OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: Andrew M. Weiner
  • Vol. 22, Iss. 15 — Jul. 28, 2014
  • pp: 17880–17889
« Show journal navigation

Dynamic diffraction-limited light-coupling of 3D-maneuvered wave-guided optical waveguides

Mark Villangca, Andrew Bañas, Darwin Palima, and Jesper Glückstad  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 22, Issue 15, pp. 17880-17889 (2014)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.22.017880


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (16499 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We have previously proposed and demonstrated the targeted-light delivery capability of wave-guided optical waveguides (WOWs). As the WOWs are maneuvered in 3D space, it is important to maintain efficient light coupling through the waveguides within their operating volume. We propose the use of dynamic diffractive techniques to create diffraction-limited spots that will track and couple to the WOWs during operation. This is done by using a spatial light modulator to encode the necessary diffractive phase patterns to generate the multiple and dynamic coupling spots. The method is initially tested for a single WOW and we have experimentally demonstrated dynamic tracking and coupling for both lateral and axial displacements.

© 2014 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

With the popularity of 3D microprinting and proliferation of commercial two-photon polymerization (2PP) microfabrication systems, interesting structures and applications have been made. Biological experiments involving custom-made scaffolds for cell force measurement have been reported [1

1. F. Klein, T. Striebel, J. Fischer, Z. Jiang, C. M. Franz, G. von Freymann, M. Wegener, and M. Bastmeyer, “Elastic fully three-dimensional microstructure scaffolds for cell force measurements,” Adv. Mater. 22(8), 868–871 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and photonic metamaterials have been fabricated using 2PP [2

2. M. S. Rill, C. Plet, M. Thiel, I. Staude, G. von Freymann, S. Linden, and M. Wegener, “Photonic metamaterials by direct laser writing and silver chemical vapour deposition,” Nat. Mater. 7(7), 543–546 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. However these structures are static and interact passively with the sample of interest. A method for interacting actively and non-invasively with a system is to use optical traps which will serve as so-called “gentle microscopic hands”. There is an arsenal of literature describing techniques and systems available to perform optical trapping and manipulation. They range from single to multiple and dynamic traps both with single-sided and counter-propagating geometries, time-multiplexing beam scanning approaches [3

3. K. Sasaki, M. Koshioka, H. Misawa, N. Kitamura, and H. Masuhara, “Pattern formation and flow control of fine particles by laser-scanning micromanipulation,” Opt. Lett. 16(19), 1463–1465 (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and beam shaping techniques such as by use of diffractive optics [4

4. J. Liesener, M. Reicherter, T. Haist, and H. J. Tiziani, “Multi-functional optical tweezers using computer-generated holograms,” Opt. Commun. 185(1-3), 77–82 (2000). [CrossRef]

] or the Generalized Phase Contrast (GPC) method [5

5. J. Glückstad, “Phase contrast image synthesis,” Opt. Commun. 130(4-6), 225–230 (1996). [CrossRef]

,6

6. R. L. Eriksen, P. C. Mogensen, and J. Glückstad, “Multiple-beam optical tweezers generated by the generalized phase-contrast method,” Opt. Lett. 27(4), 267–269 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

It is thus interesting to combine specifically designed microstructures with advanced optical manipulation [7

7. D. Palima and J. Glückstad, “Gearing up for optical microrobotics: micromanipulation and actuation of synthetic microstructures by optical forces,” Laser Photon. Rev. 7(4), 478–494 (2013). [CrossRef]

]. We have previously proposed and demonstrated that microfabricated structures can be optically manipulated using our Biophotonics Workstation (BWS) [8

8. P. J. Rodrigo, L. Gammelgaard, P. Bøggild, I. Perch-Nielsen, and J. Glückstad, “Actuation of microfabricated tools using multiple GPC-based counterpropagating-beam traps,” Opt. Express 13(18), 6899–6904 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,9

9. H.-U. Ulriksen, J. Thøgersen, S. Keiding, I. R. Perch-Nielsen, J. S. Dam, D. Z. Palima, H. Stapelfeldt, and J. Glückstad, “Independent trapping, manipulation and characterization by an all-optical biophotonics workstation,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08034 (2008). [CrossRef]

]. The advantage of such a combination is that one can perform both beam shaping and microstructure topological or material optimization to fine-tune the light-matter interaction and to attain effects that are not possible with any of the techniques alone [10

10. J. Glückstad, “Optical manipulation: Sculpting the object,” Nat. Photonics 5(1), 7–8 (2011). [CrossRef]

]. Examples of this joint optimization can be found in the demonstration of optical lift [11

11. G. Swartzlander, T. J. Peterson, A. B. Artusio-Glimpse, and A. D. Raisanen, “Stable optical lift,” Nat. Photonics 5(1), 48–51 (2011). [CrossRef]

], the force clamping applications using conical tapers [12

12. S. H. Simpson, D. B. Phillips, D. M. Carberry, and S. Hanna, “Bespoke optical springs and passive force clamps from shaped dielectric particles,” J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 126, 91–98 (2013). [CrossRef]

,13

13. D. B. Phillips, M. J. Padgett, S. Hanna, Y.-L. D. Ho, D. M. Carberry, M. J. Miles, and S. H. Simpson, “Shape-induced force fields in optical trapping,” Nat. Photonics 8(5), 400–405 (2014). [CrossRef]

] and lately in light-deflecting bent waveguides [14

14. D. Palima, A. R. Bañas, G. Vizsnyiczai, L. Kelemen, T. Aabo, P. Ormos, and J. Glückstad, “Optical forces through guided light deflections,” Opt. Express 21(1), 581–593 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. It has been reported that surface imaging can be performed by using an optically actuated probe similar to how a scanning probe microscope (SPM) works with the advantage of exerting low forces and access to areas not possible with conventional SPM [13

13. D. B. Phillips, M. J. Padgett, S. Hanna, Y.-L. D. Ho, D. M. Carberry, M. J. Miles, and S. H. Simpson, “Shape-induced force fields in optical trapping,” Nat. Photonics 8(5), 400–405 (2014). [CrossRef]

,15

15. D. B. Phillips, G. M. Gibson, R. Bowman, M. J. Padgett, S. Hanna, D. M. Carberry, M. J. Miles, and S. H. Simpson, “An optically actuated surface scanning probe,” Opt. Express 20(28), 29679–29693 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Light guiding through microfabricated waveguides has also been reported recently by us. These optically manipulated waveguides, coined wave-guided optical waveguides (WOWs) are capable of redirecting light in geometries that are hard to accomplish with conventional optical trapping and are also capable of micro-to-nano coupling by structure-mediated means [16

16. D. Palima, A. R. Bañas, G. Vizsnyiczai, L. Kelemen, P. Ormos, and J. Glückstad, “Wave-guided optical waveguides,” Opt. Express 20(3), 2004–2014 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. This is experimentally visualized in Fig. 1
Fig. 1 Side-view microscope image showing experimental visualization of the focused light coupling to a free-standing WOW. Here the trapped WOW is brought to the focus of a static beam for optimal light coupling. In subsequent results, this green coupling light will be diffractively generated on an SLM to enable dynamic addressing and full 3D targeted light delivery.
, where side view microscopy shows an upward beam coupling into an optically trapped bent waveguide for redirecting the beam.

Hence, the WOWs together with our BWS form a combined platform for targeted-light delivery. In this work, we improve this platform and report on the inclusion of a dynamic diffractive setup in the BWS for dynamically shaping light that is coupled into the optically trapped waveguides. The advantage of using dynamic holograms on a spatial light modulator (SLM) is that light can be concentrated into diffraction-limited focal spots that can dynamically track each WOW as they move in 3D space. The following sections describe the experiments and experimental demonstrations including the fabrication of WOWs and their optical manipulation on the BWS, which is now equipped for diffractive-addressing of WOWs that are displaced in 3D.

2. Design and fabrication of waveguides

2.1 Two-photon fabrication

Wave-guided optical waveguides (WOWs) are composed of a free-standing bent waveguide with a tapering end that is attached to sphere handles for optical manipulation with six degrees of freedom, as shown in Fig. 2
Fig. 2 Array of wave-guided optical waveguides fabricated by two-photon polymerization on a glass substrate. Each WOW consists of a bent waveguide held by sphere handles to aid in optical manipulation. Scale bar: 40 µm. Insets show snapshots from the side-view microscope showing a free-floating, optically manipulated WOW (see Media 1).
. This design is chosen to be able to perform targeted light-delivery in odd geometries that is not possible with traditional trapping approaches. The fabrication has been done using a commercial two-photon photopolymerization setup (Nanoscribe Photonic Professional, λ=780nm, 100fs pulses, 80 Mhz repetition rate, >140 mW average power) and a proprietary photoresist (IP-L 780, n=1.50 after exposure). The laser writing speed is set to 50 µm/s at 50% laser power. An array of microstructures is fabricated on a glass substrate.

The resulting waveguides have a diameter of D=1µm and a bending radius of 6 µm. The surrounding water (n=1.33) serves as the effective cladding for the waveguide and thus the numerical aperture is given by
NA=nwaveguide2nbackground2=0.69
(1)
The normalized waveguide parameter, V, can be computed using the waveguide diameter, D, numerical aperture, NA, and wavelength, λ=532nm, Substituting the experimental parameters yields a waveguide parameter [17

17. G. P. Agrawal, Nonlinear Fiber Optics (Academic Press, 2007).

]
V=DπλNA=4.075
(2)
For a straight waveguide, the obtained value suggests a multimode operation but because of the small bending radius and the tapering it does not necessarily mean that one will obtain a multimode output. A more detailed analysis of mode propagation in bent waveguide and effect of tapering can be found in the works of Melloni et al. [18

18. A. Melloni, P. Monguzzi, R. Costa, and M. Martinelli, “Design of curved waveguides: the matched bend,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 20(1), 130–137 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and Kerttula et al. [19

19. J. Kerttula, V. Filippov, V. Ustimchik, Y. Chamorovskiy, and O. G. Okhotnikov, “Mode evolution in long tapered fibers with high tapering ratio,” Opt. Express 20(23), 25461–25470 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] respectively.

2.2 Sample preparation

After fabrication, the WOWs are collected by putting a small drop of 0.5% Tween solution with Rhodamine 6G dissolved in ethanol over the structures. The structures are then manually removed and collected by a small capillary tube (Vitrocom 8505, 50 µm inner diameter) attached to a syringe. After collection, the structures are transferred to a cytometry cell (Hellma 131.050, 250 µm × 250 µm inner dimensions) where optical manipulation and coupling experiments are performed.

3. Diffractively addressing a trapped waveguide

3.1 Optical manipulation using the Biophotonics Workstation

Optical manipulation of the microstructures is done using our Biophotonics Workstation (BWS). A schematic diagram of the BWS is shown in Fig. 3
Fig. 3 Schematic diagram of the Biophotonics Workstation equipped with a diffractive SLM setup. The workstation generates counter-propagating beams for the optical manipulation of the WOW-handles while the SLM creates dynamic beams that dynamically track and couple to the waveguide-parts of each WOW.
and simultaneous manipulation of multiple WOWs is possible with this setup. Counter-propagating (CP) beams are used to trap the four sphere handles of each WOW. The arrangement of the handles allows movements with six-degrees of freedom and the axial movement is controlled by changing the intensity ratio of the corresponding CP beams. The traps are relayed to the sample using two long-working distance objective lenses (Olympus LMPL 50x IR objectives, WD = 6 mm and NA = 0.55). The large working distance allows for side imaging of the sample (Mitutuyo MPlanApo 20x, WD = 20.0 mm, NA = 0.42. Besides showing the trapped structures from another perspective, the side imaging also allows us to image the light emerging from the waveguides when their exit tips face the side camera view. Moreover, by adding fluorescent dye into the trapping fluid, the side imaging provides a convenient method for visualizing the axial propagation of the beams that are diffractively created to address the waveguides.

The lateral trapping is limited by the area of the light modulation component and the magnification of the relay optics. The operating area in the sample plane is around 50 µm × 50 µm. The axial trapping is dependent on the ratio of the intensities of the counterpropagating beams. In practice, we can lift a WOW up to a hundred microns from the bottom of the cuvette before toppling over.

3.2 Diffractive addressing workflow

A diffractive SLM-setup has been included to the BWS for the holographic addressing of the WOWs. The main components of the diffractive setup consist of a diode-pump solid-state laser (Laser Quantum Excel, λ=532nm) as the coupling beam and a spatial light modulator (Hamamatsu Photonics) for phase-only modulation. A simplified diagram of the optical path from the SLM to the camera plane is shown in Fig. 4
Fig. 4 Diffractive SLM-addressing workflow. For proper calibration, imaging plane displacements follow a series of conversions and scalings before calculating the necessary input phase pattern on the SLM. Focal lengths given here also correspond to the lenses given in Fig. 3.
. The phase modulated coupling beam passes through a Fourier-transforming lens (f1=250mm). The resulting diffraction pattern is relayed to the sample using a 4f configuration consisting of a lens (f2=300mm) and the bottom objective lens. Imaging is done using the top objective lens and a variable tube lens (f5). The variable tube lens enables obtaining a focused image of the WOW when it is axially displaced from the imaging plane of the top objective.

The holographic addressing uses the first diffraction order to couple light through the input facet of each WOW. Since the diffractive setup is independent of the BWS, intermediate calculations and scalings are performed in a separate LabVIEW program having its own user interface. The LabVIEW interface takes the movement of the computer mouse as user input. For ease of control, the interface is overlaid with the acquired video of the sample plane. The mouse movement (Δx,Δy) is measured relative to the position of the zeroth diffraction order in pixels. To get the equivalent physical displacement in the sample plane, a conversion factor α is multiplied to the displacements. This conversion factor is dependent on the focal length of the variable tube lens in the top imaging. The resulting displacements Δx=αΔx and Δy=αΔy are then magnified with the 4f system giving the displacements Δx=MΔx and Δy=MΔyin the diffraction plane. The displacements Δx and Δy now serves as input for the grating phase for lateral movement of the first diffraction order. It is given by
ϕlateral(x,y)=2πλf1(xΔx+yΔy)
(3)
A similar approach is followed for obtaining Δzusing the side imaging and its corresponding set of conversion factor and magnification. The axial movement is then controlled using a quadratic phase given by

ϕaxial(x,y)=πΔzλf12(x2+y2)
(4)

There may be situations where an offset is necessary to minimize unwanted coupling (i.e. from the zeroth order diffraction) or to set a convenient coordinate system for both trapping and coupling. The effective phase for holographic addressing of a single WOW is then given by

ϕeff(x,y)=mod(ϕoffset+ϕlateral+ϕaxial,2π)
(5)

The lateral and axial movement of the coupling beam is limited by SLM pixel dimension and the magnification of the 4f setup. In the experiment, limitation on the position of the WOW and coupling beam is set by the BWS since it has a much limited working region. There is also an inherent roll-off of intensity of the coupling beam due to the pixelated nature of the SLM [20

20. D. Palima and J. Glückstad, “Comparison of generalized phase contrast and computer generated holography for laser image projection,” Opt. Express 16(8), 5338–5349 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

The interfaces for trapping and coupling are two separate programs. Currently, the positioning of the coupling beam is done manually using a computer mouse and is thus limited by the response time of the user. The refresh rate of the SLM is also a limiting factor which is typically equal to video refresh rate. For real-time tracking and continuous light addressing, passing of coordinate variables and/or video processing is needed between the two programs. The processing time and SLM refresh rate will set the lower operational limit. The latency between trapping and coupling is an important consideration for such a case.

For addressing multiple WOWs independently, we may use the random mask encoding technique [21

21. M. Montes-Usategui, E. Pleguezuelos, J. Andilla, and E. Martín-Badosa, “Fast generation of holographic optical tweezers by random mask encoding of Fourier components,” Opt. Express 14(6), 2101–2107 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] which uses a disjoint set of randomly selected pixels that is assigned to different WOWs. Each set will therefore have its corresponding grating and quadratic phases. Figure 5
Fig. 5 Axial propagation profiles of multiple focal spots at different axial and lateral positions visualized by side-view microscopy. This 3D addressing capability offered by the diffractive SLM-setup enables tracking and coupling to individual WOWs as they are displaced at multiple positions within their operating volume.
shows a snapshot from the side-view microscope, which visualizes the axial propagation profiles of three holographically-created diffraction-limited spots that are focused at different lateral and axial positions. Images such as these can also be used to verify the axial calibration used for encoding phase patterns on the SLM.

3.3 Light coupling through waveguides manipulated by optical traps

The sphere handles of the WOWs are trapped by counter-propagating NIR-beams for optical manipulation. The coupling beams are focused into the sample chamber upward through the bottom objective. The presence of the coupling beam now limits the degree of freedom of the WOWs into lateral, axial and in-plane rotations. In order to visualize the path of these coupling beams, a fluorescent dye (Rhodamine 6G in ethanol) has been added to the trapping medium. For the demonstration of light coupling, a single WOW is trapped and rotated such that its tip is facing the side view CCD camera to capture the emerging light. We move the WOW to particular position and use Eq. (5) to get the necessary phase input the will result in a coupling light spot at the position of the input facet. The position of the coupling beam is manually determined using a computer mouse. Once this is set in the coupling interface, the coupling laser is then turned on. This specific and on-demand light targeting implementation is useful, for example, in excitation of specific location and where photobleaching is undesirable. If continuous light addressing is desired, the system can be modified to include a real-time tracking algorithm.

The first part of the experiment is to test coupling for a single WOW as it is being displaced axially within the trapping region. The WOW is displaced axially by changing the intensity ratio of the CP NIR beams. Figure 6
Fig. 6 Holographic coupling of a single WOW translated axially. (a) Without diffractive addressing, coupling only occurs at certain axial positions (see Media 2). (b) The green coupling-beam emerges through the sharp tip when diffractive addressing is performed (see Media 3). The first frame in both set of figures shows a static beam for reference. We stack together individual images and create an animation to aid visually the axial movement and coupling and provided them as multimedia files.
shows a comparison of light coupling with and without holographic addressing.

Both results for lateral and axial couplings show that a WOW can indeed fully benefit from the dynamic holographic addressing. In contrast to a fixed beam where coupling only occurs at specific points or regions in space, diffractively-addressed WOWs can do full 3D targeted light delivery.

4. Conclusions and outlook

We have demonstrated optimal tracking and coupling of wave-guided optical waveguides (WOWs) using dynamic holography for generating beams that track both the lateral and the axial movements of each WOW. The combination of the maneuverability of our waveguides and the dynamic holographic addressing allows full 3D targeted light delivery. This new functionality will prove useful in micro-biological applications such as for photochemical triggering and in nonlinear optics such as nanofocusing. The addition of dynamic holography to the Biophotonics Workstation also opens the possibility of using optimally shaped beams, such as non-diffracting beams for invariant axial addressing of the WOWs. Accelerating beams can also be used to account for out-of-plane rotations.

Acknowledgment

References and Links

1.

F. Klein, T. Striebel, J. Fischer, Z. Jiang, C. M. Franz, G. von Freymann, M. Wegener, and M. Bastmeyer, “Elastic fully three-dimensional microstructure scaffolds for cell force measurements,” Adv. Mater. 22(8), 868–871 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2.

M. S. Rill, C. Plet, M. Thiel, I. Staude, G. von Freymann, S. Linden, and M. Wegener, “Photonic metamaterials by direct laser writing and silver chemical vapour deposition,” Nat. Mater. 7(7), 543–546 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3.

K. Sasaki, M. Koshioka, H. Misawa, N. Kitamura, and H. Masuhara, “Pattern formation and flow control of fine particles by laser-scanning micromanipulation,” Opt. Lett. 16(19), 1463–1465 (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

J. Liesener, M. Reicherter, T. Haist, and H. J. Tiziani, “Multi-functional optical tweezers using computer-generated holograms,” Opt. Commun. 185(1-3), 77–82 (2000). [CrossRef]

5.

J. Glückstad, “Phase contrast image synthesis,” Opt. Commun. 130(4-6), 225–230 (1996). [CrossRef]

6.

R. L. Eriksen, P. C. Mogensen, and J. Glückstad, “Multiple-beam optical tweezers generated by the generalized phase-contrast method,” Opt. Lett. 27(4), 267–269 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

D. Palima and J. Glückstad, “Gearing up for optical microrobotics: micromanipulation and actuation of synthetic microstructures by optical forces,” Laser Photon. Rev. 7(4), 478–494 (2013). [CrossRef]

8.

P. J. Rodrigo, L. Gammelgaard, P. Bøggild, I. Perch-Nielsen, and J. Glückstad, “Actuation of microfabricated tools using multiple GPC-based counterpropagating-beam traps,” Opt. Express 13(18), 6899–6904 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

9.

H.-U. Ulriksen, J. Thøgersen, S. Keiding, I. R. Perch-Nielsen, J. S. Dam, D. Z. Palima, H. Stapelfeldt, and J. Glückstad, “Independent trapping, manipulation and characterization by an all-optical biophotonics workstation,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08034 (2008). [CrossRef]

10.

J. Glückstad, “Optical manipulation: Sculpting the object,” Nat. Photonics 5(1), 7–8 (2011). [CrossRef]

11.

G. Swartzlander, T. J. Peterson, A. B. Artusio-Glimpse, and A. D. Raisanen, “Stable optical lift,” Nat. Photonics 5(1), 48–51 (2011). [CrossRef]

12.

S. H. Simpson, D. B. Phillips, D. M. Carberry, and S. Hanna, “Bespoke optical springs and passive force clamps from shaped dielectric particles,” J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 126, 91–98 (2013). [CrossRef]

13.

D. B. Phillips, M. J. Padgett, S. Hanna, Y.-L. D. Ho, D. M. Carberry, M. J. Miles, and S. H. Simpson, “Shape-induced force fields in optical trapping,” Nat. Photonics 8(5), 400–405 (2014). [CrossRef]

14.

D. Palima, A. R. Bañas, G. Vizsnyiczai, L. Kelemen, T. Aabo, P. Ormos, and J. Glückstad, “Optical forces through guided light deflections,” Opt. Express 21(1), 581–593 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15.

D. B. Phillips, G. M. Gibson, R. Bowman, M. J. Padgett, S. Hanna, D. M. Carberry, M. J. Miles, and S. H. Simpson, “An optically actuated surface scanning probe,” Opt. Express 20(28), 29679–29693 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16.

D. Palima, A. R. Bañas, G. Vizsnyiczai, L. Kelemen, P. Ormos, and J. Glückstad, “Wave-guided optical waveguides,” Opt. Express 20(3), 2004–2014 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17.

G. P. Agrawal, Nonlinear Fiber Optics (Academic Press, 2007).

18.

A. Melloni, P. Monguzzi, R. Costa, and M. Martinelli, “Design of curved waveguides: the matched bend,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 20(1), 130–137 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

19.

J. Kerttula, V. Filippov, V. Ustimchik, Y. Chamorovskiy, and O. G. Okhotnikov, “Mode evolution in long tapered fibers with high tapering ratio,” Opt. Express 20(23), 25461–25470 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20.

D. Palima and J. Glückstad, “Comparison of generalized phase contrast and computer generated holography for laser image projection,” Opt. Express 16(8), 5338–5349 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

21.

M. Montes-Usategui, E. Pleguezuelos, J. Andilla, and E. Martín-Badosa, “Fast generation of holographic optical tweezers by random mask encoding of Fourier components,” Opt. Express 14(6), 2101–2107 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22.

K. I. Mortensen, L. S. Churchman, J. A. Spudich, and H. Flyvbjerg, “Optimized localization analysis for single-molecule tracking and super-resolution microscopy,” Nat. Methods 7(5), 377–381 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(090.1970) Holography : Diffractive optics
(170.4520) Medical optics and biotechnology : Optical confinement and manipulation
(220.4000) Optical design and fabrication : Microstructure fabrication
(230.7370) Optical devices : Waveguides

ToC Category:
Integrated Optics

History
Original Manuscript: May 13, 2014
Revised Manuscript: July 1, 2014
Manuscript Accepted: July 8, 2014
Published: July 16, 2014

Citation
Mark Villangca, Andrew Bañas, Darwin Palima, and Jesper Glückstad, "Dynamic diffraction-limited light-coupling of 3D-maneuvered wave-guided optical waveguides," Opt. Express 22, 17880-17889 (2014)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-22-15-17880


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. F. Klein, T. Striebel, J. Fischer, Z. Jiang, C. M. Franz, G. von Freymann, M. Wegener, and M. Bastmeyer, “Elastic fully three-dimensional microstructure scaffolds for cell force measurements,” Adv. Mater.22(8), 868–871 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. M. S. Rill, C. Plet, M. Thiel, I. Staude, G. von Freymann, S. Linden, and M. Wegener, “Photonic metamaterials by direct laser writing and silver chemical vapour deposition,” Nat. Mater.7(7), 543–546 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. K. Sasaki, M. Koshioka, H. Misawa, N. Kitamura, and H. Masuhara, “Pattern formation and flow control of fine particles by laser-scanning micromanipulation,” Opt. Lett.16(19), 1463–1465 (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. J. Liesener, M. Reicherter, T. Haist, and H. J. Tiziani, “Multi-functional optical tweezers using computer-generated holograms,” Opt. Commun.185(1-3), 77–82 (2000). [CrossRef]
  5. J. Glückstad, “Phase contrast image synthesis,” Opt. Commun.130(4-6), 225–230 (1996). [CrossRef]
  6. R. L. Eriksen, P. C. Mogensen, and J. Glückstad, “Multiple-beam optical tweezers generated by the generalized phase-contrast method,” Opt. Lett.27(4), 267–269 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. D. Palima and J. Glückstad, “Gearing up for optical microrobotics: micromanipulation and actuation of synthetic microstructures by optical forces,” Laser Photon. Rev.7(4), 478–494 (2013). [CrossRef]
  8. P. J. Rodrigo, L. Gammelgaard, P. Bøggild, I. Perch-Nielsen, and J. Glückstad, “Actuation of microfabricated tools using multiple GPC-based counterpropagating-beam traps,” Opt. Express13(18), 6899–6904 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. H.-U. Ulriksen, J. Thøgersen, S. Keiding, I. R. Perch-Nielsen, J. S. Dam, D. Z. Palima, H. Stapelfeldt, and J. Glückstad, “Independent trapping, manipulation and characterization by an all-optical biophotonics workstation,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ.3, 08034 (2008). [CrossRef]
  10. J. Glückstad, “Optical manipulation: Sculpting the object,” Nat. Photonics5(1), 7–8 (2011). [CrossRef]
  11. G. Swartzlander, T. J. Peterson, A. B. Artusio-Glimpse, and A. D. Raisanen, “Stable optical lift,” Nat. Photonics5(1), 48–51 (2011). [CrossRef]
  12. S. H. Simpson, D. B. Phillips, D. M. Carberry, and S. Hanna, “Bespoke optical springs and passive force clamps from shaped dielectric particles,” J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf.126, 91–98 (2013). [CrossRef]
  13. D. B. Phillips, M. J. Padgett, S. Hanna, Y.-L. D. Ho, D. M. Carberry, M. J. Miles, and S. H. Simpson, “Shape-induced force fields in optical trapping,” Nat. Photonics8(5), 400–405 (2014). [CrossRef]
  14. D. Palima, A. R. Bañas, G. Vizsnyiczai, L. Kelemen, T. Aabo, P. Ormos, and J. Glückstad, “Optical forces through guided light deflections,” Opt. Express21(1), 581–593 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. D. B. Phillips, G. M. Gibson, R. Bowman, M. J. Padgett, S. Hanna, D. M. Carberry, M. J. Miles, and S. H. Simpson, “An optically actuated surface scanning probe,” Opt. Express20(28), 29679–29693 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. D. Palima, A. R. Bañas, G. Vizsnyiczai, L. Kelemen, P. Ormos, and J. Glückstad, “Wave-guided optical waveguides,” Opt. Express20(3), 2004–2014 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. G. P. Agrawal, Nonlinear Fiber Optics (Academic Press, 2007).
  18. A. Melloni, P. Monguzzi, R. Costa, and M. Martinelli, “Design of curved waveguides: the matched bend,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A20(1), 130–137 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. J. Kerttula, V. Filippov, V. Ustimchik, Y. Chamorovskiy, and O. G. Okhotnikov, “Mode evolution in long tapered fibers with high tapering ratio,” Opt. Express20(23), 25461–25470 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. D. Palima and J. Glückstad, “Comparison of generalized phase contrast and computer generated holography for laser image projection,” Opt. Express16(8), 5338–5349 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. M. Montes-Usategui, E. Pleguezuelos, J. Andilla, and E. Martín-Badosa, “Fast generation of holographic optical tweezers by random mask encoding of Fourier components,” Opt. Express14(6), 2101–2107 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. K. I. Mortensen, L. S. Churchman, J. A. Spudich, and H. Flyvbjerg, “Optimized localization analysis for single-molecule tracking and super-resolution microscopy,” Nat. Methods7(5), 377–381 (2010). [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 (723 KB)     
» Media 2: MOV (181 KB)     
» Media 3: MOV (163 KB)     
» Media 4: MOV (94 KB)     
» Media 5: MOV (108 KB)     

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited