| Literature DB >> 36104372 |
Valerio Vitali1, Cosimo Lacava2, Thalía Domínguez Bucio3, Frederic Y Gardes3, Periklis Petropoulos3.
Abstract
We propose and numerically demonstrate a versatile strategy that allows designing highly efficient dual-level grating couplers in different silicon nitride-based photonic platforms. The proposed technique, which can generally be applied to an arbitrary silicon nitride film thickness, is based on the simultaneous optimization of two grating coupler levels to obtain high directionality and grating-fibre mode matching at the same time. This is achieved thanks to the use of two different linear apodizations, with opposite signs, applied to the two grating levels, whose design parameters are determined by using a particle swarm optimization method. Numerical simulations were carried out considering different silicon nitride platforms with 150, 300, 400 and 500 nm thicknesses and initially employing silicon as the material for the top level grating coupler. The use of Si-rich silicon nitride with a refractive index in the range 2.7-3.3 for the top layer material enabled to obtain similar performance (coupling efficiency exceeding - 0.45 dB for the 400 nm thick silicon nitride platform) with relaxed fabrication tolerances. To the best of our knowledge, these numerical results represent the best performance ever reported in the literature for silicon nitride grating couplers without the use of any back-reflector.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36104372 PMCID: PMC9474549 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-19352-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Comparison of different GCs for the S-C-L bands demonstrated on various SiN platforms.
| Si | Simulations | Experiments | Notes | Ref | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CE (dB) | 1 dB-BW (nm) | CE (dB) | 1 dB-BW (nm) | |||
| 100 | − 3.8 | – | − 5 | 75 (3dB-BW) | Amorphous-Si-on-Si | [ |
| 220 | − 2.28 | 57.7 | − 2.56 | 46.9 | Apodized bilayer GC | [ |
| 300 | − 0.48 | 45 | – | – | Bottom DBR+chirp generator algorithm | [ |
| 325 | − 1 | 54 | − 1.75 | 76.34 (3dB-BW) | Multilayer reflector+apodized GC | [ |
| 325 | − 1.3 | – | − 4.5 | 68 (3dB-BW) | Bottom DBR (10 layers) | [ |
| 400 | − 0.88 | 70 | – | – | Apodized GC+bottom Si grating reflector | [ |
| 400 | − 1 | 82 | − 1.3 | 80 | Si | [ |
| 400 | − 3.9 | 67 | − 4.2 | 67 | Fully-etched trenches | [ |
| 400 | − 1.2 | – | − 2.6 | 53 | Bottom DBR | [ |
| 400 | − 2.32 | 102 | − 2.5 | 53 | Bottom DBR | [ |
| 400 | − 0.38 | 42 | − 1.24 | 39 | Bottom DBR+chirp generator algorithm | [ |
| 400 | − 1.13 | 75 | − 2.58 | 52 | Bottom DBR | [ |
| 400 | − 2.52 | – | − 5.1 | 60 | DUV-lithography (500nm resolution) | [ |
| 500 | − 0.5 | 33 | − 1.17 | 40 | Bottom DBR+chirp generator algorithm | [ |
| 500 | − 1.34 | 56 | − 2.29 | 49 | Bottom DBR | [ |
| 600 | − 0.66 | 22.3 | − 1.5 | 60 (3dB-BW) | Two-step staircase-shaped GC | [ |
| 600 | − 2.13 | 63 | − 2.5 | 65 | Si | [ |
| 700 | − 2.8 | – | − 3.7 | 54 | One partial etching step | [ |
| 150 | − 0.75 | 57 | – | – | Dual level Si–Si | – |
| 300 | − 0.7 | 31 | – | – | Dual level Si–Si | – |
| 400 | − 0.39 | 28 | – | – | Dual level Si–Si | – |
| 500 | − 0.39 | 21 | – | – | Dual level Si–Si | – |
Figure 12D schematic view of the proposed dual-level Si–SiN GC.
Figure 2(a) Schematic of the optimization strategy followed in the design of the dual-level Si–SiN GC; cross-sectional schematic and simulation layout used to maximize the directionality in (b) step 1 and (c) step 2 and the CE in (d) step 3 of the design process.
Figure 3(a) Numerically simulated directionality at 1550 nm as a function of the etching depth e and bottom linear apodization factor considering a single level SiN GC with a thickness of 400 nm (step 1 of the design); (b) numerically simulated directionality at 1550 nm as a function of the top layer thickness and top linear apodization factor for a dual level Si–SiN GC with a SiN thickness = 400 nm, e = 250 nm and = 0.016 m (step 2 of the design). For both simulations campaigns: B = 3 m, T = 1 m and s = 20 nm.
Design parameters and numerical results of the simulated Si–SiN GCs for 500, 400, 300 and 150 nm thick SiN photonic platforms.
| Start parameters | Particle swarm optimization results | Performance | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
| 500 | 3 | 295 | 62 | 0.0310 | 0.0385 | 914 | 20 | 1 | 2 | 7.6 | − 0.39 dB | 21 nm |
| 400 | 3 | 240 | 65 | 0.0385 | 0.0405 | 941 | 75 | 0.46 | 2 | 7.2 | − 0.39 dB | 28 nm |
| 400 | 3 | 255 | 65 | 0.0320 | 0.0350 | 948 | 40 | 0.4 | 3 | 7.4 | − 0.44 dB | 35 nm |
| 300 | 3 | 169 | 74 | 0.0270 | 0.0275 | 976 | 78 | 0.35 | 4 | 7.4 | − 0.7 dB | 31 nm |
| 150 | 6 | 150 | 81 | 0.0550 | 0.0220 | 792 | 215 | 0.85 | − 25 | 5.1 | − 0.75 dB | 57 nm |
Figure 5(a) Numerically simulated CE as a function of wavelength for dual-level Si–SiN GCs considering 400 nm and 150 nm thick SiN platforms; (b) peak CE at 1550 nm and 1 dB BW as a function of the coupling angle for dual-level Si–SiN GC for a 400 nm thick SiN platform.
Figure 4(a) Comparison of the normalized power density profiles of the optical fibre mode and of the diffracted mode from the dual-level Si–SiN GC with 400 nm thick SiN waveguide; (b) numerically simulated CE at 1550 nm as a function of the separation s between the two layers for the dual-level Si–SiN GC with 400 nm thick SiN waveguide. All the parameters used for these simulations are listed in Table 2 (table row with = 2).
Figure 62D schematic view of the proposed dual-level SiN–SiN GC.
Design parameters of the simulated SiN–SiN GCs for a 400 nm thick SiN photonic platform with SiN and SiN as top layer materials.
| Initial parameters | Particle swarm optimization results | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 400 | 3.3 | 3 | 245 | 74 | 0.0395 | 0.0405 | 942 | 67 | 0.48 | 1.8 | 7.2 |
| 400 | 3.1 | 3 | 245 | 88 | 0.0395 | 0.0415 | 941 | 57 | 0.48 | 1.8 | 7.2 |
| 400 | 2.9 | 3 | 245 | 109 | 0.0390 | 0.0410 | 941 | 48 | 0.47 | 1.7 | 7.3 |
| 400 | 2.7 | 3 | 240 | 139 | 0.0440 | 0.0400 | 941 | 32 | 0.47 | 1.7 | 7.1 |
| 400 | 2.5 | 3 | 240 | 165 | 0.0410 | 0.0420 | 940 | 20 | 0.47 | 1.7 | 7.1 |
| 400 | 2.3 | 3 | 230 | 188 | 0.0345 | 0.0375 | 937 | 20 | 0.45 | 1.3 | 8 |
| 400 | 2.1 | 3 | 230 | 242 | 0.0295 | 0.0380 | 938 | 20 | 0.37 | 1.3 | 8.3 |
| 400 | 2 | 3 | 230 | 287 | 0.0295 | 0.0375 | 939 | 20 | 0.31 | 1.3 | 8.3 |
Figure 7(a) Thickness which maximizes the CE as a function of the top level refractive index ; (b) peak CE at 1550 nm and 1 dB BW as a function of for dual-level SiN–SiN GC for a 400 nm thick SiN platform.
Figure 8Grating sensitivity to critical fabrication parameters: peak CE dependence on (a) top thickness , (c) distance between the two layers s and (d) layers misalignment variation; (b) peak wavelength dependence on variation.