03.08.2013 Views

Edwin Jan Klein - Universiteit Twente

Edwin Jan Klein - Universiteit Twente

Edwin Jan Klein - Universiteit Twente

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

27<br />

The Micro-Resonator<br />

In Figure 2.16 a comparison is made between the filter responses of a single<br />

resonator, two resonators in series, and a second order resonator.<br />

P Drop /P In (dB)<br />

0<br />

-10<br />

-20<br />

-30<br />

Single MR<br />

Double MR<br />

2nd Order MR<br />

1548 1549 1550<br />

Wavelength (nm)<br />

1551 1552<br />

Figure 2.16a. Comparison between filter<br />

responses for αdB =1 dB/cm.<br />

P Drop /P In (dB)<br />

0<br />

-10<br />

-20<br />

-30<br />

-40<br />

-50<br />

1548 1549 1550 1551 1552<br />

Wavelength (nm)<br />

Single MR<br />

Double MR<br />

2nd Order MR<br />

Figure 2.16b. Comparison between filter<br />

responses for αdB =10 dB/cm.<br />

As a basis for the comparison the SRR was used. Although other important filter<br />

properties such as the channel crosstalk (discussed in Chapter 3.2.4) could also have<br />

been used for this comparison, the SRR has been chosen in particular because of its<br />

relevance to the “on/off” performance of the MR based switch presented in Chapter 6<br />

and the router discussed in Chapter 7. In order to make the comparison the field<br />

coupling coefficients of all filters were set such that a rejection ratio of ≈33 dB was<br />

achieved in all filters. For comparatively low cavity waveguide losses of 1 dB/cm this<br />

SRR was achieved for the parameter values given in to Table 2.1. The corresponding<br />

filter responses are shown in Figure 2.16a. Here, both the cascaded MR and the<br />

second order MR show a clear advantage over the single order MR. While the ∆λFWHM<br />

of the single MR response is only 0.054 nm (≈6.8 GHz) the cascaded and second<br />

order MR offer respectively 0.25 nm and 0.38 nm (≈31 and 48 GHz), thereby greatly<br />

increasing the available bandwidth at the same SRR. Overall the second order filter<br />

shows the best performance. Compared with the cascaded MR the second order filter<br />

has a flattened top, which can also be seen more clearly in Figure 2.15, and a steeper<br />

roll-off. This is in fact a typical characteristic of the serial higher order filter where the<br />

addition of more resonators causes the filter response to look increasingly box-shaped<br />

[54].<br />

Table 2.1. MR Filter parameters required for SRR≈33 dB at αdB =1 dB/cm.<br />

Single MR Cascaded MR Second order MR<br />

κ1 0.195 0.5 0.58<br />

κ2 0.195 0.5 0.58<br />

κ21 0.5<br />

κ22 0.5<br />

κ3 0.2<br />

Radius MR1 (µm) 50 50 50<br />

Radius MR2 (µm) 50 50<br />

ng 1.84 1.84 1.84<br />

In Figure 2.16b the same responses are shown but now at higher losses of 10 dB/cm.<br />

The parameters of these responses are given in Table 2.2. At these higher losses the

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!