June 28, 2021 at 8:11 pmmichael_zhuSubscriber
I am simulating the scattered-field by a Si3N4 waveguide on SiO2 membrane. The strongly focused light is created by a Gaussian source with thin lens model and the focus point of the Gaussian beam is 7micron above the waveguide.June 29, 2021 at 12:00 amGuilin SunAnsys EmployeeIt seems that the waveguide core is very small so you used override mesh to resolved it. When a Gaussian beam meets non-uniform material/structure, it creates diffraction. Your result confirms this. For a test, if you use larger waveguide core than the beam width, the diffraction will be less.
You can use farfiled projection and roughly check if there are larger angles than the beam divergence, which would be the side lobes due to diffraction.
June 29, 2021 at 1:09 ammichael_zhuSubscriberThanks for you quick response about diffraction field.
However, I am confused about the interference in the diffraction field, which I think should not appear. As shown in the following four figures, there is an interference pattern in the diffraction field above the waveguide, which can be alleviated by Fourier image filter. For a single-frequency Gaussian beam, I consider there is be no side lobes interference at transmission side. I wonder what result in the interference.
raw electric field
Fourier transform of the raw electric field
filtered Fourier transform of the raw electric field
the electric field without interference using Fourier image filter
June 29, 2021 at 2:57 pmGuilin SunAnsys EmployeeYou could simulate without the waveguide core and then compare the result, which in this case it should be no side lobes. Your Fourier transform shows the beam has larger spatial frequencies and not Gaussian-like distribution. As you know, the Fourier transform of the Gaussian function is also a Gaussian. so another possibility is that the source span is smaller: the geometric area should be much larger than the beam waist.
July 1, 2021 at 9:37 pmmichael_zhuSubscriberHi, gsun
Actually I am curious about the cause of the fringes in electric field magnitude figure. It turns out that the change of PML layer type leads to the fringes. With the other parameters to be the same, the type PML layer is changed from stabilized to standard. Then the fringes disappear.
However, according the the PML boundary support webpage, the stabilized PML has more layers and is more stable but in my case standard PML seems to work much better. Would you explain the phenomenon? Thank you.
Below are the electric field magnitude figures and model screenshot under two circumstance.
stabilized PML layer:
standard PML layer
July 5, 2021 at 5:13 pmGuilin SunAnsys EmployeeSorry, I misunderstood your original question regarding to "fringe". When comparing the two images, I got to know what do you mean about the fringe.
I believe they are due to PML reflection: Stabilized PML is mainly used to make the simulation stable but its absorption is not as good as the standard, Please refer Ansys Insight: õ┐«µö╣PMLÕô¬õ║øÕÅéµò░ÕÅ»õ╗Ñµ£ëµòêµèæÕêÂFDTDÕÅæµòú
so you are right that in your current case, the Standard PML should work fine.
Viewing 5 reply threads
Ansys Innovation Space
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Simulation World 2022
Check out more than 70 different sessions now available on demand. Get inspired as you hear from visionary companies, leading researchers and educators from around the globe on a variety of topics from life-saving improvements in healthcare, to bold new realities of space travel. Take a leap of certainty and check out a session today here.
Earth Rescue – An Ansys Online Series
The climate crisis is here. But so is the human ingenuity to fight it. Earth Rescue reveals what visionary companies are doing today to engineer radical new ideas in the fight against climate change. Click here to watch the first episode.
Subscribe to the Ansys Blog to get great new content about the power of simulation delivered right to your email on a weekly basis. With content from Ansys experts, partners and customers you will learn about product development advances, thought leadership and trends and tips to better use Ansys tools. Sign up here.Trending discussions
- “Import optical generation” or “delta generation rate”?
- Why am I getting “process exited without calling finalize”, and how do I fix it?
- Error on Lumerical device
- Using a license file on a new license server
- Ansys Insight: Diverging Simulations
- Error: addfdtd is not a valid function or a variable name
- Ansys Insight: About override mesh in FDTD: its use and settings
- Ansys Insight: Transmission results greater than one
- Ansys Insight: Convergence issues in CHARGE
- Is there a Lumerical script command to output the Simulation and Memory requirements?
Top Rated Tags
© 2022 Copyright ANSYS, Inc. All rights reserved.Ansys does not support the usage of unauthorized Ansys software. Please visit www.ansys.com to obtain an official distribution.