Author Affiliations
1Medical University of Innsbruck, Institute of Biomedical Physics, Innsbruck, Austria2Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Institute of Photonic Technologies, Erlangen, Germany3Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen Graduate School in Advanced Optical Technologies, Erlangen, Germany4University of Oxford, Department of Engineering Science, Oxford, United Kingdomshow less
Fig. 1. Light manipulation with an APVE. (a) Sketch of a laser-processed glass substrate containing many voxels of modified RI. (b) Tomographically measured RI cross section of a single voxel. (c) Wide-field image taken from a fabricated device.
Fig. 2. Results from a smiley generator. (a) Designed output intensity; (b) simulated readout; (c) experimental result. The total light efficiency of the experimental result is about 80%. The scale bar measures .
Fig. 3. Wavelength multiplexing. Different parts of the smiley appear, depending on the readout wavelength. (a) Target intensity patterns used for the APVE design. (b) Results from a simulated readout. (c) Experimental readouts.
Fig. 4. Power conversion efficiencies of the multicolor APVE. The solid curves indicate the measured percentage of the output power transformed into the features mouth, eyes, and head, depending on the readout wavelength. The dashed lines correspond to simulated readouts.
Fig. 5. Principle of mode-division multiplexing with our mode sorter. Multiple signals are delivered via single-mode fibers, arranged in a triangle. A lens gives each input beam a specific AOI. The APVE transforms each input beam into one of six different HG modes.
Fig. 6. Simulated results from the mode sorter. The images show intensities (top row) and phases when reading out the APVE with a Gaussian beam (, ) at six different AOIs. Each angle produces a different HG mode at the output. The saturation of the phase images is weighted by the intensity for enhanced clarity.
Fig. 7. Experimental results from the mode sorter. The images show intensities (top row) and phases when reading out the APVE with a Gaussian beam (, ) at six different incidence angles.
Fig. 8. Evolution of the transmission and the maximum crosstalk in function of the restricted NA.
| Head | Eyes | Mouth | (a) | 640 | 77 | 2 | 1 | 543 | 8 | 60 | 7 | 455 | 3 | 7 | 64 | (b) | 640 | 65 | 7 | 6 | 543 | 5 | 50 | 6 | 455 | 1 | 4 | 49 |
|
Table 1. (a) Simulated and (b) experimentally obtained conversion efficiencies η. For each wavelength, the numbers state the respective percentage of the output power forming head, eyes, and mouth.
| 640 nm (head) | 543 nm (eyes) | 455 nm (mouth) | (sim) | 83 | 82 | 87 | (exp) | 84 | 82 | 66 |
|
Table 2. Simulated and experimentally measured transmission factors T for the color smiley APVE. The values are in percentages.
Input angle no. | | | | | | | 1 | 90.6 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 2.0 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 2 | 0.2 | 89.1 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 3.4 | 0.1 | 3 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 90.2 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 4 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 0.2 | 87.2 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 5 | 0.1 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 93.9 | 0.2 | 6 | 1.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 1.6 | 0.1 | 79.6 |
|
Table 3. Simulated efficiency values ηi,j in percent. For each input angle, the numbers state the respective power fractions of the transmitted output light that is shaped into the corresponding HG modes.
Input angle no. | | | | | | | 1 | 88.4 | 1.1 | 2.6 | 0.3 | 5.0 | 3.5 | 2 | 0.3 | 87.0 | 0.3 | 1.8 | 0.7 | 2.5 | 3 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 83.8 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 4 | 0.6 | 1.6 | 0.1 | 83.7 | 0.4 | 4.4 | 5 | 2.3 | 1.4 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 86.6 | 1.2 | 6 | 1.0 | 1.4 | 1.2 | 4.5 | 1.3 | 65.7 |
|
Table 4. Experimental efficiency values ηi,j in percentages.
| | | | | | | (sim) | 50.0 | 49.2 | 49.5 | 42.2 | 57.9 | 48.9 | (exp) | 21.6 | 29.6 | 20.4 | 38.8 | 33.0 | 32.3 |
|
Table 5. Simulated and experimental transmission values T. For each mode, the numbers state the output/input power ratio in percentages.