1064nm高反射薄膜激光损伤阈值测量方法  

Laser damage threshold measurements of 1064nm high-reflection mirrors

作　　者：周刚[1,2] 马彬[1,2,3] 焦宏飞[1,2,3] 丁涛[1,2] 张锦龙[1,2] 沈正祥[1,2] 程鑫彬[1,2] 王占山[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]同济大学精密光学工程技术研究所,上海200092 [2]上海市特殊人工微结构材料与技术重点实验室,上海200092 [3]同济大学航空航天与力学学院,上海200092

出　　处：《强激光与粒子束》2011年第4期963-968,共6页High Power Laser and Particle Beams

基　　金：国家高技术发展计划项目;上海市博士后基金项目(10R21416000)

摘　　要：参照国际上对激光损伤阈值不同测量技术建立起来的相应检测规范和标准,分别采用1-on-1,S-on-1,R-on-1和光栅扫描共4种测量方式,在1 064 nm波长下对HfO2/SiO2周期性高反射薄膜进行了激光损伤阈值的测量研究。根据测量结果,比较并分析了这4种测量方式之间的差异,重点研究了R-on-1和光栅扫描测量方式中存在的激光预处理效应对薄膜损伤阈值的影响,以及辐照激光光斑尺寸与损伤阈值之间的联系,并讨论了光栅扫描方式中预处理效应与扫描间距和扫描能量密度梯度的关系。研究表明:R-on-1方式下测得的损伤阈值最高,光栅扫描和1-on-1次之,S-on-1最小;1 000个脉冲激光辐照下的累积效应不显著,并且在激光光斑尺寸的差异较小时,阈值与光斑尺寸的对应关系并不明显;光斑尺寸相同时,扫描光斑的间距越小,激光预处理效果越好。Measurements of laser induced damage threshold（LIDT） of HfO2/SiO2 high-reflection（HR） dielectric mirrors at 1 064 nm were performed using four different testing methods,1-on-1,S-on-1,R-on-1 and raster scan,according to the ISO 11254-1,-2 and other relevant standards.The difference between the four testing methods was compared and analyzed.The results suggest that R-on-1 test obtains the highest LIDT,then comes the raster scan and 1-on-1,and the S-on-1 gives the lowest.The laser cumulative effect under 1 000 pulses is not obvious,and the correlation between LIDT and spot size has not been observed when the difference of laser spot sizes is small.The influence of scanning interval and scanning fluence steps on laser conditioning effect was also discussed.Smaller interval produces better effect for the same spot size.

关 键 词：高反射薄膜 激光损伤阈值 激光预处理 光斑尺寸 光栅扫描 

分 类 号：O484.4[理学—固体物理]