Cargando…
A Practical Comparison of Beam Shuttering Technologies for Pulsed Laser Micromachining Applications
In this report we investigate the performance of various beam shutter technologies when applied to femtosecond laser micromachining. Three different shutter options are considered: a mechanical blade shutter, a bistable rotary solenoid shutter, and an electro-optic modulator (EOM) shutter. We analyz...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8839459/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35160843 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15030897 |
_version_ | 1784650374774259712 |
---|---|
author | Aboud, Damon G. K. Wood, Michael J. Zeppetelli, Gianluca Joy, Nithin Kietzig, Anne-Marie |
author_facet | Aboud, Damon G. K. Wood, Michael J. Zeppetelli, Gianluca Joy, Nithin Kietzig, Anne-Marie |
author_sort | Aboud, Damon G. K. |
collection | PubMed |
description | In this report we investigate the performance of various beam shutter technologies when applied to femtosecond laser micromachining. Three different shutter options are considered: a mechanical blade shutter, a bistable rotary solenoid shutter, and an electro-optic modulator (EOM) shutter. We analyzed the behavior of each shutter type during repeated open/close commands (period of 10 ≤ T ≤ 200 ms) using both high-speed videography and practical micromachining experiments. To quantify the performance at varying cycle periods, we introduce a new variable called the compliance that characterizes the average state of the shutter with respect to its intended position. We found that the solenoid shutter responds poorly to sequential commands. The mechanical shutter provides reliable performance for cycled commands as short as T = 40 ms, but begins to lag significantly behind the control signal for T ≤ 20 ms. The EOM shutter provides the most precise and reliable performance, with an opening time of only 0.6 ms and a high compliance with the signal commands, even when cycled very quickly (T = 10 ms). Overall, this study acts as an extensive practical guide for other laser users when considering different shutter options for their laser system and desired application. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8839459 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88394592022-02-13 A Practical Comparison of Beam Shuttering Technologies for Pulsed Laser Micromachining Applications Aboud, Damon G. K. Wood, Michael J. Zeppetelli, Gianluca Joy, Nithin Kietzig, Anne-Marie Materials (Basel) Article In this report we investigate the performance of various beam shutter technologies when applied to femtosecond laser micromachining. Three different shutter options are considered: a mechanical blade shutter, a bistable rotary solenoid shutter, and an electro-optic modulator (EOM) shutter. We analyzed the behavior of each shutter type during repeated open/close commands (period of 10 ≤ T ≤ 200 ms) using both high-speed videography and practical micromachining experiments. To quantify the performance at varying cycle periods, we introduce a new variable called the compliance that characterizes the average state of the shutter with respect to its intended position. We found that the solenoid shutter responds poorly to sequential commands. The mechanical shutter provides reliable performance for cycled commands as short as T = 40 ms, but begins to lag significantly behind the control signal for T ≤ 20 ms. The EOM shutter provides the most precise and reliable performance, with an opening time of only 0.6 ms and a high compliance with the signal commands, even when cycled very quickly (T = 10 ms). Overall, this study acts as an extensive practical guide for other laser users when considering different shutter options for their laser system and desired application. MDPI 2022-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8839459/ /pubmed/35160843 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15030897 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Aboud, Damon G. K. Wood, Michael J. Zeppetelli, Gianluca Joy, Nithin Kietzig, Anne-Marie A Practical Comparison of Beam Shuttering Technologies for Pulsed Laser Micromachining Applications |
title | A Practical Comparison of Beam Shuttering Technologies for Pulsed Laser Micromachining Applications |
title_full | A Practical Comparison of Beam Shuttering Technologies for Pulsed Laser Micromachining Applications |
title_fullStr | A Practical Comparison of Beam Shuttering Technologies for Pulsed Laser Micromachining Applications |
title_full_unstemmed | A Practical Comparison of Beam Shuttering Technologies for Pulsed Laser Micromachining Applications |
title_short | A Practical Comparison of Beam Shuttering Technologies for Pulsed Laser Micromachining Applications |
title_sort | practical comparison of beam shuttering technologies for pulsed laser micromachining applications |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8839459/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35160843 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15030897 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT abouddamongk apracticalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications AT woodmichaelj apracticalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications AT zeppetelligianluca apracticalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications AT joynithin apracticalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications AT kietzigannemarie apracticalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications AT abouddamongk practicalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications AT woodmichaelj practicalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications AT zeppetelligianluca practicalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications AT joynithin practicalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications AT kietzigannemarie practicalcomparisonofbeamshutteringtechnologiesforpulsedlasermicromachiningapplications |