Re: Difference beetween methods (Rafael Gonzalez) and Re: Difference beetween methods (Manish Kumar)

On Aug 13, 2012, at 9:42 AM, Manish Kumar wrote:

> Dear Sir,
> 
> Thank you for your reply.
> It does make sense and could be the possible reason of why the calculated results is not matching.
> 
> In the meanwhile I'm not sure if actually the paper by M. Notomi, "Theory of light propagation in strongly modulated photonic crystals: Refractionlike behavior in the vicinity of the photonic band gap", Phys. Rev. B 62, 10696 (2000) made use of this effective index method or not.
> 
> Could you please tell me some good reference paper / link for understanding the implementation of this method to reduce 3D photonic crystal to a 2D calculation.

We have a recent paper on one such "effective 2d" technique, which also references other work on this:

	http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-20-2-1617

However, I should note that all of these "effective 2d" techniques are only heuristic approximations when applied to high-contrast 3d structures -- although they are often surprisingly effective, at least at predicting the dispersion relation, there is no guarantee of accuracy.    It isn't actually that expensive to just do the full 3d calculation, so I usually recommend that you do this at some point, although it is good to start with the 2d calculations just because they are simpler and can give you a rough understanding of what is going on before you deal with the complexities of 3d.

Steven

_______________________________________________
mpb-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://ab-initio.mit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mpb-discuss