4.6 Article

Ultra compact Bragg grating devices with broadband selectivity

期刊

OPTICS LETTERS
卷 45, 期 3, 页码 644-647

出版社

OPTICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1364/OL.384688

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [1707641, 1704085, 180789, 1640227, 190184]
  2. Office of Naval Research (MURI)
  3. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (MOABB, NLM)
  4. Semiconductor Research Corporation
  5. Army Research Office
  6. National Nanotechnology Coordinating Office [1542148]
  7. Cymer
  8. Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (LEED: A Lightwave Energy-Efficient Datacenter)
  9. Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative
  10. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
  11. Division of Computing and Communication Foundations [1640227] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  12. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  13. Division Of Materials Research [1707641] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  14. Directorate For Engineering
  15. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [1704085] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Current silicon waveguide Bragg gratings typically introduce perturbation to the optical mode in the form of modulation of the waveguide width or cladding. However, since such a perturbation approach is limited to weak perturbations to avoid intolerable scattering loss and higher-order modal coupling, it is difficult to produce ultra-wide stopbands. In this Letter, we report an ultra-compact Bragg grating device with strong perturbations by etching nanoholes in the waveguide core to enable an ultra-large stopband with apodization achieved by proper location of the nanoholes. With this approach, a 15 mu m long device can generate a stopband as wide as 110 nm that covers the entire C L band with a 40 dB extinction ratio and over a 10 dB sidelobe suppression ratio (SSR). Similar structures can be further optimized to achieve higher SSR of > 17 dB for a stopband of about 80 nm. (C) 2020 Optical Society of America

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据