Determination of the second-order susceptibility of ammonium dihydrogen phosphate and α-quartz at 633 and 1064 nm

Abstract

The second-order susceptibility d(36) of ammonium dihydrogen phosphate (ADP) was determined from phase-matched second-harmonic generation (SHG) at two wavelengths. A cw single-mode He-Ne laser (λ= 633 nm) and a cw single-mode Nd:YAG laser (λ= 1064 nm) were used as fundamental beam sources. The results were d(36)(ADP, 633 nm) =(1.31 ± 0.05) ×10(-9) esu = 0.55 ± 0.02 pm/V and d(36)(ADP, 1064 nm) = (1.10 ± 0.06) × 10(-9) esu = 0.46 ± 0.03 pm/V. The d(11) values of α-quartz were determined relative to d(36)(ADP) to be d(11)(α-quartz, 633 nm) = (7.4 ± 0.3) × 10(-10) esu = 0.31 ± 0.01 pm/V and d(11)(α-quartz, 1064 nm) = (7.1 ± 0.3) × 10(-10) esu = 0.30 ± 0.01 pm/V by the use of the Maker fringe method. The Miller's delta ofADP and α-quartz is in good agreement at the two wavelengths.

Electrical control of second-harmonic generation in a WSe2 monolayer transistor

“…(where is along the armchair direction) 22 . We used (2) = 2 11 = 0.6 pm/V for α-quartz 35 and took it as a constant in our wavelength range (1400 to 1600 nm). To obtain the effective volume second-order susceptibility, we divided the calculated second-order sheet susceptibility, | (2) | , by the monolayer WSe2 thickness of 0.7 nm.…”

Accurate measurement of quadratic nonlinear-optical coefficients of zinc oxide

“…2, 3, and 4, the agreement between the experiment and theory is quite satisfactory, demonstrating the reliability of our measurement, analysis, and excellent quality of our sample. Based on the fitting combined with relative measurements using quartz (d 11 0.30 pm ∕ V [14][15][16]) as a reference material, we determined the magnitudes of the nonlinear-optical coefficients as follows:…”

Third‐Order Nonlinear Optical Response‐Driven Upconversion Phosphors

“…Although NSSOs crystallize into the NCS environment, the weaker SHG responses of their samples suggest that the NCS degree of these materials is not as evident as that of α‐SiO 2 , thereby canceling the NLO polarization for the overall SHG process. At = 214 pm 2 V −2 for α‐SiO 2 , [ 22 ] our calculations yield [NSSO] = 324.59 pm 2 V −2 , [NSSO:Tb 3+ ] = 276.60 pm 2 V −2 , [NSSO:Ce 3+ ] = 297.98 pm 2 V −2 , and [NSSO:Eu 2+ ] = 306.07 pm 2 V 2 . Again, we confirmed that the undoped NSSO exhibits the best THG response.…”