Yun-Cheng Ku1, Jiunn-Woei Liaw2,3,4, Szu-Yao Mao1, Mao-Kuen Kuo1. 1. Institute of Applied Mechanics, National Taiwan University, 1, Sec. 4, Roosevelt Road, Taipei 106, Taiwan. 2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Chang Gung University, 259 Wen-Hwa first Road, Kwei-Shan, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan. 3. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ming Chi University of Technology, New Taipei City 243303, Taiwan. 4. Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan City 33305, Taiwan.
Abstract
The conversion of a helical surface plasmon polariton (SPP) creeping out of a circular nanohole in a thick metal (Ag or Au) film into a spiral (Hankel type) SPP outward propagating at the film's interface is studied theoretically. The dispersion relations of SPPs of various modes in a nanohole, calculated from a transcendental equation, show that the propagation length of an SPP of mode 1 is much larger than the other modes in a specific frequency band, which is dependent on the nanohole size. In this band, the streamlines of the Poynting vector (energy flux) of mode-1 SPP in nanohole exhibit helixes; the surface component of the energy flux is perpendicular to the phase front of the SPP. Numerical results show that, after a helical SPP tunnels through a nanohole, most of the energy flux fans out at the outlet as a dipole radiation. The spatial phase distribution of E z above the interface indicates that the transmission light carries orbital angular momentum with a topological charge of 1. Additionally, a part of the helical SPP creeping along the edge of an outlet naturally converts into a spiral (Hankel type of order 1) SPP outward propagating at the film's interface; both SPPs have the same handedness. Moreover, the interferences of multi SPPs generating from two nanoholes and even from a two-dimensional nanohole array are also related to the spiral SPP.
The conversion of a helical surface plasmon polariton (SPP) creeping out of a circular nanohole in a thick metal (Ag or Au) film into a spiral (Hankel type) SPP outward propagating at the film's interface is studied theoretically. The dispersion relations of SPPs of various modes in a nanohole, calculated from a transcendental equation, show that the propagation length of an SPP of mode 1 is much larger than the other modes in a specific frequency band, which is dependent on the nanohole size. In this band, the streamlines of the Poynting vector (energy flux) of mode-1 SPP in nanohole exhibit helixes; the surface component of the energy flux is perpendicular to the phase front of the SPP. Numerical results show that, after a helical SPP tunnels through a nanohole, most of the energy flux fans out at the outlet as a dipole radiation. The spatial phase distribution of E z above the interface indicates that the transmission light carries orbital angular momentum with a topological charge of 1. Additionally, a part of the helical SPP creeping along the edge of an outlet naturally converts into a spiral (Hankel type of order 1) SPP outward propagating at the film's interface; both SPPs have the same handedness. Moreover, the interferences of multi SPPs generating from two nanoholes and even from a two-dimensional nanohole array are also related to the spiral SPP.
The
size-dependent color filter of a two-dimensional (2D) nanohole
array in a metal film for light transmission was discovered by Ebbesen’s
experiments.[1−4] In the past decades, the related issues have been extensively studied.[5−13] The phenomena are found to be related to a surface plasmon polariton
(SPP) propagating along nanoholes in a metal film.[14−16] On the one
hand, Shin et al. found that the HE11 mode is the dominant
propagating mode in a nanohole of a thick Ag film.[16] On the other hand, the SPP at the interface of a metal
film induced by a transmission light via a metallic nanohole has been
studied.[17−19] For example, Yin et al. used near-field scanning
optical microscopy (NSOM) to measure an SPP originating from a nanohole
at the upper interface of Au film irradiated by a linearly polarized
(LP) light at the lower side.[17] In addition,
Chang et al. used the finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method
to verify that this induced SPP can be approximated by a Hankel-type
SPP of order 1 propagating at the upper interface of a thin Au film.[18] Häfele et al. used leakage radiation
microscopy to measure the interference of SPPs from a pair of nanoholes;
this result can be explained by the interference of two Hankel-type
SPPs of order 1 originating from two nanoholes.[20,21] Furthermore, on the one hand, the interference of multi SPPs generated
from the transmission light through a one-dimensional (1D) or 2D array
of nanoholes in a Au film measured by NSOM has been reported.[22−24] On the other hand, the scattering light from two nanoholes and a
1D array of nanoholes in Au film were measured by dark-field microscopy.[25] Several studies also reported that a Hankel-type
SPP of order 1 can also be induced around a nanohole at the illumination
side of a metal–dielectric interface, which is the scattering
result of an incident light encountering a nanohole.[26,27] Recently, a circularly polarized (CP) plane wave in the terahertz
regime carrying only spin angular momentum (SAM) via a sub-wavelength
(square or circular) aperture in Al foil can produce a transmission
in the near field carrying orbital angular momentum (OAM) through
the spin–orbit interaction (SOI) of an electromagnetic field.[28] The phenomenon of SOI is indicated by the phase
singularity of a longitudinal electric field. Wei et al. utilized
a Laguerre–Gaussian (LG) light beam carrying OAM at λ
= 633 nm to irradiate a single nanohole in a Au film and then detected
the OAM of the transmission light on the backside of film at a long
distance, for example, 120 μm.[29] These
studies demonstrate that a metallic nanohole can facilitate the SOI
of light to produce a transmission field with OAM at the near field
or far field no matter whether the incident field carries OAM or not.[28−30]In this paper, we demonstrate that, via a sub-wavelength nanohole
in metallic film, a light source without carrying OAM in the UV–vis–NIR
(NIR = near-infrared) regime, for example, a CP light only carrying
SAM, can also induce a transmission light with OAM of topological
charge 1. In addition, we investigate the mechanism of how a Hankel-type
(spiral) SPP is launched at the film’s interface via a nanohole.
We propose that the major cause is due to the conversion of a helical
SPP of mode 1 creeping from the outlet of a nanohole into a Hankel-type
SPP of order 1 at the film’s surface. First, we theoretically
characterize the SPPs of various modes propagating along an infinitely
long metallic nanohole by solving a transcendental equation.[31−33] Comparing these modes, we think that a helical SPP of mode 1 is
the dominant mode propagating along a metallic nanohole based on a
consideration of the propagation length. Alternatively, we use a finite
element method (FEM) to numerically investigate how a helical SPP
converts into a spiral SPP at the outlet of a nanohole in a thick
metal film; a schematic is plotted in Figure . This conversion of SPPs is via the edge
of the outlet of a nanohole. Since SPP is a collective motion of free
electrons in metal interacting with the electromagnetic (EM) field,
the conversion is an extension of SPP creeping from the nanohole to
the upper surface. In addition, the radiation of the energy flux of
a helical SPP from the outlet of nanohole will be studied. The OAM
carried by the transmission light will be identified by the phase
singularity.[19−21,33] Moreover, the interferences
of two spiral SPPs from a pair of nanoholes and multi-spiral SPPs
from a 2D array of nanoholes will be studied.
Figure 1
Schematic of a helical
SPP propagating upward in a metallic nanohole
converted into a spiral SPP outward propagating at the upper surface
from the outlet, where a is the radius of nanohole,
and t is the thickness of metal film. Cylindrical
coordinates (r, θ, z) are
used to describe the behaviors of these SPPs.
Schematic of a helical
SPP propagating upward in a metallic nanohole
converted into a spiral SPP outward propagating at the upper surface
from the outlet, where a is the radius of nanohole,
and t is the thickness of metal film. Cylindrical
coordinates (r, θ, z) are
used to describe the behaviors of these SPPs.
Method
Throughout this paper, the time factor of the EM field is exp(−iωt), and the subscripts of 1 and 2 represent the
surrounding dielectric medium and the metal, respectively. We assume
a Bessel-type SPP of mode m inside the dielectric
medium through an infinitely long circular nanohole with a radius
of a. The electrical field of z component
in terms of wavenumber β for an
SPP of mode m in the dielectric medium passing through
a nanohole is expressed in cylindrical coordinates (r, θ, z) aswhere J is the first-kind Bessel function of
order m (m = 0, ±1, ±2,
...), 0 ≤ r ≤ a, and k1 = 2πn/λ. Here,
λ is the
wavelength of the incident light in vacuum, and n is the refractive index of the surrounding medium. eq is derived in the cylindrical coordinates
based on E satisfying
a scalar Helmholtz equation in material 1. Similarly, the counterpart
of eq in the metal
side (a ≤ r) for an SPP of
mode m is expressed aswhere H(1) is the first-kind
Hankel function of order m, and . Here, ε2r is
the relative
permittivity of metal. Using eqs and 2 satisfying E1(a, θ, z) = E2(a, θ, z) and the other components
of EM field matching the boundary conditions at the wall of nanohole,
we can obtain a transcendental equationwhere β is a complex wavenumber of the mode-m SPP.[32,33] We can calculate the dispersion
relation of mode-m SPP in a nanohole by solving eq numerically to find the
complex root of β.[33] In particular,
the behavior of the mode-1 SPP will be concerned due to its long propagation
length in the following.However, an analytical form of an outward-propagating
Hankel-type
(spiral) SPP of order m in the dielectric medium
(z ≥ 0) at a flat dielectric/metal interface
can be expressed in cylindrical coordinates (r, θ, z) aswhere and ; . The counterpart of eq inside metal (z ≤
0) iswhere . The propagation
length of spiral SPP at
interface is about 1/Im(2ksp) with a wavelength
of 2π/Re(ksp). In the following
study, we will focus on how a helical SPP in a nanohole converts into
a spiral SPP at the interface. We believe that a natural way for a
part of a helical SPP propagating in a nanohole to continue its polariton
is to make a ninety-degree turn at the outlet edge and convert into
a spiral SPP outward propagating at the interface of a thick film.
We also apply FEM (COMSOL) to further verify this phenomenon for a
thick metal film with a nanohole irradiated by a CP light.
Results
and Discussion
In the following, we do not take the substrate
effect into account.
Therefore, an effective refractive index of the surrounding medium
is assumed to be 1.2, throughout this paper, to simulate a real case:
a metal film on a silica substrate immersed in air. First, we numerically
calculate the dispersion relation of SPP of different modes (m = 0, 1, 2) in an infinite nanohole from the complex root
β of transcendental equation, eq .[33,34] Dielectric constants of Au and Ag measured by Johnson and Christy
are used for simulation.[35] The Re(neff) and propagation length 1/Im(2β) versus wavelength for different-size nanoholes
in Au or Ag thick film are plotted in Figure , where the effective refractive index is
defined as neff = β/k0. These spectra of
propagation length indicate that a specific-sized nanohole is a bandpass
filter. In particular, the propagation length of an SPP of mode 1
is much larger than the other modes in a specific frequency band,
which is size-dependent. This is to say that only the wavelength-selective
SPP of mode 1 is allowed to pass through a nanohole of specified size
in a thick metal film. In general, the larger the nanohole’s
radius the more red-shifted and broadened the bandpass region of the
propagation length of mode-1 SPP. Since the thicknesses of most metal
films are thinner than 400 nm, a typical length of 800 nm is chosen
as the threshold for the propagation length to define the bandpass
region and bandwidth of each mode. If the threshold of propagation
length is 800 nm (dot line in Figure ), the bandpass region of mode-1 SPP is [595, 650]
for a = 120 nm, [560, 810] nm for a = 160 nm, and [548, 968] nm for a = 200 nm in Au
film. For a nanohole of a = 90 nm in Ag film, the
bandpass region of mode-1 SPP is [370, 520] nm (Figure d). In addition, the propagation length of
mode-1 SPP increases as the size of the nanohole increases. This could
be attributed to the attenuation of SPP along nanohole being mainly
due to the confinement of the metal wall and the induced Ohm loss.
If the diameter of the nanohole is larger, the attenuation is less,
so the propagation length is larger. Note that, for a bigger nanohole
of a = 200 nm in Au film, as shown in Figure c, the propagation length of
mode-0 SPP is also larger than 800 nm in a bandpass region of 565–709
nm. For this case, not only mode-1 SPP but also mode-0 SPP can propagate
through the nanohole in a thick gold film of 1 μm. The bandpass
region of the propagation length of SPP is mode-dependent. Generally,
the lower cutoff wavelength of the bandpass region depends on the
plasmon property of metal, and the upper cutoff wavelength depends
on
the size of nanohole as well as the refractive index of surrounding
medium.
Figure 2
Dispersions of SPP of modes 0, 1, and 2 in a nanohole; Re(neff) and propagation length vs wavelength. Au
film with a nanohole of (a) a = 120 nm, (b) a = 160 nm, and (c) a = 200 nm. (d) Ag
film with a nanohole of a = 90 nm. Solid lines: wavenumber
of Re(neff), and dash lines: propagation
length (R: 0, G: 1, B: 2 mode). Dot lines: bandpass region of propagation
length according to a threshold of 800 nm.
Dispersions of SPP of modes 0, 1, and 2 in a nanohole; Re(neff) and propagation length vs wavelength. Au
film with a nanohole of (a) a = 120 nm, (b) a = 160 nm, and (c) a = 200 nm. (d) Ag
film with a nanohole of a = 90 nm. Solid lines: wavenumber
of Re(neff), and dash lines: propagation
length (R: 0, G: 1, B: 2 mode). Dot lines: bandpass region of propagation
length according to a threshold of 800 nm.In addition, Figure a shows the streamlines of a Poynting vector (energy flux) S = Re(E × H̅)/2 of the
mode-1 SPP within a nanohole of a = 160 nm in Au
film at λ = 700 nm, which is within the bandpass region of Figure b; neff = 0.6810 + 1.3965 × 10–2i. The corresponding propagation length is 3.99 μm. Figure a shows the phase
front of the surface charge, Re(Dn), of
Bessel-type SPP of mode 1 (eq ) on the metal wall of a nanohole at λ = 700 nm, where Dn = ε1rε0E·n. The helix angle is ϕ = 45.64° according
to tan(ϕ) = m/Re(βa). The pitch of the helix is the wavelength
of SPP; λsp = 1029 nm. Additionally, the direction
of the streamline of the Poynting vector (energy flux) S on the wall is perpendicular to the phase front (Figure a). Note that, for this case,
the phase velocity of a helical SPP of m = 1 is larger
than light speed in vacuum. This is similar to the case of an opaquely
incident plane wave encountering a planar interface; the phase velocity
along the interface is larger than light speed. However, the group
velocity of SPP is still slower than light speed. The spatial phase
distribution of E in
a nanohole shows a phase singularity with topological charge of 1
(eq ). The winding behavior
of streamline of energy flux and the phase singularity of the optical
field are indications of an optical vortex carrying OAM.[33,36] Furthermore, the full-field responses of an incident CP plane wave, E = e(e + ie)/√2, irradiating a thick metal film with
a single nanohole, are analyzed by FEM (COMSOL) numerically, where
the thickness of the film is 1 μm, as shown in Figure b. Since the thickness of the
metal film is larger than the penetration depth of a normally incident
light in metal, the only way for light to transmit is via the nanohole.
In addition, the crosstalk of SPPs on both sides of the metal film
will not happen. Figure b shows that the phase front of Re(Dn) on the wall of the nanohole in a finite-thickness film has a pitch
of 1028 and a helix angle of 46°, which are consistent with the
results of an analytical solution of a mode-1 SPP (Figure a). It illustrates that the
induced SPP by CP light, propagating along a nanohole in a finite-thickness
film, is a mode-1 SPP. Figure b also indicates that the streamline of energy flux of the
mode-1 SPP fans out toward the medium at the outlet of the nanohole.
In addition, part of the energy flow creeps along the metallic wall
and makes a turn at the edge of the outlet to convert into a spiral
(Hankel type of order 1) SPP propagating outward from the nanohole
at the interface of film and dielectric medium. According to eq , the analytical form of
an outward propagating spiral SPP of order 1 at the interface (z ≥ 0) is expressed aswhere the
complex amplitude E0 depends on the film
thickness, diameter, refractive
index of medium, and wavelength. We can use the result of FEM to fit eq for obtaining appropriate E0. Figure c shows that the patterns of phase front, Re(E), at z =
0 of FEM result (left-hand side, LHS) and the analytical solution
of eq (right-hand side,
RHS). Both phase fronts are almost identical; the pattern of Re(E) exhibits a spiral phase
front of this spiral SPP. This demonstrates that the new generated
SPP at the upper interface is an outward-propagating Hankel-type SPP
of order 1 with λsp = 557 nm at λ = 700 nm; . We also can
observe that the streamlines
of energy flux of this spiral (Hankel type of order 1) SPP are perpendicular
to the phase front. Additionally, the spatial phase distribution of
the E field at a cross
section above the outlet (z = 1500 nm) is plotted
in Figure d. The phase
singularity with a topological charge of 1 is observed, which is evidence
of the transmission light from the nanohole’s outlet carrying
OAM. In summary, these results elucidate that a plasmonic nanohole
is a bandpass filter of selecting mode-1 SPP with OAM to pass through,
as a CP plane wave is incident. Furthermore, a part of the transmission
SPP converts into a spiral (Hankel type) SPP outward propagating at
the upper interface.
Figure 3
(a) The streamlines of energy flux of mode-1 SPP in a
nanohole
of a = 160 nm and the phase front of surface charge
Re(Dn) on the wall of nanohole in Au film
at λ = 700 nm (analytical solution). (b) The streamlines of
energy flux and the phase fronts of Re(Dn) on the nanohole’s wall and at the upper interface, induced
by a CP plane wave of λ = 700 nm incident normally on 1 μm
Au film (FEM results). (c) LHS: FEM result of Re(E) at the upper interface (z = 0) showing outward-propagating spiral SPP, and RHS: analytical
form of Hankel-type SPP at the interface. (d) Spatial phase distribution
of E field at z = 1500 nm, indicating a phase singularity with a topological
charge of 1.
(a) The streamlines of energy flux of mode-1 SPP in a
nanohole
of a = 160 nm and the phase front of surface charge
Re(Dn) on the wall of nanohole in Au film
at λ = 700 nm (analytical solution). (b) The streamlines of
energy flux and the phase fronts of Re(Dn) on the nanohole’s wall and at the upper interface, induced
by a CP plane wave of λ = 700 nm incident normally on 1 μm
Au film (FEM results). (c) LHS: FEM result of Re(E) at the upper interface (z = 0) showing outward-propagating spiral SPP, and RHS: analytical
form of Hankel-type SPP at the interface. (d) Spatial phase distribution
of E field at z = 1500 nm, indicating a phase singularity with a topological
charge of 1.If the frequency of incident light
is not within the bandpass region
of mode-1 SPP, the propagation length of the induced SPP is short.
For example, the streamlines of Poynting vector and phase fronts of
the surface charge Re(Dn) of mode-1 SPP
at λ = 500 and 900 nm are shown in Figure a and Figure S1 (Supporting Information), respectively (analytical solution). As for the
SPPs of the other modes (m = 0, 2) within a nanohole
of a = 160 nm in Au film, the results of mode-0 SPP
at λ = 570 nm and mode-2 SPP at λ = 550 nm are shown in Figure b,c. These profiles
demonstrate that this energy flux of an SPP is attenuated rapidly,
not allowed to tunnel through the nanohole. Additionally, the streamlines
of energy flux of mode-0 SPP exhibit straight lines, rather than helical
lines (Figure b).
Except the mode 0, the higher-order SPPs exhibit helical propagation
in a nanohole; the phase fronts of SPPs of modes 1 and 2 on the metal
wall also exhibit helical distributions. The spatial phase distribution
of E at a cross section
of a nanohole for each mode is also plotted in Figure to indicate the corresponding topological
charge. For example, Figure b indicates the topological charge is 2 for mode-2 SPP.
Figure 4
Streamlines
of energy flux (analytical solution) in a nanohole
of a = 160 nm and the phase front of the surface
charge Re(Dn) on the wall of a nanohole
in Au film of infinite thickness. (a) Mode-1 SPP at λ = 500
nm, (b) mode-0 SPP at λ = 570 nm, and (c) mode-2 SPP at λ
= 550 nm. Phase distribution of E at a cross section of a nanohole for each mode indicates the
corresponding topological charge.
Streamlines
of energy flux (analytical solution) in a nanohole
of a = 160 nm and the phase front of the surface
charge Re(Dn) on the wall of a nanohole
in Au film of infinite thickness. (a) Mode-1 SPP at λ = 500
nm, (b) mode-0 SPP at λ = 570 nm, and (c) mode-2 SPP at λ
= 550 nm. Phase distribution of E at a cross section of a nanohole for each mode indicates the
corresponding topological charge.As for Ag film, the results in a nanohole are shown in Figure . Figure a shows the streamlines of
the Poynting vector of mode-1 SPP and the phase front of Re(Dn) on the wall of a nanohole (a = 90 nm) in Ag film at λ = 440 nm in a medium of n = 1.2; the phase of E at the cross section indicates the topological charge of 1. According
to eq , the wavenumber
is β1 = 11.4882 + 0.1461i μm–1. The propagation length of helical mode-1 SPP is
3.42 μm at λ = 440 nm within the bandpass region of a
nanohole in Ag film, as shown in Figure d. The pitch, λsp, of the
helix of phase front, Re(Dn), is 547 nm,
and the helix angle ϕ is 44.05°. Again, we observe that
the streamline of the Poynting vector on the wall is perpendicular
to the phase front. Figure b–d shows the results calculated by FEM for a nanohole
in Ag film with thickness of 1 μm, irradiated by a CP light.
Again, Figure b illustrates
that the streamlines of energy flux spread with a large divergence
angle at the outlet of a nanohole. A standing wave in the nanohole
is observed (Figure c), which is the result of a reflected mode-1 SPP from the outlet
interfering with the upward propagating SPP. For this case, the thickness
of Ag film nearly satisfies the resonance condition of mode-1 SPP
if the thickness is an integer multiple of λsp. Therefore,
the pattern of nodal line of |E| is clearer, as shown
in Figure c (RHS).
Additionally, the distribution of Re(E) on the wall (LHS) is also plotted to show the helical
SPP. The corresponding Re(E) at the interface of Ag film (z = 0), calculated
by FEM, is shown in LHS of Figure d, and the analytical solution of Hankel SPP of order
1 is shown in RHS. By a comparison of both spiral phase fronts, we
conclude that the induced SPP is a Hankel SPP of order 1. It is originated
from the conversion of the creeping mode-1 SPP on the wall of a nanohole.
Figure 5
In Ag
film, mode-1 SPP passing through a nanohole of a =
90 nm at λ = 440 nm. (a) The streamlines of energy flux
inside an infinite nanohole and Re(Dn)
on the wall (analytical solution). (b) The streamlines of energy flux
at the outlet. (c) The intensities of Re(E) on the wall and |E| at the x-z cross section of y = 0 inside a nanohole
in Ag film with a finite thickness of t = 1 μm,
induced by an incident CP plane wave (FEM results). LHS: Re(E), and RHS: |E|. (d) The corresponding Re(E) at the interface of film (z = 0). LHS: FEM,
and RHS: Hankel-type SPP of order 1.
In Ag
film, mode-1 SPP passing through a nanohole of a =
90 nm at λ = 440 nm. (a) The streamlines of energy flux
inside an infinite nanohole and Re(Dn)
on the wall (analytical solution). (b) The streamlines of energy flux
at the outlet. (c) The intensities of Re(E) on the wall and |E| at the x-z cross section of y = 0 inside a nanohole
in Ag film with a finite thickness of t = 1 μm,
induced by an incident CP plane wave (FEM results). LHS: Re(E), and RHS: |E|. (d) The corresponding Re(E) at the interface of film (z = 0). LHS: FEM,
and RHS: Hankel-type SPP of order 1.If the incident light illuminating metal film with a nanohole is
an LP light, two helical mode-1 SPPs with right-handedness and left-handedness
are induced in the nanohole. This is because an LP light is the linear
superposition of right-handed and left-handed CP lights. Therefore,
two spiral SPPs with opposite handedness are generated from the nanohole’s
outlet at the backside interface; they combine together to become
a Hankel-type SPP of mode 1 in the medium (z ≥
0).Moreover, we study the interference
of two SPPs originating from
a pair of nanoholes of a = 160 nm with a pitch (center
to center) of 620 nm in Au film of t = 1 μm.
The phase front Re(E) of FEM and an approximation of the superposition of two Hankel-type
SPPs of order 1, eq , individually originating from the two nanoholes at interface of z = 0 are shown in Figure for comparison, where a right circularly polarized
(RCP) light of λ = 700 nm irradiates the film from the lower
side. We found that the result of the approximation is in agreement
with that of FEM. Using this approximation, the pitch between two
nanoholes can be easily optimized to tailor the interference of two
Hankel-type SPPs for a constructive or destructive purpose.
Figure 6
Interference
of SPPs at the upper side (z = 0)
originating from two nanoholes of a = 160 nm with p = 620 nm in Au film of t = 1 μm,
irradiated by an RCP plane wave of λ = 700 nm at the lower side
(z = −t). Re(E) of (a) FEM and (b) approximation of
the sum of two Hankel-type SPPs of order 1 at the upper interface
of z = 0.
Interference
of SPPs at the upper side (z = 0)
originating from two nanoholes of a = 160 nm with p = 620 nm in Au film of t = 1 μm,
irradiated by an RCP plane wave of λ = 700 nm at the lower side
(z = −t). Re(E) of (a) FEM and (b) approximation of
the sum of two Hankel-type SPPs of order 1 at the upper interface
of z = 0.We also use FEM with a periodic boundary condition to simulate
the interference of multi SPPs from a 2D nanohole array (a = 160 nm) with a pitch of 1000 nm (lattice constant) in Au film
irradiated by a CP light of λ = 700 nm. The R(E) calculated by FEM at the interface
of z = 0 and by an approximation of Hankel SPPs of
order 1 originating from a 5 × 5 array are plotted in Figure . Again, we found
that the result of the approximation of Hankel SPPs is in agreement
with that of FEM, in comparison of Figure a,b. Figure c shows the FEM result of the spectrum of transmission
efficiencies at the inlet, outlet, and far field of a nanohole array
in Au films with t = 1000 nm and p = 1000 nm. The transmission efficiency TI at the inlet (z = −t) or TO at the outlet (z = 0) is
defined aswhere A is the area of a
nanohole, A0 is the area of a unit cell,
and S0 is the Poynting vector of incident
light. As for the transmission efficiency T at the
far field, the area for the integral of the numerator in eq is A0, a unit cell of array (p × p), at z = 1000 nm. The bandpass region of transmission
efficiency (Figure c) is consistent with that of the propagation length of mode-1 SPP
(Figure b for a = 160 nm); the bandpass region is from 580 to 800 nm for
a threshold of 1 μm propagation length. However, there is an
obvious dip in this band at λ = 637 nm for TI, as shown in Figure c. This dip corresponds to a band rejection of the
incident energy flux flowing into a nanohole array of p = 1000 nm, that is, a strong reflection. Generally, the wavelengths
of dip mainly depend on the pitch of array. According to Bloch’s
equationthe estimated wavelengths λ of dip are
586 nm (i = 2, j = 1, l = 1), 638 nm (i = 1, j = 0, l = 2), and 870 nm (i = 1, j = 1, l = 1).[3,37] These values are in
agreement with those calculated by FEM; 582, 637, and 866 nm. For
different pitches (p = 1000, 1100, 1200 nm), the
transmission efficiencies T are shown in Figure S2
and Table S1 (Supporting Information).
Our results show that the wavelengths of dip calculated by FEM are
in agreement with those estimated by eq . Figure c also illustrates that the transmission efficiency at the outlet
(z = 0) is less than that at the inlet (z = −t) due to the attenuation of mode-1 SPP
in a nanohole; TO ≤ TI. Additionally, the transmission efficiency T at the far field is less than that at the outlet (z = 0) due to the partial energy of mode-1 SPP being converted into
a Hankel-type SPP at the interface (z = 0); T ≤ TO. We also investigate
the thickness effect of film on the transmission. The results for
Au film of different thicknesses (t = 250, 500, 1000
nm) with a nanohole of a = 160 nm and p = 1000 nm are shown in Figure d. From these spectra of transmission efficiency T, we found that the bandpass region and the dip are nearly
independent of the thickness of Au film for the same pitch, except
that the thicker the film the smaller the transmission efficiency.
Moreover, we can adjust the pitch of a nanohole array to control the
constructive or destructive interference of multi SPPs. For example,
through suppressing the interference of multi SPPs of a 2D nanohole
array the coherent emission from multi nanoholes at the far field
becomes possible.[8,38] Conversely, a coherent resonance
of SPPs could be achieved by a specific design for the pattern of
nanoholes.[39]
Figure 7
2D nanohole array of a = 160 nm and p = 1000 nm (lattice constant)
in Au film with t =
1 μm irradiated by an RCP plane wave of λ = 700 nm at
the lower interface (z = −t). The Re(E) calculated
by (a) FEM with a periodic boundary condition and (b) by an approximation
of a 5 × 5 array of Hankel-type SPPs at the interface of z = 0. (c) Spectra of transmission efficiencies at the inlet,
outlet, and far field of a nanohole. (d) Spectrum of transmission
efficiency T of a nanohole array in Au films of different
thicknesses: t = 250, 500, 1000 nm.
2D nanohole array of a = 160 nm and p = 1000 nm (lattice constant)
in Au film with t =
1 μm irradiated by an RCP plane wave of λ = 700 nm at
the lower interface (z = −t). The Re(E) calculated
by (a) FEM with a periodic boundary condition and (b) by an approximation
of a 5 × 5 array of Hankel-type SPPs at the interface of z = 0. (c) Spectra of transmission efficiencies at the inlet,
outlet, and far field of a nanohole. (d) Spectrum of transmission
efficiency T of a nanohole array in Au films of different
thicknesses: t = 250, 500, 1000 nm.
Conclusion
From the dispersion relations of SPPs of different
modes propagating
along a metallic nanohole solved by a transcendental equation, we
found that the propagation length of mode-1 SPP is much larger than
that of the other modes in a size-dependent frequency band. In this
band region, the streamlines of energy flux (Poynting vector) of a
mode-1 Bessel-type SPP in the nanohole exhibit helixes carrying OAM.
The distribution of Re(Dn) on the wall
of a nanohole shows the phase front of the helical SPP with a helix
angle; the streamline of energy flux is perpendicular to this phase
front. A coil-shaped helical SPP of mode 1 might be a natural way
for light to propagate through a sub-wavelength nanohole in metal
film. Furthermore, numerical results of a thick Au or Ag film show
that, if an incident CP light is used for illumination, only the mode-1
SPP is allowed to reach the outlet. Additionally, most of the energy
flux of mode-1 SPP fans out as a radiating dipole source at the outlet
of a nanohole carrying OAM with a topological charge of 1. Of interest,
when a mode-1 helical SPP creeps out of the nanohole’s outlet
a part of it converts into a spiral (Hankel type of order 1) SPP outward
propagating at the metal–dielectric interface of the film;
their handedness is the same. If an incident LP light is used for
illumination, two helical SPPs with opposite handedness are generated
simultaneously to propagate along a nanohole. This is because an LP
light can be decomposed into right-handed and left-handed CP lights.
Consequently, a total SPP of two spiral SPPs with opposite handedness
is induced at the outlet of a nanohole to propagate at the interface.
We also studied the interference of two spiral SPPs generated from
two nanoholes and the interference of multi spiral SPPs from a 2D
nanohole array. We found that the results of an approximation solution
in terms of Hankel form are in agreement with those of FEM. Our studies
may provide an insight into the mechanism of interference of multi
spiral SPPs converted from the transmission helical SPPs via a metallic
nanohole array. These findings will be useful to design nanohole-array
metamaterials for applying SPP to nearfield sensing, for example,
Fano resonance.[6,9,40−43] In addition, it is worth mentioning that a higher-order SPP with
a topological charge larger than 1 could be generated efficiently
through nanoholes in a plasmonic film by using a special structured-light
(e.g., Bessel beam) irradiation.
Authors: Hanwei Gao; Jerome K Hyun; Min Hyung Lee; Jiun-Chan Yang; Lincoln J Lauhon; Teri W Odom Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2010-10-13 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Dirk Jan W Dikken; Jeroen P Korterik; Frans B Segerink; Jennifer L Herek; Jord C Prangsma Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-04-28 Impact factor: 4.379