OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: C. Martijn de Sterke
  • Vol. 16, Iss. 8 — Apr. 14, 2008
  • pp: 5797–5806
« Show journal navigation

Radiation losses in optical nanofibers with random rough surface

A. V. Kovalenko, V. N. Kurashov, and A. V. Kisil  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 16, Issue 8, pp. 5797-5806 (2008)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.16.005797


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (173 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

Radiation losses of optical nanofibers are investigated in assumption of Gaussian statistics of distorted glass/air interface. Nonlinear relationship between the radiated power and roughness power spectrum is established. The losses in the single mode silica nanofibers are estimated for the case of inverse-square law of the roughness power spectrum.

© 2008 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

Progress in fiber optics technologies caused attention to the problem of radiation losses induced with a roughness of a waveguide surface. The open surface of the waveguide core has a structure of frozen capillary wave [1–3

1. P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, D. P. Williams, L. Farr, M. W. Mason, A. Tomlinson, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, “Ultimate low loss of hollow-core photonic crystal fibers,” Opt. Express 13, 236–244 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. As formation of such structure results from equilibrium thermodynamics, it can not be eliminated by means of technology. Therefore, the roughness induced radiation losses are intrinsic in the waveguides with glass/air interface. These losses are considered to be critical when essential part of the light power is carried with an evanescent wave, particularly in photonic crystal waveguides [1

1. P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, D. P. Williams, L. Farr, M. W. Mason, A. Tomlinson, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, “Ultimate low loss of hollow-core photonic crystal fibers,” Opt. Express 13, 236–244 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,2

2. P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, “Loss in solid-core photonic crystal fibers due to interface roughness scattering,” Opt. Express 13, 7779–7793 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], and optical nanofibers [4

4. L. Tong, R. R. Gattass, J. B. Ashcom, S. He, J. Lou, M. Shen, I. Maxwell, and E. Mazur, “Subwavelengthdiameter silica wires for low-loss optical wave guiding,” Nature 426, 816–819 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,5

5. L. M. Tong, L. L. Hu, J. J. Zhang, J. R. Qiu, Q. Yang, J. Y. Lou, Y. H. Shen, J. L. He, and Z. Z. Ye, “Photonic nanowires directly drawn from bulk glasses,” Opt. Express 14, 82–87 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

In recently published paper [6

6. G. Zhai and L. Tong, “Roughness-induced radiation losses in optical micro or nanofibers,” Opt. Express 15, 13805–13816 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], the radiation losses in nanofibers are estimated in assumption of sinusoidally perturbed surface. It is demonstrated that for realistic perturbation amplitude, the typical values of the loss coefficient are about 1–10-3 dB/mm and substantially depend on the perturbation period and refractive index contrast. Besides, the paper contains the conclusion that the model of sinusoidal perturbation can be generalized for all kinds of the surface deformation by means of Fourier analysis. This statement is controversial because direct generalization of the represented model assumes linear relationship between the amplitude of perturbation and the power of light scattered by this perturbation. Meanwhile, the radiated power is expressed as the square of linear functional of perturbation amplitude and thus can not be represented as a sum of independent contributions of perturbation’s Fourier components. This problem is solved with a help of statistical approach, when the perturbed surface is treated as a random field and the radiated power is determined with averaging over perturbation ensemble.

The statistical approach to the problem of light scattering in randomly perturbed waveguides, first developed in early studies of Marcuse [7

7. D. Marcuse, “Radiation losses of dielectric waveguides in terms of the power spectrum of the wall distortion function,” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 48, 3233–3242 (1969).

,8

8. D. Marcuse, Theory of Dielectric Optical Waveguides (Academic Press, New York, 1974).

], was used in [1

1. P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, D. P. Williams, L. Farr, M. W. Mason, A. Tomlinson, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, “Ultimate low loss of hollow-core photonic crystal fibers,” Opt. Express 13, 236–244 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,2

2. P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, “Loss in solid-core photonic crystal fibers due to interface roughness scattering,” Opt. Express 13, 7779–7793 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] in order to estimate the lower bound of intrinsic losses in photonic crystal fibers. The mean radiated power is expressed through the power spectral density of the random roughness and this relation has the linear character. Marcuse’s approximation is quite good for weakly guiding fibers but it sets aside the following.

It is well known [9

9. L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1995).

] that the solution of Maxwell equations for inhomogeneous medium in the first approximation of the small perturbation method has a form of linear relation between the mean power of the scattered wave and the power spectral density of refractive index fluctuations. It is demonstrated [8

8. D. Marcuse, Theory of Dielectric Optical Waveguides (Academic Press, New York, 1974).

] that the perturbation of the waveguide surface can be represented with equivalent perturbation of the refractive index. The refractive index perturbation is expressed as discontinuous function of the amplitude of the surface roughness. As this relation can not be linearized, the radiated power must have nonlinear form of dependence on the roughness power spectrum even in the first approximation of the small perturbation method. This means that a part of the scattered power, proportional to low frequency components of the roughness spectrum, is lost in the linear solutions. As the power spectrum has inverse-square law of dependence on the spatial frequency [3

3. J. Jäckle and K. Kawasaki, “Intrinsic roughness of glass surfaces,” J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 7, 4351–4358 (1995). [CrossRef]

], the scattering on harmonics of the small frequencies can be considerable.

It was demonstrated earlier [10

10. O. I. Barchuk, A. V. Kovalenko, V. N. Kurashov, and A. I. Maschenko, “Statistical characteristics of fluctuations of dielectric constant in planar waveguide with rough walls,” Ukrainskiy Fizicheskiy Zhurnal (Ukrainian Physical Journal) 36, 612–617 (1991).

] that the power spectrum of refractive index fluctuations in perturbed planar waveguide can be expressed through the roughness correlation with a help of Price’s theorem about nonlinear operations over Gaussian random field [11

11. R. Price, “A useful Theorem for Non-Linear devices having Gaussian Inputs,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 4, 69–72 (1958). [CrossRef]

,12

12. A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes (McGraw-Hill, New York1984).

]. In the present paper, we intend to establish the relation between the radiation losses and the power spectrum of the rough surface of nanofiber, and to estimate the loss value.

2. Radiation losses in approximation of weakly perturbed fiber surface

Following [6

6. G. Zhai and L. Tong, “Roughness-induced radiation losses in optical micro or nanofibers,” Opt. Express 15, 13805–13816 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 13

13. A. W. Snyder and J. D. Love, Optical Waveguide Theory (Chapman and Hall, New York, NY1983).

], the rough surface of a fiber waveguide is represented as a variation of its radius ρ

ρ(z,φ)=ρ0+ξ(z,φ)
(1)

where ρ0 is the radius of unperturbed waveguide, the function ξ(z, φ) describes the perturbation (Fig. 1).

We take that ξ is the uniform Gaussian random field [12

12. A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes (McGraw-Hill, New York1984).

] with zero mean and statistical correlation function, which depends on the residual coordinates Δz=z 2-z 1, Δφ21

ξ*(z1,φ1)ξ(z2,φ2)=σξ2γξ(Δz,Δφ)
(2)

where σ2 ξ is the roughness variance, γξ denotes normalized correlation. We suppose the perturbation magnitude ξ being small. The small order of ξ means that the amplitude of electric field of both propagating and radiation modes can be considered constant within the perturbed region. As in nanofibers the perturbation is less in scale than 1 nm [4

4. L. Tong, R. R. Gattass, J. B. Ashcom, S. He, J. Lou, M. Shen, I. Maxwell, and E. Mazur, “Subwavelengthdiameter silica wires for low-loss optical wave guiding,” Nature 426, 816–819 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], the small order condition holds with high accuracy.

Fig. 1. Perturbed fiber waveguide. n co, n cl, are the refractive indices of the core and the cladding (air), respectively.

e1(r,φ)=ψ1(r)exp(iφ)
evr(Q;r,φ)=ψvr(Q;r)exp(ivφ),v=0,±1,±2
(3)

The mode normalization is chosen as

02πdφ0+rdre1×h1*·z=1
02πdφ0+rdrev(Q)×hμ*(Q)·z=δ(QQ)δvμ
(4)

An amplitude of the radiation mode, exited by the fiber of length L, is given by [6

6. G. Zhai and L. Tong, “Roughness-induced radiation losses in optical micro or nanofibers,” Opt. Express 15, 13805–13816 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 13

13. A. W. Snyder and J. D. Love, Optical Waveguide Theory (Chapman and Hall, New York, NY1983).

]

av(Q)=±a¯0Ldzexp[i(β1β(Q))z]02πexp[i(1v)φ]fv(Q;ξ)
(5)

where ā is the amplitude of the propagating HE11 mode and the following designations are introduced

fv(Q;ξ)={ucoξ,ifξ(z,φ)<0uclξ,ifξ(z,φ)>0
(6)
uco=C(Ψvr*(Q;ρ00)·Ψ1(ρ00)),
ucl=C(Ψvr*(Q;ρ0+0)·Ψ1(ρ0+0)),
C=ikρ04(ε0μ0)12(nco2ncl2)
(7)

Pv(Q)=av(Q)2
(8)

The total mean power, radiated with the random roughness, is expressed with integral over the whole of system of radiation modes [13

13. A. W. Snyder and J. D. Love, Optical Waveguide Theory (Chapman and Hall, New York, NY1983).

]

Prad=v0kρnclpv(+ITE)(Q)dQ+v0kρnclpv(ITE)(Q)dQ+
+v0kρnclpv(+ITM)(Q)dQ+v0kρnclpv(ITM)(Q)dQ
(9)

The loss coefficient is obtained as

η=101g(1PradP¯)L
(10)

where =ā 2 is the power of the fundamental mode.

Substituting (5) into (8), carrying out transformations similar to [8

8. D. Marcuse, Theory of Dielectric Optical Waveguides (Academic Press, New York, 1974).

], we express the mean power of the radiation mode through the correlation of f ν (Q;ξ)

pv(Q)=2πLa¯2dΔzππdΔφGf(Δz,Δφ)exp[i(1v)Δφ]exp[i(β1β(Q))Δz]
(11)

where

Gf=fv*(Q;ξ1)fv(Q;ξ2),ξ1ξ(φ1,z1)),ξ2ξ(φ2,z2)
(12)

Deriving (11) takes into account periodic behavior of Gf in the azimuthal coordinate Gfφ, Δz)=Gfφ±2π, Δz). Also, it is assumed that Gf takes significant values only when ΔzL. If the last condition is violated, the integral for dΔz should be taken in limits -L≤ΔzL with the window wz)=1-|Δz|L -1.

The expression (11) has a quite expected structure. As the amplitude of exited mode is the Fourier component of the uniform random field f ν (6), the mean square of the amplitude is given by Fourier transform of the correlation Gf. In addition, it follows from (11) that radiation losses are linear in L.

3. Dependence of radiated power on roughness correlation

The mean power of the radiation mode depends on the perturbation ξ through the random field f ν (6). The multipliers u co,u cl (7) are the scalar products of electric fields of fundamental and radiation modes in core and cladding. As the radial component of the electric field has discontinuity in core/cladding interface, the expression (6) defines sectionally linear mapping ξ→f ν. The functional dependence of correlation Gf on the roughness correlation is established with Price’s theorem as follows

d2Gfdγξ2=σξ4d2f*(ξ1)dξ12d2f(ξ2)dξ22
(13)

In accordance with (6), we have d2fvdξ2=(ucoucl)δ(ξ) . Therefore, averaging in (13) is elementary and gives

d2Gfdγξ2=σξ2ucoucl22π1γξ2
(14)

Solving this equation under the boundary conditions

Gf(γξ=0)=f2=σξ22πucoucl2,
Gf(γξ=1)=f2=σξ22(uco2+ucl2)
(15)

results in

Gf(γξ)=σξ24uco+ucl2γξ+σξ22πucoucl2(γξarcsinγξ+1γξ2)
(16)

Relations (11), (16) establish the desired dependence of the mean power of the radiation mode on the roughness correlation.

It is convenient to represent the expression (16) in the following form

Gf(γξ)=ΓL(Q)σξ2γξ(Δz,Δφ)+ΓN(Q)σξ2γ~(Δz,Δφ)+const
(17)

where

ΓL(Q)=14uco+ucl2,ΓN(Q)=(π2)4πucoucl2
(18)
γ~(Δz,Δφ)=2π2(γξarcsinγξ+1γξ21)
(19)

Note that in (11) β1∓β(Q)>0, because |β(Q)|<kn cl1 [13

13. A. W. Snyder and J. D. Love, Optical Waveguide Theory (Chapman and Hall, New York, NY1983).

]. Therefore, the constant term from (17) does not contribute to the power p ν(Q) and can be eliminated. The function γ˜zφ) is well approximated with a square law γ˜ ≈γ2 ξ (Fig. 2). Assuming such approximation, the power of radiation mode is expressed through the roughness power spectrum S µ (β) by

pv(Q)2πLa2ΓL(Q)S1v(β1β(Q))+ΓN(Q)S˜1v(β1β(Q))
(20)

where

Sμ(β)=σξ2dΔzππdΔφγξ(Δz,Δφ)exp(iβΔz)exp(iμΔφ)
(21)
S˜μ(β)=Sμ(β)*Sμ(β)4π2σξ214π2σξ2m=++dβSm(β)Sμm(ββ)
(22)

According to (20), the radiated power is a sum of two terms, the first term being linear and the second one being quadratic in correlation γξ. Note that both terms are of the same order of smallness in roughness variance σ2 ξ, but are different in dependence on the refractive index contrast because ΓL~(n 2 co-n 2 cl)2, ΓN~(n 2 co-n 2 cl)4. Therefore, the quadratic term in (20) is negligibly small for weakly guiding fibers, but it becomes significant in the particular case of nanofibers, in which n co and n cl are considerably different in value.

Fig. 2. Square law approximation of the nonlinear term of the correlation Gfξ).

To explain the nature of the second term in (20), let us represent the perturbation ξ with equivalent current sources with density [13

13. A. W. Snyder and J. D. Love, Optical Waveguide Theory (Chapman and Hall, New York, NY1983).

]:

J=i(ε0μ0)12k(nco2ncl2)δ(rρ0)ξ(φ,z)a¯eexp(iβ1z)
(23)

In the last expression, the electric field e equals to unperturbed field of the fundamental mode in the core if ξ<0, and it is equal to the field in the cladding otherwise:

e={e1(ρ00),ifξ(z)<0e1(ρ0+0),ifξ(z)>0
(24)

Consider the current induced with a separate Fourier component of the perturbation, which has the spatial frequency Ω:ξ(z;Ω)=ξΩsinΩz. Since r - component of the electric field of the fundamental mode is discontinuous in core/cladding transition, the correspondent component of the field e is of the form of raised meander function with the period Ω-1, and can be expanded in Fourier series: er=c 0+c 1sin(Ωz)+c 2sin(2Ωz)+…. Therefore, the induced current (23) is expressed as superposition of harmonic currents: J=mJmexp(i(β1mΩ)z) . Thus, the harmonic perturbation is represented with the equivalent anharmonic induced current, and the linear and the quadratic terms in (20) correspond to the currents J 1 and J 2 respectively.

In context of this paper, the losses, which are caused with low frequency perturbations, are of the special importance. The current J m exp(i1-mΩ)z) radiates in resonance the plain waves in directions, which subtend an angle θ with Oz axis. This angle satisfies the relation: kn cl cos θ=(β1-mΩ). As β1>kn cl, the losses are caused with currents J m with m≥1. It is easy to show, that J 1~(n 2 co-n 2 cl), J m~(n 2 co-n 2 cl)2, m=2,3…. Therefore, in weakly guiding fibers, the induced currents J 2, J 3… could be neglected. Then, the minimal frequency of perturbation, which still satisfies the resonance condition, equals Ωmin1-kn cl. The lower frequencies of the perturbation cause no radiation losses. When refractive index contrast is high, the currents J 1 and J 2 have the same order of smallness, and produce two meaningful components in the expression for total radiation losses. It should be noticed that the minimal frequency of the resonant perturbation is halved, when the current J 2 is taken into account: Ωmin=(β1-kn cl)/2.

4. Losses from perturbation with inverse square-law power spectrum

In accordance with [3

3. J. Jäckle and K. Kawasaki, “Intrinsic roughness of glass surfaces,” J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 7, 4351–4358 (1995). [CrossRef]

], unbounded glass surface has a random roughness with spectral power density S(β)

S(β)=kBTα1β2
(25)

where T is the glass transition temperature, α is the surface tension in transition, β is bidirectional vector of spatial frequencies, bounded in the absolute value as βlow<|β|<βhigh. The lower cutoff frequency is conditioned with gravity βlow=gdα , where d is the glass density. Its value is small in comparison with the typical frequencies of the optical range. Thus, for α=0.1 J·m-2 [3

3. J. Jäckle and K. Kawasaki, “Intrinsic roughness of glass surfaces,” J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 7, 4351–4358 (1995). [CrossRef]

], d=2500kg·m-3, the estimation gives βlow≈0.5 mm-1. The high-frequency cutoff is specified with atomic structure of the matter.

In a round fiber the spectrum must be quantized in the azimuthal coordinate because of periodicity condition, and can be approximated as

Sμ(β)=kBTαρ0·1vμ2+β2,vμ={μρ01,μ=±1,±2±μmaxβcut,μ=0
(26)

In the fiber, the cutoff frequency βcut is not equivalent to βlow of the unbounded plane surface, and is introduced into (26) phenomenologically in order to avoid singularity of S 0 (β). With that, a numerical value of βcut remains uncertain. This uncertainty, nevertheless, presents no obstacle to estimation of the radiated power. Let us assume that the lower cutoff βcut is small enough against the inverse radius of the fiber ρ-1 0. In such approximation, the roughness variance σ2 ξ and the convolved spectrum µ(β) (22) are given by

σξ2=(2π)2μ+dβSμ(β)kBT4παρ0βcut
(27)
S˜μ(β)kBTαρ0·MM2vμ2+β2
(28)

where M=2, if µ=0, and M=1, otherwise. The power p ν(Q) (20) depends on the parts of the spectra (26), (28), which correspond to the spatial frequencies β=β1∓β(Q)>0. Therefore, the points S µ(0), µ(0) lie aside the integration boundaries (9), which gives an opportunity to calculate the radiation losses in the limit βcut→0.

In the single-mode operation of the waveguide, the spectral components S 01∓β(Q)), 01∓β(Q)) are considerably larger than the rest of S µ, µ. These components “are responsible” for excitation of the radiation modes, which have the same azimuthal number with the fundamental mode. So, the terms with ν=1 are the most significant in the expression for the total radiated power (9).

5. Numerical results, discussion and conclusion

We applied the proposed theoretical model to estimate the radiation losses caused with the rough glass/air interface of the nanofibers. The physical parameters of the model were chosen so as to make possible comparison with the reported experiments [4

4. L. Tong, R. R. Gattass, J. B. Ashcom, S. He, J. Lou, M. Shen, I. Maxwell, and E. Mazur, “Subwavelengthdiameter silica wires for low-loss optical wave guiding,” Nature 426, 816–819 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 5

5. L. M. Tong, L. L. Hu, J. J. Zhang, J. R. Qiu, Q. Yang, J. Y. Lou, Y. H. Shen, J. L. He, and Z. Z. Ye, “Photonic nanowires directly drawn from bulk glasses,” Opt. Express 14, 82–87 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. For the lack of data, we confined the calculation to the case of the silica fiber, for which we accepted n co=1.46, T=1500K, α=0.3 J·m-2 [1

1. P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, D. P. Williams, L. Farr, M. W. Mason, A. Tomlinson, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, “Ultimate low loss of hollow-core photonic crystal fibers,” Opt. Express 13, 236–244 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The calculated dependence of the loss coefficient on the fiber diameter at the wavelength λ=633nm is represented at Fig. 3. The chosen diameter range corresponds to the single-mode operation. Figure 3(a) shows separately the losses calculated in linear in S 0 (β) approximation. As follows from these calculations, the total loss estimation increases essentially when the term, proportional to the convolved spectrum 0(β), is taken into account. So, the surface induced radiation losses are considerably nonlinear in the perturbation spectrum.

Fig. 3. Dependence of the loss coefficient on the fiber diameter. (a) Linear approximation in S 0(β) (dash), nonlinear loss component (dot), aggregate losses (solid), βcut=0. (b) Losses for different cutoff frequencies of surface perturbation, βcut=1.0 mm-1 (blue), βcut=0.1 mm-1 (red), βcut=0 (black).

The calculations, carried out for various values of the lower cutoff βcut, demonstrate that the choice of this parameter makes effect only when the fiber diameter is especially small, in our case being less than 180 nm (Fig. 3(b)). The result, which fits qualitatively to the experiment [4

4. L. Tong, R. R. Gattass, J. B. Ashcom, S. He, J. Lou, M. Shen, I. Maxwell, and E. Mazur, “Subwavelengthdiameter silica wires for low-loss optical wave guiding,” Nature 426, 816–819 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 5

5. L. M. Tong, L. L. Hu, J. J. Zhang, J. R. Qiu, Q. Yang, J. Y. Lou, Y. H. Shen, J. L. He, and Z. Z. Ye, “Photonic nanowires directly drawn from bulk glasses,” Opt. Express 14, 82–87 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], is obtained in the limit βcut→0.

The plot of losses at Fig. 3(b) can be separated into three parts which demonstrate substantial difference in behavior. The losses go up with decreasing waveguide diameter from 450 nm to approximately 180 nm. They form pseudo-plateau in the range 180 nm<D<300 nm. For very small diameters D<180 nm, the plot of losses becomes very sensitive to the choice of the lower cutoff frequency of the perturbation. To explain the plot’s behavior, we shall notice at first that the radiated power (20) is proportional to the power density w 1 of electric component of the fundamental mode, taken in the perturbed area. Dependence of w 1 on the waveguide diameter is nonmonotonic, and has the maximum at D≈300 nm (Fig. 4(a)). We notice also that the radiation arises from the spectral components of the perturbation which have the spatial frequencies β exceeding Ωmin : β>Ωmin=(β1-kn cl)/2. As the gap (β1-kn cl) decreases with the decrease of the waveguide diameter, the low frequency perturbation components add their contribution into the total radiation losses. The perturbation power spectrum is expected to have inverse-square low, therefore, the contribution of the low frequencies is very critical, and could be explained in terms of the effective depth of the perturbed layer Δξ.

Let us define Δξ as:

Δξ2=Ωmin+S0(β)dβ
(29)
Fig. 4. (a). Dependence of the power density of the electric component of the fundamental mode in the core/cladding interface on the fiber diameter. (b) Effective depth of the perturbed layer for different cutoff frequencies of surface perturbation, βcut=1.0 mm-1 (blue), βcut=0.1 mm-1 (red), βcut=0 (black).

The calculated losses are somewhat less in value than those observed experimentally. Apparently, the suggested model is approximate, and sets aside some important particularities of the experiment. With it, the model must be useful in understanding of losses in optical nanofibers, caused with intrinsic roughness of glass/air interface.

Appendix A

for the pair of the fundamental modes

e±1(r,φ)=N12(e11,even(r,φ)±ie11,odd(r,φ))=Ψ±1(r)exp(±iφ)
(27)

for radiation modes

e±vr(Q;r,φ)=Nv(Q)12(ev,evenr(Q;r,φ)±iev,oddr(Q;r,φ))=Ψ±vr(Q;r)exp(±ivφ)
(28)

where e 11, even, e 11, odd are the fields of the even and the odd HE11 mode, e r ν, even, e r ν, odd are ITE or ITM modes, N, N ν(Q) are the normalization factors [6

6. G. Zhai and L. Tong, “Roughness-induced radiation losses in optical micro or nanofibers,” Opt. Express 15, 13805–13816 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 13

13. A. W. Snyder and J. D. Love, Optical Waveguide Theory (Chapman and Hall, New York, NY1983).

].

References and links

1.

P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, D. P. Williams, L. Farr, M. W. Mason, A. Tomlinson, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, “Ultimate low loss of hollow-core photonic crystal fibers,” Opt. Express 13, 236–244 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2.

P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, “Loss in solid-core photonic crystal fibers due to interface roughness scattering,” Opt. Express 13, 7779–7793 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3.

J. Jäckle and K. Kawasaki, “Intrinsic roughness of glass surfaces,” J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 7, 4351–4358 (1995). [CrossRef]

4.

L. Tong, R. R. Gattass, J. B. Ashcom, S. He, J. Lou, M. Shen, I. Maxwell, and E. Mazur, “Subwavelengthdiameter silica wires for low-loss optical wave guiding,” Nature 426, 816–819 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5.

L. M. Tong, L. L. Hu, J. J. Zhang, J. R. Qiu, Q. Yang, J. Y. Lou, Y. H. Shen, J. L. He, and Z. Z. Ye, “Photonic nanowires directly drawn from bulk glasses,” Opt. Express 14, 82–87 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6.

G. Zhai and L. Tong, “Roughness-induced radiation losses in optical micro or nanofibers,” Opt. Express 15, 13805–13816 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

D. Marcuse, “Radiation losses of dielectric waveguides in terms of the power spectrum of the wall distortion function,” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 48, 3233–3242 (1969).

8.

D. Marcuse, Theory of Dielectric Optical Waveguides (Academic Press, New York, 1974).

9.

L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1995).

10.

O. I. Barchuk, A. V. Kovalenko, V. N. Kurashov, and A. I. Maschenko, “Statistical characteristics of fluctuations of dielectric constant in planar waveguide with rough walls,” Ukrainskiy Fizicheskiy Zhurnal (Ukrainian Physical Journal) 36, 612–617 (1991).

11.

R. Price, “A useful Theorem for Non-Linear devices having Gaussian Inputs,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 4, 69–72 (1958). [CrossRef]

12.

A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes (McGraw-Hill, New York1984).

13.

A. W. Snyder and J. D. Love, Optical Waveguide Theory (Chapman and Hall, New York, NY1983).

14.

L. Tong, J. Lou, and E. Mazur, “Single-mode guiding properties of subwavelength-diameter silica and silicon wire waveguides,” Opt. Express 12, 1025–1035 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(060.2400) Fiber optics and optical communications : Fiber properties
(290.5880) Scattering : Scattering, rough surfaces

ToC Category:
Fiber Optics and Optical Communications

History
Original Manuscript: February 15, 2008
Revised Manuscript: April 3, 2008
Manuscript Accepted: April 6, 2008
Published: April 10, 2008

Citation
A. V. Kovalenko, V. N. Kurashov, and A. V. Kisil, "Radiation losses in optical nanofibers with random rough surface," Opt. Express 16, 5797-5806 (2008)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-16-8-5797


Sort:  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, D. P. Williams, L. Farr, M. W. Mason, and A. Tomlinson, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight and P. St. J. Russell, "Ultimate low loss of hollow-core photonic crystal fibers," Opt. Express 13, 236-244 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. P. J. Roberts, F. Couny, H. Sabert, B. J. Mangan, T. A. Birks, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, "Loss in solid-core photonic crystal fibers due to interface roughness scattering," Opt. Express 13, 7779-7793 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. J. Jäckle and K. Kawasaki, "Intrinsic roughness of glass surfaces," J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 7, 4351-4358 (1995). [CrossRef]
  4. L. Tong, R. R. Gattass, J. B. Ashcom, S. He, J. Lou, M. Shen, I. Maxwell, and E. Mazur, "Subwavelengthdiameter silica wires for low-loss optical wave guiding," Nature 426, 816-819 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. L. M. Tong, L. L. Hu, J. J. Zhang, J. R. Qiu, Q. Yang, J. Y. Lou, Y. H. Shen, J. L. He, and Z. Z. Ye, "Photonic nanowires directly drawn from bulk glasses," Opt. Express 14, 82-87 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. G. Zhai and L. Tong, "Roughness-induced radiation losses in optical micro or nanofibers," Opt. Express 15, 13805-13816 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. D. Marcuse, "Radiation losses of dielectric waveguides in terms of the power spectrum of the wall distortion function," Bell Syst. Tech. J. 48, 3233-3242 (1969).
  8. D. Marcuse, Theory of Dielectric Optical Waveguides (Academic Press, New York, 1974).
  9. L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1995).
  10. O. I. Barchuk, A. V. Kovalenko, V. N. Kurashov, and A. I. Maschenko, "Statistical characteristics of fluctuations of dielectric constant in planar waveguide with rough walls," (Ukrainskiy Fizicheskiy Zhurnal) Ukr. Phys. J. 36, 612-617 (1991).
  11. R. Price, "A useful Theorem for Non-Linear devices having Gaussian Inputs," IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 4, 69-72 (1958). [CrossRef]
  12. A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes (McGraw-Hill, New York 1984).
  13. A. W. Snyder and J. D. Love, Optical Waveguide Theory (Chapman and Hall, New York, NY 1983).
  14. L. Tong, J. Lou, and E. Mazur, "Single-mode guiding properties of subwavelength-diameter silica and silicon wire waveguides," Opt. Express 12, 1025-1035 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

Figures

Fig. 1. Fig. 2. Fig. 3.
 
Fig. 4.
 

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited