Skip to main content
Solved

POP beam profile not as expected

  • April 25, 2025
  • 1 reply
  • 84 views

Michael.Wright

I have built a sequential model where I am trying to simulate how to edge-couple a 780nm laser diode to a thin-film lithium niobate waveguide (PPLN). I am using POP to calculate the coupling efficiency and have acquired a .zbf file from Lumerical that is the ‘output mode’ of the PPLN when running in the SHG mode, and using this as the ‘input’ data for the fibre overlap integral data. I believe I am getting reasonable answers but the beam profile graph is not showing the beam profile I would expect. The x and y half-angle divergences (in degrees) of the laser is 4.25 and 8.5, respectively. The beam profile at a distance of 15 microns from the laser shows a beam that is bigger in x than in y but only in the POP graph. in the 3D shaded model it is larger in y than in x, as I would expect from a DBR type laser. Can someone help me make sense of this? 

 

The Rayleigh range of this beam is xR ~ 45 microns and yR ~ 11 microns, is the fact that I am looking at distances on the order the Rayleigh range, or less, pushing the limits of what Zemax can simulate?  

 

Best answer by Jeff.Wilde

@Michael.Wright,

POP and Gaussian Beam Analysis (GBA) take diffraction into account, while simple ray tracing does not.  So, in your case, the laser beam expansion is properly predicted by either POP or GBA.  Ray tracing in Zemax is set up and executed separately, and the parameters chosen for it (aperture, stop size, apodization, vignetting factors, etc) have no impact on POP or GBA (however, surface apertures are taken into account for beam propagation in POP).   As a result, you will not typically observe a correlation between ray patterns in a layout window and beam profiles in POP. 

Here’s what I see with the laser beam in your case.  I placed an elliptical aperture on Surface 2, which is 15 microns from the laser output, and used vignetting factors to have the rays fill this aperture.  None of this had any impact on the Skew Gaussian Beam analysis.

 

Regards,

Jeff

View original
Did this topic help you find an answer to your question?

1 reply

Jeff.Wilde
Luminary
Forum|alt.badge.img+3
  • Luminary
  • 509 replies
  • Answer
  • April 28, 2025

@Michael.Wright,

POP and Gaussian Beam Analysis (GBA) take diffraction into account, while simple ray tracing does not.  So, in your case, the laser beam expansion is properly predicted by either POP or GBA.  Ray tracing in Zemax is set up and executed separately, and the parameters chosen for it (aperture, stop size, apodization, vignetting factors, etc) have no impact on POP or GBA (however, surface apertures are taken into account for beam propagation in POP).   As a result, you will not typically observe a correlation between ray patterns in a layout window and beam profiles in POP. 

Here’s what I see with the laser beam in your case.  I placed an elliptical aperture on Surface 2, which is 15 microns from the laser output, and used vignetting factors to have the rays fill this aperture.  None of this had any impact on the Skew Gaussian Beam analysis.

 

Regards,

Jeff


Reply


Cookie policy

We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

 
Cookie settings