4.6 Article

Experimental and theoretical investigation of waveguided plasmonic surface lattice resonances

期刊

OPTICS EXPRESS
卷 30, 期 21, 页码 37846-37862

出版社

Optica Publishing Group
DOI: 10.1364/OE.470017

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plasmonic nanostructures have great potential for refractive index sensing applications, but their low quality-factor limits their use. By studying the coupling between gold nanoparticle gratings and a waveguide, we have developed a theoretical framework to describe these structures and successfully improve the quality-factor, leading to high sensitivity results.
Plasmonic nanostructures are good candidates for refractive index sensing applications through the surface plasmon resonance due to their strong dependence on the surrounding dielectric media. However, typically low quality-factor limits their application in sensing devices. To improve the quality-factor, we have experimentally and theoretically investigated two-dimensional gold nanoparticle gratings situated on top of a waveguide. The coupling between the localized surface plasmon and waveguide modes results in Fano-type resonances, with high quality-factors, very similar to plasmonic surface lattice resonances. By combining plasmonic surface lattice resonance and waveguide theory, we present a theoretical framework describing the structures. By immersing the fabricated samples in three different media we find a sensitivity of similar to 50 nm/RIU and figure of merit of 8.9, and demonstrate good agreement with the theory presented. Further analysis show that the sensitivity is very dependent on the waveguide parameters, grating constant and the dielectric environment, and by tuning these parameters we obtain a theoretical sensitivity of 887 nm/RIU.Published by Optica Publishing Group under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

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

4.6
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