JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 35, NO.

2, JANUARY 15, 2017 159

Monolithic High-Contrast Gratings:

Why Do They Not Scatter Light?
Maciej Dems

Abstract—Monolithic high-contrast gratings (MHCGs) are able
to reflect light as well as can classical subwavelength high-contrast
gratings (HCGs), without requiring, as do classical HCGs, to
be sandwiched between low-refractive-index layers. Although
the replacement of low-index cladding on the input side with
high-index material should cause strong scattering of the incident
wave into higher diffractive orders, this effect can be suppressed
so that MHCGs reflect only the zero-order plane wave. This paper
describes a numerical investigation of the reflectivity maxima for
both classical and monolithic gratings, and conducts a formal
mathematical analysis of the plane wave reflection. It shows that
the absence of scattering in MHCGs is attributed to a particular
structure of the impedance/admittance matrix, which makes
the reflectivity of the grating independent of the substrate
refractive index. By carefully choosing the grating parameters,
this structure of the impedance/admittance matrix can be found
for any value of the grating refractive index, allowing MHCGs to
be designed in any material wavelength.
Index Terms—Diffraction theory, gratings, scattering, subwave-
length structures.
I. INTRODUCTION
HE thick multi-layered Bragg mirrors in surface-emitting
T lasers can be replaced with subwavelength High-Contrast
Gratings (HCGs) only a few-hundred nanometers thick,
which—if properly designed—can reflect 100% of the in-
cident light [1]–[5]. Such gratings are composed of parallel
high-refractive-index bars separated by air gaps and arranged
periodically with a pitch smaller than the incident light
wavelength. Conventionally, it has been assumed that HCGs
must be surrounded on both the top and bottom sides by a
low-refractive-index material, such as air or an oxide. This
can be seen as an advantage, as it enables the design of
compact tunable lasers [6], [7], but it can also cause problems
when it comes to device manufacture or thermal and elec-
trical optimization. However, we have recently demonstrated
subwavelength Monolithic HCGs (MHCGs), in which the
low-refractive-index layer on one side is replaced by a layer
with high refractive index [8]. This allows the grating to be
etched directly in a monolithic material, which comprises the
laser cavity. For perpendicularly incident waves these MHCGs
are still equally as good as classical HCG mirrors. We have
shown that such structures enable the design of an ultra-thin
double-HCG laser [9], [10], with only a GaAs cavity, a quantum
well active region within, and two MHCGs on either side. Such
a VCSEL (Vertical-Cavity Surface-Emitting Laser), with the
shortest cavity possible, could have applications as an on-chip
integrated light source. Unlike previous devices [11], our design
does not require the mirrors or the cavity to be separated by air.
Contrary to classical HCGs, which have low-refractive-index
layers on both sides, MHCGs support multiple diffraction or-
ders of the reflected wave. However, a surprising property of
our MHCGs is their lack of scattering: all the energy is re-
flected into the zero diffraction order. This effect is the key
factor enabling application of MHCGs in VCSELs. Without it,
the scattering losses would dominate significantly over the laser
gain and would make lasing impossible.
When we observed this no-scattering effect in our numeri-
cal simulation results, we immediately asked ourselves several
important questions:
r How was it possible?
r Was it only a random occurrence, or a an inherent property
of MHCGs?
r Would it be possible to make other gratings designs—in
particular in other materials systems—which could show
similar scatter-less reflection?
In this paper, I set out to answer these questions. To do so, I
provide a detailed numerical analysis of the transition between
classical HCGs and MHCGs, which occurs when the refractive
index of the layer directly beneath the grating is increased to
the value of the refractive index of the grating bars—allowing
higher diffraction orders of the reflected wave. I also investigate
mathematical equations describing the light reflection process,
and I identify the source of the differences between the scatter-
less reflection peaks and those that either show strong scattering
or do not occur in MHCGs.
With this approach I am able to answer the questions posed
above, and provide better understanding of the physics of mono-
lithic high-contrast gratings.

Manuscript received September 26, 2016; revised November 22, 2016; ac- II. REFLECTIVITY OF HIGH-CONTRAST GRATINGS
cepted November 23, 2016. Date of publication November 28, 2016; date of
current version December 22, 2016. This work was supported by the Polish A. Reference HCG
National Center of Science, award no. 2015/19/B/ST7/00562.
The author is with the Institute of Physics, Łódź University of Technology, Consider a highly-reflective classical subwavelength grating
Łódź 90-924, Poland (e-mail: maciej.dems@p.lodz.pl). either suspended in air or placed on a low refractive index
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. substrate (Fig. 1). Examples of such gratings have been rig-
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JLT.2016.2633224 orously studied in the past [1], [3], [14]. They can provide near
0733-8724 © 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI. Downloaded on April 07,2020 at 17:10:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 160
Fig. 1. Structure and dimensions of a high-contrast grating either suspended
in air or placed on a low refractive index substrate. Dimension and refractive
index symbols defined in this figure are used consistently throughout the article.
Fig. 2. (a) Reflectivity spectrum of a perpendicularly illuminated typical
highly-reflective subwavelength grating optimized for TE polarization and sus-
pended in the air (n s = 1). (b) Dependence of TE grating reflectivity over 98%
as a function of wavelength and the refractive index of the substrate material
(n s ). The grating is illuminated from the substrate side and white lines indicate
the cut-offs of the first, second, and third diffraction orders of the reflected light.
Refer to the text for grating parameters. In subsequent figures, this particular
structure will be called the reference grating.
100% reflectivity over a broad wavelength spectrum for two
independent light polarizations: TE (Transverse Electric),
when the electric field vector is parallel to the bars, and
TM (Transverse Magnetic) in which case the magnetic field
vector is parallel to the bars [15]. For both polarizations, the
exact location and bandwidth of high reflectivity ranges depend
on the grating’s geometric properties, incidence angle, and on
the refractive indexes of the grating and cladding materials.
Fig. 2(a) shows a sample of such high reflectivity ranges in
the reflectivity spectrum of a perpendicularly illuminated typi-
cal HCG having the refractive index ng = 3.52 (assumed to be
constant over the all analyzed wavelengths), suspended in the
air (ns = 1.00), with a pitch L = 1.00 μm, fill factor f = 0.40,
and thickness h = 0.20 μm (see Fig. 1 for a precise definition
of the symbols). Henceforward, we shall refer to this HCG as
the reference grating. It is optimized for the TE light polariza-
tion and provides two high reflectivity peaks around 1100 nm
and 1500 nm. It is shown later that once the substrate refractive
index is increased sufficiently for the first-order mode to appear,
the peak reflectivity quickly drops below 98%.
The numerical results presented in Figs. 2, 3, and 5–8
are computed with the plane-wave reflection transfer (PWRT)
method [4] in which the fields are expanded into 25 periodic
basis functions in the direction perpendicular to the grating.
For periodic gratings, analyzed here, this method is equivalent
to the popular rigorous coupled waves analysis (RCWA) [16],
[17], which has already proved its applicability to the grating
analysis.
The 1100 nm and 1500 nm hight reflectivity peaks of the
reference grating are also visible near the bottom of Fig. 2(b),
which depicts reflectivity over 98% as a function of both the
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI. Downloaded on April 07,2020 at 17:10:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 35, NO. 2, JANUARY 15, 2017
Fig. 3. Grating reflectivity as in Fig. 2 for TM-optimized grating. The spec-
trum in subfigure (a) is computed for the substrate refractive index 1.47, indi-
cated in subfigure (b) with the horizontal gray line.
Fig. 4. Shapes of the grating modes at the (a) transmission and (b) reflection
sides of the reference grating with n s = 2.5 and for the wavelength of 1034 nm.
Dashed lines indicate averages of the modes and thick black line shows the sum
of all the grating modes. Although the grating operates in triple-mode regime
(rather than double-mode regime), the transmission-side averages add up to
zero, providing 100% reflectivity, as discussed in [12], [13].
Fig. 5. (a) Reflectivity spectra for three diffraction orders of the reference
grating with n s = 2.5. Dashed vertical line denotes second-mode cut-off and
solid yellow line shows the wavelength of maximum reflectivity. (b) Electric
field squared magnitude distribution. Bottom-side incident wave is reflected into
higher-order modes, resulting in a strongly scattered pattern.
wavelength λ and the refractive index of the substrate material
ns . The 1500 nm reflectivity peak shows a typical dependence
on the substrate refractive index ns . As ns increases, the peak
shifts towards the longer wavelengths. It never crosses the first
diffraction order cut-off line—i. e. it exists only if the substrate
does not support diffraction orders other than zero. This is the
case with almost all of the subwavelength gratings reported in
the literature [3], [14], so it can be considered a typical property
of highly reflective HCGs used in VCSELs. Similar behavior
can be observed for a typical TM polarized grating [1] in Fig. 3
(ng = 3.48, L = 0.70 μm, f = 0.75, h = 0.46 μm). In this
example, however, there are two independent high-reflectivity
peaks at ns = 1, which coalesce forming well know broadband
sight reflectivity region at ns = 1.47. Still, the peaks shift sig-
nificantly with ns (although one of them towards shorter wave-
lengths) and disappear once the substrate starts supporting the
first diffraction order.
 DEMS: MONOLITHIC HIGH-CONTRAST GRATINGS: WHY DO THEY NOT SCATTER LIGHT?
Fig. 6. Reflectivity over 98% from MHCGs optimized for (a) TE and (b) TM
polarization as a function of the wavelength and substrate refractive index n s .
In both cases, there is a reflectivity peak independent of the n s , which provides
reflection without scattering. The gratings are illuminated from the substrate
side and white lines indicate the cut-offs of the higher-diffraction orders in the
substrate.
Fig. 7. Reflectivity spectra for three diffraction orders of MHCGs optimized
for (a) TE and (b) TM polarizations. In both cases, the reflectivity of higher-
order modes drops to zero at 980 nm, so the gratings provide a pure zero-order
plane-wave reflection with no light scattering. The dashed vertical line denotes
the second-mode cut-off and the solid yellow line shows the wavelength of
maximum reflectivity.
Fig. 8. (a) Electric field squared magnitude for TE-optimized grating and (b)
magnetic field squared magnitude for TM-optimized grating (see Table I). In
both cases, there is an incident plane-wave shining from the bottom and the
reflected field has only a zero non-evanescent order. As a consequence, there is
a flat standing wave visible in the substrate (compare with Fig. 5(b)).
In case of the reference grating (TE-optimized) there is an-
other high-reflectivity region near the wavelength of 1000 nm
for ns between 2.3 and 3.3 (and higher, although the maximum
stays below 99.5%). The occurrence of 100% reflectivity for
such a large ns can be explained by the fact that on the trans-
mission (top) side of the grating the refractive index remains
equal to one and, thus, only the zero-order transmitted mode
exists. Hence, it is still possible for the grating to match the
zero-transmission condition and provide nearly 100% reflectiv-
ity. This condition states that no light is transmitted through the
grating if it is operating in the two-mode regime and the spa-
tial averages of these modes add up to zero [12], [13]. These
modes (determined analytically as presented in [13]) are vi-
sualized in Fig. 4(a). Although at a wavelength of 1034 nm
the grating supports three internal modes, the intensity of
one is negligible and the averages of the other two add up
to zero.
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI. Downloaded on April 07,2020 at 17:10:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
161
Figure 4(b) shows the same modes on the reflection (bottom)
side. Contrary to the transmission side, on this side the sum of
all the modes has a non-zero average. This also has a strongly
oscillatory nature, which allows it to couple to higher diffraction
orders. Hence, the incident light is reflected into all diffraction
orders that can propagate in the substrate. The intensity of the
light reflected into each of these orders is shown in Fig. 5(a). The
light intensities reflected into zero, first, and second diffraction
orders are presented for the substrate refractive index ns = 2.5.
At the maximum total grating reflectivity—observed for the
1034 nm wavelength—the light is reflected into all three orders.
Hence, the reflected wave suffers very strong scattering, as illus-
trated in Fig. 5(b). This scattering makes such mirrors useless
for almost all applications in surface-emitting lasers.
For TM-optimized grating—presented in Fig. 3—no reflec-
tivity peak exists for ns above the first reflected order cutoff.
B. MHCG
As stated in the introduction, in our previous publication [8]
we have shown that a carefully designed MHCG with ns =
ng = 3.52 can reflect light into the zero diffraction order only,
providing a reflected plane wave with no scattering. This is
clearly different behavior to that described above for the refer-
ence grating. Our MHCGs operate on a reflectivity peak, which
has the unique property of being independent of the substrate
refractive index ns . Fig. 6 shows such reflectivity peaks for
MHCGs optimized for TE and TM polarizations (the geomet-
rical parameters of both gratings are summarized in Table I).
For both polarizations, the reflectivity peak near the 980 nm is
independent of the substrate refractive index. This is the funda-
mental effect behind the properties of the MHCG. For low ns
(around 1.0), the gratings reflect only the zero-order plane-wave,
as this is the only one that exists below the cut-off. Hence, all the
energy (nearly 100% reflectivity) propagates as a zero-order re-
flected wave. As ns increases, the reflected wave intensity does
not change, as it is independent on ns . As a consequence, even
for ns above the first or second order cut-off, higher reflected
orders must have zero intensity, because of energy conservation.
This is visible in Fig. 7, where the reflectivity spectra for each
diffractive order is presented; and in Fig. 8, which shows field
profiles. Contrary to Fig. 5(b), the reflected field for both TE
and TM MHCGs is a scatter-less zero-order plane wave.
In Fig. 6(b) more than one reflectivity peak is visible. At lower
wavelengths (700 nm for ns = 1.0) a narrow-bandwidth, highly-
reflective resonance can be seen, similar to that observed for the
reference grating. The resonant wavelength shifts towards blue
with increasing ns and disappears once the first-diffraction order
appears in the substrate. This is qualitatively different behavior
from the 980 nm peak. The existence of both types of regions of
high-reflectivity in the same structure provides an opportunity
to investigate their fundamental differences. This will be the
purpose of the next section.
III. THEORETICAL REFLECTION ANALYSIS
The scatter-less properties of MHCGs, can be explained with
a rigorous theoretical analysis. Similar analysis has already been
 162 JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 35, NO. 2, JANUARY 15, 2017

TABLE I perpendicular to the grating plane for the n-th diffraction order
GEOMETRICAL PARAMETERS OF MHCGS OPTIMIZED FOR HIGH REFLECTIVITY 
AT 980 NM FOR TE AND TM POLARIZATION. REFER TO FIG. 1 FOR
EXPLANATION OF THE SYMBOLS αn = εs ω 2 − (2πn/L)2 , (3)

where εs = n2s is the permittivity of the substrate.

grating optimized for
Similarly, the fields in the air (the transmission side, region
TE TM (3)) can be represented as
  
grating height h nm 164 302
(3) 2πnx
grating pitch L nm 817 497 H (x, z) = tn cos exp(−iγn (z−h)), (4)
fill factor f % 35.0 50.0 n
L
grating refractive index ng 3.52 3.52
  
substrate refractive index ns 3.52 3.52 2πnx
ωE (3) (x, z) = γn tn cos exp(−iγn (z−h)), (5)
n
L

where tn is the n-th diffraction order amplitude transmission

coefficient and γn is the perpendicular transmitted wavevector
component:

γn = ω 2 − (2πn/L)2 . (6)
Inside the grating, the field profile is the superposition of
infinite periodic waveguide array modes that can be derived
analytically. Without entering into the details, which have been
presented elsewhere [13], we can assume that the m-th mode
has the propagation constant βm and a lateral profile described
Fig. 9. Grating sections, coordinates and diffraction orders used in modal
analysis. by the known function Fm (x). The fields in the grating region
((2)) are then

presented e. g. in [12], [13], however, it focused on the 100% H (2) (x, z) = [ um cos(βm z)
reflection mechanism of classical HCGs. In the contrary, the m
aim of this section is the explanation of the lack of scattering + wm sin(βm z) ] Fm (x), (7)
in MHCGs. Only for the sake of clarity, the whole derivation is 
presented. ωE (2) (x, z) = iβm [−um sin(βm z)
Without losing sight of the general picture, we can focus on m
the TM polarization only—for TE, some details would differ, +wm cos(βm z)] ε−1
g (x)Fm (x), (8)
but the final findings and conclusions would be the same.
Consider a zero-order plane wave incident from the substrate where εg (x) is the lateral distribution of the permittivity in the
side (section (1) in Fig. 9), traveling into a perfect infinite grat- grating region (n2g in bars and 1 between them) and um with wm
ing. For the TM polarization, the only non-zero component of are m-th mode amplitudes, corresponding to the, respectively,
the magnetic field is Hy and the only horizontal component magnetic and electric fields at the reflection interface.
of the electric field is Ex (Ez can always be determined from At the region’s boundaries, both H and E fields must be
the horizontal components). Hence, we can reduce the Maxwell contiguous. Four contiguity equations can then be formulated:
equations to scalar equations and represent the fields in the sub-    
2πnx
strate as 1+ rn cos = um Fm (x), (9)
n
L m
H (1) (x, z) = exp(−iα0 z)    
2πnx
   α0 − αn rn cos = wm iβm εs
2πnx L
+ rn cos exp(+iαn z), (1) n m
L
n
× ε−1
g (x)Fm (x), (10)
ωE (1)
(x, z) = ε−1
s α0
exp (−iα0, z)    
2πnx
   tn cos = [um cos(βm h)
2πnx L
− αn ε−1
s rn cos exp(+iαn z), (2) n m
n
L
+wm sin(βm h)] Fm (x),
(11)
where the electric field is normalized (i. e. assuming free space
   
impedance Z0 ≡ 1), ω = 2π/λ is the normalized wave angular 2πnx
γn tn cos = iβm [−um sin(βm h)
frequency (assuming the speed of light c ≡ 1), n is the number n
L m
of a diffraction order, rn is the amplitude reflection coefficient of
the n-th diffraction order, and αn is the wavevector component + wm cos(βm h)] ε−1
g (x)Fm (x). (12)

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI. Downloaded on April 07,2020 at 17:10:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 DEMS: MONOLITHIC HIGH-CONTRAST GRATINGS: WHY DO THEY NOT SCATTER LIGHT? 163

In order to remove the x-dependence from the above equations,

they are multiplied by cos(2πnx/L) and integrated over the
grating period. This yields the following equations in a matrix
form:
d0 + r = MH u, (13)
d0 − r = η ME w, (14)
t = MH (χu + σw) , (15)
t = ME (−σu + χw) , (16)
where each bold lower letter is a column vector, each bold capital
letter is a dense matrix, and each bold Greek letter is a diagonal Fig. 10. Hinton diagrams of Z matrices computed for TM-optimized MHCG
 T at (a) 700 nm and (b) 980 nm wavelengths. Square size indicates the magnitude
matrix. In particular, d0 = 1 0 0 . . . is a Kronecker’s delta of matrix cells and the color shows their phase: white real positive (phase 0),
vector, r and t are the vectors of the reflection and transmission black real negative (phase π), red imaginary positive (phase 12 π), blue imaginary
coefficients, respectively, u and w are vectors of the sin and cos negative (phase 32 π). The number both of cladding and grating modes considered
is 9. Note that matrices visualized in this figure do not depend on n s .
amplitudes in the grating, MH and ME are overlap matrices of
the magnetic and electric fields
  To find the physical meaning of the Z matrix, we can combine

2 L 2πnx equations (13), (14), (22), and (25), which gives
[MH ]n m = Fm (x) cos dx, (17)
L 0 L d0 − r = ηZ (d0 + r). (26)
  
2 iβm L −1 2πnx The left-hand side of the above equation (d0 − r) corresponds
[ME ]n m = Fm (x)εg (x) cos dx, (18)
L γn 0 L to the electric field on the reflection side of the grating, while
and other diagonal matrices are the right-hand term (d0 + r) corresponds to the magnetic field.
Hence, the matrix ηZ can be interpreted as equivalent to an
[χ]m m = cos(βm h), (19) impedance matrix of the system.
[σ]m m = sin(βm h), (20) The key to understanding the properties of the MHCG lies
in the Z matrix. Fig. 10 visualizes the Z matrix in the form
γn L2 − (nλ)2 of Hinton diagrams for two high reflectivity peaks of the TM-
[η]n n = εs = εs . (21) optimized MHCG. The first column of the 980 nm-wavelength
αn εs L2 − (nλ)2
peak matrix has a dominant diagonal element, while the other
Vectors u and w define the amplitudes of the waveguide-array elements are negligible (they are at least two orders of magnitude
modes inside the grating. Although, at the wavelength of inter- smaller than the diagonal). Ignoring these non-diagonal terms,
est, the grating operates in the two-mode regime (i. e. only two it is possible to extract the zero-order reflection coefficient from
propagating modes exist), there are an infinite number of evanes- Eq. (24) as
cent modes. These do not contribute to energy transfer and decay −1
to negligible amplitudes over the grating height; however, they η00 − Z00
r0 ≈ −1 . (27)
play an important role in coupling to the substrate modes on the η00 + Z00
reflection side and to the free space modes on the transmission Fig. 10(b) further shows that the Z00 element for the 980 nm
side. The mutual relation between the sin and cos modes in the −1
peak is purely imaginary. In contrast, η00 is real (η00 = ns , see
grating depends only on the coupling at the transmission side Eq. (21)). This allows us to further simplify Eq. (27) to the form
and can be derived by eliminating t from Eqs. (15) and (16):
Y∗
w = (ME χ − MH σ)−1 (ME σ + MH χ) u = Q u. (22) r0 ≈ , (28)
Y
−1
Using the newly-defined Q matrix, we can derive the reflection where Y = η00 + Z00 . As a consequence
coefficients vector as

−1
 |r0 | ∼
= 1. (29)
r = I + ηME QM−1 H I − ηME QM−1 H d0 . (23)
In other words, the zero-order reflectivity coefficient is always
Of all the above matrices, the only one that depends on the 100% regardless of the value of ns , which only impacts the phase
substrate refractive index ns is η. Hence, we can separate it of the reflected wave. In accordance with the law of conservation
from the rest and write of energy, all other reflected diffraction orders are suppressed.
For the TM case, Eq. (27) can be used regardless of the
r = (I + ηZ)−1 (I − ηZ) d0
value of ns , as long as the first-column of the the Z matrix has

−1
−1 
= η −1 + Z η − Z d0 , (24) dominant diagonal element (as shown in Fig. 10(b)). Magnitudes
of the first-column diagonal elements of matrices η −1 ± Z are
where
−2 1/2
equal to η00 + |Z00 |2 so they are always larger than Z00 .
Z = ME QM−1
H . (25) Hence, even for large ns the above conclusions remain valid.

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI. Downloaded on April 07,2020 at 17:10:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 164
Fig. 11. (a) Hinton diagram for the Z matrix, determined at the 980 nm
wavelength for the TE-optimized MHCG. The diagonal element in the first
column is again purely imaginary; however, it does not dominate over the
non-diagonal elements as in case of the TM-optimized grating. For the matrices
 −1
(b) η−1 − Z and (c) η−1 + Z the the first-column diagonal element again
becomes dominant. Diagram (a) does not depend on n s and diagrams (b) and
(c) are shown for n s = 1, which gives the smallest absolute values of η and,
hence, is the worst case scenario.
Equations (27)–(29) cannot be applied for the 700 nm peak,
where non-diagonal elements of the first column of matrix Z
cannot be neglected: Z10 is as significant as Z00 (Fig. 10(a))
and Z00 is not purely imaginary. Hence, both the phase and the
magnitude of r0 change with ns . This is observed as a red-shift
and the vanishing of the peak with increase of the substrate
refractive index.
A. TE-Optimized Grating
For TE light polarization, the Z matrix can be considered
equivalent to the admittance matrix (in contrast to the impedance
matrix for TM). Without entering into details, which are not
relevant to this discussion, its explicit form can be derived in
a similar manner, as presented above for the TM-optimized
grating. A Hinton diagram of the Z matrix for TE-optimized
MHCGs is shown in Fig. 11. Again, the diagonal element of the
first column Z00 is purely imaginary, although this time it does
not dominate the other elements in its column as significantly as
was the case with the TM-optimized grating. As a consequence,
it might seems that the approximation of Eq. (27) is not valid;
yet, in fact it is. In this case, all the elements of the first column
of the Z matrix are small in magnitude. Hence, the matrices
η −1 ± Z again have sufficiently dominant diagonal elements in
their first columns (see Figs. 11(b) and 11(c)). This is so even
−1
for ns = 1, which gives the smallest possible value of η00 , as
−1
for the TE polarization η00 = ns .
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI. Downloaded on April 07,2020 at 17:10:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 35, NO. 2, JANUARY 15, 2017
Fig. 12. Hinton diagrams for the first columns of the Z and η−1 − Z matrices
for TE-optimized MHCGs with different n g . The geometric dimensions of
the gratings vary in each case; however, they are not shown for the sake of
clarity. Regardless of the material used (for every n g ), the Z 0 0 element of the
admittance matrix is purely imaginary (in each left column it is either red or
blue) and the diagonal element of the first column of η−1 − Z dominates over
the non-diagonal elements. This means that for each n g Eqs. (27)–(29) are valid.
In conclusion, Eqs. (27)–(29) still provide good approxima-
tions for the TE-optimized MHCG, because of the purely imag-
inary Z00 element and the domination of the diagonal element
in the first column of the η −1 − Z matrix. It is possible to
find grating parameters for which this condition holds, regard-
less of the refractive index of the grating bars ng , as long as
ng ≥ 1.8, which provides sufficiently large contrast within the
grating [18]. This allows MHCGs to be designed in any material
system. To illustrate this possibility, the first columns of the Z
and η −1 − Z matrices for different ng are shown in Fig. 12. In
all cases, the same characteristics are visible (i. e. the purely
imaginary Z00 and dominating diagonal element of η −1 − Z),
which means that the independence of |r0 | on the substrate re-
fractive index ns is an intrinsic property of the reflection peak
and not a mere coincidence for one particular set of parameters.
As both Z and η matrices depend strongly on the λ, the
above reasoning—for both TM and TE cases—applies only to
one particular wavelength, for which the approximation (27)
can be used. In consequence, the discussed reflectivity peaks
do not shift in wavelength, as seen in Fig. 6. However, the
bandwidth of these peaks may change with ns and it is closely
related to the dependence of the elements of both matrices on
λ: as the wavelength detunes from the optimal value, Z00 stops
being purely imaginary and the first-column diagonal element
domination of η −1 ± Z are less and less pronounced. Hence, the
farther from the optimal wavelength, the less accurate equation
(28) is.
IV. GRATING MODE INTERFERENCE
The 100% reflectivity of HCGs is explained by destructive
interference on the transmission side. The two grating modes,
averaged over the grating period, add up to zero, resulting in
no transmission of the zero diffraction order. As this is the only
non-evanescent order, and transfers the energy, all light must
be reflected back. The two grating modes on the reflection side
interfere with each other in a nondestructive way. The TM-
optimized MHCG with ns = 1 has two reflectivity peaks near
700 nm and 980 nm (Fig. 6(b)). Fig. 13 shows the profiles
and relative amplitudes of the grating modes on the reflection
side for these two peaks. Colored lines indicate the shapes and
 DEMS: MONOLITHIC HIGH-CONTRAST GRATINGS: WHY DO THEY NOT SCATTER LIGHT?
Fig. 13. Grating modes on the reflection side of the TM-optimized MHCG
for (a) 700 nm and (b) 980 nm reflectivity peaks at n s = 1.0. Solid colored
lines indicate propagating modes, dashed pale colored lines indicate evanescent
modes, and thick black lines indicate the sum of all the modes. At the 980 nm
peak, the resulting mode is flat and thus perfectly couples to the zero-order
reflected plane wave.
amplitudes of the propagating modes (opaque red and blue lines)
and evanescent modes (semi-transparent faded lines). Actual
field profiles—the sums of all these modes—are marked with
thick black lines. For the 700 nm peak (Fig. 13(a)) the field has
a strongly non-uniform profile, effectively coupling to not only
the zero-order plane wave but also to the higher orders. For low
ns this higher-order coupling does not influence the reflectivity
of the zero order, because all higher orders are evanescent and
do not transfer energy. This changes as the substrate refractive
index ns is increased above the first-order cut-off: the reflectivity
peak shifts and finally disappears.
The situation is different for the 980 nm peak (Fig. 13(b)).
The grating mode interference on the reflection side results in
a flat plane wave. As ns is increased, the flat shape of the
grating mode can oscillate slightly; however, the flat component
remains dominant because of the properties of the Z matrix
described above. The flat profile perfectly couples to the zero-
order reflected plane-wave and shows negligible coupling to
higher reflected orders.
V. CONCLUSION
In MHCGs, the incident plane wave can be reflected into
multiple diffraction orders, due to the high refractive in-
dex in which the reflected light propagates. However, in our
designs higher diffraction orders are suppressed, providing
scatter-less reflection and enabling the design of an ultra-
compact VCSEL. This is the result of a very special form
of the grating’s impedance/admittance matrix, which causes
the zero-order reflectivity peak to be independent of the sub-
strate refractive index. This form of matrix can be obtained
for any wavelength by tuning the geometrical parameters of the
grating—its pitch, fill-factor, and height. Although choosing the
appropriate parameters is not straightforward and may require
numerical optimization, it is possible to find high the reflectiv-
ity peaks of MHCGs regardless of the material from which it
has been fabricated, provided the material provides sufficient
contrast.
The analysis presented in this article has been performed
for the normal light incidence on the grating. The reflection
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI. Downloaded on April 07,2020 at 17:10:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
165
properties for this angle are crucial for MHCG VCSELs, hence
although for other incident angles the grating reflectivity drops
significantly [8], the analyzed high scatter-less reflectivity under
the normal incidence enables new desings of ultra-thin surface-
emitting lasers.
REFERENCES
[1] C. F. R. Mateus, M. C. Y. Huang, Y. Deng, A. R. Neureuther, and
C. J. Chang-Hasnain, “Ultrabroadband mirror using low-index cladded
subwavelength grating,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett., vol. 16, no. 2,
pp. 518–520, Feb. 2004.
[2] M. C. Y. Huang, Y. Zhou, and C. J. Chang-Hasnain, “Single mode high-
contrast subwavelength grating vertical cavity surface emitting lasers,”
Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 92, 2008, Art. no. 171108.
[3] C. Chase, Y. Rao, W. Hofmann, and C. J. Chang-Hasnain, “1550 nm hight
contrast grating VCSEL,” Opt. Express, vol. 18, pp. 15461–15466, 2010.
[4] M. Dems, “Modelling of high-contrast grating mirrors. The impact of im-
perfections on their performance in VCSELs,” Opto-Electr. Rev., vol. 19,
pp. 340–345, 2011.
[5] M. Gebski
˛ et al., “Transverse mode control in high-contrast grating VC-
SELs,” Opt. Express, vol. 22, no. 17, pp. 20954–20963, Aug. 2014.
[6] M. Amann, “Tuning triumph,” Nature Photonics, vol. 2, pp. 134–135,
2008.
[7] M. C. Y. Huang, Y. Zhou, and C. J. Chang-Hasnain, “A nanoelectrome-
chanical tunable laser,” Nature Photonics, vol. 2, pp. 180–184, 2008.
[8] M. Gebski
˛ et al., “Monolithic high-index contrast grating: A ma-
terial independent high-reflectance VCSEL mirror,” Opt. Express,
vol. 23, no. 9, Apr. 2015, Art. no. 11674. [Online]. Available:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/oe.23.011674
[9] M. Gebski, M. Dems, M. Wasiak, J. A. Lott, and T. Czyszanowski, “Mono-
lithic subwavelength high-index-contrast grating VCSEL,” IEEE Photon.
Technol. Lett., vol. 27, no. 18, pp. 1953–1956, Sep. 2015. [Online]. Avail-
able: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/LPT.2015.2447932
[10] M. Gebski,
˛ M. Dems, M. Wasiak, R. P. Sarzaał, J. A. Lott, and
T. Czyszanowski, “Double high refractive-index contrast grating VCSEL,”
Proc. SPIE, vol. 9381, Mar. 2015, Art. no. 93810Q. [Online]. Available:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.2079328
[11] C. Sciancalepore, B. Ben Bakir, X. Letartre, C. Seassal, and P.
Viktorovitch, “Ultra-compact vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers
using a double set of photonic crystal mirrors,” Proc. SPIE,
vol. 8639, Mar. 2013, Art. no. 863908. [Online]. Available:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.2006178
[12] V. Karagodsky, F. G. Sedgwick, and C. J. Chang-Hasnain, “Theoretical
analysis of subwavelength high contrast grating reflectors,” Opt. Express,
vol. 18, pp. 16973–16988, 2010.
[13] C. J. Chang-Hasnain and W. Yang, “High-contrast gratings for integrated
optoelectronics,” Adv. Opt. Photon., vol. 4, pp. 379–440, 2012.
[14] Y. Zhou et al., “High-index-contrast grating (HCG) and its applications
in optoelectronic devices,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron., vol. 15,
no. 5, pp. 1485–1499, Sep./Oct. 2009.
[15] I.-S. Chung, “Study on differences between high contrast grating reflectors
for TM and TE polarizations and their impact on VCSEL designs,” Opt.
Express, vol. 23, no. 13, Jun. 2015, Art. no. 16730. [Online]. Available:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.23.016730
[16] M. G. Moharam and T. K. Gaylord, “Rogorous coupled-wave analysis
of planar-grating diffraction,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer., vol. 71, pp. 811–818,
1981.
[17] M. G. Moharam, D. A. Pommet, E. B. Grann, and T. K. Gaylord, “Stable
implementation of the rigorous coupled-wave analysis for surface-relief
gratings: Enhanced transmittance matrix approach,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. A,
vol. 12, pp. 1077–1086, 1995.
[18] M. Marciniak et al., “Optimal parameters of monolithic high contrast
grating mirrors,” Opt. Lett., vol. 41, no. 15, Jul. 2016, Art. no. 3495.
[Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/ol.41.003495
Authors’ biographies not available at the time of publication.