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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aboud, Damon G. K., Wood, Michael J., Zeppetelli, Gianluca, Joy, Nithin, Kietzig, Anne-Marie
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