OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: C. Martijn de Sterke
  • Vol. 20, Iss. 24 — Nov. 19, 2012
  • pp: 26486–26498
« Show journal navigation

Femtogram dispersive L3-nanobeam optomechanical cavities: design and experimental comparison

Jiangjun Zheng, Xiankai Sun, Ying Li, Menno Poot, Ali Dadgar, Norman Nan Shi, Wolfram H. P. Pernice, Hong X. Tang, and Chee Wei Wong  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 20, Issue 24, pp. 26486-26498 (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.20.026486


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (5079 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We present the design and experimental comparison of femtogram L3-nanobeam photonic crystal cavities for optomechanical studies. Two symmetric nanobeams are created by placing three air slots in a silicon photonic crystal slab where three holes are removed. The nanobeams’ mechanical frequencies are higher than 600 MHz with ultrasmall effective modal masses at approximately 20 femtograms. The optical quality factor (Q) is optimized up to 53,000. The optical and mechanical modes are dispersively coupled with a vacuum optomechanical coupling rate g0/2π exceeding 200 kHz. The anchor-loss-limited mechanical Q of the differential beam mode is evaluated to be greater than 10,000 for structures with ideally symmetric beams. The influence of variations on the air slot width and position is also investigated. The devices can be used as ultrasensitive sensors of mass, force, and displacement.

© 2012 OSA

1. Introduction

Cavity optomechanics, a subject studying the coherent interaction of optical and mechanical degrees of freedom of various optical cavities, has been a recent research focus [1

1. T. J. Kippenberg and K. J. Vahala, “Cavity optomechanics: back-action at the mesoscale,” Science 321(5893), 1172–1176 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4

4. F. Marquardt, “Optomechanics: push towards the quantum limit,” Nat. Phys. 4(7), 513–514 (2008). [CrossRef]

]. Its applications include laser cooling of mesoscopic systems to their motional quantum mechanical ground state [5

5. E. Verhagen, S. Deléglise, S. Weis, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Quantum-coherent coupling of a mechanical oscillator to an optical cavity mode,” Nature 482(7383), 63–67 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

13

13. I. Wilson-Rae, P. Zoller, and A. Imamoğlu, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical resonator mode to its quantum ground state,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 92(7), 075507 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], photon–phonon translation and storage of light pulses [14

14. S. Weis, R. Rivière, S. Deléglise, E. Gavartin, O. Arcizet, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Optomechanically induced transparency,” Science 330(6010), 1520–1523 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16

16. G. Bahl, M. Tomes, F. Marquardt, and T. Carmon, “Observation of spontaneous Brillouin cooling,” Nat. Phys. 8(3), 203–207 (2012). [CrossRef]

], and quantum precision measurements of microwave and optical photons [17

17. C. A. Regal, J. D. Teufel, and K. W. Lehnert, “Measuring nanomechanical motion with a resonant microwave cavity interferometer,” Nat. Phys. 4(7), 555–560 (2008). [CrossRef]

19

19. G. Anetsberger, E. Gavartin, O. Arcizet, Q. P. Unterreithmeier, E. M. Weig, M. L. Gorodetsky, J. P. Kotthaus, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Measuring nanomechanical motion with an imprecision far below the standard quantum limit,” Phys. Rev. A 82, 061804(R) (2010).

]. Photonic crystals (PhC) are a versatile cavity platform widely used for light–matter and light–structure interactions, e.g., cavity quantum electrodynamics [20

20. G. Khitrova, H. M. Gibbs, M. Kira, S. W. Koch, and A. Scherer, “Vacuum Rabi splitting in semiconductors,” Nat. Phys. 2(2), 81–90 (2006). [CrossRef]

,21

21. I. Fushman, D. Englund, A. Faraon, N. Stoltz, P. Petroff, and J. Vuckovic, “Controlled phase shifts with a single quantum dot,” Science 320(5877), 769–772 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], nonlinear optics [22

22. P. Colman, C. Husko, S. Combrie, I. Sagnes, C. W. Wong, and A. De Rossi, “Temporal solitons and pulse compression in photonic crystal waveguides,” Nat. Photonics 4(12), 862–868 (2010). [CrossRef]

24

24. J. F. McMillan, M. Yu, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “Observations of spontaneous Raman scattering in silicon slow-light photonic crystal waveguides,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 93(25), 251105 (2008). [CrossRef]

], and cavity optomechanics [25

25. M. Notomi, H. Taniyama, S. Mitsugi, and E. Kuramochi, “Optomechanical wavelength and energy conversion in high- Q double-layer cavities of photonic crystal slabs,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97(2), 023903 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,26

26. Y. Li, J. Zheng, J. Gao, J. Shu, M. S. Aras, and C. W. Wong, “Design of dispersive optomechanical coupling and cooling in ultrahigh-Q/V slot-type photonic crystal cavities,” Opt. Express 18(23), 23844–23856 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Enabled by large optical gradient forces [27

27. M. Li, W. H. P. Pernice, C. Xiong, T. Baehr-Jones, M. Hochberg, and H. X. Tang, “Harnessing optical forces in integrated photonic circuits,” Nature 456(7221), 480–484 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

29

29. G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462(7273), 633–636 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], high-Q PhC cavities exhibit strong optomechanical interactions in both one-dimensional (1D) [30

30. M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459(7246), 550–555 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and two-dimensional (2D) [31

31. J. Zheng, Y. Li, M. S. Aras, A. Stein, K. L. Shepard, and C. W. Wong, “Parametric optomechanical oscillations in two-dimensional slot-type high-Q photonic crystal cavities,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100(21), 211908 (2012). [CrossRef]

33

33. E. Gavartin, R. Braive, I. Sagnes, O. Arcizet, A. Beveratos, T. J. Kippenberg, and I. Robert-Philip, “Optomechanical coupling in a two-dimensional photonic crystal defect cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106(20), 203902 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] geometries.

2. Optical design: band structure and radiation suppression

Nanobeams are widely used to build high-frequency nanomechanical resonators [37

37. A. K. Naik, M. S. Hanay, W. K. Hiebert, X. L. Feng, and M. L. Roukes, “Towards single-molecule nanomechanical mass spectrometry,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 4(7), 445–450 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

39

39. M. Poot and H. S. J. van der Zant, “Mechanical systems in the quantum regime,” Phys. Rep. 511(5), 273–335 (2012). [CrossRef]

]. As shown in Fig. 1
Fig. 1 Geometry of the L3-nanobeam cavity. (a) Overview of the device. (b) Zoom-in of the beam region. a is the lattice constant of the triangular PhC; sx1, sx2, and sx3 are the hole offsets in the x direction; sy is the hole offset in the y direction; wb1 and wb2 are beam widths; was1, was2, and was3 are slot widths. (c) Scanning electron micrograph of a fabricated beam-cavity.
, our nanobeam-in-cavity consists of two nanobeams embedded in a PhC slab where three air slots are placed in the region of three missing holes of a triangular lattice. Since a PhC cavity based on three missing air holes in an otherwise perfect triangular lattice is usually referred to as an L3 cavity [40

40. Y. Akahane, T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, “Fine-tuned high-Q photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Opt. Express 13(4), 1202–1214 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,41

41. X. Yang, M. Yu, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102(17), 173902 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], we name ours an “L3-nanobeam cavity.” The nanobeams introduce strong perturbation to the original L3 cavity, resulting in significant modification of the optical characteristics [42

42. T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, “Analysis of the experimental Q factors (~ 1 million) of photonic crystal nanocavities,” Opt. Express 14(5), 1996–2002 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]: First, the effective refractive index in the cavity region is reduced by the slots, which shifts the cavity resonance away from the bandgap and makes it difficult to localize the optical energy in a small volume; Second, the sharp edges of the slots result in a large radiation energy leakage [40

40. Y. Akahane, T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, “Fine-tuned high-Q photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Opt. Express 13(4), 1202–1214 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Careful designs are thus required to restore a high optical Q after introducing the slots. We overcome the adverse effects and optimize the cavity with the following strategies: First, the y distance of wwg is increased, i.e., made wider than the width of a single-missing-row (W1) waveguide, which compensates the effect of reduced effective refractive index. The holes in the cavity row are enlarged accordingly to provide a reliable in-plane field confinement in the x direction. The holes surrounding the cavity are shifted to tune the optical field profile such that the vertical radiation scattering is minimized [40

40. Y. Akahane, T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, “Fine-tuned high-Q photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Opt. Express 13(4), 1202–1214 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Numerical modeling proved the effectiveness of the above implementations and that the optical field of this L3-nanobeam cavity is indeed different from that of a regular L3 cavity [40

40. Y. Akahane, T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, “Fine-tuned high-Q photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Opt. Express 13(4), 1202–1214 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. For simplicity, it is straightforward to construct symmetric structures with wb = wb1 = wb2 and was = was1 = was2 = was3.

Next, to create a cavity mode, we confine the field in the x direction by replacing the infinitely long slots with ones of the planned beam length, surrounded by “mirror” air holes [45

45. B.-S. Song, T. Asano, Y. Akahane, Y. Tanaka, and S. Noda, “Transmission and reflection characteristics of in-plane hetero-photonic crystals,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 85(20), 4591–4593 (2004). [CrossRef]

]. Figure 3(a)
Fig. 3 (a) Band structure of the TE-like y-odd band for the “mirror” waveguide with hole radius rwg = 160 nm. (b) Waveguide bandedge frequency versus the waveguide hole radius rwg. The inset illustrates the geometry.
shows the TE-like y-odd guided band for the “mirror” waveguide with hole radius rwg = 160 nm. Figure 3(b) shows that the edge of this guided band is pushed up by using a larger radius. Comparing Fig. 3(a) and Fig. 2(b), we find that the band of the “mirror” waveguide sits well above that of the slot waveguide. Their zero overlap in frequency range is important for suppressing the optical energy leakage via the “mirror” waveguide. Based on the above guidelines, a selected set of geometrical parameters are: (a, r, h, wwg, rwg) = (430 nm, 0.29a, 220 nm, W1.35, 160 nm), which are used for further optimization of the cavity mode.

3. Mechanical design: eigenmodes and elastic radiation leakage

Doubly clamped beams have been widely used to build mechanical resonators [37

37. A. K. Naik, M. S. Hanay, W. K. Hiebert, X. L. Feng, and M. L. Roukes, “Towards single-molecule nanomechanical mass spectrometry,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 4(7), 445–450 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

39

39. M. Poot and H. S. J. van der Zant, “Mechanical systems in the quantum regime,” Phys. Rep. 511(5), 273–335 (2012). [CrossRef]

]. Their high mechanical quality factor Qm and mechanical frequency fm are very useful for optomechanical applications, such as mass sensing, force sensing, and cooling/amplification of mechanical vibrations [48

48. G. Anetsberger, R. Rivière, A. Schliesser, O. Arcizet, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Ultralow-dissipation optomechanical resonators on a chip,” Nat. Photonics 2(10), 627–633 (2008). [CrossRef]

]. Depending on specific geometry, the frequency of the silicon nanobeams used here is around 1 GHz for the fundamental in-plane mode. The mechanical Q is affected by various loss mechanisms, e.g., clamping, thermoelastic damping, defect motions, and fluidic loss, etc. Among all the sources, clamping loss is usually a major loss channel for doubly clamped beams [39

39. M. Poot and H. S. J. van der Zant, “Mechanical systems in the quantum regime,” Phys. Rep. 511(5), 273–335 (2012). [CrossRef]

]. We compute the complex frequencies of mechanical modes of the L3-nanobeam cavity with the eigenvalue module in COMSOL 4.2a, a multiphysics solver based on a finite-element method [49

49. COMSOL Group, http://www.comsol.com/

]. The mechanical Q is then easily derived. The simulated geometry is identical to that used in the optical modeling. PMLs are applied at the boundaries of computation domain as an efficient impedance-matched nonphysical material for absorbing the radiating elastic waves without reflection [35

35. D. Bindel and S. Govindjee, “Elastic PMLs for resonator anchor loss simulation,” Tech report UCB / SEMM-2005/01.

,36

36. U. Basu and A. K. Chopra, “Perfectly matched layers for time-harmonic elastodynamics of unbounded domains: theory and finite-element implementation,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 192(11-12), 1337–1375 (2003). [CrossRef]

,50

50. M. Eichenfield, J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “Modeling dispersive coupling and losses of localized optical and mechanical modes in optomechanical crystals,” Opt. Express 17(22), 20078–20098 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Its implementation is based on complex coordinate scaling and has also been widely used in electromagnetic simulations [46

46. A. F. Oskooi, D. Roundy, M. Ibanescu, P. Bermel, J. D. Joannopoulos, and S. G. Johnson, “MEEP: A flexible free-software package for electromagnetic simulations by the FDTD method,” Comput. Phys. Commun. 181(3), 687–702 (2010). [CrossRef]

]. The outer edges of the PMLs are fixed, and the thickness of the PMLs is set approximately to one elastic wavelength. As shown in Fig. 6(a)
Fig. 6 (a) Top view of the meshed structure used in the finite-element analysis. Fixed boundary conditions are applied outside the PMLs. The top and bottom surfaces are set as free boundaries. (b),(c) Normalized displacement field intensity (log scale) for the differential and common mode of Design 1, respectively. The insets are zoom-ins of the localized beam motion showing the displacements in linear scale. (d),(e) Corresponding von Mises stress field (log scale). (f) Radiating longitudinal elastic wave excited by the differential beam motion (Media 1). (g) Radiating transverse wave excited by the common beam motion (Media 2). In (f) and (g), the displacement fields (linear scale) are overlaid with structural deformation.
, the minimum mesh element size is 2.4 nm and the mesh element growth rate is 1.3. The maximum mesh element size is 20 nm in the beam region and 60 nm in other regions. The resolution of the curvature is 0.2. With these settings, every mesh element is thus at least 89 times smaller than the wavelengths of the transverse and longitudinal elastic waves, which are 9.66 μm and 5.34 μm, respectively, in silicon at 1 GHz. The effectiveness of absorption by the PMLs is confirmed [36

36. U. Basu and A. K. Chopra, “Perfectly matched layers for time-harmonic elastodynamics of unbounded domains: theory and finite-element implementation,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 192(11-12), 1337–1375 (2003). [CrossRef]

] by applying harmonic point forces to a photonic crystal membrane.

Figure 6 illustrates the in-plane mechanical modes of the nanobeams. For the L3-nanobeam cavity, the two nanobeams are clamped to the pliant PhC slab and are thus mechanically coupled via the anchors, resulting in a differential and a common mode [30

30. M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459(7246), 550–555 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. For Design 1, the computed complex frequencies fm of these eigenmodes are 9.61 × 108 + i4.24 × 104 Hz and 9.58 × 108 + i9.94 × 106 Hz, respectively. These compare well with an analytical estimate from fm=CE/ρ(wb/Ls2) [39

39. M. Poot and H. S. J. van der Zant, “Mechanical systems in the quantum regime,” Phys. Rep. 511(5), 273–335 (2012). [CrossRef]

], where the Young’s modulus E is 170 GPa and the density ρ is 2330 kg/m3 for single-crystal silicon. C is a constant dependent on the mode and the beam clamping conditions at the ends of the beam. For the fundamental mode of a doubly clamped beam, C = 1.07 (for a Poisson’s ratio of 0.28) and the estimated frequency is 1.2 GHz for a beam with the dimensions of Design 1, which is slightly higher due to the finite mechanical compliance at the clamping points in the COMSOL computations.

Furthermore, we note that the clamping-loss-limited mechanical Q for the differential mode (1.13 × 104) is more than two orders of magnitude higher than that for the common mode (only 48). This significant Q difference can be explained by the mechanical displacement field and stress field as shown in Fig. 6(b)6(g). Figure 6(b) and 6(c) are snapshots of the mechanical displacement intensity (log scale) for the differential and common modes. The displacement intensity is defined as I=Re(u)2+Re(v)2+Re(w)2 where u, v, and w are the displacements in the x, y and z directions, respectively. The difference resides not only in the beam motion but also in the radiating elastic waves propagating in the PhC membrane: First, the amplitude of the radiating elastic waves for the differential mode is much smaller than that for the common mode, which directly explains the much higher Q of the differential mode than the common mode. Second, the radiation pattern for the common mode is similar to that produced by an in-plane harmonic point force driving the membrane in the y direction, while the radiation pattern for the differential mode is more interference-like. The loss channels are also different for these two modes, as illustrated by the stress fields in Fig. 6(d) and 6(e). The differential mode has much more localized field around the anchor region than the common mode. This is attributed to the fact that the two nanobeams pull the anchors in opposite directions for the differential mode, whereas they pull in the same direction for the common mode. The different forces induce the excited elastic waves with different phases for the two modes. Further inspection of the propagating elastic waves reveals their different nature. As shown in Fig. 6(f) and 6(g) (movies attached separately), the lattice holes move along the propagation direction for the differential mode, but move laterally with respect to the propagation direction for the common mode. This indicates that longitudinal waves are excited by the differential beam motion while transverse waves are excited by the common beam motion, which are in agreement with their different stress fields. The above investigation points to a greatly suppressed radiation loss for the differential mode. In parallel with the numerical designs, we measured the fabricated samples of Design 1 [34

34. X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram doubly clamped nanomechanical resonators embedded in a high-Q two-dimensional photonic crystal nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12(5), 2299–2305 (2012), doi: [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] which show mechanical Q values up to 1230 in vacuum [34

34. X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram doubly clamped nanomechanical resonators embedded in a high-Q two-dimensional photonic crystal nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12(5), 2299–2305 (2012), doi: [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The discrepancy in the Q values is mainly caused by fabrication imperfections, as illustrated in detail in Section 4.

Compared with Design 1, Design 2 employs thinner and longer nanobeams (wb, Ls) = (60 nm, 1.9a). The simulated frequency is 693.9 MHz for the differential mechanical mode, about 268 MHz lower than that of Design 1. The mechanical Q calculated from the complex frequency is 4.99 × 104, more than four times higher than that of Design 1. Its transfer function between the force and displacement obtained from the frequency−response module in COMSOL 4.2a is shown in Fig. 7(a)
Fig. 7 (a) Transfer function obtained by forced frequency−response analysis. The phase, the transfer intensity, and its Lorentzian fit are plotted in blue dashed line, blue square markers, and red solid line, respectively. (b) Mechanical frequency fm and quality factor Qm versus the beam width for both the differential and common mode. Design 2 with wb = 60 nm is used here.
. A harmonic point force oscillating along the y direction is applied at the center of one beam, where the displacement amplitude is also monitored. The transfer intensity is the peak-normalized square of the displacement amplitude and a mechanical Q of 4.53 × 104 is obtained by the Lorentzian fitting, which matches well (within 9%) with that from the complex-frequency computations. Similarly, the mechanical Q fitted from the transfer intensity of Design 1 is 1.09 × 104, which also matches well (within 4%) with that derived from the complex frequency (1.13 × 104). The small discrepancies arise from the computational errors between different solvers. The π-phase transition across the resonance also provides the mechanical Q from its maximum phase slope 2Qm/fm, which is essentially the same as the fitted value from transfer intensity. The transfer function method thus confirms the results obtained by the eigenvalue solver, albeit more computational intensive. The above numerical results from two different designs have shown a large frequency tuning range and a strong dependence of mechanical Q on the beam width. Such dependence is exhibited in Fig. 7(b), where the beam width varies from 50 to 70 nm for Design 2. The mechanical frequencies change linearly with a slope of 9.45 MHz/nm and 9.91 MHz/nm for the differential and common mode, respectively. The slight difference between their slopes is a result of varying mechanical coupling strength of the two beams: wider beams with larger elastic constant exert larger forces to the clamping points yielding stronger coupling and larger frequency difference. The L3-nanobeam cavities possess high frequencies for beam width wb less than 100 nm with a linear frequency dependence on wb according to fmwb/Ls2. Furthermore, the mechanical Q increases from 1.72 × 104 to 2.03 × 105 as the beam width decreases from 70 to 50 nm. This is most likely due to the fact that beams with a smaller elastic constant and a smaller mass apply less force to the anchor region and that the stress field is more localized with a reduced beam cross-sectional area. These two factors lead to weaker residual loss (and thus higher Q) for the differential modes, while they do not affect much on the common mode Q. It should be noted that, even with the beam width variation, the optical Q values remain above 4.36 × 104 as shown in Table 1

Table 1. Optomechanical properties of the L3-nanobeam cavities. Design 1 and Design 2 refer to the two structures obtained in optical Q optimization for different beam geometries.

table-icon
View This Table
. The overall resonant wavelength shift is about 19 nm, corresponding to an average of 0.95 nm per 1 nm increase in beam width.

4. Dispersive optomechanical coupling and influence of beam asymmetry

Variations from fabrication: So far we have been focusing on symmetric structures with two identical beams. As both nanobeam width and slot width are below 100 nm, tiny variations from the ideal design can cause deviation from the expected properties. To evaluate such effects from, e.g., fabrication imperfections, the center slot of Design 1 is shifted laterally such that the two nanobeams now have different beam widths. Figure 8(a)
Fig. 8 (a) Mechanical frequency fm and quality factor Qm versus the center-slot displacement sc. Design 1 corresponds to the structure with sc = 0. Mode 1 originates from the differential mode, while Mode 2 originates from the common mode. (b)–(e) Zooms of the displacement fields of the nanobeams with sc = 0.25 nm (b,c) and sc = 3.0 nm (d,e).
shows that the higher-frequency mode (Mode 1) originates from the differential motion of the two beams and thus exhibits a higher mechanical Q than the lower-frequency mode (Mode 2) until the center slot shift sc reaches 2.0 nm. Note that the mechanical Q of Mode 1 drops to around 1,000 with sc = 0.25 nm, i.e., only a 0.5 nm difference in the beam width. It continues to drop to around 100, similarly to that of Mode 2 when sc is larger than 1.0 nm. The decoupling of the two beams with increased sc is also reflected by the beam frequencies, both of which exhibit a linear dependence for sc larger than 0.5 nm, each approaching the frequency of an individual beam. When sc reaches 3.0 nm, the frequency difference between the two branches is as large as 50.8 MHz. Figure 8(b)8(e) show the displacement fields of the nanobeams for the two modes with sc = 0.25 nm (b,c) and sc = 3.0 nm (d,e). The coupled and uncoupled beam motions are evident, which is consistent with the frequency behavior shown in Fig. 8(a). It should be noted that such a 3-nm lateral shift of center slot only slight changes the optical Q, but considerably alters the optomechanical coupling rates for both mechanical modes to approximately one half of that of the differential mode of Design 1 [see Table 1].

Table 1 summarizes the optomechanical properties of several typical devices numerically studied in this paper. The experimental results reported in Ref [34

34. X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram doubly clamped nanomechanical resonators embedded in a high-Q two-dimensional photonic crystal nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12(5), 2299–2305 (2012), doi: [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. are in good agreement with the simulation predictions. Fabricated based on Design 1, the sample exhibits a loaded optical Q of 1.0 × 104, a mechanical frequency around 1 GHz, and a mechanical Q of 1230 in vacuum for the differential mode [34

34. X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram doubly clamped nanomechanical resonators embedded in a high-Q two-dimensional photonic crystal nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12(5), 2299–2305 (2012), doi: [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The common mode is not observed in the optical transduction measurement due to its small optomechanical coupling rate and a very low mechanical Q. The mode decoupling is also experimentally demonstrated in samples with intentional asymmetry: when the center slot is shifted laterally by 3.0 nm in the layout design, two mechanical peaks are observed with their mechanical Q values both around 55. It is evident that the differential mode of high mechanical Q benefits from the overall symmetry of the double beams. In our simulations here, the higher optical and mechanical Q values are obtained for ideally fabricated structures. In practice, however, the unavoidable structural imperfections during fabrication always deteriorate the device performance. Taking account of the loss to the coupling waveguides, the measured optical Q agrees very well with the simulated value. The optical Q should be further improved by implementation of Design 2 where a 4-fold enhancement is expected. Actually, cavities with thinner beams generally possess higher optimized Q values due to the weaker perturbation. For example, a cavity (was, wb, Ls, sx1, sx2, sx3, sy) = (48 nm, 48 nm, 1.9a, −0.335a, −0.085a, 0.115a, 0), labeled as “HiQ48nm” in Table 1, exhibits an optical Q of 1.02 × 105. On the mechanical part, we have observed a drop of mechanical Q from 1230 in vacuum to 580 in air [34

34. X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram doubly clamped nanomechanical resonators embedded in a high-Q two-dimensional photonic crystal nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12(5), 2299–2305 (2012), doi: [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. It is clear that air damping plays a major role in ambient conditions. Under vacuum conditions, while the mechanical Q of devices reported by other groups [5

5. E. Verhagen, S. Deléglise, S. Weis, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Quantum-coherent coupling of a mechanical oscillator to an optical cavity mode,” Nature 482(7383), 63–67 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,6

6. J. Chan, T. P. M. Alegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Gröblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478(7367), 89–92 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,53

53. K. Y. Yasumura, T. D. Stowe, E. M. Chow, T. Pfafman, T. W. Kenny, B. C. Stipe, and D. Rugar, “Quality factors in micron- and submicron-thick cantilevers,” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 9(1), 117–125 (2000). [CrossRef]

] is limited by thermoelastic damping (TED), the TED-limited mechanical Q of our devices is estimated by COMSOL to be 7.08 × 104 for the fundamental differential mode of Design 1 at room temperature [49

49. COMSOL Group, http://www.comsol.com/

]. Under cryogenic conditions, the Q value is even larger [5

5. E. Verhagen, S. Deléglise, S. Weis, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Quantum-coherent coupling of a mechanical oscillator to an optical cavity mode,” Nature 482(7383), 63–67 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,6

6. J. Chan, T. P. M. Alegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Gröblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478(7367), 89–92 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Thus, it is safe to exclude TED as the main loss mechanism. On the other hand, since the significant Q drop and mode decoupling of center-slot-shifted cavities are well predicted by analysis in Fig. 8, it is concluded that clamping loss should be the main loss mechanism for our devices measured in vacuum and the relatively low measured Q values are basically due to the uncontrollable fabrication imperfections.

5. Conclusions

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Xingshng Luan, Di Wang, Jie Gao and James F. McMillan for helpful discussions on the optical and mechanical simulations. This work is supported by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DAPPA) DSO with program manager Dr. J. R. Abo-Shaeer under the ORCHID program (contract number C11L10831). M.P. acknowledges a Rubicon fellowship from The Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NOW)/Marie Curie Cofund Action.

References and links

1.

T. J. Kippenberg and K. J. Vahala, “Cavity optomechanics: back-action at the mesoscale,” Science 321(5893), 1172–1176 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2.

I. Favero and K. Karrai, “Optomechanics of deformable optical devices,” Nat. Photonics 3(4), 201–205 (2009). [CrossRef]

3.

D. Van Thourhout and J. Roels, “Optomechanical device actuation through the optical gradient force,” Nat. Photonics 4(4), 211–217 (2010). [CrossRef]

4.

F. Marquardt, “Optomechanics: push towards the quantum limit,” Nat. Phys. 4(7), 513–514 (2008). [CrossRef]

5.

E. Verhagen, S. Deléglise, S. Weis, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Quantum-coherent coupling of a mechanical oscillator to an optical cavity mode,” Nature 482(7383), 63–67 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6.

J. Chan, T. P. M. Alegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Gröblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478(7367), 89–92 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

J. D. Teufel, T. Donner, D. Li, J. W. Harlow, M. S. Allman, K. Cicak, A. J. Sirois, J. D. Whittaker, K. W. Lehnert, and R. W. Simmonds, “Sideband cooling of micromechanical motion to the quantum ground state,” Nature 475(7356), 359–363 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

8.

J. C. Sankey, C. Yang, B. M. Zwickl, A. M. Jayich, and J. G. E. Harris, “Strong and tunable nonlinear optomechanical coupling in a low-loss system,” Nat. Phys. 6(9), 707–712 (2010). [CrossRef]

9.

A. D. O’Connell, M. Hofheinz, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bialczak, M. Lenander, E. Lucero, M. Neeley, D. Sank, H. Wang, M. Weides, J. Wenner, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, “Quantum ground state and single-phonon control of a mechanical resonator,” Nature 464(7289), 697–703 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10.

Y.-S. Park and H. Wang, “Resolved-sideband and cryogenic cooling of an optomechanical resonator,” Nat. Phys. 5(7), 489–493 (2009). [CrossRef]

11.

S. Gröblacher, J. B. Hertzberg, M. R. Vanner, G. D. Cole, S. Gigan, K. C. Schwab, and M. Aspelmeyer, “Demonstration of an ultracold micro-optomechanical oscillator in a cryogenic cavity,” Nat. Phys. 5(7), 485–488 (2009). [CrossRef]

12.

A. Schliesser, R. Rivière, G. Anetsberger, O. Arcizet, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Resolved-sideband cooling of a micromechanical oscillator,” Nat. Phys. 4(5), 415–419 (2008). [CrossRef]

13.

I. Wilson-Rae, P. Zoller, and A. Imamoğlu, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical resonator mode to its quantum ground state,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 92(7), 075507 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14.

S. Weis, R. Rivière, S. Deléglise, E. Gavartin, O. Arcizet, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Optomechanically induced transparency,” Science 330(6010), 1520–1523 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15.

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, T. P. Mayer Alegre, J. Chan, M. Eichenfield, M. Winger, Q. Lin, J. T. Hill, D. E. Chang, and O. Painter, “Electromagnetically induced transparency and slow light with optomechanics,” Nature 472(7341), 69–73 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16.

G. Bahl, M. Tomes, F. Marquardt, and T. Carmon, “Observation of spontaneous Brillouin cooling,” Nat. Phys. 8(3), 203–207 (2012). [CrossRef]

17.

C. A. Regal, J. D. Teufel, and K. W. Lehnert, “Measuring nanomechanical motion with a resonant microwave cavity interferometer,” Nat. Phys. 4(7), 555–560 (2008). [CrossRef]

18.

V. Fiore, Y. Yang, M. C. Kuzyk, R. Barbour, L. Tian, and H. Wang, “Storing optical information as a mechanical excitation in a silica optomechanical resonator,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107(13), 133601 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

19.

G. Anetsberger, E. Gavartin, O. Arcizet, Q. P. Unterreithmeier, E. M. Weig, M. L. Gorodetsky, J. P. Kotthaus, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Measuring nanomechanical motion with an imprecision far below the standard quantum limit,” Phys. Rev. A 82, 061804(R) (2010).

20.

G. Khitrova, H. M. Gibbs, M. Kira, S. W. Koch, and A. Scherer, “Vacuum Rabi splitting in semiconductors,” Nat. Phys. 2(2), 81–90 (2006). [CrossRef]

21.

I. Fushman, D. Englund, A. Faraon, N. Stoltz, P. Petroff, and J. Vuckovic, “Controlled phase shifts with a single quantum dot,” Science 320(5877), 769–772 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22.

P. Colman, C. Husko, S. Combrie, I. Sagnes, C. W. Wong, and A. De Rossi, “Temporal solitons and pulse compression in photonic crystal waveguides,” Nat. Photonics 4(12), 862–868 (2010). [CrossRef]

23.

J. F. McMillan, M. Yu, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “Observation of four-wave mixing in slow-light silicon photonic crystal waveguides,” Opt. Express 18(15), 15484–15497 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

24.

J. F. McMillan, M. Yu, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “Observations of spontaneous Raman scattering in silicon slow-light photonic crystal waveguides,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 93(25), 251105 (2008). [CrossRef]

25.

M. Notomi, H. Taniyama, S. Mitsugi, and E. Kuramochi, “Optomechanical wavelength and energy conversion in high- Q double-layer cavities of photonic crystal slabs,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97(2), 023903 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

26.

Y. Li, J. Zheng, J. Gao, J. Shu, M. S. Aras, and C. W. Wong, “Design of dispersive optomechanical coupling and cooling in ultrahigh-Q/V slot-type photonic crystal cavities,” Opt. Express 18(23), 23844–23856 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

27.

M. Li, W. H. P. Pernice, C. Xiong, T. Baehr-Jones, M. Hochberg, and H. X. Tang, “Harnessing optical forces in integrated photonic circuits,” Nature 456(7221), 480–484 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

28.

M. Bagheri, M. Poot, M. Li, W. P. H. Pernice, and H. X. Tang, “Dynamic manipulation of nanomechanical resonators in the high-amplitude regime and non-volatile mechanical memory operation,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 6(11), 726–732 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

29.

G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462(7273), 633–636 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

30.

M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459(7246), 550–555 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

31.

J. Zheng, Y. Li, M. S. Aras, A. Stein, K. L. Shepard, and C. W. Wong, “Parametric optomechanical oscillations in two-dimensional slot-type high-Q photonic crystal cavities,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100(21), 211908 (2012). [CrossRef]

32.

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, T. P. M. Alegre, M. Winger, and O. Painter, “Optomechanics in an ultrahigh-Q two-dimensional photonic crystal cavity,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 97(18), 181106 (2010). [CrossRef]

33.

E. Gavartin, R. Braive, I. Sagnes, O. Arcizet, A. Beveratos, T. J. Kippenberg, and I. Robert-Philip, “Optomechanical coupling in a two-dimensional photonic crystal defect cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106(20), 203902 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

34.

X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram doubly clamped nanomechanical resonators embedded in a high-Q two-dimensional photonic crystal nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12(5), 2299–2305 (2012), doi: [CrossRef] [PubMed]

35.

D. Bindel and S. Govindjee, “Elastic PMLs for resonator anchor loss simulation,” Tech report UCB / SEMM-2005/01.

36.

U. Basu and A. K. Chopra, “Perfectly matched layers for time-harmonic elastodynamics of unbounded domains: theory and finite-element implementation,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 192(11-12), 1337–1375 (2003). [CrossRef]

37.

A. K. Naik, M. S. Hanay, W. K. Hiebert, X. L. Feng, and M. L. Roukes, “Towards single-molecule nanomechanical mass spectrometry,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 4(7), 445–450 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

38.

M. Li, H. X. Tang, and M. L. Roukes, “Ultra-sensitive NEMS-based cantilevers for sensing, scanned probe and very high-frequency applications,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 2(2), 114–120 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

39.

M. Poot and H. S. J. van der Zant, “Mechanical systems in the quantum regime,” Phys. Rep. 511(5), 273–335 (2012). [CrossRef]

40.

Y. Akahane, T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, “Fine-tuned high-Q photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Opt. Express 13(4), 1202–1214 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

41.

X. Yang, M. Yu, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102(17), 173902 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

42.

T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, “Analysis of the experimental Q factors (~ 1 million) of photonic crystal nanocavities,” Opt. Express 14(5), 1996–2002 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

43.

S. G. Johnson and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Block-iterative frequency-domain methods for Maxwell’s equations in a planewave basis,” Opt. Express 8(3), 173–190 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

44.

J. Gao, J. F. McMillan, M.-C. Wu, J. Zheng, S. Assefa, and C. W. Wong, “Demonstration of an air-slot mode-gap confined photonic crystal slab nanocavity with ultrasmall mode volumes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 96(5), 051123 (2010). [CrossRef]

45.

B.-S. Song, T. Asano, Y. Akahane, Y. Tanaka, and S. Noda, “Transmission and reflection characteristics of in-plane hetero-photonic crystals,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 85(20), 4591–4593 (2004). [CrossRef]

46.

A. F. Oskooi, D. Roundy, M. Ibanescu, P. Bermel, J. D. Joannopoulos, and S. G. Johnson, “MEEP: A flexible free-software package for electromagnetic simulations by the FDTD method,” Comput. Phys. Commun. 181(3), 687–702 (2010). [CrossRef]

47.

K. Srinivasan and O. Painter, “Momentum space design of high-Q photonic crystal optical cavities,” Opt. Express 10(15), 670–684 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

48.

G. Anetsberger, R. Rivière, A. Schliesser, O. Arcizet, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Ultralow-dissipation optomechanical resonators on a chip,” Nat. Photonics 2(10), 627–633 (2008). [CrossRef]

49.

COMSOL Group, http://www.comsol.com/

50.

M. Eichenfield, J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “Modeling dispersive coupling and losses of localized optical and mechanical modes in optomechanical crystals,” Opt. Express 17(22), 20078–20098 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

51.

S. G. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. A. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. D. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E Stat. Nonlin. Soft Matter Phys. 65(6), 066611 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

52.

C. W. Wong, P. T. Rakich, S. G. Johnson, M. Qi, H. I. Smith, E. P. Ippen, L. C. Kimerling, Y. Jeon, G. Barbastathis, and S.-G. Kim, “Strain-tunable silicon photonic band gap microcavities in optical waveguides,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 84(8), 1242–1244 (2004). [CrossRef]

53.

K. Y. Yasumura, T. D. Stowe, E. M. Chow, T. Pfafman, T. W. Kenny, B. C. Stipe, and D. Rugar, “Quality factors in micron- and submicron-thick cantilevers,” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 9(1), 117–125 (2000). [CrossRef]

54.

Y. Takahashi, Y. Tanaka, H. Hagino, T. Sugiya, Y. Sato, T. Asano, and S. Noda, “Design and demonstration of high-Q photonic heterostructure nanocavities suitable for integration,” Opt. Express 17(20), 18093–18102 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(220.4880) Optical design and fabrication : Optomechanics
(230.5750) Optical devices : Resonators
(230.5298) Optical devices : Photonic crystals

ToC Category:
Photonic Crystals

History
Original Manuscript: July 31, 2012
Revised Manuscript: October 22, 2012
Manuscript Accepted: November 1, 2012
Published: November 9, 2012

Citation
Jiangjun Zheng, Xiankai Sun, Ying Li, Menno Poot, Ali Dadgar, Norman Nan Shi, Wolfram H. P. Pernice, Hong X. Tang, and Chee Wei Wong, "Femtogram dispersive L3-nanobeam optomechanical cavities: design and experimental comparison," Opt. Express 20, 26486-26498 (2012)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-20-24-26486


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. T. J. Kippenberg and K. J. Vahala, “Cavity optomechanics: back-action at the mesoscale,” Science 321(5893), 1172–1176 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. I. Favero and K. Karrai, “Optomechanics of deformable optical devices,” Nat. Photonics 3(4), 201–205 (2009). [CrossRef]
  3. D. Van Thourhout and J. Roels, “Optomechanical device actuation through the optical gradient force,” Nat. Photonics 4(4), 211–217 (2010). [CrossRef]
  4. F. Marquardt, “Optomechanics: push towards the quantum limit,” Nat. Phys. 4(7), 513–514 (2008). [CrossRef]
  5. E. Verhagen, S. Deléglise, S. Weis, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Quantum-coherent coupling of a mechanical oscillator to an optical cavity mode,” Nature 482(7383), 63–67 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. J. Chan, T. P. M. Alegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Gröblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478(7367), 89–92 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. J. D. Teufel, T. Donner, D. Li, J. W. Harlow, M. S. Allman, K. Cicak, A. J. Sirois, J. D. Whittaker, K. W. Lehnert, and R. W. Simmonds, “Sideband cooling of micromechanical motion to the quantum ground state,” Nature 475(7356), 359–363 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. J. C. Sankey, C. Yang, B. M. Zwickl, A. M. Jayich, and J. G. E. Harris, “Strong and tunable nonlinear optomechanical coupling in a low-loss system,” Nat. Phys. 6(9), 707–712 (2010). [CrossRef]
  9. A. D. O’Connell, M. Hofheinz, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bialczak, M. Lenander, E. Lucero, M. Neeley, D. Sank, H. Wang, M. Weides, J. Wenner, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, “Quantum ground state and single-phonon control of a mechanical resonator,” Nature 464(7289), 697–703 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Y.-S. Park and H. Wang, “Resolved-sideband and cryogenic cooling of an optomechanical resonator,” Nat. Phys. 5(7), 489–493 (2009). [CrossRef]
  11. S. Gröblacher, J. B. Hertzberg, M. R. Vanner, G. D. Cole, S. Gigan, K. C. Schwab, and M. Aspelmeyer, “Demonstration of an ultracold micro-optomechanical oscillator in a cryogenic cavity,” Nat. Phys. 5(7), 485–488 (2009). [CrossRef]
  12. A. Schliesser, R. Rivière, G. Anetsberger, O. Arcizet, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Resolved-sideband cooling of a micromechanical oscillator,” Nat. Phys. 4(5), 415–419 (2008). [CrossRef]
  13. I. Wilson-Rae, P. Zoller, and A. Imamoğlu, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical resonator mode to its quantum ground state,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 92(7), 075507 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. S. Weis, R. Rivière, S. Deléglise, E. Gavartin, O. Arcizet, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Optomechanically induced transparency,” Science 330(6010), 1520–1523 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. A. H. Safavi-Naeini, T. P. Mayer Alegre, J. Chan, M. Eichenfield, M. Winger, Q. Lin, J. T. Hill, D. E. Chang, and O. Painter, “Electromagnetically induced transparency and slow light with optomechanics,” Nature 472(7341), 69–73 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. G. Bahl, M. Tomes, F. Marquardt, and T. Carmon, “Observation of spontaneous Brillouin cooling,” Nat. Phys. 8(3), 203–207 (2012). [CrossRef]
  17. C. A. Regal, J. D. Teufel, and K. W. Lehnert, “Measuring nanomechanical motion with a resonant microwave cavity interferometer,” Nat. Phys. 4(7), 555–560 (2008). [CrossRef]
  18. V. Fiore, Y. Yang, M. C. Kuzyk, R. Barbour, L. Tian, and H. Wang, “Storing optical information as a mechanical excitation in a silica optomechanical resonator,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107(13), 133601 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. G. Anetsberger, E. Gavartin, O. Arcizet, Q. P. Unterreithmeier, E. M. Weig, M. L. Gorodetsky, J. P. Kotthaus, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Measuring nanomechanical motion with an imprecision far below the standard quantum limit,” Phys. Rev. A 82, 061804(R) (2010).
  20. G. Khitrova, H. M. Gibbs, M. Kira, S. W. Koch, and A. Scherer, “Vacuum Rabi splitting in semiconductors,” Nat. Phys. 2(2), 81–90 (2006). [CrossRef]
  21. I. Fushman, D. Englund, A. Faraon, N. Stoltz, P. Petroff, and J. Vuckovic, “Controlled phase shifts with a single quantum dot,” Science 320(5877), 769–772 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. P. Colman, C. Husko, S. Combrie, I. Sagnes, C. W. Wong, and A. De Rossi, “Temporal solitons and pulse compression in photonic crystal waveguides,” Nat. Photonics 4(12), 862–868 (2010). [CrossRef]
  23. J. F. McMillan, M. Yu, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “Observation of four-wave mixing in slow-light silicon photonic crystal waveguides,” Opt. Express 18(15), 15484–15497 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. J. F. McMillan, M. Yu, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “Observations of spontaneous Raman scattering in silicon slow-light photonic crystal waveguides,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 93(25), 251105 (2008). [CrossRef]
  25. M. Notomi, H. Taniyama, S. Mitsugi, and E. Kuramochi, “Optomechanical wavelength and energy conversion in high- Q double-layer cavities of photonic crystal slabs,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97(2), 023903 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Y. Li, J. Zheng, J. Gao, J. Shu, M. S. Aras, and C. W. Wong, “Design of dispersive optomechanical coupling and cooling in ultrahigh-Q/V slot-type photonic crystal cavities,” Opt. Express 18(23), 23844–23856 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. M. Li, W. H. P. Pernice, C. Xiong, T. Baehr-Jones, M. Hochberg, and H. X. Tang, “Harnessing optical forces in integrated photonic circuits,” Nature 456(7221), 480–484 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. M. Bagheri, M. Poot, M. Li, W. P. H. Pernice, and H. X. Tang, “Dynamic manipulation of nanomechanical resonators in the high-amplitude regime and non-volatile mechanical memory operation,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 6(11), 726–732 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462(7273), 633–636 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459(7246), 550–555 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. J. Zheng, Y. Li, M. S. Aras, A. Stein, K. L. Shepard, and C. W. Wong, “Parametric optomechanical oscillations in two-dimensional slot-type high-Q photonic crystal cavities,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100(21), 211908 (2012). [CrossRef]
  32. A. H. Safavi-Naeini, T. P. M. Alegre, M. Winger, and O. Painter, “Optomechanics in an ultrahigh-Q two-dimensional photonic crystal cavity,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 97(18), 181106 (2010). [CrossRef]
  33. E. Gavartin, R. Braive, I. Sagnes, O. Arcizet, A. Beveratos, T. J. Kippenberg, and I. Robert-Philip, “Optomechanical coupling in a two-dimensional photonic crystal defect cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106(20), 203902 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram doubly clamped nanomechanical resonators embedded in a high-Q two-dimensional photonic crystal nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12(5), 2299–2305 (2012), doi: [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. D. Bindel and S. Govindjee, “Elastic PMLs for resonator anchor loss simulation,” Tech report UCB / SEMM-2005/01.
  36. U. Basu and A. K. Chopra, “Perfectly matched layers for time-harmonic elastodynamics of unbounded domains: theory and finite-element implementation,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 192(11-12), 1337–1375 (2003). [CrossRef]
  37. A. K. Naik, M. S. Hanay, W. K. Hiebert, X. L. Feng, and M. L. Roukes, “Towards single-molecule nanomechanical mass spectrometry,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 4(7), 445–450 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. M. Li, H. X. Tang, and M. L. Roukes, “Ultra-sensitive NEMS-based cantilevers for sensing, scanned probe and very high-frequency applications,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 2(2), 114–120 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. M. Poot and H. S. J. van der Zant, “Mechanical systems in the quantum regime,” Phys. Rep. 511(5), 273–335 (2012). [CrossRef]
  40. Y. Akahane, T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, “Fine-tuned high-Q photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Opt. Express 13(4), 1202–1214 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. X. Yang, M. Yu, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102(17), 173902 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, “Analysis of the experimental Q factors (~ 1 million) of photonic crystal nanocavities,” Opt. Express 14(5), 1996–2002 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. S. G. Johnson and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Block-iterative frequency-domain methods for Maxwell’s equations in a planewave basis,” Opt. Express 8(3), 173–190 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. J. Gao, J. F. McMillan, M.-C. Wu, J. Zheng, S. Assefa, and C. W. Wong, “Demonstration of an air-slot mode-gap confined photonic crystal slab nanocavity with ultrasmall mode volumes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 96(5), 051123 (2010). [CrossRef]
  45. B.-S. Song, T. Asano, Y. Akahane, Y. Tanaka, and S. Noda, “Transmission and reflection characteristics of in-plane hetero-photonic crystals,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 85(20), 4591–4593 (2004). [CrossRef]
  46. A. F. Oskooi, D. Roundy, M. Ibanescu, P. Bermel, J. D. Joannopoulos, and S. G. Johnson, “MEEP: A flexible free-software package for electromagnetic simulations by the FDTD method,” Comput. Phys. Commun. 181(3), 687–702 (2010). [CrossRef]
  47. K. Srinivasan and O. Painter, “Momentum space design of high-Q photonic crystal optical cavities,” Opt. Express 10(15), 670–684 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. G. Anetsberger, R. Rivière, A. Schliesser, O. Arcizet, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Ultralow-dissipation optomechanical resonators on a chip,” Nat. Photonics 2(10), 627–633 (2008). [CrossRef]
  49. COMSOL Group, http://www.comsol.com/
  50. M. Eichenfield, J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “Modeling dispersive coupling and losses of localized optical and mechanical modes in optomechanical crystals,” Opt. Express 17(22), 20078–20098 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. S. G. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. A. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. D. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E Stat. Nonlin. Soft Matter Phys. 65(6), 066611 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. C. W. Wong, P. T. Rakich, S. G. Johnson, M. Qi, H. I. Smith, E. P. Ippen, L. C. Kimerling, Y. Jeon, G. Barbastathis, and S.-G. Kim, “Strain-tunable silicon photonic band gap microcavities in optical waveguides,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 84(8), 1242–1244 (2004). [CrossRef]
  53. K. Y. Yasumura, T. D. Stowe, E. M. Chow, T. Pfafman, T. W. Kenny, B. C. Stipe, and D. Rugar, “Quality factors in micron- and submicron-thick cantilevers,” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 9(1), 117–125 (2000). [CrossRef]
  54. Y. Takahashi, Y. Tanaka, H. Hagino, T. Sugiya, Y. Sato, T. Asano, and S. Noda, “Design and demonstration of high-Q photonic heterostructure nanocavities suitable for integration,” Opt. Express 17(20), 18093–18102 (2009). [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.

Supplementary Material


» Media 1: MOV (650 KB)     
» Media 2: MOV (819 KB)     

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited