MIM structure

fdtd
cavity

#1

I re-run the file of this post: 基于等离子体表面激元(SPP)的MIM结构波导的光源选择,可以直接使用模式光源中的基础TM模光源来激发吗?


to find figure 3(a) and 4(a). for example my figure 4(a):

First peak is similar to paper result but second peak has problem and it is larger than it.
I am very confused.
If possible, check my file and solve my problem.file:plasmonic waveguide filter_Mod.fsp (292.5 KB)

The Best,
Dezyani


#2

HI,
This is my question too. When I use plasma metal divergence is occurred.
Please solve it for anyone.


#3

In the simulation, I used stabilized PML because standard PML did not converge. Is possible to use standard PML, when the metal(plasma) surface is used?


#4

Hi,
I think the metal material model makes a lot of difference to the results in this kind of MIM filters. So, are you using the same model as the paper?


#5

In the paper, has been said “The parameters for silver can be set as ε∞ = 3.7, ωp = 9.1 eV, and γ = 0.018 eV”. I use plasma model.


#6

I used this page for conversion.
Website: https://www2.chemistry.msu.edu/faculty/reusch/virttxtjml/cnvcalc.htm


#7

If is possible, check my simulation file.


#8

I am waiting for your kind answer.


#9

I am checking it now and will get back to you.


#10

Thank you @aya_zaki


#11

Hello Guys,
I have tried every way to get the same results of the paper.

  1. I used the Ag-J&C data and I got exactly the same results as the plasma model

  2. I tried a mesh of dx= 1nm and dy= 1nm >> No change in the peaks level - only a slight shift in the resonance position.

  3. The only factor that changes the peak value is the simulation time. I suppose the simulation time used in the paper was not sufficient. As I use time long enough for the field to decay everywhere, I find the peak of the second mode gets higher.

  4. I also tried to limit the source bandwidth from 800 to 1200 nm for higher accuracy but this only gave higher power.

  5. In all the simulations below, I used multifrequency mode calculations.