section) supporting an identical mode while separated in space. Due to the symmetry and orientation of the waveguide profile, the two modes can be chosen to be either symmetric or anti-symmetric with respect to a mirror plane between them. As the two waveguides are brought closer and closer together, the individual guided modes interact more and more and give rise to an optical gradient force that is transverse to the waveguide axis (this is to be contrasted with radiation pressure that involves momentum exchange between photons and is longitudinal in nature). An interesting phenomena that occurs for this particular geometry is that the sign of the force can be tuned to be either attractive or repulsive depending on just the relative phase of the two modes which we will demonstrate in this tutorial.

The optical gradient force arising from the evanescent coupling of the modes of two adjacent structures can, in addition to the MST, be computed using the following analytic expression:

F=-\frac{1}{\omega}\frac{d\omega}{ds}\Bigg\vert_\vec{k}U,

where ω is the eigenmode frequency of the coupled-waveguide system, s is the separation distance between the parallel waveguides, k is the conserved wave vector and U is the total energy of the electromagnetic fields (for more details, see the original paper by Povinelli et al.). By convention, negative and positive values correspond to attractive and repulsive forces, respectively. This expression has been shown to be mathematically equivalent to the Maxwell stress tensor method and in this tutorial we will verify this result by Rakich et al. for the parallel-waveguide example. It is convenient to normalize the force so as to eliminate the tricky units altogether and since we know that the total power transmitted through the waveguide is P = vgU / L (vg is the group velocity, L is the waveguide length and U is defined as before), we focus instead on the following dimensionless quantity: force per unit length and power (F / L)(ac / P) (a is an arbitrary unit length and c is the speed of light).

We can therefore compute the optical gradient force in two ways, one indirect and the other direct: 1) using any frequency-domain solver (in our case MPB), we compute the eigenmode frequency (and corresponding group velocity) for a mode with a fixed propagating wavevector at a number of different separation distances and then use a finite-difference scheme to evaluate the above expression and 2) in Meep, we compute both the force using the MST and the power transmitted through the waveguide only at the frequency corresponding to the guided mode. In this particular example, we consider just the fundamental y-odd mode, which happens to clearly show the bi-directional features of the force.

First, let us set up the two-dimensional computational cell (although since we are interested in a propagating mode of the structure which requires an axial wavevector defined later on, technically we will have a three-dimensional simulation)

 (set-param! resolution 30)
 (define-param nSi 3.45)
 (define Si (make medium (index nSi)))
 (define-param dpml 1.0)
 (define-param sx 5)
 (define-param sy 3)
 (set! geometry-lattice 
     (make lattice (size (+ sx (* 2 dpml)) (+ sy (* 2 dpml)) no-size)))
 (set! pml-layers (list (make pml (thickness dpml))))
 (define-param sw 1.0) ; waveguide width
 (define-param s 1.0)  ; waveguide separation distance
 (set! geometry (list 
       (make block (center (* -0.5 (+ s sw)) 0)
             (size sw sw infinity) (material Si))
       (make block (center (*  0.5 (+ s sw)) 0)
             (size sw sw infinity) (material Si))))

There are two mirror symmetries that we can exploit to reduce the simulation size by a factor of four.

 (define-param xodd? true)
 (set! symmetries (list 
        (make mirror-sym (direction X) (phase (if xodd? -1 +1)))
        (make mirror-sym (direction Y) (phase -1))))

Next, we set the Bloch-periodic boundary condition in order to excite a specific guided mode of the waveguide system (corresponding to a wavevector of π / a)

 (define-param beta 0.5)
 (set! k-point (vector3 0 0 beta))

Since we do not know apriori what the eigenmode frequency will be at any given separation distance, we first excite a spectrum of frequencies using a broadband point-dipole source positioned in the middle of each waveguides and then determine the resonant mode frequency using harminv. Since we are using a Bloch periodic boundary condition in the z direction, the excited mode (if any) will propagate indefinitely in time which is why we stop the simulation at a fixed runtime after the Gaussian sources have turned off (choosing a suitable runtime requires some care since larger values will in turn lead to larger fields which might cause instabilities in the floating-point arithmetic).

 (define-param fcen 0.22)
 (define-param df 0.06)
 (set! sources (list 
         (make source (src (make gaussian-src (frequency fcen) (fwidth df))) 
                (component Ey) (center (* -0.5 (+ s sw)) 0))
         (make source (src (make gaussian-src (frequency fcen) (fwidth df))) 
                (component Ey) (center (* 0.5 (+ s sw)) 0) (amplitude (if xodd? -1.0 1.0)))))
 (define-param runtime 200)
 (run-sources+ runtime 
     (after-sources (harminv Ey (vector3 (* 0.5 (+ s sw)) 0) fcen df)))
 (define f (harminv-freq-re (car harminv-results)))
 (print "freq:, " s ", " f "\n")

Once we have determined what the eigenmode frequency is, we can then use this value to accurately excite the mode of interest using the eigenmode-source feature and also compute the force and the transmitted power only at this value. The eigenmode-mode feature invokes MPB via a library routine in order to compute the relevant mode of interest and subsequently imports the steady-state field profile into the Meep simulation for use as the initial amplitude of the source. This then enables an efficient excitation of the relevant mode of interest in the time domain to a much higher degree of accuracy than would otherwise be possible had we simply used a point-dipole source.

 (reset-meep)
 (change-sources! (list
    (make eigenmode-source
      (src (make gaussian-src (frequency f) (fwidth df)))
      (component Ey)
      (size sw sw 0)
      (center (* -0.5 (+ s sw)) 0)
      (eig-kpoint k-point)
      (eig-match-freq? true)
      (eig-parity ODD-Y))
    (make eigenmode-source
      (src (make gaussian-src (frequency f) (fwidth df)))
      (component Ey)
      (size sw sw 0)
      (center (* 0.5 (+ s sw)) 0)
      (eig-kpoint k-point)
      (eig-match-freq? true)
      (eig-parity ODD-Y)
      (amplitude (if xodd? -1.0 1.0)))))
 (define wvg-pwr (add-flux f 0 1
    (make flux-region (direction Z) (center 0 0) 
 	   (size (* 1.2 (+ (* 2 sw) s)) (* 1.2 sw) 0))))
 (define-param dpad 0.1)
 (define wvg-force (add-force f 0 1
   (make force-region (direction X) (weight +1.0) 
         (center (- (* 0.5 s) dpad) 0) (size 0 sy))
   (make force-region (direction X) (weight -1.0) 
         (center (+ (* 0.5 s) sw dpad) 0) (size 0 sy))))
 (run-sources+ runtime)
 (display-fluxes wvg-pwr)
 (display-forces wvg-force)

Note that we have defined a single flux plane (spanning an area slightly larger than both waveguides) rather than two separate flux planes, one for each waveguide. This is because in the limit of small separation, two flux planes will overlap thus complicating the analysis whereas the total power through a single flux plane need, by symmetry, only be halved in order to determine the value for just one of the two waveguides. Also note that instead of defining a closed, four-sided box surrounding the waveguide for computing the MST, we chose instead to compute the MST along two y-oriented lines (with different weights to correctly sum the total force), one on each side of the waveguide since by symmetry we need not consider the force in the y direction.

We run this simulation over a range of separation distances and compare the result to that obtained from MPB which shows good agreement. Note the presence of mainly repulsive forces for the anti-symmetric mode and mainly attractive forces for the symmetric mode.

Normalized force per unit length and input power versus waveguide separation of two parallel waveguides.
Personal tools