Theoretical modeling and design of photonic structures in zeolite nanocomposites for gas sensing. Part II: volume gratings

D. Cody; I. Naydenova

doi:10.1364/JOSAA.35.000012

Journal of the Optical Society of America A
Vol. 35,
Issue 1,
pp. 12-19
(2018)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.35.000012

Theoretical modeling and design of photonic structures in zeolite nanocomposites for gas sensing. Part II: volume gratings

D. Cody and I. Naydenova

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
D. Cody and I. Naydenova, "Theoretical modeling and design of photonic structures in zeolite nanocomposites for gas sensing. Part II: volume gratings," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 35, 12-19 (2018)

Export Citation
- BibTex
- Endnote (RIS)
- HTML
- Plain Text
Citation alert
Save article

Check for updates

Abstract

The suitability of holographic structures fabricated in zeolite nanoparticle-polymer composite materials for gas sensing applications has been investigated. Theoretical modeling of the sensor response (i.e., change in hologram readout due to a change in refractive index modulation or thickness as a result of gas adsorption) of different sensor designs was carried out using the Raman–Nath theory and Kogelnik’s coupled wave theory. The influence of a range of parameters on the sensitivity of holographically recorded surface and volume photonic structures has been studied, namely, hologram geometry, hologram thickness and spatial frequency, reconstruction wavelength, and zeolite nanoparticle refractive index. From this, the optimum fabrication conditions for both surface and volume holographic gas sensor designs have been identified. Here in Part II, results from modeling of the influence of design on the sensor response of holographically recorded volume grating structures for gas sensing applications are reported.

Full Article | PDF Article

More Like This

Theoretical modeling and design of photonic structures in zeolite nanocomposites for gas sensing. Part I: surface relief gratings

D. Cody and I. Naydenova
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 34(12) 2110-2119 (2017)

Zeolite Thin Film-Coated Long Period Fiber Grating Sensor for Measuring Trace Chemical

Jian Zhang, Xiling Tang, Junhang Dong, Tao Wei, and Hai Xiao
Opt. Express 16(11) 8317-8323 (2008)

Photopolymerizable nanocomposites for holographic recording and sensor application

Elsa Leite, Izabela Naydenova, Svetlana Mintova, Louis Leclercq, and Vincent Toal
Appl. Opt. 49(19) 3652-3660 (2010)

Previous Article Next Article

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Figures (8)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Tables (3)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Equations (12)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Type of Sensor	Thickness (μm)	Optimum $Δ n$	Optimum Sensor Response, i.e., $Δ (Δ n) / Δ d$ for $Δ η = 5 %$
$Δ (Δ n)$ -based	25	$6 \times 10^{- 3}$	$3.82 \times 10^{- 4}$
	50	$2.5 \times 10^{- 3}$ or $8.5 \times 10^{- 3}$	$1.98 \times 10^{- 4}$
	100	$1 \times 10^{- 3}$ or $4 \times 10^{- 3}$ or $7 \times 10^{- 3}$ or $1 \times 10^{- 2}$	$1.11 \times 10^{- 4}$
$Δ d$ -based	25	$7.5 \times 10^{- 3}$	1.38 μm
	50	$1 \times 10^{- 2}$	1.10 μm
	100	$1 \times 10^{- 2}$	1.11 μm

		$Δ n$	Spatial Frequency (lines/mm)	$d$ (μm)	$λ_{r}$ (nm)	Sensor Response, i.e., $Δ (Δ n)$ or $Δ d$ for $Δ η = 1 %$
Transmission	$Δ (Δ n)$ -based	0.0025	1000	75	594	$2.75 \times 10^{- 5}$
		0.005			473	$2.13 \times 10^{- 5}$
		0.01			633	$2.55 \times 10^{- 5}$
	$Δ d$ -based	0.0025	1000	75	594	0.83
		0.005			473	0.32
		0.01			633	0.19
		$Δ n$	Spatial Frequency (lines/mm)	$d$ (μm)		Sensor Response, i.e., $Δ (Δ n)$ or $Δ d$ for $Δ λ = 10 nm$
Reflection	$Δ (Δ n)$ -based	–	4500	25		$2.45 \times 10^{- 5}$
				50		$1.25 \times 10^{- 5}$
				100		$6.14 \times 10^{- 6}$
	$Δ d$ -based	0.0025	4500	–		0.246
		0.005				0.123
		0.01				0.061

	$Δ n$	SF (lines/mm)	$d$ (μm)	$λ_{r}$ (nm)	$Δ (Δ n)$ for $Δ η = 1 %$ (** $Δ λ = 10 nm$ )
Thin SRG	0.15	500	1	405	$4.9 \times 10^{- 3}$
Thick SRG	0.15	1500	4.5	405	$2.7 \times 10^{- 4}$
Transmission VG	0.0025	1000	75	594	$2.8 \times 10^{- 5}$
Reflection VG**, 30% DE	0.0004	4500	100	633	$6.1 \times 10^{- 6}$

Type of Sensor	Thickness (μm)	Optimum $Δ n$	Optimum Sensor Response, i.e., $Δ (Δ n) / Δ d$ for $Δ η = 5 %$
$Δ (Δ n)$ -based	25	$6 \times 10^{- 3}$	$3.82 \times 10^{- 4}$
	50	$2.5 \times 10^{- 3}$ or $8.5 \times 10^{- 3}$	$1.98 \times 10^{- 4}$
	100	$1 \times 10^{- 3}$ or $4 \times 10^{- 3}$ or $7 \times 10^{- 3}$ or $1 \times 10^{- 2}$	$1.11 \times 10^{- 4}$
$Δ d$ -based	25	$7.5 \times 10^{- 3}$	1.38 μm
	50	$1 \times 10^{- 2}$	1.10 μm
	100	$1 \times 10^{- 2}$	1.11 μm

		$Δ n$	Spatial Frequency (lines/mm)	$d$ (μm)	$λ_{r}$ (nm)	Sensor Response, i.e., $Δ (Δ n)$ or $Δ d$ for $Δ η = 1 %$
Transmission	$Δ (Δ n)$ -based	0.0025	1000	75	594	$2.75 \times 10^{- 5}$
		0.005			473	$2.13 \times 10^{- 5}$
		0.01			633	$2.55 \times 10^{- 5}$
	$Δ d$ -based	0.0025	1000	75	594	0.83
		0.005			473	0.32
		0.01			633	0.19
		$Δ n$	Spatial Frequency (lines/mm)	$d$ (μm)		Sensor Response, i.e., $Δ (Δ n)$ or $Δ d$ for $Δ λ = 10 nm$
Reflection	$Δ (Δ n)$ -based	–	4500	25		$2.45 \times 10^{- 5}$
				50		$1.25 \times 10^{- 5}$
				100		$6.14 \times 10^{- 6}$
	$Δ d$ -based	0.0025	4500	–		0.246
		0.005				0.123
		0.01				0.061

Abstract

Cited By

Figures (8)

Tables (3)

Equations (12)

Journal of the Optical Society of America A