4.3 Article

Understanding diffraction grating behavior, part II: parametric diffraction efficiency of sinusoidal reflection (holographic) gratings

期刊

OPTICAL ENGINEERING
卷 59, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPIE-SOC PHOTO-OPTICAL INSTRUMENTATION ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1117/1.OE.59.1.017103

关键词

sinusoidal phase gratings; scalar parametric nonparaxial diffraction grating efficiency model; generalization of the classical paraxial expression for diffraction efficiency of sinusoidal reflection gratings

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the widespread availability of electromagnetic (vector) analysis codes for describing the diffraction of electromagnetic waves by periodic grating structures, the insight and understanding of nonparaxial parametric diffraction grating behavior afforded by approximate methods (i.e., scalar diffraction theory) is being ignored in the education of most optical engineers today. We show that the linear systems formulation of nonparaxial scalar diffraction theory enables the development of a scalar parametric diffraction grating model [for transverse electric (TE) polarization] for sinusoidal reflection gratings with arbitrary groove depths and arbitrary nonparaxial incident and diffracted angles. This scalar parametric analysis is remarkably accurate as it includes the ability to redistribute the energy from evanescent orders into the propagating ones, thus allowing the calculation of nonparaxial diffraction efficiencies to be predicted with an accuracy usually thought to require rigorous electromagnetic theory. These scalar parametric predictions of diffraction efficiency are compared to paraxial scalar and rigorous electromagnetic (vector) predictions for a variety of nonparaxial diffraction grating configurations, thus providing quantitative limits of applicability of nonparaxial scalar diffraction theory to sinusoidal reflection gratings as a function of the grating period-to-wavelength ratio (lambda/d). (C) 2020 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据