______________________________________________________________

GE Research & Development Center

Computer Simulation of Rugate Optical Interference Filters by Using the Characteristic Matrix Method I: Introduction and Simple Applications

G.T. Dalakos

99CRD082, June 1999

Class 1

Technical Information Series

Copyright 1999 General Electric Company. All rights reserved.

Corporate Research and Development Technical Report Abstract Page

Title

Computer Simulation of Rugate Optical Interference Filters by Using the Characteristic Matrix Method I: Introduction and Simple Applications G.T. Dalakos Phone (518)387-7494 8*833-7494

Author(s)

Component Report Number Number of Pages Key Words

Polymer Materials Laboratory

99CRD082

Date

June 1999

35

Class

optical interference filters, rugates, computer simulations, apodization, modeling

Rugate filters are advanced optical interference filters which can reduce out-of-band noise (this includes side-lobes and secondary harmonics of the primary design stopband). An important tradeoff is in reduction of stopband optical density (OD) and bandwidth. These compare to conventional, twomaterial stack design. Refinements to a single band rugate input design profile are shown to further reduce out-of-band noise but also degrade the stopband in most cases. Optimal designs are dictated by the tradeoff of stopband OD and bandwidth for better out-of-band transmission. Three approaches for multiple rugate designs have been examined and each offer advantages and tradeoffs in stopband bandwidth, out-of-band noise, and total filter coating thickness. All conclusions are based on simulations based on the characteristic matrix method. A description of this technique and computer codes are included in this report.

Manuscript received June 1, 1999

Computer Simulation of Rugate Optical Interference Filters by the Characteristic Matrix Method I: Introduction and Simple Applications G.T. Dalakos

Introduction
Simulation of rugates has largely been of an evolutionary nature at CRD, and thus, this report includes early as well as recent results (actual codes listings used in Appendix B1,B2). Introductory in nature, this report should be useful for someone with little experience in the design of optical interference coatings. Excellent introductory texts on optical interference coatings are included in the references [1,2]. It was the authors intent to organize in one report what has been only scattered in pieces. Simulations have provided valuable insight into the effects of rugate design parameters on 1. Spectral response. 2. Unique individual approaches to filter configurations. 3. Non-linear individual film models for thickness and refractive index. We will discuss 1 and 2 here. Optical interference filters are used to reflect specific wavelengths of light while transmitting all other wavelengths outside the stopband (rejected range of wavelengths). These types of filters are also known as minus filters. Optical interference filters work on the principle of the constructive/destructive nature of light waves. For this report we define light as electromagnetic radiation within the visible (VIS) and near infra-red (NIR). Light is defined (disregarding quantum effects) by a simple wave with an intensity and wavelength given by wave amplitude and its frequency. We will assume that light waves pass through a non-absorbing and non-magnetic medium. A wave passing across an interface (let us picture a light wave traveling through air and entering a solid medium) with a change in the refractive index will reflect some of the wave and transmit the rest through. If the thickness is on the order of the wavelength of the incident light, some of the reflected wave will interfere with the incoming wave. A reflected wave 180 degrees out of phase wave with incident (i.e., maximum destructive interference) is achieved by of the optical thickness. The optical thickness is defined as the physical film thickness times the refractive index (RI) of the medium. Note that the only two variables to be specified here are the film thickness and its refractive index. Building upon the above discussion, one may correctly guess that stacking different RI materials each of one quarter optical thickness will be able to greatly influence the amount of light at a specific wavelength passing through the materials. The simplest approach for this is to use two

different materials and alternatively stack them upon each other. However, there are tradeoffs/ limitations using this approach. Some tradeoffs include the appearance of secondary lobes just outside of the stopband and harmonics at shorter wavelengths of the rejected wavelength. One may reduce these side lobes and secondary harmonics by smoothing out the transition between the interfaces. This is accomplished by including additional materials with intermediate values of the refractive index, i.e., mixtures or alloys of the two end materials. By adding more types of films with different refractive index values, one can eventually approach a continuous change in the RI profile. Thus, a continuous profile wave function replaces the binary low/high refractive index profile of the simple stack case. The continuously varied refractive index profile design is known as a rugate filter design. The rugate interference filter design is a fairly new one. Rugates have been pioneered by the military and only recently have become commercially produced. Successful fabrication of rugates has been accomplished here at GE CRD but will not be discussed here. We shall now discuss the rugate design.

Rugate Design Equations

Simple equations have been used to relate the input parameters to the output optical characteristics of rugates [3]. These along with the refractive index profile (sine wave) are shown below in Figure 1.

d (period)

N=2 (number of periods)

=0

Refractive Index (RI)

n (RI range)

Physical Thickness, x

na (average RI)

Equations

(Refractive Index Expression)

RI(x) = na +.5n sin((2x/nad)+)

Centerband WL = 2nad Bandwidth = n/2na Optical Density = (1.36*BW*N)-log10(4/ns)

Figure 1. Rugate design equations relating spectral response characteristics to refractive index profile wave parameters. 2

The phase of the wave affects the spectral response in general and most notably, the out-of-band transmittance noise. The input variables define parameters of a wave function refractive index profile. The response variables, parameters of a frequency (or commonly shown here as %Transmittance or %Reflectance) plot include position and bandwidth of the stopband as well as the extent of reflection or optical density (O.D.) at the centerband. The OD is a log(10) function of the %transmission value as defined in (E1).

O. D.= log10 (% T )

(E1)

OD is a commonly reported optical property because it is convenient in reporting small percentages of transmitted radiation (often a fraction of a percent). A table of OD and corresponding percent transmittance is shown below.

Table 1. %Transmittance and corresponding O.D. % Transmitted light 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 O.D. 2 3 4 5 6

To obtain the spectral response of the design refractive index profile, one must either use transform functions or build a model of the effect of a dielectric film stack on the incident electromagnetic radiation [4]. Modeling to obtain the response spectra of inputted RI profiles by the second method is the focus of the report and is explained below.

Rugate Simulation Program

The approach to simulating rugate interference filters is based on the characteristic matrix method commonly used for simple film stacks. Implementation of rugate design equations (previous section) and wave functions used in the RI profile to the matrix approach can be used to simulate more complicated rugate filters. Over the course of simulation work, two programming approaches were used. The first for preliminary work was written in Mathworks Matlab application code. The second program was written in VAX/FORTRAN code. The later program, run at a fraction of the time taken by the first (minutes vs. hours), was the primary driving force for transferring operating platforms. One disadvantage of using run-time efficient FORTRAN is the added complication of linking and compiling the listing. Most of the simulation results presented here were run under the FORTRAN code. Recently, the FORTRAN codes have been moved (10/98) to the SGI (Silicon Graphics) in place at CRD. Use of FORTRAN on SGI has speeded things up 3

considerably. Programming and users guides to SGI FORTRAN 77 may be viewed, downloaded, or ordered on-line [5].

Description of the Program

Specifics of the characteristic matrix method are described in detail in [6]. The actual code used for simulations is enclosed in this report (for help, see Appendix B1, B2). The flowchart in Figure 2 is helpful in describing in general the method used for rugate simulation. Parameters for running a basic rugate design shown below in Table 1 are first inputted. Table 2. Variables used in Rugate Simulation Program. Input Basic Design, required Incident RI Substrate RI High RI material Low RI material Number of periods Centerband wavelength Spatial Resolution Phase of wave Output Spectral Output % Transmittance % Reflectanc Electric field magnitude Magnetic field magnitud

Additional Parameters Angle of incidence S-Polarized light only P-Polarized light only % Linear Apodization Quintic Interface thickness Clipping option

For geometrical expressions, radians are used for both Matlab and FORTRAN. The program uses geometrical expressions even for zero angle incidence in order to calculate the phase shifts of the waves passing across an interface. The design RI profile is generated in steps of the spatial resolution (input). The basic sinusoid may be altered by apodization, interface matching, or clipping if desired. These enhancements to the profile will be detailed later. The characteristic matrix is used to calculate the electric and magnetic field magnitudes exiting the film stack for a single wavelength. The radiation reflected and transmitted from the stack can be calculated from the field magnitudes. Elements of the matrix are calculated from the phase shift as a function of wavelength from passing each interface. The matrixes are then multiplied in series (a matrix for each interface in the stack) to calculate the stack matrix. The stack or characteristic matrix is then used to calculate the field magnitudes and finally the %reflected and %transmitted of the wavelength of interest. This sequence of calculations must be repeated for each wavelength. For the FORTRAN file, each pass sends the data to a .dat file for editing. Likewise, data for the %reflected, field magnitudes, and the RI profile can be saved to .dat files. For the cases of running simulations for oblique angles of incidence, two calculations must be made: one for the S, and one for the P-polarized light component. At small angles (<5 degrees), the differences in the two polarized waves are minimal. 4

Example of a Basic Rugate Design

For clarification of the previous sections, a simple design is used here to relate the input with the output. Table 3 contains the input. From the input a RI profile is generated and shown in Figure 2. The output or spectral response is shown in Figure 3. Table 3. Inputs to Basic Rugate Design. Inputs nh=1.75 nl=1.45 ni=1 ns=1.46 N=10 sr=50 Angstroms lc=633 nm WL range=4001000nm
1.80 1.75 Refractive Index 1.70 1.65 1.60 1.55 1.50 1.45 1.40 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Layer number

Figure 2. Basic input sin wave representing refractive index profile.

100 90 80 %Transmittance 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 400 500 600 700 Wavelength, nm 800 900 1000

Figure 3. Spectral output (response) in terms of transmittance as a function of wavelength from the refractive index profile of Figure 2. 5

We note that by using a 50 angstrom spatial resolution, we have almost a continuous, ten period profile for the refractive index (Figure 2). The resulting spectral response of the transmission has a 3nm resolution. The spectrum shows a single rejection band at the design stopband wavelength of 633nm. The ripple shown on either side of the stopband, otherwise known as sidelobes, can be suppressed by modifying/adding on to the refractive index profile. In applications, it is usually desirable to maximize the out-of band transmission. The next section shall discuss the effects of these modifications to the input RI profile on the response frequency spectrum.

Modifications to the Refractive Index Profile

There are basically two types of modifications or refinements to the primary RI profile which may be used. Superimposing a decay function on a sin wave will gradually increase the sinusoidal oscillations from zero to the maximum amplitude. This is known as apodization of the refractive index profile. Another approach to decreasing the sidelobes is to match the average RI of the sin wave to the entrance and exit media (i.e., air and substrate respectively). Refractive index matching and apodization tend to smooth out the sidelobes but also erode away the stopband bandwidth and optical density.

(a) Apodization Apodization of the primary sin wave may be accomplished through various superimposed functions: linear, gaussian, and quintic or 5th order polynomial [7]. Figure 4 shows a combination of a linear (first half of wave) and quintic (later half) function superimposed on a primary sin wave.

1.75

1.65

RI
1.55

1.45 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Layer number Figure 4. Apodized sin wave. The first half of the wave is superimposed with a linear function and the second half, with a quintic or 5th order polynomial function. Note the very ends of the wave tapering off: this is interface matching (discussed later). 6

GE has predominately used quintic matching as it closely models an ideal response square wave function from a Fourier transform analysis [8]. A special type of quintic apodized profiles is referred to as wavelets. A wavelet is defined as a 100% apodized RI profile. An example of a wavelet is shown later in Figure 9. Wavelets are further examined elsewhere [9,10]. We shall now examine the effects of increased apodization percentage of the wave function on spectral noise (unwanted side lobes, harmonics) and stopband OD and bandwidth. In general, increasing the apodization percent favorably reduces out-of-band noise from the primary frequency but also reduces stopband OD and bandwidth. The following RI profiles are apodized to an increasing degree with their simulated output of spectral responses.

Table 4. Apodization simulation designs and output. Figure 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 description Un-apodized RI profile (sin wave) spectral response of Figure 5 50% quintic apodized sin wave spectral response of Figure 7 100% quintic apodized sin wave spectral response of Figure 9 Comparison showing stopband OD degradation Secondary harmonic transmittance as a function of % apodization.

1.75

Refractive Index

1.65

1.55

1.45 0 1000 2000

30period layer number

Figure 5. Un-apodized sin wave input RI profile.

100

0ap,30periods,%T

50

0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

wavelength, nm

Figure 6. Spectral response of Figure 5.

1.75

Refractive Index

1.65

1.55

1.45 0 1000 2000

30period layer number

Figure 7. 50% quintic apodization sin wave input RI profile.

100

%T

50

0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

wavelength, nm

Figure 8. Spectral response of Figure 7.

1.75

Refractive Index

1.65

1.55

1.45 0 1000 2000

30period layer number

Figure 9. 100% quintic apodization (wavelet) of sin wave input RI profile.

100 90 80 70

%T

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

wavelength, nm

Figure 10. Spectral response of Figure 9.

10 9 8 7 6

%T

5 4 3 2 1 0 900 1000 1100

wavelength, nm

Figure 11. Comparison of spectral responses centered at primary frequency from unapodized (solid line), 50% apodized (dashed line), and 100% apodized (dotted line) input functions. 9

100

90 100% Apodization 50% Apodization

80

%T

70 0% Apodization 60 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550

wavelength, nm

Figure 12. Comparison of spectral responses centered at secondary harmonic frequency from unapodized (solid line), 50% apodized (dashed line), and 100% apodized (dotted line) input functions.

As the degree of apodization superimposed on the primary sin wave increases, the out-of-band noise decreases substantially. However, the price to pay is in the OD of the primary stopband. This can be seen easily in a comparative close-up (Figure 9) bands as a function of increasing apodization. The value of the optical density at the secondary harmonic also decreases as seen in Figure 12. Apodization of the RI profile is effective in reducing out-of-band noise; however, it also results in degradation of the primary band. Another refinement to the input sin wave may be employed to reduce out-of band noise while minimizing the effect on the stopband itself.

(b) Interface Matching By gradually matching the average sin wave RI to the substrate or incident RI, one can reduce Fresnel (or back) reflections and therefore out-of-band noise without negatively affecting the stopband [11]. Simulations here have matched interfaces using a 5th order polynomial, or quintic expression. I.e., RI(thickness of matching layer, x) = c1 + c2x + c3x2 + c4x3 + c5x4 + c6x5 (E2)

where c1 - c6 are constants which may be solved for by using appropriate boundary conditions and x is the physical thickness of the matching layer. Solving for the constants yields RI(x) = na - (na-ns)(10x3 - 15x4 + 6x5) (E3)

where na and ns are the average and substrate RI as shown in Figure 11. The normalized boundary conditions used to solve the constants are: 10

Table 5. Boundary conditions for E2. RI = 1 RI = 0 RI = 0.5 RI(x) = 0 RI(x) = 0 at x = 0 at x =1 at x = 0.5 at x = 0 at x = 1

1.7

Refractive Index

Average RI 1.6

1.5

Substrate RI 1.4

Thickness of Matching Layer, AU

Figure 13. Quintic function used to match two different refractive index materials.

The effects of using a matching layer can be seen from the improvement of out-of-band noise reduction (Figures 14-19) while having minimal effects on the stopband OD (Figure 18). Simulations using three different thickness are compared with their spectral responses. Figures 5 and 6 may be referred to as baseline spectra for comparison.

11

1.8

Refractive Index

1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0 1000 2000

Layer Number

Figure 14. Quintic interface matching thickness of 1000 applied to sin wave input RI profile.

100

%T

50

0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

Wavelength, nm

Figure 15. Spectral response of Figure 14 RI profile.

12

1.8

Refractive Index

1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0 1000 2000

Layer Number

Figure 16. Quintic interface matching thickness of 2500 applied to sin wave input RI profile.

100

%T

50

0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

Wavelength, nm

Figure 17. Spectral response of Figure 16 RI profile.

13

1.8

Refractive Index

1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0 1000 2000

Layer Number

Figure 18. Quintic interface matching thickness of 7500 applied to sin wave input RI profile.

100

%T

50

0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

Wavelength, nm

Figure 19. Spectral response of Figure 18 RI profile.

14

10 9 8 7 6

%T

5 4 3 2 1 0 900 1000 1100

Wavelength, nm

Figure 20. %Transmittance spectra of Figures 15,17,19 with a close-up of the primary stopband.

100 90 80 5000, 7500A 2500A

%T

70 60 50

1000A

450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550

Wavelength, nm

Figure 21. %Transmittance spectra superimposing filter designs with quintic interface matching thickness of 1000, 2500, 7500 - close-up of Figures 13,15,17 secondary harmonic stopband.

15

(c) combination The input RI profile and resulting simulation using a design with 100% apodization and 7500A quintic interface matching are shown in Figures 22 and 23. The output spectra (Figure 23) shows almost all out-of-band noise is gone but at the cost of severe stopband degradation.

1.8

Refractive Index

1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0 1000 2000

layer number

Figure 22. 100% apodized (wavelet) RI profile with a quintic apodized matching layer thickness of 7500.

100 90 80 70 60

%T

50 40 30 20 10 0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

wavelength, nm

Figure 23. Spectral response of Figure 22 input RI profile.

16

1.8

Refractive Index

1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0 1000 2000

layer number

Figure 24. 40% apodized RI profile with a quintic apodized matching layer thickness of 7500.

100

%T

50

0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

wavelength, nm

Figure 25. Spectral response of Figure 24 input RI profile.

By using a more conservative degree of apodization (40%) with a 7500 matching layer thickness, we can realize a good reduction in noise without affecting the stopband as much. The best approach to RI profile refinements depends on the desired spectral response. In general, the following observations on the use of apodization and interface matching layers to the basic sine wave are given: 1. Apodization is very effective at reducing out-of-band noise but will have deleterious effects on the primary stopband as well. The degree of these changes seems to be fairly proportional to the degree of applied apodization. 2. Quintic interface matching has a moderate but definite effect on noise reduction without negatively affecting the stopband. 17

3. Combination of the two refinements to the input RI profile work best with moderate values of the apodization percentage. The previous discussion has focused on single stopband configurations. Multiple filter designs may be approached in a few ways and will be discussed next.

Approaches to Multiple-Band Filter Designs

The nature of waves allows addition (or superposition) of simple waves while also being able to deconvolute a complicated signal into single wave cycles. Rugates, therefore, may be superimposed in a single RI profile. What approach is best for stacking rugates? Should the bands be deposited in serial mode or by superposition? The following example will look at different approaches and the effect on stopband bandwidth, optical density, and the overall filter thickness. The three bands in this example, for demonstration purposes only, are 633 nm (HeNe), 830 nm (Semiconductor laser) and 1064 nm (Nd:YAG). Of course, other wavelengths may be used. The other criterion is achieving an OD = 6 within each of the three stopbands. In depositing multiple stopbands for rugates there are at least three approaches. They are 1. Stacking one stopband on top of another (series). 2. Superimposing three bands to get a non-linear RI profile function. Using only part of available RI range so as to cover all superimposed points in the profile (approx. use 1/3 of the range, for the case of a three-band filter so as to cover points when all waves add up constructively). 3. Superimposing three bands as above but using the entire RI range. The RI profile will then have to be clipped to fit the allowable range. The final thickness of the film will have to be extended to get desired OD. These three RI profile configuration approaches are shown below in Figure 26.

18

1 .8 1 .7 5 1 .7 1 .6 5 1 .6 1 .5 5 1 .5 1 .4 5 1 .4 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0

(a)

2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000

(b)

1 .7 5 1 .7 1 .6 5 1 .6 1 .5 5 1 .5 1 .4 5 1 .4 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0

(c)

Figure 26. Stopband stacking configurations. (a) series addition of 3 distinct sin waves. (b) superposition of 3 sin waves. (c) Superposition of 3 sin waves, clipped or restricted within certain RI boundary limits.

Results for the clipped case, (c), were simulated while configurations (a) and (b) were found using simple rugate design equations. Spectral output and its corresponding RI profile of the clipped approach are shown in Figures 27-29. Stopband bandwidth and total coating thickness are shown below in Table 6 for the three different configurations for the three-band design. These results show that if minimizing coating thickness is important, superimposing waves with clipping is best. However, clipping results in reduction in bandwidths (compared to the simple stacking approach) as well as an increase in the out-of-band noise as shown in Figure 29. This noise is assumed to be caused by the large amount of information lost by clipping of the input RI profile. This out-of-band noise may be reduced by decreasing the cycle amplitudes and therefore, reducing the clipped input signal. The tradeoff in doing this will be in stopband bandwidth. If the angle-of-incidence coverage is critical (large bandwidths), then stacking is preferred. One may notice that two sets of three-band designs (superimposing with clipping), to allow juxtaposition of each of the bands will result in an increase in total thickness (40%) as well as wider bandwidths (i.e., 58nm vs. 49nm: 18%). Specifications on the required bandwidth is needed for the exact preferred approach. 19

1.8 1.7 1.6

ri 100ap

1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0 500 1000 1500

layer2
Figure 27. Plot of entire clipped RI profile of the three superimposed sine waves. Total number of 50 Angstrom layers = 6872.

Simulation of clipped RI profile (First 1000 layers, 50 A each, shown out of 6872 total layers) 1/14/97 clip.for 1.7

Refractive Index

1.6

1.5

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

layer number
Figure 28. Plot of first 1000 layers of previous figure.

20

100

%T

50

0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100

wavelength, nm
Figure 29. Spectral output for fully clipped three-band design. Note excessive out-of-band noise. *Simulation using VAX FORTRAN program clip.for. Parameters include RI(low)=1.45, RI(high)=1.70, RI(substrate)=1.46, 170 periods.

Table 6. Bandwidth and total coating thickness of multiple stopband designs. Parameter OD (633 nm) OD (830 nm) OD (1064 nm) BW (633 nm) BW (830 nm) BW (1064 nm) RI range used Thickness (um) of total coating Simple Stacking of 3 bands 6 6 6 49 64 81 0.25 49.1 Superimpose with limited RI range 10.8 7.8 6.0 16 20 26 0.08 65.7 Superimpose with clipped RI profile. 10.7 8.2 6.1 29 39 50 0.25 34.3

21

One option that does not appear beneficial in BW or total thickness is the approach of superimposing the waves while using a reduced RI range. Superposition of multiple bands tends to reduce secondary harmonics of the primary stopbands (in unclipped mode). Serial stacking, on the other hand, maintains most of the secondary harmonics of each stopband. This is shown in Figure 31.

1.7

1.6

R.I.
1.5 1.4 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000

layer num
Figure 30. RI input profile of a 3-band rugate filter in serial mode.
100

%T

50

0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

wl
Figure 31. Spectral output of Figure 30. Note secondary harmonics of 633nm and 830nm primary stopbands. 22

Conclusion
This work has shown basic applications of the current rugate simulation work at GE CRD. Rugate filters are an advanced optical interference filter which can reduce out-of-band noise (includes side-lobes and secondary harmonics). The primary tradeoff is in the reduction in stopband optical density and bandwidth. This is in comparison to a 2 material stack design. Refinements to the initial rugate design further reduce out-of-band noise and also degrade the stopband. Optimal designs are dictated by the tradeoff of stopband OD, bandwidth for better outof-band transmission. Three approaches for multiple rugate designs have been examined and each offer advantages and tradeoffs in stopband bandwidth, out-of-band noise, and total filter coating thickness. Further applications of rugate simulations are planned to be included in a future CRD report. The focus shall be on simulating angular shifting phenomena of rugates.

23

Appendix A: Symbols and Abbreviations used in Rugate Computer Codes. Symbols and Abbreviations B = magnetic field strength d = period length E = electric field strength na = average refractive index of low and high-end materials nh = high-end refractive index material ni = refractive index of incident medium nl = low-end refractive index material ns = refractive index of substrate N = number of periods in index profile OD = optical density sr = spatial resolution (individual film thickness) S = S-polarized light (electric field vector vertical to earth surface) P = P-polarized light (electric field vector parallel to earth surface) WL = wavelength dl = bandwidth of stopband* dn = range of refractive index materials used in index. lc = Centerband wavelength of stopband *bandwidth defined at full height width mean (FHWM) of stopband.

24

Appendix B1: Typical MATLAB program listing %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % % % Program to simulate spectral response of rugate filter design % % written by George Dalakos 9/19/97 % % % %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%Calculates P-polarized light through rugates. Useful for oblique angles-of-incidence ns=input(Enter the substrate index > )

% polycarbonate =1.59, Pyrex =1.46 %nh=input(Enter high RI > ) %nl=input(Enter low RI > ) rr=input(Enter low average RI ,current =1.6 ) nh=1.75; nl=1.45; na=(nh+nl)/2;

%average refractive index cb1=input(enter centerband #1 in nm > ) cb2=input(enter centerband #2 in nm > ) angle=input(Enter the angle of incidence > ) % Transform degrees to radians angle=angle*3.1416/180;

%num=input(number of steps 40 1 period) %number of steps max 1024 in student version nu=input(number of periods ) period1=cb1*10/(2*na); %period2=cb2*10/(2*na);

25

% period length in Angstroms %rugate design. calculates refractive index as a fxn of thickness num=nu*(period1/50); for r=1:num

n(r)=(na)+(((nh-nl)/2)*sin(2*pi*50*r/period1));

end

ks=0; %no absorption in films. Either reflecting or transmitting for i=1:150 %initialize characteristic matrix m1=1; m2=0; m3=0; m4=0; m5=0; m6=0; m7=1; m8=0; for j=1:num if j<2, ang(j)=asin((sin(angle))/n(j)); else ang(j)=asin((n(j-1)*sin(ang(j-1)))/(n(j))); end

x1=m1; x2=m2; x3=m3; x4=m4; x5=m5; 26

x6=m6; x7=m7; x8=m8; wl(i)=3980+(20*i); phi=2*pi*n(j)*50*cos(ang(j))/wl(i); y1=cos(phi); y7=y1; temp=sin(phi); y4=temp*cos(ang(j))/n(j); y6=temp*n(j)/cos(ang(j)); y2=0; y3=0; y5=0; y8=0;

%product of the characteristic matrix m1=(x1*y1)-(x4*y6); m2=(x2*y1)+(x3*y6); m3=(x3*y7)-(x2*y4); m4=(x1*y4)+(x4*y7); m5=(x5*y1)-(x8*y6); m6=(x6*y1)+(x7*y6); m7=(x7*y7)-(x6*y4); m8=(x5*y4)+(x8*y7);

end %Calculation of the electric and magnetic field magnitudes eo1=m1+(m3*ns)-(m4*ks); eo2=m2+(m3*ks)+(m4*ns); ho1=m5+(m7*ns)-(m8*ks); ho2=m6+(m7*ks)+(m8*ns); n1=eo1-ho1; n2=eo2-ho2; d1=eo1+ho1; d2=eo2+ho2; dsqr=(d1^2)+(d2^2); cr1=((n1*d1)+(n2*d2))/dsqr; cr2=((n2*d1)-(n1*d2))/dsqr; ct1=d1/dsqr; 27

ct2=-d2/dsqr; % Transmittance at specific wavelength z=i*20+3990 t(i)=(4*ns/dsqr)*100; end %The optical density %od1=(.7*(nh-nl)*(50*num/period1*na))-log10(4/ns) %od2=(.7*(nh-nl)*(50*num/period2*na))-log10(4/ns) %pause %Sets the axis values %v=[wl(1),wl(100),0,100]; %axis(v) %Plot transmittance as a function of wavelength (Angstroms). %plot(wl,t) g=-log10(t/100); plot(wl,g)

28

Appendix B2: Typical FORTRAN program listing c %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% c % FORTRAN Rugate Program for S-Polarization % c % written by George Dalakos 12/97 % c %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

c c c c c c c c c

Steps in rugate Program 1. Rugate program asks for filter design input. 2. Calculate Refractive index profile 3. Calculate final elements of characteristic matrix 4. Calculate electric and magnetic fields w/ matrix 5. Use them for each wavelength to get transmission value. 6. Write %T value to file 7. Run for each wavelength in desired range. Define variables

real t(901), n(8000), wl(901) complex m1,m2,m3,m4,m5,m6,m7,m8,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6,x7,x8 c complex y1,y2,y3,y4,y5,y6,y7,y8 real ns,na,nh,nl,dn,ks,an,ang,ango,y6,q,ni,n1,an1,num2,num3 integer nu,o,s c c Input Refractive Index values Assumption: Index of refraction of air=1. ni=1 type *,Input the high RI,low RI read *,nh,nl type *,Input Quintic Interface matching thickness in angstroms read *,q na=(nh+nl)/2 dn=nh-nl type *,Input % total apodization read *,a ni=1 c c c c assume 50 Angstrom spatial resolution. Others can be used but watch out for total # of films that it does not exceed max. array dimensions. I.E., increase SR, can increase # of periods. 29

c c

type *,Enter in the substrate index read *,ns type *,Enter in the angle of incidence read *,an type *,Enter in phase lag read *,an1 Transform angle degrees into radians an=an*3.1416/180 an1=an1*3.1416/180 type *,Enter in the number of periods read *,nu per1=(6330)/(2*na) num=nu*per1/50 num2=num+(q/50) num3=num+(2*q/50)

c c

Generates Refractive Index values for individual films which makes up sinusoidal RI profile. do 101 o=1,q/50

n(o)=(na-nl)*((6*(o*50/q)**5)+(10*(o*50/q)**3)-(15*(o*50/q)**4)) n(o)=nl+n(o) 101 write (2,*) n(o) do 100 i=q/50,num2 x=i-(q/50) a1=x/(num*a/200) c n1=.05*(dn/2)*sin((4*3.1416*x*50/per1)+(an1)) n(i)=na+((dn/2)*(sin(2*3.1416*x*50/per1))) if (x .lt. num*(a/200)) then n(i)=(n(i)-na)*((6*a1**5)+(10*a1**3)-(15*a1**4))+na c n(i)=na+(x/(num*a/200))*(n(i)-na) else n(i)=n(i) end if if (x .gt. num*(1-(a/200))) then a1=(num-x)/(num*a/200) n(i)=(n(i)-na)*((6*a1**5)+(10*a1**3)-(15*a1**4))+na c n(i)=na+(((num-x)/(num*(a/200)))*(n(i)-na)) else n(i)=n(i) end if 30

100

write (2,*) n(i)

do 102 s=num2,num3 v=s-num2 n(s)=(na-1.57)*((6*(v*50/q)**5)+(10*(v*50/q)**3)-(15*(v*50/q)**4)) n(s)=na-n(s) 102 write (2,*) n(s)

ks=0 c c Assumption: no absorption in films Step up from the starting wavelength do 200 j=1,421 c Initialize matrix components m1=1 m2=0 m3=0 m4=0 m5=0 m6=0 m7=1 m8=0 do 300 k=1,num3 c Calculates the angle at each layer interface if (k .lt. 2) then ang=asin((sin(an))/n(k)) else ang=asin((n(k-1)*sin(ango))/(n(k))) end if ango=ang c Characteristic matrix elements x1=m1 x2=m2 x3=m3 x4=m4 x5=m5 31

x6=m6 x7=m7 x8=m8 wl(j)=3790+(j*10) c Calculates the phase angle. phi=2*3.1416*n(k)*50*cos(ang)/wl(j) y1=cos(phi) y7=y1 temp=sin(phi) c Calculates for S-Polarized light. y4=temp/(n(k)*cos(ang)) y6=temp*n(k)*cos(ang) y2=0 y3=0 y5=0 y8=0 m1=(x1*y1)-(x4*y6) m2=(x2*y1)+(x3*y6) m3=(x3*y7)-(x2*y4) m4=(x1*y4)+(x4*y7) m5=(x5*y1)-(x8*y6) m6=(x6*y1)+(x7*y6) m7=(x7*y7)-(x6*y4) m8=(x5*y4)+(x8*y7) 300 c c continue Calculate the magnitude of the electric and magnetic fields at each wavelength coming through the filter. e01=m1+(m3*ns)-(m4*ks) e02=m2+(m3*ks)+(m4*ns) h01=m5+(m7*ns)-(m8*ks) h02=m6+(m7*ks)+(m8*ns) c Use the field amplitudes to calculate the transmission. n1=e01-h01 32

n2=e01-h02 d1=e01+h01 d2=e02+h02 dsqr=(d1**2)+(d2**2) cr1=((n1*d1)+(n2*d2))/dsqr cr2=((n2*d1)-(n1*d2))/dsqr ct1=d1/dsqr ct2=-d2/dsqr z=j*10+5260 t(j)=(4*ns/dsqr)*100 type *,wl(j),t(j) c c Write the transmission value at each wavelength, j to file, for004.for. write (4,*) t(j)

200

continue stop end

33

References
[1] [2] [3] A. Thelen, Design of Optical Interference Coatings, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1989. J. D. Rancourt, Optical Thin Films: Users Handbook, Macmillan, New York, 1987. W.E. Johnson and R.L. Crane, Introduction to rugate filter technology, SPIE Proceedings, vol. 2046, pp. 88-108 (1993). J.A. Dobrowlski and D. Lowe, Appl. Opt., 17, 3039-3050 (1978) Hyperlink (Internet Address) for SGI technical manuals: http://techpubs.sgi.com/library/ P.H. Berning, Theory and calculation of optical thin films, G. Hass Ed., Physics of Thin Films, vol 1. Academic Press, New York, pp. 69-121 (1963). W.H. Southwell, Using apodization functions to reduce sidelobes in rugate filters, Appl. Opt. 28 , 5091-5094 (1989). B.G. Bovard, Rugate Filter Theory: An Overview, Appl. Opt., 32 (28), 5427-5442 (1993). J.J. Druessel, Design of Gradient Index Optical Thin Films, Ph.D. dissertation, (1996), p. 75 (USAF document # AFIT/DS/ENP/96-03).

[4] [5] [6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10] W.H. Southwell et al., Using Wavelets to Design Gradient-index Interference Coatings, SPIE Proceedings, vol. 2046, p.46-80 (1993). [11] W.H. Southwell and R.H. Hall, Rugate filter sidelobe suppression using quintic and rugated quintic matching layers, Appl. Opt. 28 (14), 2949-2951 (1989).

34

G.T. Dalakos

Computer Simulation of Rugate Optical Interference Filters by Using the Characteristic Matrix Method I: Introduction and Simple Applications

99CRD082 June 1999