| PREFACE
The book is divided into nine chapters. Except for the first two introductory chapters, each chapter is independent and restricted to a particular subject to be studied. To the best of the author s knowledge, the most appropriate theories have been chosen to model the specific topic of VCSELs. In Chapters 3 and 4, theoretical models have been developed to analyze the modal profile and polarization, respectively, of VCSELs. The most popular structure of VCSELs is a cylindrical symmetric cavity, which is assumed in the derivation of the models. In addition, this configuration of VCSELs allows investigation of the modal profile and polarization separately such that the complexity of theoretical models can be reduced. In Chapter 3, different methods of solving the wave equation for the modal profile of VCSELs are discussed in detail. The reader can choose the most appropriate model with the required speed and accuracy to analyze the problems. In Chapter 4, two- and four-level models are described to study the polarization properties of the fundamental transverse mode. These simplified models can evaluate the dominant factors that control the polarization properties of VCSELs. It must be noted that the investigation of VCSELs using cold cavity approximations is not realistic. This is so because most of the measurable data, such as threshold current, lasing wavelength, slope efficiency, and output power, all depend on the operating temperature of lasers. Furthermore, the optical behavior of VCSELs is affected by thermal lensing (i.e., self-focusing of transverse modes into the core region of the active layer). Therefore, the thermal properties of VCSELs are investigated in Chapter 5. The method of effective temperature using a simple rate equation model is presented. Effective thermal conductivity and heat generation rate are also derived. The objective in defining effective temperature is to simplify the study by using a rate equation model so that the computational efficiency can be improved. However, this approach will not provide detailed information on heat distribution. Detailed heat distribution inside the laser cavity is studied by solving the heat equation numerically. In this case, the influence of thermal lensing on the optical field profile can be evaluated. Spatial hole burning of carrier concentration also has significant influence on the modal profile of VCSELs. Therefore, Chapter 6 describes the use of a simple rate equation to evaluate the distribution of carrier concentration inside the active region. In this case, self-consistent calculation of optical gain and carrier concentration (i.e., self-consistent calculation of the Poisson and Schrödinger equations) is ignored to simplify the calculation. Different methods for approximating the nonuniform distribution of carrier concentration are also discussed. On the other hand, nonuniform distributions of electric potential and current are required as the input parameters to calculate the heat distribution inside the laser cavity. They have to be solved numerically using the Poisson and continuity equations simultaneously with appropriate boundary conditions. The electric potential across the active layer and the corresponding carrier concentration can be linked together by a simple diode equation. This is so because the simplified relation between optical gain and carrier concentration has been assumed. The self-consistent calculation of optical field, heat, and electrical characteristics of VCSELs is also described in Chapter 6. The dynamic response of VCSELs is analyzed in Chapter 7. Preliminary investigation of the dynamic response of VCSELs using a simple rate equation model is described. Hence, the time variation of carrier concentration and photon density inside the active layer can be calculated. Furthermore, detailed analysis of optical fields can be considered using the beam propagation method such that the influence of optical confinement on the dynamic response of VCSELs can be evaluated. However, detailed investigation of the transient response of heat and electrical properties is avoided in the self-consistent calculation. This is because the time variation of heat and voltage, which are related to heat and the Poisson equations, is much slower than that of photon density and carrier concentration. This assumption significantly reduces the computation time of the model without sacrificing the accuracy of the calculation. The influence of various transportation mechanisms inside the quantum well (QW) active region on the dynamic response of VCSELs is also discussed in this chapter. The methods used to evaluate the spontaneous emission and linewidth of VCSELs are described in Chapter 8. Simple models have been developed to study these parameters quantitatively through the investigation of the spontaneous emission factor and linewidth enhancement factor. On the other hand, the magnitude of the spontaneous emission factor and linewidth enhancement factor is evaluated using rate equation model by empirically fitting the measurable data. Hence, design criteria to optimize the spontaneous emission of VCSELs are obtained. Other nonlinear features of VCSELs such as self-sustained pulsation, bistability, dual-wavelength operation, and wavelength tunability are studied in Chapter 9 using rate equation models. The advantage of using simple rate equation models is that the parameters that describe the nonlinear behavior of VCSELs can be easily extracted through some measurable data such as injection current and lasing power. In conclusion, this book presents the most effective way to implement laser models of VCSELs, which the reader can easily understand. However, the readers are assumed to have the usual undergraduate background knowledge of electromagnetic theory and solid-state physics as well as basic computational skills. Materials of this research monograph concentrate on the evaluation of modeling techniques to analyze VCSELs under various operating conditions. As each chapter of this book is mostly independent of the other chapters, readers can selectively study any chapter for their own interest. Although this book is of most interest to the design engineer of VCSELs, it also provides valuable information to CAD tool designers in other fields of semiconductor lasers. Siu Fung Yu Singapore |
Chapter 4.4.4 - Stability Analysis of Polarizations in Birefringence
4.4.4 Stability Analysis of Polarizations in Birefringence For the case γbf ≠ 0 but γa = 0, four types of steady-state solutions can be obtained (see Fig. 4.10). Two of them have orthogonal linear polarization, which are defined as the h and v modes. For each of these modes, the circular polarized components have equal amplitudes. The other two types of solutions are elliptically polarized for which the circular polarized components have unequal amplitude [43]: 1. The solutions of the two orthogonal linear polarizations are derived (i.e., Figs. 4.10a and 4.10b). Letting Eh = 0, and setting the time derivative terms of ![]() Figure 4.10 Steady-state solutions of (4.72)–(4.74): (a) v mode; (b) h mode; and (c,d) elliptically polarized (after Ref. 34). (4.73) and (4.74) to zero, the υ-mode solution can be expressed as ![]() and the corresponding two orthogonal polarizations are given by ![]() Again letting Eυ = 0 and setting the time derivative terms of (4.73) and (4.74) to zero, the h-mode solution can be expressed as ![]() and the corresponding orthogonal polarization are given by ![]() The corresponding steady-state values of the total carrier population and the population difference between the sublevels with opposite value of the spin for both linearly polarized solutions are ![]() Hence, it is shown that γbf leads to a frequency difference of 2γbf between the h and v modes. 2. The solutions of the two elliptical polarizations, which is similar to that of the derivation of orthogonal polarizations, are deduced (i.e., Figs 4.10c and 4.l0d). This is done by setting the time derivative terms of (4.72)—(4.74) to zero and assuming that E+ ≠ E- ≠ 0. The two elliptically polarized solutions are given by ![]() These two solutions are distinguished by the two values for the normalized population difference ns, which are given by ![]() The corresponding value for Ns is obtained from ![]() but is restricted to the condition that Ns > l, which implies the pumping level should satisfy ![]() The stability of the four types of steady-state solutions given above can be examined by writing their solutions as [43] ![]() where a± is a complex perturbation of the field amplitude, and ∆N and δn are real perturbations of N and n, respectively.After substituting the perturbed solutions (4.94) into (4.72)—(4.74) and linearizing to the first-order in the perturbation, one obtains the following set of linear coupled differential equations for a±, ∆N, and δn. ![]() To simplify the notation, (4.95) is written in vectorial form ![]() where A = (a+, a*+, a-, a*-, ∆N‚ δn)T and M is a 6 x 6 matrix whose coefficients can be easilv derived from (4.95) The eigenvalues of M are determined by a sixth-order polynomial that has to be solved. The stability of a steady-state solution is given by the real parts of the eigenvalues λ [i.e., stable if Re(λ) < 0 for all λ], while the imaginary part of λ gives a frequency characteristic of the evolution of the perturbation. The stability of the two orthogonal polarizations can be analyzed by substituting the steady-state v mode solutions, (4.83) and (4.87) or the steady-state h-mode solutions, (4.85) and (4.87), in (4.96). The set of equations given by (4.96) can be decoupled into two independent subsets if the equations are rewritten for the variables S = a+ + α_ and R = a+ — a_ [34]. The first subset is ![]() where Q = Qs± is assumed. These equations determine the stability of a polarization (i.e., h or v mode) with respect to the perturbation of same polarization. This subset of equations is independent of γbf and τJ. The general solutions of (4.97) are ![]() It can be shown that one of the three eigenvalues of (4.98) has zero value and the other two are of complex expressions but with negative real part. This means that each steady-state solution of the two orthogonal polarizations is unconditionally stable with respect to amplitude perturbation of the same polarization. The second subset of equations is ![]() where the upper and lower signs denote the stabilities of h and v modes, respectively, in steady state. This subset determines the stability of a polarized solution with respect to perturbations of the "orthogonal polarization." To determine the eigenvalues of (4.99), it is assumed that ![]() and the resulting eigenequation (i.e., third-order polynomial) for λ is ![]() where the upper and lower signs denote the stabilities of υ and h modes, respectively, in steady state. If the coefficient of λ0 of (4.101) is zero (i.e., equivalent to, say, γbf = 0), there is a zero eigenvalue associated with the arbitrariness of the polarization direction. It can also be shown that the other two complex eigenvalues of (4.101) always have a negative real part, which implies that the system is unconditionally stable. However, if the coefficient of λ0 of (4.101) is nonzero, the zero eigenvalue becomes nonzero, which determines the stability of the system. On the other hand, if αH = 0 (i.e., if there is no coupling between amplitude and phase fluctuations), both solutions of the two orthogonal polarizations are always stable [i.e., the coefficients of the polynomial (4.101) are all positive as µ > 1]. Hence, there exists a regime of bistability for any value of µ or γbf and no polarization switching occurs as the injection current is changed, but the nonvanishing value of αH, together with the phase anisotropy, causes polarization switching. Now, the stability of a particular solution for a general value of αH in terms of two control parameters, the injection current µ and the birefringence parameter γbfτd is analyzed. This can be done by selecting a critical value of µ so that any variation from that value of µ can lead to purely exponential growth or decay of the polarized solutions. The condition for the h-polarized solution can be obtained from (4.101) by setting the coefficient of λ0 to zero. The critical value of µ at which the stability of this solution change is given by ![]() Using the same augment (i.e., the coefficient of λ0 should be less than or equal to zero for the requirement that all λ real parts be negative), it can be shown that the h-mode solution is always stable for any µ < µh. For the υ-polarized solution, the condition for the υ-polarized solution can be obtained from (4.101) by equating the product of coefficients of λ2 and λ1 to the coefficient of λ0. Hence, the critical value of µ at which the stability of this solution change is given by ![]() For the υ-polarized solution to be stable, all real parts of λ values must be negative, which implies that µ > µυ. Figure 4.11 shows the four different regions ![]() Figure 4.11 Stability diagram for the steady-state solutions. The h mode is stable below the solid curve, while the v mode is stable to the left of the dashed line. These two curves divide four zones of different stability for the two linearly polarized solutions. In I, both solutions are stable; in II, neither solution is stable; in III, only the h mode is stable; and in IV, only the v mode is stable. Elliptically polarized solutions are stable within the narrow region between the solid and dashed–dotted curves. (After Ref. 43). with different stabilities for the linearly polarized solutions obtained from (4.102) and (4.103): region I—both orthogonal polarizations are stable; region II—both are unstable; region III—only the h-mode solution is stable; region IV—only the υ-mode solution is stable. The stability diagram is a consequence of the combined effect of saturable dispersion associated with the αH factor and spin dynamics associated with a finite value of τJ-¡. In the calculation above, the following parameters have been used : τp = 300 ns, τd = 1 ns, τJ = 50 ns, and αH = 3.0. The linear stability of elliptically polarized solutions can also be examined by solving (4.96) numerically for the sixth-order polynomial eigenvalues. To find the stability of a particular elliptical polarization, the coefficients of the polynomial of the eigenequation have to be obtained numerically in order to deduce the corresponding eigenvalues. The stability is determined by looking at the real part of the eigenvalue as described previously. The condition of a stable elliptically polarized solution is also shown in Figure 4.11. The elliptically polarized solution is stable in a narrow domain of parameters bounded by the dashed and solid lines in which µ is close to but larger then µh. |
Design and fabrication of vertical cavity surface emitting lasers (VCSELs) requires an iterative process, which is extremely expensive and time-consuming. The use of computer-aided design (CAD) tools can help shorten the design cycle and speed up the development process. Laser models, which are found in the literature, can be used to implement CAD tools for the analysis and design of VCSELs. However, some comprehensive models, which perform sophisticated functions, are difficult to implement and show low computational efficiency. Other simplified models exhibit high computing speed but deliver inadequate descriptions of the observed effects. As a result, inconsistent conclusions may be obtained because different assumptions are applied. This book attempts to provide a guideline for the derivation of models based on appropriate assumptions for a particular problem so that the phenomena observed by the experiment can be easily explained. In fact, the objective throughout this book is to search for the simplest and most direct treatment for modeling VCSELs. The author believes that the laser models covered in this book can help the readers customize their CAD tools to fit into their applications. In addition, the readers should have no difficulty in implementing their own laser models.
TABLE OF CONTENTS 



















