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. 43, Issue 22, 2213002(2023)

Multipole Method Analysis of Waveguides Based on Graphene-Coated Double Elliptical and Cylindrical Parallel Nanowires

Yida Du1, Ning Li1, Wenrui Xue1、*, Huihui Li1, Yue Zhang1, and Changyong Li1,2,3
Author Affiliations
  • 1College of Physics and Electronic Engineering, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, Shanxi , China
  • 2State Key Laboratory of Quantum Optics and Quantum Optics Devices, Institute of Laser Spectroscopy, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, Shanxi , China
  • 3Collaborative Innovation Center of Extreme Optics, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, Shanxi , China
    • show less
    AbstractGet PDF(in Chinese)
    Figures&Tables (10)
    Equations (0)
    References (39)
    Cited By (1)
    Tools
    Paper Information
    Topics
    Figures & Tables(10)
    Cross-sectional schematic diagram of three parallel hybrid dielectric nanowire waveguides coated with graphene

    Fig. 1. Cross-sectional schematic diagram of three parallel hybrid dielectric nanowire waveguides coated with graphene

    Download full size
    Electric field z component and electric field intensity distribution of fundamental mode. (a) Normalized electric field z component; (b) normalized electric field intensity distribution

    Fig. 2. Electric field z component and electric field intensity distribution of fundamental mode. (a) Normalized electric field z component; (b) normalized electric field intensity distribution

    Download full size
    Comparison chart of results calculated by multipole method (MPM) and finite element method (FEM) when maximum numbers of series expansion terms are 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Fig. 3. Comparison chart of results calculated by multipole method (MPM) and finite element method (FEM) when maximum numbers of series expansion terms are 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Download full size
    Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of wavelength from 8.0 to 10.0 μm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Fig. 4. Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of wavelength from 8.0 to 10.0 μm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Download full size
    Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of Fermi energy from 0.35 to 0.60 eV. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Fig. 5. Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of Fermi energy from 0.35 to 0.60 eV. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Download full size
    Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of radius of cylindrical nanowire from 42 to 58 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Fig. 6. Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of radius of cylindrical nanowire from 42 to 58 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Download full size
    Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of semi-major axis of elliptical cylindrical nanowire from 96 to 104 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Fig. 7. Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of semi-major axis of elliptical cylindrical nanowire from 96 to 104 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Download full size
    Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of semi-short axis of elliptical cylindrical nanowire from 91 to 99 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Fig. 8. Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of semi-short axis of elliptical cylindrical nanowire from 91 to 99 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Download full size
    Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of transverse spacing between nanowire surfaces from 12 to 28 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Fig. 9. Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of transverse spacing between nanowire surfaces from 12 to 28 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Download full size
    Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of relative height of cylindrical nanowire from 50 to 66 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Fig. 10. Comparison chart between results calculated by MPM and results calculated by FEM within rang of relative height of cylindrical nanowire from 50 to 66 nm. (a) Real part of effective refractive index and its relative error; (b) imag part of effective refractive index and its relative error

    Download full size
    Tools

    Get Citation

    Copy Citation Text

    Yida Du, Ning Li, Wenrui Xue, Huihui Li, Yue Zhang, Changyong Li. Multipole Method Analysis of Waveguides Based on Graphene-Coated Double Elliptical and Cylindrical Parallel Nanowires[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2023, 43(22): 2213002

    Download Citation

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

    Category: Integrated Optics

    Received: Jul. 3, 2023

    Accepted: Sep. 6, 2023

    Published Online: Nov. 20, 2023

    The Author Email: Wenrui Xue (wrxue@sxu.edu.cn)

    DOI:10.3788/AOS231207

    Topics

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