transmission measurement vs simulation

[Serena Zhang]

We have measured both specular transmittance and total transmittance (with an integrating sphere). The source is not polarized. I am looking into three different methods: TMM, Layered KKR and FDTD. It seems TMM and LKKR can simulate the specular transmittance and reflectance, but FDTD is simulating total transmittance with a detector plane. Is that right?

What would be the best measurement method for transmittance/reflectance/diffraction that can fully reflect the simulation?

BTW, I am simulating a multilayer colloidal photonic crystal structure.

[Aurelien Duval]

Hi,

You are right, FDTD will calculate the transmittance along the detector plane in the near-field. To account for specular transmittance you need to calculate the far-field transform (you can do this by exporting your detector plane result into f3d and then by using the far-field transform tool of the OptiTools toolbox). You can then use the far-field angular distribution to determine the power transmitted.

A similar approach was used in the following (a bit outdated) example :

Diffraction Efficiency and Diffraction Angle Based on Grating Unit Cell

To simulate an unpolarized light source, the only possibility here is to run 2 simulations:
– 1 simulation with X polarization (or TE in 2D)
– 1 simulation with Y polarization (or TM in 2D)

and then calculate the average of both simulations.

+1

[mohammed mostafa]

thanks Aurelien

[Author]

Posts