Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

F OREWORD The aim of this book is to present a reference for the research work done during the last two decades in las...

Author: Arvi Kruusing

72 downloads 736 Views 14MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

F OREWORD

The aim of this book is to present a reference for the research work done during the last two decades in laser processing assisted by neutral liquids (LALP). At present, the total number of scientific-technical papers dealing with LALP exceeds 700, and of patents 500, which justifies the need for a comprehensive reference. The book does not systematically cover the use of lasers in medicine, despite the fact that organs and tissues contain a significant amount of liquid. Nor does it cover laser etching in reactive liquids and laser deposition form solutions. References to these kinds of processing are given in the introduction (Chapter 1). The four main areas of LALP are: (i) laser peening, where water is used as a safe confining medium conforming with the workpiece; (ii) cutting and drilling, where water is also preferably used, in order to cool the workpiece and to prevent the redeposition of debris; (iii) the generation of colloidal particles in water or in organic solvents; (iv) the removal of microparticle contamination from solid surfaces through laser vaporization of a liquid film (water and alcohols) on the surface. Altogether, about 70 different liquids have been used until now, including liquid metals and liquefied gases. The principles of organising the data in the book are as follows: •

•

• • •

Essential data of research reports about the main four kinds of processing (i) to (iv) are presented in chronological tables, with an accent on the materials processed or achieved. Concise receipts of the processes are presented. As far as possible, the experimental conditions and results are described quantitatively. General principles, experimental techniques, main phenomena, and mechanisms of every kind of processing are described by text and graphics. Related topics, such as residual stress measurement and alternative processing methods are dealt with to some extent in order to help the readers from other areas or students. General topics on the physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions are gathered in a special chapter (Chapter 7). A comprehensive table of 61 properties of 100 liquids has been included. In addition to the liquids used in LALP, several common solvents and cryoliquids are added. The book contains a glossary with about 330 terms. It is intended to help the less prepared readers, especially students, who do not have previous experience in this special field.

The book contains material from literature sources originally acquired for the following research projects: Project 0140215s98 (Estonian Ministry of Education), Projects 4512 and 5864 (Estonian Science Foundation). The original figures were drawn by CorelDraw software licensed to the University of Oulu. I am grateful to many researchers, especially toYuji Sano, Stephan Roth,Walter Huber, Boris Luk’yanchuk, Vladimir P. Zharov, Tianqing Jia, and Dongsik Kim who provided me with original figures; to a number of publishers and authors who kindly permitted the use of their material in this book, and to the team Elsevier Science for their patience and good cooperation. Invaluable help in the manuscript preparation was provided by my son Aavo Kruusing and my daughter Airi Männamaa. Arvi Kruusing, Oulu, April 2007

ix

C H A P T E R

O N E

Introduction

Contents 1.1 LALP Chronology 1.2 Laser Processing and Analysis of Liquid Systems That Are Not Covered in This Book 1.3 Inventions in Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

4 6 8

There are occasions where the workpiece at laser processing is in contact with liquids (e.g. in natural bodies of water, nuclear reactors, boreholes, etc.); the workpiece may contain liquid in its normal state (e.g. moisture in building materials, wood, paper) or the liquid may be applied to workpiece in order to enhance the processing or to achieve some other useful effect. Very often the liquid present is water as most abundant and safe (see Fig. 1.1).

(a)

(b)

(c)

H 2O

(d)

(e)

(f)

Figure 1.1 Examples of liquid presence at laser materials processing: (a) processing in water environment; (b) workpiece/material is immersed into/suspended in liquid; (c) liquid is applied onto surface of workpiece; (d) liquid acts as lightguide; (e) processing in vapour; and (f) material contains capillary or chemically bonded liquid. Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing ISBN-13: 978-0-08-044498-7

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1

2

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Table 1.1 Main physical principles of LALP (in ascending order pursuant to increasing laser–liquid interaction intensity). See also Fig. 2.24.

Method

Why used

Light-matter interaction needed

Desired changes in the workpiece

Liquid as waveguide or lens

Concentration of light without solid optical elements

Light reflection/ refraction/selffocusing in liquid

Various

Liquid as photomask; backside etching of transparent materials

Liquid conforms with the surface of workpiece

Light absorption in liquid

Various

Photochemical processes (oxidation, etc.)

Liquid serves as the source of chemical species

Photoactivation of liquid

Photochemical

Removal of particles from surfaces

Lower risk of surface damage

Vaporization of liquid only

No changes

Generation of micro/nanoparticles

Cleaner particles – no extra chemicals used; rapid and simple process

Vaporization of both workpiece and of liquid

Vaporization

Subtractive processing (cutting, drilling, removal of oxide layers, etc.)

Practically no debris redeposition in the work zone; lower thermal load on the workpiece

Vaporization of both workpiece and of liquid

Vaporization

Shock processing (peening, forming, densification)

Shock pressures up to 10 times larger than in gas or in vacuum; simpler and safer than in case of solid confinement media

Vaporization and ionization of liquid only

Plastic deformation

Besides water, about 70 other liquids are used in laser materials processing, mostly organic solvents. In high-energy processing regarding the peening without exception water is used as the safest and cheapest liquid, in microprocessing (micromachining, particle generation) organic solvents are often the choice. Liquids metals (e.g., Hg, Ga) and molten salts (e.g., NaNO3 , KNO3 ) have also been used. The book also refers to some cases where frozen liquid layers on the surfaces are laser ablated (water ice, solid N2 , and CH4 a.o.). Table 1.1 lists the main types of liquids-assisted laser processing (LALP) andTable 1.2 provides a comparison of relevant advantages and disadvantages. Experiments of laser irradiation of liquid–solid interfaces started soon after the invention of lasers in 1960s, but systematic research on LALP began at the end of 1980s (see Figs 1.2–1.4). At the beginning of 1990s four main directions emerged: (i) laser peening, (ii) liquids-assisted laser micromachining, especially the backside etching of optical components, (iii) removal of microparticles from silicon wafers, and (iv) generation of nanoparticles in liquids.

3

Introduction

Table 1.2 Overall advantages and disadvantages of LALP (in comparison with laser processing in vacuum/gas and with alternative kinds of processing; only liquids neutral under normal conditions are considered). Advantages

Disadvantages

• Non-contact (low mechanical load on workpiece) • Flexible and rapid process control • Many process control parameters available in extreme range: laser wavelength, pulse length, fluence, energy density, liquids properties, liquid’s temperature, flow rate, etc. • Can be applied on inclined and curved surfaces (light and liquid conform with sloped and uneven surfaces) • Can be applied inside of tubes, etc. • Can be applied under water (e.g. in nuclear reactors, sea) without the need for local dry zone • High-energetic efficiency if short light pulses are used • Low thermal load on workpiece: narrow HAZ, little damage of biomaterials • Reduced risk of atmosphere contamination by gases and particles • Liquid may serve as a lightguide • Liquid may serve as a source of starting materials (carbon, nitrogen, oxygen), but also of highly reactive species (OH, H2 O2 , F2 , Cl2 ) • At elevated temperatures and pressures the solubility of solids in liquids may increase considerably (dissolution of debris, hydrothermal growth, etc.) • Bubble dynamics and migration generates strong hydrodynamic forces that carry the debris away • Shorter thermal relaxation time than in gas or in vacuum • Laser wavelength is shorter than in vacuum and gases • Self-focusing in liquids may be used for concentration of light.

• Expensive equipment (laser) • Need for auxiliary liquid-handling system • Burn and eye damage hazard by laser light, especially at IR-wavelength • Power loss due to cooling by liquid • Explosion, toxicity, and electronic apparatus damage hazard due to liquid vapours • Explosion hazard due to thermal or photolytical liquid dissociation products (e.g. O2 + H2 ) • Reflection loss at water surface • Light scattering by mist, liquid surface unevenness, thermal gradients, suspended particles and bubbles • Splashes at liquid surface may contaminate the optical components • Light absorption and scattering in liquids is greater than in gases • Corrosion/oxidation (in case of oxygen- or halogen-containing liquids) • Contamination of workpiece with carbon, nitrogen, etc. from liquids • Hydrogen incorporation into workpiece from hydrogen-containing liquids (causes brittleness) • Polymerization of organic liquids • Laser-induced thermal and mechanical shocks are more intense than in gas or vacuum (more dislocations, deformations, or cracking of materials) • Collapse of bubbles may cause surface damage • Process monitoring, modelling, and simulation are more complicated than in gas or vacuum • Lower optical breakdown threshold than in gas (water–air)

80 Number of publications

70 60 50 40 30 20 10

19 7 19 4 7 19 5 7 19 6 7 19 7 7 19 8 7 19 9 8 19 0 8 19 1 8 19 2 8 19 3 8 19 4 8 19 5 8 19 6 8 19 7 8 19 8 8 19 9 9 19 0 9 19 1 9 19 2 9 19 3 9 19 4 9 19 5 9 19 6 9 19 7 9 19 8 9 20 9 0 20 0 0 20 1 0 20 2 0 20 3 0 20 4 0 20 5 06

0

Figure 1.2 Development of the number of scientific-technical publications (excl. patents) about LALP. The total number of research reports and reviews referred in this book is about 700.

4

Number of publications

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 e

tiv

c tra

b

Su

Figure 1.3

ck

o Sh

g

in

an le C

er

es

cl

ti ar

th

O

P

Relative research activity in the four main areas of LALP.

Number of publications

35 30

shock

20

cleaning 15

particles

10

other

5 0 1985

Figure 1.4

subtractive

25

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

Development of research activities in the main areas of LALP.

1.1 LALP Chronology

1963

G.A. Askar’yan and E.M. Moroz (P. N. Lebedev Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia) propose mechanical momentum generation by laser vaporization on solid targets

1963

R.M. White (General Electric Company, Palo Alto, USA) reports about pressure pulse generated at ruby laser irradiation of aluminium target

1968

Studies of laser peening at Batelle Columbus Laboratories start (Columbus, USA)

1970

Confined ablation-mode laser shock processing reported (N.C. Anderholm – Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, USA)

1971

Generation of vacancies in laser-shocked materials reported (S.A. Metz and F.A. Smidt Jr. – Naval Research laboratory,Washington, USA)

1973

Permanent local deformation of laser-shocked metal targets reported (J.D.O’Keefe, C.H. Skeen, and C.M. York – TRW Systems Group and University of California, USA)

1974

Laser shock treatment in water confinement reported (J.A. Fox – US Army Mobility Equipment Research and Development Center, Fort Belvoir, USA)

1974

First laser peening patent issued (P.I. Mallozi and B.P. Fairand – US3850698)

5

Introduction

1975

Laser ablation of various metals in various liquids reported (V.A. Ageev – V.I. Lenin Tadzhik State University, Dushanbe, USSR)

1975

Surface damage of the backside of a glass plate in contact with water due to laser irradiation reported (R.K. Leonov,V.V. Efimov, S.I. Zakharov, N.F. Taurin, and P.A. Yampol’skii – All-Union Scientific-Research Institute of Optophysical Measurements, Moscow, USSR)

1981

Initiation of corrosion pits by laser ablation in electrolyte solution reported (R.K. Ulrich and R.C. Alkire – University of Illinois, Urbana, USA)

1983

Liquid jet–guided laser-enhanced electroplating reported (R.J. von Gutfeld, M.H. Gelchinski, L.T. Romankiw, and D.R. Vigliotti – IBM T. J. Watson Research Center,Yorktown Heights, USA)

1986

Laser cutting of 3-mm thick steel sheet under water reported (R. Schünemann – Universität Hannover, Germany)

1987

Metal ions desorption from silicon surface in water under laser irradiation was reported (E.Yu. Assendel’ft,V.I. Beklemyshev, I.I. Makhonin,Yu. N. Petrov,A.M. Prokhorov, and V.I. Pustovoi – Institute of General Physics, Moscow, Russia)

1988

Start of laser shock processing research in France at Laboratoire pour l’Application des Lasers de Puissance (LALP)

1988

Photo-resist particles removal from solid surfaces due to acoustic wave generated by absorption of the laser light on the free surface of water was reported (E.Yu. Assendel’ft,V.I. Beklemyshev, I.I. Makhonin, Yu. N. Petrov,A.M. Prokhorov, and V.I. Pustovoi – Institute of General Physics, Moscow, Russia)

1989

Backside drilling of holes and channels in fused silica in contact with water solution of NiSO4 (J. Ikeno,A. Kobayashi, and T. Kasai – Japan)

1990

Steam Laser Cleaning – removal of Al2 O3 particles from Si wafer, covered with water film reported (K. Imen, S.J. Lee, and S.D. Allen – Center for Laser Science & Engineering, Iowa City, USA)

1991

Densification of porous materials by laser shock reported (D. Zagouri, J.- P. Romain, B. Dubrujeaud, and M. Jeandin – France)

1992

Formation of diamond particles at laser irradiation of graphite in benzene reported (S.B. Ogale, A.P. Malshe, S.M. Kanetkar, and S.T. Kshirsagar – Poona University, Pune, India)

1993

Water jet–guided laser technology was invented by B. Richerzhagen – Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Lausanne (ETHL), Switzerland

1993

Generation of colloidal Au and Ni nanoparticles by laser ablation of metal targets in liquids reported (A. Fojtik and A. Henglein – Hahn-Meitner-Insitut, Berlin, Germany)

1995

Conversion of tensile surface residual stresses into compressive by laser peening in water without protective coating using multiple impacts demonstrated (N. Mukai, N. Aoki, M. Obata,A. Ito,Y. Sano, and C. Konagai – Toshiba Corporation,Yokohama, Japan)

1996

Improvement of laser cutting quality of marble by saturating it by water reported (K. Sugimoto,T. Aihara, H. Kamata, and S. Kanaoka – Taisei Corporation and Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Japan)

1996

Cathodic potential controlled laser ablation of oxide layers in electrolytes reported (R. Oltra, O. Yava¸s, and O. Kerrec – Université de Bourgogne, France)

1996

Reduction of colloidal Ag particles size by laser irradiation reported (A. Takami, H. Yamada, K. Nakano, and S. Koda – University of Tokyo, Japan)

1998

Observation of PbZrTiO3 nanoplatelets growth at laser-irradiated solid–liquid interface (A. Kruusing – Tallinn Technical University, Estonia)

1998

Laser MicroJet® technology was commercialized by Synova S.A. in Lausanne, Switzerland

1998

Conversion of fluorocarbon resin surface from hydrophobic to hydrophilic by laser irradiation under water and aqueous solutions reported (K. Hatao, K. Toyoda, and M. Murahara – Japan)

6

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

1999

Precise backside laser etching of fused silica in contact with pyrene solution in acetone reported (J. Wang. H. Niino, and A. Yabe – National Institute of Materials and Chemical Research,Tsukuba, Japan)

1999

Laser peening was applied to combat against stress corrosion cracking in Japanese nuclear power reactors

2000

Microscale laser shock processing reported (W. Zhang and Y.L. Yao – Columbia University, New York, USA)

2000

Control of laser-ablation generated colloid size by surfactants reported (F. Mafuné, J. Kohno,Y. Takeda, T. Kondow, and H. Sawabe – Japan)

2000

Generation of conducting polymer particles by laser ablation in water reported (Y. Tamaki,T. Asahi, H. Masuhara, Osaka University – Japan)

2001

Photo-induced transformation of spherical Ag nanoparticles into nanoprisms reported (R. Jin,Y. Cao, C.A. Mirkin, K.L. Kelly, G.C. Schatz, and J.G. Zheng – Northwestern University, Evanston, USA)

2001

MAPLE and MDW/LIFT techniques reported (P.K. Wu, B.R. Ringeisen, J. Callahan, M. Brooks, D.M. Bubb, H.D. Wu,A. Piqué, B. Spargo, R.A. McGill, and D.B. Chrisey – Naval Research Laboratory, USA)

2002

Formation of polyynes by laser irradiation of graphite particles in liquids reported (M. Tsuji,T. Tsuji, S. Kuboyama, S.-H. Yoon,Y. Korai,T. Tsujimoto, K. Kubo,A. Mori, and I. Mochida – Kyushu University, Kasuga, Japan)

2004

Removal of particles from surfaces by laser-induced cavitation bubbles reported (W.D. Song, M.H. Hong, B. Lukyanchuk, and T.C. Chong – Data Storage Institute, Singapore)

2004

Laser backside etching of fused silica using an absorbed layer of toluene reported (K. Zimmer, R. Böhme, and B. Rauschenbach – Leibnitz-Institut für Oberflächenmodifizierung e.V., Leipzig, Germany)

2004

Liquids-assisted laser shock cleaning for nanoscale particles removal reported (Deoksuk Jang and Dongsik Kim – POSTECH, Pohang, Korea)

2006

Observation of ZnSe nanorod growth at laser-irradiated solid–liquid interface (T. Jia, M. Baba, M. Huang, F. Zhao, J. Qiu, X. Wu, M. Ichihara, M. Suzuki, R. Li, Z. Xu, and H. Kuroda – Japan and China)

2006

Laser backside etching of fused silica in contact with gallium and mercury reported (K. Zimmer, R. Böhme, D. Ruthe, and B. Rauschenbach – Leibnitz-Institut für Oberflächenmodifizierung e.V., Leipzig, Germany)

2006

Removal of oil film from metal surfaces by water decomposition products generated by laser cavitation reported (H. Hidai and H. Tokura – Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan)

2006

Laser-assisted transformation of Hg into Au under laser exposure of Hg suspensions in D2 O reported (G.A. Shafeev, F. Bozon-Verduraz, and M. Robert – A.M. Prokhorov General Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia; Université Paris 7, France)

1.2 Laser Processing and Analysis of Liquid Systems That Are Not Covered in This Book Following publications are recommended for reference of LALP technologies and analytical techniques not covered in this book.

Stereolithography Ready JF, Farson DF, Feeley T, et al., eds. LIA Handbook of laser materials processing. Berlin: Springer-Verlag and Heidelberg GmbH & Co.; July 2001:545–554. Upcraft S, Fletcher R. The rapid prototyping technologies. Assemb Autom 2003; 23(4):318–330. Bertsch A, Jiguet S, Bernhard P, Renaud P. Microstereolithography: A review. Mater Res Soc Symp Proc 2003; 758:3–15.

Introduction

7

Liquid-phase photochemistry Donohue T. Applied laser photochemistry in the liquid phase. Opt Eng (Laser Appl Phys Chem) 1989; 20: 89–172. Eisenthal KB. Ultrafast chemical reactions in the liquid state. Topics Appl Phy (Ultrashort Laser Pulses) 1993; 60:319–356, 461–469.

Laser wet etching in reactive liquids Ogale SB. Laser-induced synthesis, deposition and etching of materials. Bull Mater Sci 1988; 11(2–3):137–157 Bäuerle D. Laser processing and chemistry, 3rd edn. Berlin: Springer; 2001:325–333.

Laser reactive quenching at liquid–solid interface Kanetkar SM, Ogale SB. Pulsed laser reactive quenching at liquid–solid interface. Bull Mater Sci 1988; 11(2–3):167–190.

Laser-assisted liquid-phase deposition and electroplating Ogale SB. Laser-induced synthesis, deposition and etching of materials. Bull Mater Sci 1988; 11(2–3):137–157. Bäuerle D. Laser processing and chemistry, 3rd edn. Berlin: Springer; 2001:449–458.

Laser machining and treatment of biological materials and objects Niemz MH. Laser-tissue interactions: Fundamentals and applications, 2nd edn. Berlin: Springer; 2002. Vogel A, Venugopalan V. Mechanisms of pulsed laser ablation of biological tissues. Chem Rev 2003; 103(2):577–644. Vogel A, Noack J, Hüttman G, Paltauf G. Mechanisms of femtosecond laser nanosurgery of cells and tissues. Appl Phy B: Laser Opt 2005; 81(8):1015–1047.

Laser desorption from solid surfaces . . Lazneva, Lazerna fotodecopbci (od ped. . . Konopova) L.: Izd-vo LU, 1990, 199 c. (E. F. Lazneva, Laser photodesorption. Lenigrad, Leningrad State University Press, 1990).

Matrix-assisted laser desorption (MALDI) Stump MJ,Fleming RC,GongW-H,Jaber AJ,Jones JJ,Surber CW,Wilkins CL. Matrix-assisted laser desorption mass spectrometry. Appl Spectros Rev 2002; 37(3):275–303. Creaser CS, Ratcliffe L. Atmospheric pressure matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionisation mass spectrometry: A review. Curr Anal Chem 2006; 2(1):9–15. MALDI Recipes. www.nist.gov/maldi; http://polymers.msel.nist.gov/maldirecipes/index.cfm

Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) in liquids and at solid–liquid interfaces Rusak DA,Castle BC,Smith BW,Winefordner JD. Fundamentals and applications of laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy. Crit Rev Anal Chem 1997; 27(4):257–290. Song K, Lee YI, Sneddon J. Applications of laser-induced breakdown spectrometry. Appl Spectros Rev 1997; 32(3):183–235. Schechter I. Laser induced plasma spectroscopy. A review of recent advances. Rev Anal Chem 1997; 16(3):173–298.

8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Cremers DA, Radziemski LJ. Handbook of laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy. Chichester: John Wiley; 2006. Miziolek AW, Palleschi V, Schechter I, eds. Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS): Fundamentals and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006.

1.3 Inventions in Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing Main classes of International Patent Classification (IPC, version 2007.01) regarding the main arts of LALP:

Subtractive processing B23K B23K 26/00 B23K 26/12 B23K 26/14 B23K 26/16

working by laser beam (e.g. welding, cutting, boring) in a special atmosphere (e.g. in an enclosure) using a flow (e.g. a jet of gas, in conjunction with the laser beam) removing of by-products (e.g. particles or vapours produced during treatment of a workpiece) B23K 26/36 removing material B23K 26/38 by boring or cutting B23K 26/40 taking account of the properties of the material involved

Shock processing B22F Working metallic powder; manufacture of articles from metallic powder; making metallic powder B22F 3/087

using high-energy impulses (e.g. magnetic field impulses)

B23K B23K 26/00

working by laser beam (e.g. welding, cutting, boring)

C21 Metallurgy of iron C21D 1/09 C21D 7/00 C21D 10/00

by direct application of electrical or wave energy; by particle radiation modifying the physical properties of iron or steel by deformation modifying the physical properties by methods other than heat treatment or deformation

C22 Metallurgy; ferrous or non-ferrous alloys; treatment of alloys or non-ferrous metals C22F 3/00

changing the physical structure of non-ferrous metals or alloys by special physical methods (e.g. treatment with neutrons)

9

Introduction

F01 Machines or engines in general F01D 5/14

form or construction

Cleaning B08 Cleaning B08B 3/00 B08B 7/00

cleaning by methods involving the use or presence of liquid or steam cleaning by methods not provided for in a single other subclass or a single group in this subclass B08B 3/10 with additional treatment of the liquid or of the object being cleaned (e.g. by heat, by electricity, by vibration)

Generation and modification of particles B22F Working metallic powder; manufacture of articles from metallic powder; making metallic powder B22F 9/00 B22F 9/02

making metallic powder or suspensions thereof using physical processes

B82 Nanotechnology B82B 3/00

manufacture or treatment of nanostructures

The number of patents in LALP is around 500, about 50 per cent regarding subtractive processing, and 20 per cent regarding laser peening. Selected inventions are described under corresponding sections of this book.

C H A P T E R

TW O

Cleaning

Contents 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5

Introduction Principles of Liquids-Assisted Laser Cleaning Particles on Solid Surfaces Experimental Techniques in Laser Wet/Steam Cleaning Research Physics and Phenomenology of Liquids-Assisted Laser Removal of Particles from Surfaces

11 12 17 30 37

2.1 Introduction Liquids may facilitate the removal of particles or surface layers from solids in several ways: by reduction of adhesion forces, by providing expanding vapours, or by acting as a medium for acoustic or shock waves. At the presence of liquid, the threshold laser energies/fluences for cleaning and thus the surface damage hazard is lower, as a rule. The most important application of liquids-assisted (wet) laser cleaning has been the removal of particulate contamination from solid surfaces, especially from silicon wafers for semiconductor integrated circuits (IC). Particles on wafer mask light in photolithographic process and cause declinations from the desired geometry, in worst case shortcuts and breaks [1, 2]. According to different sources, the minimum permissible contaminating particle size is 1/10 to 1/4 of the minimum feature size of IC [3, 4]. Today, there is a need to remove particles of diameters down to tens of nanometres. The particles may origin from the ambient atmosphere (SiO2 , Al2 O3 ), from previous processing steps (photoresist residuals, Cu, TEOS, Al-F), from equipment (wear particles), and from humans (textile wear). Regarding other areas, liquid-assisted laser techniques have proved to be effective for removal of small particles from rotating magnetic information storage disc surfaces [5] and from telescope mirrors [6]. Particles on surface are not always contaminants. Konov et al. [7] describe a process where diamond nanoparticles on surface were used as nuclei for diamond film growth. By selective laser removal of these seed particles in a water–alcohol solution, patterned diamond films were achieved in the subsequent diamond growth. Liquids may be beneficial also at laser removal of surface layers from solids, by lowering the thermal load on the materials and preventing the dissipation of debris into the ambient atmosphere. Local removal of oxide layers is needed, for example: • • •

in microelectronics for fabricating openings in passivating the insulating layers for electrical contacts [8]; in mechanical engineering to enable welding or gluing [9]; in corrosion research for initiation of corrosion pits.

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing ISBN-13: 978-0-08-044498-7

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

11

12

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Table 2.1

Liquids used at laser cleaning.

Liquids

Additives

Water, ethanol, methanol, IPA, acetone

NaCl, methanol, ethanol, IPA

Laser techniques have been considered appropriate also for removal of radioactive contaminants (watercontaining or under water) in nuclear facilities, and for cleaning of optical surfaces in space systems from frozen water and gases. Table 2.1 lists the liquids and their additives used in wet laser cleaning. Alcohols and alcohol additives to water were used for better wetting (for achieving of continuous liquid film on surface). NaCl additive to water was found to enhance the ‘long-term memory effect’ of acoustic cavitation [10] (see Section 7.2.4). Advantages of liquids-assisted laser cleaning of surfaces (in comparison with dry laser cleaning (DLC) and other cleaning methods): • • • • •

• •

Liquid may considerably lower the adhesion forces (van der Waals and double-layer forces). In liquid the capillary force is absent. The cleaning threshold (minimum laser fluence) is lower in liquids. Smaller particles can be removed. Particles may be removed individually. Lower hazard to damage the surface to be cleaned: the focusing of light at transparent particles can be avoided by using absorbing in the liquid light or by choosing a liquid with index of refraction equal to that of the particles [11]. Consumption of ultra-pure liquids is drastically reduced (in comparison with conventional wet cleaning). Electrical (electrochemical) layer removal control is possible. Disadvantages and hazards of liquids-assisted laser cleaning:

• • •

Laser sources are expensive. Liquid droplets on surface may act as lenses and concentrate the light. Generated vapours may be harmful to optical and electronical systems.

2.2 Principles of Liquids-Assisted Laser Cleaning 2.2.1 Particles removal by frontside laser irradiation (steam laser cleaning) Steam laser cleaning (SLC) is the most important kind of laser removal of particulates from surfaces. Here, a thin liquid film, of thickness up to some micrometres, is condensed from vapour onto the contaminated surface. At laser irradiation, the liquid vaporizes and the pressure and movement of the expanding vapours propels the particles off the surface (Fig. 2.1). Also the displacement of surface due to thermal expansion and acoustic transients may contribute to the removal of particles (see Section 2.5.3). The film may be discontinuous, but it is important that there is liquid in contact with the particles. The liquid may origin also from the humidity in the ambient atmosphere – if the substrate and particle surfaces are hydrophilic, a capillary condensation of the humidity occurs.

2.2.2 Particles removal by backside laser irradiation Particles on transparent to laser light substrates may be effectively removed by heating the liquid through the substrate by absorbing in the liquid light. In case of water, the Er:YAG lasers emitting at water absorption maxima near 2.94 µm is often the choice. In comparison with SLC, the thermal load on particles is greatly reduced; for example, living cells have been safely removed from glass slides (Fig. 2.2).

13

Cleaning

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 2.1 Situations in Steam Laser Cleaning; (a) transparent liquid – transparent substrate – opaque particle; (b) transparent liquid – opaque substrate – transparent particle; (c) transparent liquid – opaque substrate – opaque particle; (d) opaque liquid (after the articles by Tam et al. [3], Oltra and Boquillon [12], and Veiko and Shakhno [13]). Cover slide H2O

Micro-objective Sample cavity

CCD

Lens

Particles or cells Absorbing layer

X, Y, Z stage Fast thermal expansion

Laser beam

Er:YAG 2.94 µm, 400 µs 0,1–100 J/cm2

Figure 2.2 Principle of removal of particles and living cells by backside laser irradiation [14]. © SPIE (2002), reproduced with permission from Ref. [14].

2.2.3 Removal of particles by laser-generated acoustic waves in liquid In the pioneering work about laser particles removal from an immersed into liquid substrate, Assendel’ft et al. [15, 16] used a 100 ns, 0.3 J pulsed CO2 -laser beam focused onto free surface of water. Photo-resist particles of size 1–0.1 µm were effectively removed from Si substrates by laser-induced acoustic transients. Acoustic pressure at particles in the cleaning regime was estimated to be in range from 0.02 to 38 MPa.

2.2.4 Liquid-assisted laser shock cleaning Liquid-assisted laser shock cleaning (LLSC) is a combination of SLC with laser shock cleaning (LSC), where a shock wave is generated by laser breakdown in the gas above the specimen. In LLSC, the surface to be cleaned is first covered by a liquid film and then subjected to laser heating and shock wave simultaneously (Fig. 2.3). The technique has been proved to be effective to remove nanoparticles as small as 20 nm with over 90% efficiency from silicon wafers, thus being superior to any other cleaning method [17].

2.2.5 Removal of particles by bubble collapse induced flow Song et al. describe an experiment [18] where SiO2 and polystyrene particles were removed from Si wafers by laser-generated bubbles collapse induced flow (Fig. 2.4). The bubbles collapse flow near solid surfaces in the cleaning regime was later studied by Ohl et al. [19] using particle image velocimetry (PIV). The tangential to surface flow velocities were highest during the time interval of jet impact (see Section 7.2.4) and exceeded 10 m/s (at bubble max size 2 mm); the high tangential velocities were deemed to be the main reason for particles detachment.

14

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Compressed gas

Flow controller

Timinig control unit

Translation stage

Laser for optical brakedown

Sample

Liquid reservoir Lens Heater

Temperature control unit

Thermometer Mirror

Laser for liquidfilm evaporation

Figure 2.3 Scheme of liquid-assisted laser shock cleaning. The substrate to be cleaned is covered with a thin liquid film (condensed vapour). An Nd:YAG laser pulse then induces breakdown of air and a spherical shock wave propagates from the centre of the plasma. An excimer laser pulse is fired at the moment when the shock wave touches the centre of the cleaning zone with the sample moving periodically on a translation stage under multiple number of laser pulse irradiation. Courtesy by D. Kim, POSTECH, Pohang, Korea, © Dongsik Kim, reproduced with permission.

Optical system

Laser

Stage

Bubbles Substrate Liquid

Figure 2.4 Schematics of particles removal by bubble collapse induced flow. © American Institute of Physics, reprinted with permission (2004) from Ref. [18].

2.2.6 Removal of surface layers by laser ablation/spallation in liquid In situ local removal of passive oxide layers from metal surfaces by a focused laser beam was found to be useful in corrosion studies (initiation of corrosion pits). In comparison with mechanical methods like scraping, straining, abrading, shearing, guillotining, and fracturing, laser ablation method provides several advantages: (i) there is no contamination form film removing tools, (ii) uniform and reproducible depassivation is achieved in a few microseconds, (iii) depassivated area is well defined and can be controlled easily by changing the size of the laser beam on the working electrode surface [20, 21]. Interestingly, removal of iron oxide layers by this scheme was found to be enhanced when the specimen was held in an electrolyte solution under proper cathodic potential (e.g. 1.45V/SCE for 40 min) (Fig. 2.5)

15

Cleaning

Laser pulse Electrolyte Oscilloscope

Potentiostat

Transducer

Figure 2.5 Experimental configuration for the laser-induced oxide film removal in a liquid confinement at controlled electrochemical potential [22]. The workpiece is immersed into the liquid and laser irradiation causes melting, vaporization, or spallation of the oxide layer. Here, the laser light is fed to the sample through an optical fibre and the ablated area corresponds to the core diameter of the fibre. © Elsevier.

0.8 0.7

kFe

3O4

0.6 0.5

Before polarization

0.4 0.3 0.2

After 40 min of polarization

0.1 0.0 500

600

700

800

1000

Wavelength (nm)

Figure 2.6 Computed spectra of the imaginary part of the refractive index k of a Fe3 O4 layer before and after cathodic polarization. © SPIE (2000), reproduced with permission from Ref. [25].

[23, 24]. Further studies revealed that at cathodic polarization the transparency of the oxide layer was increased considerably (Fig. 2.6), so that the laser light could penetrate deeper and cause the oxide layer spallation due to thermal stresses. In addition, mechanical effects resulting from H2 incorporation (enbrittling of the material and increase of stresses due to volume increase) might have been contributed to the oxide layer removal as well. In the article by Cortona et al. [26], the removal of porous oxide layer, containing 18 per cent of water, from AlMgSi1 alloy surface by laser ablation is reported. Some investigations directed to laser removal of radioactively contaminated layers from concrete are described in the articles by Savina et al. [27–29] (see Table 4.11, Savina (1998) [27], Savina (2000) [28], and Robinson (2001) [29].

2.2.7 Removal of frozen gas and liquid layers from optical surfaces Orbiting earth spacecrafts optics suffers form contamination by dust, H2 O, CO2 , O2 , and various organic molecules, originating from micrometeorite impacts, from high-energy particles (electrons, oxygen a.o.) irradiation of construction materials (outgassing and offgassing), and from manoeuvring motors. Organic contaminants tend to polymerize under sunlight UV radiation. The condensates form islands at surface defects and degrade the performance of optical components [30]. Different techniques have been proposed for removal of contamination from optical surfaces of orbiting spacecrafts, like electron and ion bombardment. Laser irradiation was found to be a favourable alternative here.

16

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Laser pulse

Micro phone

HCI solution

Shock Wave front Sample

Figure 2.7 Experimental setup for the removal of oxide scale on low carbon steel enhanced by shock wave generated by laser breakdown on the surface of a aqueous HCl solution [33]. Microphone was used for shock intensity estimation by audible sound level. ‘Fig. 1 of Laser-assisted chemical cleaning for oxide scale removal from carbon steel surfaces’ reproduced with permission from Journal of Laser Applications, February 2004,Volume 16, Issue 1, pp. 25–30, Laser Institute of America, Orlando, Florida. The Laser Institute of America disclaims any responsibility or liability resulting from the placement and use in the described manner. © Laser Institute of America (2004). www.laserinstitute.org. All rights reserved.

Piper et al. [30], Pierce et al. [31] have investigated laser cleaning of cryogenic mirrors (Ni-coatedAl, Au/Nicoated Al, Be) by CO2 and Nd:YAG lasers. The mirrors were contaminated by dust and frozen at 100–140 K components of laboratory air, mainly H2 O and CO2 . It was found that CO2 laser was proper for contaminants removal, because its light was effectively absorbed in the contaminant layer, but 1.06 µm Nd:YAG laser not.

2.2.8 Laser-generated shock wave enhanced scale removal In the articles by Lim et al. [32, 33], an oxide scale on low carbon steel was removed by laser-generated mechanical impact in liquid; but only in case when the workpiece was held at least 10 s in at least 10% HCl solution before laser irradiation. Without laser, the minimum HCl concentration needed for scale removal was 18 per cent (Fig. 2.7).

2.2.9 Removal of organic contaminants by water decomposition products In the article by Hidai et al. [34], a tapping oil contamination was removed from various metal surfaces (Ni, Cu, Zn, SUS304), thereby from the inside of holes, by water decomposition products, generated by a 150 mJ ArF laser beam focused onto water surface. Except Zn, no damage of the metal was observed (Fig. 2.8).

2.2.10 Cleaning of surfaces through contaminants dissolution in laser-generated supercritical solution Dolgaev et al. [35] report about non-diamond carbon layer removal from suspended in HNO3 aqueous solution diamond particles (4 nm) in result of irradiation of the suspension by YSGG:Cr3+ :Yb3+ :Ho3+ laser beam (2.92 µm, ≈130 ns, 1 kHz, 10 J/cm2 ). Contamination removal was ascribed to the solvation of non-diamond carbon in supercritical solution.

2.2.11 Dehydroxylation of a silica glass surface Halfpenny [36] and Fernandes [37] report about dehydroxylation of silica glass surface by laser irradiation (Fig. 2.9). Irradiation of the surface by UV light (255.3 nm = 4.86 eV) led to breaking of OH bonds (ED = 4.436 eV) and removal of the hydroxyl groups. The process was proposed for controlling the particles adherence to silica surfaces.

17

Cleaning

Laser beam Lens F180 Sample

Water surface

L

Figure 2.8 Experimental setup used for cleaning of metal samples from tapping oil by laser-generated water decomposition products [34]. Oil layers were totally removed by 18 000–36 000 laser pulses of energy 150 mJ at 193 nm wavelength. © Elsevier. UV photon H

H

H

O

H O

H

H

H

H etc.

H

O

O

O

O

O

Si

Si O

Si O

Si O

Si Heat

Bulk silica

O Si

O Si

O

Si O

Si O

Bulk silica

Figure 2.9 Modification of the chemical structure of a silica surface by laser irradiation: an hydrophilic to hydrophobic transition occurs [36]. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media.

2.2.12 Ice-assisted laser particles removal In patent US2004140298 [38], a water ice layer deposition onto surface to be cleaned before laser irradiation was proposed.

2.3 Particles on Solid Surfaces 2.3.1 Adhesion phenomena and adhesion forces In order to remove a particle from a surface, the adhesion forces need to be overcome. In laser removal of micrometre and nanometre-sized particles from solid surfaces, the adhesion forces to be considered are: van der Waals force, double-layer force, capillary force, and chemical bond force (Fig. 2.10). On ferromagnetic substrates, also magnetic forces may be significant. In comparison with macroscopic systems, the gravitational force is unimportant. The adhesion is greatly affected by the surface roughness and the environment (Fig. 2.11). Much of experimental and theoretical research is done by spherical particles; highly spherical latex, glass, silica, and alumina particles of various sizes are commercially available, also of calibrated size. In real cleaning situations, however, the particles are mostly of irregular shape.

Cohesion energy approach Interaction energy of electrically neutral bodies in vacuum can be expressed by Dupré equation: γ = γ1 + γ2 − γ12 ,

(2.1)

18

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

105

Force (N)

106

Capillary force van der Waals force due to 1% deformation

107

van der Waals force

Electrostatic image force

108 Electrical doublelayer force

109 0.1

Gravitational force

1.0

10

100

Partical diameter (m)

Figure 2.10 The adhesion forces as a function of the diameter for an Al2 O3 particle on a flat Si substrate [39–41]. In dry ambient, the capillary force may be absent. Compilation of data by Kohli [42]. © Koninklijke Brill NV. Republished with permission. Capillary condensed water

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 2.11 Situations in a particle–substrate system: (a) irregular particle on a rough surface (the real case); (b) model spherical particle on a flat surface; deformation of the substrate by adhesion forces and capillary liquid are shown; (c) immersed into liquid system; and (d) particle–substrate system after long storage (hundreds to thousands of hours).

where, γ is the energy per unit area of the interface (Dupré energy or thermodynamic work of adhesion), γ1 and γ2 are the respective surface energies (surface tensions) of both materials, and γ12 is the interfacial energy. Dupré energy of adhesion corresponds to the work per unit area required to separate the surfaces from contact to infinity. For completely apolar materials. √ γ12 = 2 γ1 γ2 . (2.2) Hamaker constants Aii (see below) are related to γ1 and γ2 as [43]: γi =

Aii A11 → γ1 = , 24πl02 24πl02

γ2 =

A22 , 24πl02

where l0 is the ‘practical’ minimum equilibrium distance, l0 = 157 ± 9 pm.

(2.3–2.5)

19

Cleaning

Electrostatic forces In general, the force on a charged particle resting on a conducting substrate in the presence of an applied electric field is given as [39, 42]: Fe = qE −

q2 qEd 3 3 πε0 d 6 E 2 + − , 16πε0 h2 16h3 128 h4

(2.6)

where d is the particle diameter, E the electric field strength, h is the distance of the particle from the surface, and q is the total electrical charge of the particle. The physical meanings of the terms in this formula are: 1st term: Coulomb force, 2nd term: image force exerted by an image charge of −q at position −h from the surface, 3rd term: dielectrophoretic force on the induced dipole caused by the gradient of the field from the image charge, 4th term: polarization force due to interacting of the induced dipole and its image. Image and polarization forces between a particle and a surface are always attractive, the other forces may be whether attractive or repulsive. Formulae for electrostatic forces acting on rough particles are given in the article by Soltani andAhmadi [39]. When the particle and the substrate are materials with different contact potentials, electrons from the material with lower work function are transferred to the material with higher one until the Fermi levels in both materials reach the same level. The potential difference U arising from this levelling can reach values of up to 0.5V. For a sphere on a flat surface, the corresponding force is [44]: Fel = πε0

R (U )2 , h

(2.7)

where h is the distance of the particle from the surface.

Chemical bond forces In adhesion of oxide particles to oxide or oxidized surfaces, the hydrogen bond forces may be considerable or even dominant (Fig 2.12) [45]. Wu et al. [45] estimate the hydrogen bond force as: FHbond =

DSEbond , dbond

(2.8)

where D is the OH group density, S and Ebond are the total interaction area and the hydrogen bonding interaction energy between particle and substrate, respectively, and dbond is on the dissociation length of the hydrogen O H

H

O

O H

H

H

O

O

R H O

Si

Si

Si

Si

Si

O O O

O O O

O O O

O O O

O O O

Figure 2.12 Hydrogen bonding between a SiO2 or oxidized Si surface and a hydrogen-bonded liquid. The dashed lines are hydrogen bonds. ‘R’ may be a hydrogen atom (for water) or a radical (for alcohols). After Wu et al. [45] and Fernandes et al. [37].

20

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

bond. Ebond depends on the nature of the surfaces, in particular on their degrees of hydroxylation and on the electronic structure of the materials. The average bonding energy of the O—H—O hydrogen bond is about 5 kcal/mole (∼0.22 eV/bond) [46, 47]. The dissociation length of the hydrogen bond in the order of 1 Å [45]. According to Wu et al. [45], the hydrogen bond force for SiO2 and Al2 O3 particles on silicon is an order of magnitude greater than the van der Waals force, both in air and in alcohols.

van der Waals force van der Waals force is an electrical force caused by polarization induced mutually in the particle and in the substrate. For spherical particles, the corresponding interaction energy and force are expressed as: WvdW = −

A123 R , 6h

FvdW =

A123 R , 6h2

(2.9)

where A123 is the effective Hamaker constant, R is the particle radius in sphere–plane interactions, or the reduced particle radius in sphere–sphere interactions, R=

R1 R2 , R1 + R 2

(2.10)

and h is the distance between the particle and the substrate. Equation (2.9) is valid if the distance h is less than few per cent of the particle’s radius. At larger separations, the potential retardation can be taken into account by formula [48]: A123 R 1 WvdW = − (2.11) 6h 1 + 11.12h/λ where λ is the characteristic wavelength for interaction (distance between atoms in solids ∼90 nm). This expression is a good approximation in case of separation distances smaller than 20 per cent of the particle radius and in particle size range at least 0.1–1 µm. The effective Hamaker constant A123 depends on the materials that are interacting and may be calculated from the individual Hamaker constants Ajj [49, 50], A123 =

√ √ √ √ A11 − A33 · A22 − A33 ,

(2.12)

where A11 and A22 are the Hamaker constants for the particle and the surface, respectively, and A33 is the Hamaker constant for the third medium (gas or liquid). The Hamaker constants Aii for some materials of interest to this book are given in Table 2.2. For interactions across vacuum, A123 reduces to A12 , √ A12 = A11 A22 . (2.13) When inserted into liquid, the van der Waals interaction (adhesion force) may be reduced considerably: for example about 2 times for Au or Ag surfaces, 4 times for polystyrene (PS), and 6 times for MgO surfaces [50]. Equation (2.12) suggests also that effective Hamaker constant may also obtain negative values, thus the force between particles may become repulsive if immersed into a liquid. The condition for repulsion is [50]: A11 < A33 < A22

or A11 > A33 > A22 .

(2.14)

Photoenhanced van der Waals force According to Kimura [53], the illumination of metal colloids at Mie resonance frequencies (see Section 5.2) can accelerate their coagulation by 100 to 5000 times due to decrease of interparticle potential energy and the corresponding increase of van der Waals force.

21

Cleaning

Table 2.2 Non-retarded (static) Hamaker constants Aii for two identical materials interacting over vacuum (at room temperature if not given else). Material

Aii [J]

Reference −20

54.5 × 10

Au

Visser [51]

−20

44.6 × 10

Ag

Visser [51]

−20

30.6 × 10

Cu

Visser [51]

−20

32.6 × 10

Diamond

Visser [51]

−20

25.6 × 10

Si

Visser [51]

−20

24.8 × 10

6H−SiC

Bergström [52]

−20

β-SiC

24.6 × 10

Bergström [52]

β-Si3 N4

18 × 10−20

Bergström [52]

Si3 N4 (amorphous)

16.7 × 10−20

Bergström [52]

−20

15.2 × 10

α-Al2 O3 TiO2 (tetragonal)

Bergström [52]

−20

15.3 × 10

Bergström [52]

−20

12.1 × 10

MgO (cubic) ZnO (hexagonal)

Bergström [52]

−20

9.21 × 10

Bergström [52]

−20

8.68 × 10

SiO2 (quartz) SiO2 (amorphous)

Bergström [52]

−20

6.50 × 10

Bergström [52]

−20

7.3 × 10

PS (polystyrene)

Visser [51]

Glycerol

6.7 × 10−20

van Oss [43]

Benzene

4.66 × 10−20

van Oss [43]

Water

4.62 × 10−20

van Oss [43]

−20

4.39 × 10

Ethanol ◦

Argon (−188 C) ◦

Nitrogen (−183 C) ◦

Helium (−271.5 C)

van Oss [43]

−20

2.33 × 10 1.42 × 10

van Oss [43]

−20

van Oss [43]

−20

0.0535 × 10

van Oss [43]

The ratio of interparticle potential energy when illuminated Uirr , to the potential energy in dark Udark is expressed by: Uirr 16α0 E02 k2 =− Udark 27ωM

R DM

2 ,

(2.15)

where α0 is static polarizability, E0 is the amplitude of the external field, k is a numerical factor, ωM is Mie resonance frequency, and R is the (reduced) radius of the particles. DM = ReD(ωM ), where D(ω) is the centroid of the surface screening charge. DM roughly coincides with the position of maximum induced electron density. For silver, DM ≈ −0.85 Å and the photoenhanced interaction energy has maximum at particle radius of R ≈ 20 nm.

22

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Capillary force Capillary force is due to capillary condensed liquid (Fig. 2.13) [54, 55]. It may be the dominant particle adhesion force in humid ambient [54]. Due to increased vapour pressure at a concave interface, Eq. (7.57), capillary condensed water can be very stable – according to Bhattacharya and Mittal [40] even a 24 h baking at 180◦ C did not decrease the adhesion strength of particles to silicon. Capillary force has two components, the capillary pressure force Fcp and the surface tension force Fst [55]. Capillary pressure force: Fcp = 2γ πR (cos 1 + cos 2 ) .

(2.16)

Fst = lγ cos α,

(2.17)

Surface tension force:

where γ is the surface tension, and 1 and 2 are the wetting angles of the particle and of the substrate. The total capillary force becomes: Fc = Fcp + Fst = 2γ πR( cos 1 + cos 2 ) + lγ cos α.

(2.18)

The analysis by Pakarinen et al. [55] showed that the surface tension force is negligible for a 1 µm radius spherical particle, but for a 15 nm radius particle of it can be the largest component of the total capillary force. For a Si—SiO2 system, the capillary force should be taken into account beginning from RH > 20 per cent [55]. The volume of the capillary condensed liquid for complete wetting may is expressed by [56, 57]: Vl ≈ 4πRK2 R,

(2.19)

where RK is the Kelvin radius. For water: RK ≈

µσ , ρl RG T ln RH −1

or in nanometers 0.52 , RK ≈ ln RH −1

(2.20)

where RG is the universal gas constant, ρ is the density of the liquid, µ its molar weight, σ the surface tension coefficient, and RH is the relative humidity. 1

R

2

Figure 2.13 Capillary liquid at a particle (hydrophilic particle on a hydrophilic substrate). The liquid may originate from capillary condensed vapour of a rest of the bulk liquid. After Pakarinen et al. [55].

23

Cleaning

Double-layer force Double-layer force is an electrostatic force determined by ions distribution at charged surfaces in electrolytes. Solid surfaces may acquire charge in several ways, for example, at SiO2 surface the process goes on the way: −SiOH ↔ −SiO− + H+

(2.21)

Cations from solution absorb on the negatively charged surface and attract in turn negative anions from the solution, thus building up a double ion layer structure [58]. Different double-layer theories use different simplifications of the physical situation; a solution proposed for cleaning situations (spherical particle on a flat surface, low constant potential approximation) is given by [59, 44, 60]: εR 2 2 Wdl = · 0 + part 4

2 2 02 part

2 02 + part

1 + exp(−κh) · ln + ln [1 − exp(−2κh)] 1 − exp(−κh)

(2.22)

where ε is the permittivity of the medium, 0 is the surface potential of the surface, part is the surface potential of the particle, and κ is the Debye–Hückel inverse double-layer thickness (reciprocal length parameter):

κ=

2000e 2 NA I , εkB T

(2.23)

where e is the electronic charge, kB is the Boltzmann’s constant, T is the temperature, NA is the Avogadro constant, and I is the ionic strength of the (bulk of) solution, 1 Ci Zi2 2 i=1 n

I=

where Ci is the molarity concentration (mol/l) of ion i, Zi is the charge of that ion, and the sum is taken over all ions in the solution (Table 2.3). Equation (2.22) is a good description of the interaction energy for part and 0 values smaller than 50–60 mV and if the product κR > 5. This means that for an average particle radius of 0.12 µm, the equation holds if the ionic strength is larger than 10−4 M. At lower ionic strengths, as in case of deionized water, the calculated electrostatic interaction energy should, therefore, be considered as indicative [60]. For practical calculations the surface potentials may be approximated by their zeta-potentials (ζ-potential). ζ-potentials are dependent on the nature and concentration of the ions, and on the pH of the solution (Fig. 2.14). However, the isoelectric points of oxide materials (Table 2.4), which are of main interest in laser cleaning, are rather independent on kinds of ions and their concentration, but depend on the structure of the material [61]. Table 2.3 Debye–Hückel inverse double-layer thickness for some electrolytes. [43] Solution

1/κ(nm)

H2 O

1000

10−5 mol NaCl

100

10−3 mol NaCl

10

−1

10

mol NaCl

1

24

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

10 Al2O3

ζ-potential (mV)

20 30

ZnO

40 0

TiO2

40 30

SiO2 Neutral

20 10 0

2

4

6

8

10

12 pH

Figure 2.14 Dependence of ζ-potentials of some materials on pH of the solution (schematically after Hunter [61] Hann [62] Vos et al. [60] Kamada et al. [63] and Kalin et al. [64]). Other oxides behave similarly. Table 2.4 Point of zero charge (isoelectric point) of some materials of interest to wet laser cleaning and to laser particles generation [60, 63, 64]. Material

Isoelectric point (pH)

Quartz, SiO2

2–3.7

Silicon carbide

3.2

Cassiterite, SnO2

4.5

Rutile,TiO2

4.7–6

Zirconia

6

Hydroxyapatite, Ca5 (PO4 )3 (OH)

7

Si3 N4

4.6–8.8

Corundum, Al2 O3

8–9

ZnO

∼9.7

Magnesia, MgO

12

Electrostatic double-layer force can be calculated by Hogg–Healy–Fuerstenau (HFF) equations [50]: (1) constant potential approximation: F(h) =

κe −κh εR 2 2 01 02 2 −κh 01 + 02 , − e 2 + 2 2 1 − e −2κh 01 02

(2.24)

κe −κh 2 01 02 εR 2 2 −κh 01 + 02 , + e 2 + 2 2 1 − e −2κh 01 02

(2.25)

(2) constant charge approximation: F(h) =

where 01 and 02 are the potentials of the interacting surfaces and κ is the inverse double-layer thickness (Eq. (2.23)).

25

Cleaning

Double-layer force may be considerably reduced by proper choice of the liquid and the solutes. Principally, at high pH values the potential or the charge of the adherents increases, the adhesion lowers and the attraction may change into propulsion [50].

Magnetic force Force F on a magnetized particle in a magnetic field B can be calculated by [65]: (M · B)dS,

F=

(2.26)

S

where M is the magnetization and dS is a vector in the surface normal direction, whose modulus equals to the area dS.

2.3.2 Adhesion force theories considering the deformation of the particle and the substrate Adhesion forces cause deformation of both substrate and of particle leading to an increase of the contact area and this way to an increase of the adhesion force as well. According to Kohli [42], due to the deformations, the adhesion force between polymer particles rises about 100 times and the force between metal or oxide particles about 20 times. In the following, some significant to laser cleaning results of adhesion theories are presented [66–69]. In the formulae below, K and E* are the combined elastic moduli of two spheres (or of a sphere and a plane), given by: 3 1 − ν12 3 1 1 − ν22 1 = = · ∗, − (2.27) K 4 E1 E2 4 E Parameters µ and λ, used as criteria for applicability of different models, are:

32 µ= 3π

3

2RWa2 πE ∗2 z03

and

λ = 1.16 µ.

(2.28)

Hertz model In Hertz model no adhesion is considered, the deformation is elastic and is caused by the external force F only (Fig. 2.15). The radial distribution of the contact pressure is given by: r 2 r 2 3F 3Ka 1− = 1 − , p (r) = 2πR 2πa2 a a

(2.29)

where a is the contact radius, a3 = RF/K . Due to deformation, the sphere approaches to the surface (Fig. 2.39) by: F . (2.30) Ka Without external force no deformation occurs. Hertz theory is not applicable directly to the particle adhesion problems; however, it is incorporated into other theories which consider the adhesion forces as well. Hertz pressure distribution is shown in (Fig. 2.16). δ=

26

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Bradley’s model This model considers two rigid spheres interacting via Lennard–Jones potentials. Force between two spheres: −2 8πwR 1 h −8 h F (h) = . − 3 4 h0 h0

(2.31)

The maximum adhesion force (pull-off force) occurs at h = h0 : FBradley = 2πRWa .

(2.32)

DMT model (Derjaguin, Muller, Toporov) The bodies are considered to deform according to Hertz theory, but forces acting outside of the contact region are taken into account. Contact radius: R 3 a = (F + 2πWA R) . (2.33) K Contact radius at zero external force: 2 3 πWA R . (2.34) a0 = K Pull-off force: FDMT = 2πRWa ,

(2.35)

This model is applicable to small compressible solids where µ < 1.

JKR model (Johnson, Kendall, Roberts) This model neglects long range forces outside the contact area and considers only short range forces inside the contact region. Deformation is assumed to be Hertzian. Contact radius:

3 R 2 (2.36) F + 3πRWa + 6πRWa F + (3πRWa ) , a= K

F R (1) Hertz

y aHertz δ

Figure 2.15

JKR

aJKR

Surface deformations according to Hertz and JKR models [69]. © Elsevier.

27

Cleaning

Contact radius at zero external force:

3

a0 =

6πWa R 2 . K

(2.37)

Pull-off force: 3 πRWa 2 The model is applicable to highly adhesive bodies where µ > 1. FJKR =

(2.38)

MD model (Maugis, Dugdale) Adhesion is considered as a constant additional stress σ0 over an annular region around the contact area up to a maximum separation h0 beyond which it falls to zero, as shown in (Fig 2.16). Adhesion energy is Wa = σ0 h0 . This model applies to all materials, from large rigid spheres with high surface energies to small compliant bodies with low surface energies (Fig 2.17) [69, 70]. The adhesion force in MD theory can be calculated from a set of parametric equations [69, 70]: 4 2 δ = A − Aλ m2 − 1, 3 2 4λ2 A λA 2 −m + 1 + m2 − 1 arctan m2 − 1 = 1 m − 1 + m2 − 2 arctan m2 − 1 + 2 3 and 3 2 F = A − λA m2 − 1 + m2 arctan m2 − 1 ,

(2.39)

(2.40)

(2.41)

where, A= 3

a πWa R 2 /K

F=

,

(2.42)

F , πWa R

R

p

P1 a

(2.43)

p1

a

d Pa c

s0 h0

pa c

(a) d

a

h0 ρ u (b)

Figure 2.16 (a) The MD traction distribution is made up of two terms: Hertz pressure p1 on area r < a, and adhesive tension pa on area r < c. In the annulus a < r < c the traction is constant (=σ0 ) and the surfaces separate up to a distance h0 . The net load P = P1 − Pa . (b) A liquid meniscus at the edge of a contact gives rise to a Dugdale adhesive tension σ0 = γ/ρ, where γ is the surface tension of the liquid [67]. © Elsevier.

28

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

104

Hertz p p 0/

5

0.0

JKR

102

d 101

100 101 103

MD

DMT

0.

05

Bradley (rigid)

102

d0 /h0 20

1 /h 0

d0 /h0 0.05

Load P P/pwR

103

101

100

101

102

Elasticity parameter, l 1.16 µ

Figure 2.17 Adhesion map for elastic spheres based on the MD model [67]. In the Hertz zone adhesion forces are negligible. The Bradley, DMT, and JKR asymptotic theories may be used in the zones so marked. © Elsevier.

and δ= 3

δ π2 Wa2 R/K 2

.

(2.44)

The material properties are taken into account by a dimensionless parameter λ (cf. Eq. (2.28)): 2.06 λ= h0

3

RWa2 , πK 2

(2.45)

where h0 is a typical atomic dimension. DMT and JKR models are special cases of MD model (λ → 0 and λ → ∞, correspondingly). According to Johnson and Greenwood [67], MD model exactly reproduces also the adhesion due the capillary forces exerted by the meniscus (Fig. 2.13). In this case the Dugdale stress σ0 is given by the capillary pressure γ/ρ, and the thickness h0 by 2ρ cos θ, where γ is the surface tension of the liquid. The effective work of adhesion is then given by Wa = 2γ cos θ.

MP model (Maugis, Pollock) MP model assumes the contact profile of pressure Hertzian, but with the radius of curvature changed due to the plastic deformation [71, 72]. Adhesion force: √ 9 π Wa K √ Fa = F + 2πWa R. (2.46) 8 H 3/2 Contact radius:

a=

2WA R , 3Y

where, H is contact hardness, H ≈ 3Y and Y is yield strength of the material in compression.

(2.47)

29

Cleaning

Deformation of the surface can be accounted in the van der Waals force Eq. (2.9) by adding a term derived from the formula for van der Waals force per unit area between two plates [50]: Fdeform =

A , 6πh03

(2.48)

yielding Fa = Fsphere−plane + Fdeform

AR = 2 6h0

a2 1+ Rh0

,

(2.49)

where A is the Hamaker constant, R the particle radius, h0 the distance between particle and substrate (often assumed as 4 Å), and a the contact radius that may result from adhesion-induced deformation, Eqs (2.34), (2.36), (2.37), (2.42), and (2.47).

Numerical solutions Elasticity-adhesion problem for two spheres was solved numerically (iteratively) by Greenwood [73]. Gilabert et al. [74] simulated the adhesion and pull-off force of polystyrene spheres of radia 1–8 nm by molecular dynamics method using Lennard–Jones potential. These calculations demonstrated a pretty good adequacy of analytical models (from Bradley to MP) to particle adhesion problems.

Influence of the surface roughness For particles on dry surfaces the adhesion force decreases considerably if the surface roughness increases (Fig. 2.18). 1.4 1.3 Total pull-off force, Pc Pc / N pc

1.2 1.1 0.1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5

JKR

0.4 0.3

DMT

0.2 0.1 0

0

0.5

1.0

1.5 2.0 2.5 Roughness, s / dc

3.0

3.5

4.0

Figure 2.18 Effect of random roughness on adhesion between nominally flat surfaces having N asperities each of radius R and standard deviation of height σ. Pc = JKR pull-off force (=1.5πωP) and δc = JKR pull-off displacement = (3/4)(π2W2a R/E*2 )1/3 for each aspherity [67]. © Elsevier.

30

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

(a)

(b)

Figure 2.19 Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) images of 1.5 µm SiO2 particles: (a) after 17 h storage and (b) after 1350 h storage [76]. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media.

Long-time stability of particle-surface contact Adhesion forces cause a deformation of both the particle and of the substrate, balanced by elastic forces arising from deformations of both of the particle and the substrate. The elastic deformation tends to relax in time (hundreds and thousands of hours) via creep and migration of the matter (Fig. 2.19), causing the increase of the adhesion force [75, 76].

2.4 Experimental Techniques in Laser Wet/Steam Cleaning Research 2.4.1 Preparation of particles covered surfaces In the research of laser cleaning, there is a need for controlled covering of substrates with particles. The particles density should be high enough to achieve statistically reliable counts over the laser spot and coarse enough to avoid particles aggregation.

‘Dip and tap’ method (Fig. 2.20a) The substrate to be covered is dipped into a large volume of particles or the particles are spooned onto the substrate. The loose particles are then removed by sharp tapping or fast flow of dry gas. The method leads to a medium density of particles, 10–40 per cent coverage by area, on solvent cleaned glass slides, and to lower densities on ultrasonically cleaned slides, 0.1–7 per cent, average 1.8 per cent [77, 78].

Drying of a suspension (Fig. 2.20b) Suspension of particles in an organic solvent (e.g. isopropylalcohol, IPA) is prepared by ultrasonic agitation. A drop of the suspension is applied onto the substrate. The solvent vaporizes but particles remain on the surface. Particles density may be controlled by spinning of the suspension-coated substrate. Higher rotating velocities result in thinner fluid films and lower surface density of particles [79, 80]. A variant of this method is described in the article by Neves et al. [81] (Fig. 2.20c). The substrate to be coated by particles was placed in a 10-cm-diameter Petri dish with ethanol, the whole being placed on a heated vibrating table (≈50◦ C) and a specific amount of metallic particles was placed in the centre of the wafer. After a certain time, the ethanol evaporated leaving the metallic particles uniformly distributed over the surface of the wafer.

31

Cleaning

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 2.20 Some important methods of preparation of particle-covered surfaces. (a) ‘dip and tap’ method, (b) drying of particles suspension, (c) in situ suspension preparation, and (d) laser ablation of a compacted powder target.

xy stages 0.1–3.5 s Valve opening control Substrate Flow meter

z stages

50°C Heater Computer water + 8% alc.

40°C Laser triggering

Nitrogen

fluence 10–200 J/m2, 10 ns

Mirror

Focusing lens Pulsed laser: excimer, Nd:YAG, etc.

Thermometer

Figure 2.21 Schematics of steam laser cleaning system developed at École Polytechnique de Montréal. The wafer is kept face down to avoid resettlement of the removed particles. © SPIE (1999), reproduced with permission from Ref. [85].

Laser ablation deposition (Fig. 2.20d) Particles with high tendency to form aggregates like Al2 O3 may be effectively dispersed by laser ablation [78]. A compacted Al2 O3 powder target was irradiated by a focused XeCl laser beam (308 nm) at fluence 4.4–12.3 J/cm2 . Prepared by this method samples had 1 µm alumina particle densities of 0.01–1.5 per cent, in average 0.6 per cent. Particles may be deposited also electrophoretically [82], be dusted or sprayed onto surfaces. Fernandes and Kane [83] list the particle deposition methods and give further references. There are industrial devices for controlled deposition of particles onto silicon wafers available as well, for cleaning standards and for research purposes [84]. Figs. 2.21–2.23 present some complete steam laser cleaning systems.

2.4.2 Application of liquid and monitoring the liquid film thickness and condition In steam laser cleaning process, the liquid film is formed by condensation of vapours on the contaminated surface (Figs 2.21–2.23). Vapour is generated by heating the liquid (water–alcohol mixture) in a special vessel and fed to the cleaned surface by pulsed nitrogen flow. The thickness of the liquid film may be controlled by vapour pulse duration. Usually the vapour pulse lasts some seconds yielding a liquid film of thickness

32

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Low pressure N2 Liquid film Flow controller

Sample stage controller

Filter

Port Nozzle

Level sensor Liquid supply controller

Stage Servo controller

Liquid supply

Puffer Heaterthermocouple (8% IPA) assembly Heater Mirror

Beam splitter Rotating mirror Energy meter

Lenses Beam homogenizer

Filter

Heater power supply & temperature controller

Thermocouple Reservoir (40% IPA, 60% water)

Lens

Computer

Beam expander

Controls each subcontroller and laser

KrF excimer laser

Mirror

Figure 2.22 Schematics of a high-throughput laser cleaning tool developed at IBM [86]. The beam from an industrial KrF excimer laser (248 nm radiation, 200 Hz repetition rate, 200 W output) is scanned galvanometrically and the wafer by a translation stage; the liquid film is deposited continuously. © Elsevier.

Dry N2

Humidified N2

Process monitoring microscope

Focusing lenses and mirror

OPO Pulsed laser Laser beam

Humidifier

Photodiode

Reflected light

Particle

Dark field illumination laser Suction

Valve MFC

Water layer consensed Rotation axis

Narrow gap suction Translation axis

Figure 2.23 Particle removal system for high-volume manufacturing system by Sumitomo Mitsubishi Silicon Group [87]. An image analyzing system detects individual particles which are thereafter removed by local steam deposition, laser irradiation, and suction. Capability of the system to clean 4000 silicon wafers in 2 weeks was demonstrated. © Trans Tech Publications Inc., reproduced with permission.

33

Cleaning

Ip(°C) 104 Abiation 3

I(MW/cm2)

10

10 4 10 3

102

10 2

10 10

1 101

103

Hotter Melting Deeper Cleaning

Photothermal sensing

102

101

1

10

102

103

104

105

106

t(ns)

Figure 2.24 Parametric space indicating various possible effects when a solid surface (e.g. stainless steel) is irradiated by a laser beam with various intensities, I and pulse widths, τ [86]. © Elsevier.

0.2–10 µm. Liquid film last on the surface some seconds, therefore, the laser pulse is fired about 0.1 s after the vapour pulse. The vapour may be supplied also continuously (Fig. 2.22). The thickness of the liquid film can be monitored interferometrically and its lasting by optical reflectometry (Figs 2.27–2.28).

2.4.3 Choice of laser beam parameters In steam laser cleaning, it is energetically advantageous to use lasers whose wavelength does not absorb in liquid, but in the substrate. Thus, excimer and frequency multiplied Nd-ion lasers are the best choice. For 1.06 µm wavelength form Nd:YAG and similar Nd-ion lasers, the reflectivity of solid surfaces is usually higher that in the UV-VIS region. The use of CO2 laser, whose 10.6 µm light cannot penetrate a common liquids film, but vaporizes the liquid surface only, is rationalized by independence of the cleaning process of the substrate material and by absence of the substrate damage hazard. A discussion about the choice of laser wavelength for steam laser cleaning is presented in the article by Oltra and Boquillon [12]. Figure 2.24 presents a comparison of laser beam parameters in cleaning with these in other kinds of laser processing.

2.4.4 Measuring and monitoring techniques in steam laser cleaning Detection of acoustic emission (sound) Thermal expansion of the laser heated target and rapid vaporization of the liquid induce hearable sound transients, whose intensity can be used for monitoring the laser–matter interaction intensity (Fig. 2.7).

Detection of displacements of interfaces Laser heating caused displacement of the rear side of the substrate can be measured by interferometric or piezoelectric probes (Fig. 2.25) (cf. Figs 3.13 and 3.15). Probing of the backside displacements is needed also for precise determination of vapour film thickness by an interferometric probe at the front side (Fig. 2.26).

34

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Laser pulse

Laser pulse

Oxidized metallic sample

Oxidized metallic sample

Interferometric probe

Piezoelectric transducer

(a)

(b)

Figure 2.25 Experimental setups for on-line monitoring of laser-induced oxide film removal process using: (a) interferometric probe and (b) piezoelectric probe [22]. © Elsevier.

Light source Beam splitter I1 I2 Mirror Effective bubble layer

Solid sample

Bubbles

Probe beam (diameter ~1 mm)

Water

Cr Quartz substrate

Figure 2.26

Principle of interferometrical measurement of vapour film thickness [88]. © Elsevier.

Detection of reflected and scattered light Level of surface contamination and the vaporization onset can be monitored by reflected or scattered light (Fig. 2.27). The dynamics of vaporization and ejected particles flow can be probed by deflection/scattering of a probe beam parallel to the surface (Fig. 2.28).

Surface plasmon probe A versatile high-resolution probe, sensitive to refractive index change of a liquid at a solid interface, is the surface plasmon probe (SPP) (Figs 2.29 and 2.30). Because the refractive index of a liquid or a gas depends on the density, pressure, and temperature, these parameters may be measured and mapped by SPP. The time resolution

35

Cleaning

FM BS 40/60 Nd:YAG

Dump BS 50/50

Attenuator

PD3 IF

p–pol. IF PD2

PBS

s–pol.

NDF M

L4

AFR Cell

PD1 L3

IF

L2

L1 Sample

F

Cover

Heater Ar laser M

Figure 2.27 Reflecting/scattering light probe for monitoring of vapour layer state [80]. The response time of the system to bubble nucleation was <1 ns. © World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd., republished with permission. Mirror

He–Ne laser Beam expander He

Lens

–N

e la

ser

Lens UV mirror

Beam homogenizer Photodiode Beam splitter

Energy meter

Lens Interference filter Knife edge

Sample Lens Interference filter

Excimer laser beam Photodiode

Figure 2.28 Schematic diagram of the experimental setup with optical reflectance probe and the photoacoustic deflection probe. The diameter of the deflection probe beam is exaggerated, it was ∼10 µm in the cited work. Probe beam deflection signal ϕ(t) is proportional to the time derivative of the pressure pulse at the probe beam position, ϕ(t)∝ ∂P/∂t. Pressure transients with peak values of order 1 bars were recorded by this technique. © American Institute of Physics (1996), reprinted with permission from Ref. [89].

36

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

PIN diode

KrF l 348 nm FWHM 25 ns

HeNe (optical reflectance probe) Quartz window

Cuvette filled with water

Ag

u HeNe (surface plasmon probe)

PIN diode

Figure 2.29 Combined optical reflectance and surface plasmon resonance probe for monitoring temperature, pressure, and vaporization transients [80]. The thickness of the Ag film was ≈50 nm. © World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd., reproduced with permission.

100 1 nm vapour film without vapour film

Reflectivity (%)

80

60

40

20

0 52.5

53.0

53.5 54.0 Angle of incidence u (deg)

54.5

Figure 2.30 Response of the surface plasmon wave sensor to vapour film generated by laser heating [80]. © World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd., reproduced with permission.

in micrometres and spatial resolution in nanoseconds may easily be achieved. Pressures are measured at least in range of 0.2–20 MPa [80]. The drawback is that a specially prepared target is needed for implementation of this method.

Using temperature dependence of optical properties of materials Leung et al., Zapka et al. [91, 92] used the temperature dependence of the transmittance and reflectance of amorphous silicon for determination of dynamic temperatures in steam laser cleaning process. Temperature dependence of refractive index, extinction coefficient, and optical gap energy for both amorphous and crystalline silicon in region 20–360◦ C and at 0.752 and 1.15 µm light wavelength are presented in the article by Do et al. [93].

Cleaning

37

2.5 Physics and Phenomenology of Liquids-Assisted Laser Removal of Particles from Surfaces 2.5.1 Detailed description of the standard steam cleaning process Common steam laser removal of particles form silicon wafers proceeds the following way [94]: • • • • • • • • • •

• • •

Condensation of a liquid film of micrometre thickness onto the sample surface to be cleaned just prior to laser irradiation. Short pulse laser irradiation, for example 20 ns from an excimer laser. The laser radiation is strongly absorbed within a surface layer of the sample. Heat is transferred from the substrate to the liquid film. Superheating of the liquid sheet at the interface between the liquid and solid surface. Heterogeneous bubble nucleation process at interface sites of the solid sample; particles can act as nucleation sites. Creation of a dense population of bubbles. Fast growth of the bubbles in the liquid sheet interface layer. Explosive blast wave generation by rapidly expanding vapour layer; the pressure pulse lasts ∼40 ns. At a time delay of 200–400 ns after the laser pulse the bulk of the liquid film is ejected as a liquid disc and accelerated to a lift-off velocity of the order of 40 m/s; during lift-off the liquid disc experiences an acceleration of order 109 –1010 m/s2 . The expanding vapour generates a lifting force on the particles; if the adhesion forces are overcome, the particles are removed from the surface. The liquid film and the ejected particles are propelled to macroscopic distances of more than 10 mm away from the surface before the atmosphere decelerates them. The redeposition of particles is avoided by placing the substrate face down or using a gas flow.

2.5.2 Optical effects The principal optical effects that may affect the liquid-assisted laser cleaning process are: • • • •

Reflection of the light at interfaces – air/liquid and liquid/substrate. The light intensity losses may be tens of percents (Section 7.1.2). In case of insufficient wetting, steam condensates into droplets. The curved surfaces of the droplets act as convex lenses, focusing the light. Light refraction on the curved surface of the meniscus near the particles (in case of capillary condensed liquid or at deposition of a very thin liquid layer) [95]. Focusing of light in transparent particles (SiO2 , PSL) (Fig. 2.31).

Light focusing in liquid droplets and in particles may cause a damage of the substrate. Figure 2.31 presents light rays in a transparent particle in geometrical optics approximation. Field concentration occurs also when particle’s diameter is comparable with the wavelength of the light; some examples of light field distribution may be found in the articles by Luk’yanchuk et al. [96] and by Arnold et al. [56]. According to Mosbacher et al. [97], Mie resonances of light field may enhance the light intensity at particles up to ∼30 times.

2.5.3 Acceleration and inertial effects Acceleration Acceleration of both laser-heated substrate and of particles, caused by their rapid thermal expansion, is one of the major factors in DLC, but it may affect the laser wet cleaning process as well [98]. In air, the detachment of particles from solid surfaces occurs at accelerations in order of ∼106 g [99]. Figure 2.32 shows measured surface displacements of a water-covered quartz plate at nanosecond pulsed laser irradiation. The surface accelerations range up to 5 × 105 m/s2 (50 000 g).

38

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

n

1

1.5

0.75 0.5

y/a

0.25 0.00 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

z/a

Surface displacement (nm)

Figure 2.31 Ray tracing for a big particle of diameter a >> λ with refractive index n = 1.5 [96]. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media. 30

(a)

20

55 61 64 67 68 (mJ/cm2)

10

0

0

200

400 600 Time (ns)

800

1000

Figure 2.32 Displacement of a cleaning target induced by an excimer laser pulse with liquid-film deposition (pure water) on the laser spot (248 nm, 24 ns). Recorded by an interferometric probe at backside of the substrate © American Institute of Physics (2003), reprinted with permission from Ref. [100]. Laser beam man Particle Fad

Substrate

SAW pulse

Figure 2.33 Interaction of particles with short-pulsed laser-generated surface waves. © American Institute of Physics (1998), reprinted with permission from Ref. [103].

Surface waves Rapid thermal expansion of laser-heated substrate may excite surface waves, which can accelerate the particles also outside of the irradiated area (Fig. 2.33). Detachment of 1–2 µm Al2 O3 particles by laser-generated surface waves have been investigated by Kolomenskii, Mikhalevich et al. [101, 102]. Particle detachment from

39

Cleaning

silicon surfaces occurred at some mJ/cm2 , thus at ≈100 times lower fluences in comparison with direct laser irradiation [103].

Inertial force Grigoropoulos and Kim [98] present a formula for scaling of the inertial force acting on a particle on a rapidly heated surface Fi ∝

4 πR 3 ρβdth T , 3 τ2

(2.50)

where R is the particle’s radius, ρ is the particle’s density, β is the volume expansion coefficient of the substrate, T is the temperature increase, τ is laser pulse length, and dth is thermal penetration depth, √ dth = ατ =

λτ , ρC

where α is the thermal diffusivity, λ is thermal conductivity, ρ is density, and C is the material specific heat.

2.5.4 Heating and phase change (absorbing substrate, non-absorbing liquid) Because the laser spot diameter is usually much larger than the thermal penetration depth of the substrate, heat transfer may be considered 1D.Temperature transients and temperature distributions in laser cleaning situations were calculated by Yavas et al. [104], Park et al. [95] Kim et al. [88] (Figs 2.34 and 2.35). The temperatures in (Figs 2.34 and 2.35) were calculated without taking heat resistance of interfaces into account. For silicon and water/IPA interfaces the heat transfer coefficients were measured by Leiderer et al. [80]: hH2 O = 3 × 107 W/m2 K, hIPA = 1 × 107 W/m2 K. Rapid heating, ∼1010 K/s, drives the liquid into superheated state (see Section 7.2.3). Below critical temperature, the vaporization (bubble nucleation) is a statistical process that depends also on surface properties. Theoretical and experimental determination of the superheating temperature and of vapour dynamics in real situations has been the topic of many investigations (see Table 2.5).

250 at the surface at 0.5 m from the surface at 2.0 m from the surface

Temperature ( C)

200

150

100

50

0

0

100

200

300

400

Time (ns)

Figure 2.34 Computed temperature transients at different locations inside a crystalline silicon irradiated with a KrF excimer laser (λ = 248 nm, τ = 16 ns) [95]. Heat transfer to the ambient was neglected. © IEEE (1994), reproduced with permission.

40

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Surface temperature (K)

550

(a)

70

40

500

50

80

60

(mJ/cm2)

450 400 350 Laser pulse

300 250

0

200

400 Time (ns)

600

800

60

14 PZT I OPT I PZT II OPT II PZT III OPT III PZT IV OPT IV PZT V OPT V

12 10 8.0 6.0

50 40 30 20 10

4.0 2.0 0.0

Bubble nucleation threshold 0

20

40

60

80

100

Reflectance drop (%)

Maximum pressure (bar) (absolute)

Figure 2.35 Calculated temperature increase at the Cr–water interface heated by an excimer-laser pulse of different fluences [88]. The dotted line shows the temporal shape of the laser-pulse intensity in arbitrary units (triangular pulse with peak intensity at t = 17 ns and width of 48 ns). © Elsevier.

0 10 120

Fluence (mJ/cm2)

Figure 2.36 The pressure pulse amplitudes (water on chrome) plotted as a function of excimer laser fluence (248 nm, 24 ns). The data produced by piezoelectric transducer are represented by the symbols labelled with ‘PZT’ and the data by the deflection probe are represented by the symbols labelled with ‘OPT’. The experiments were repeated 5 times as indicated by the Roman numerics. The amplitude of the optical specular reflectance drop is also plotted with the dashed line. The bubble nucleation threshold is marked by the arrow. The experimental setup is shown in (Fig. 2.28). © American Institute of Physics (1996), reprinted with permission from Ref. [89].

For nanosecond laser pulses, the following observations have been made (transparent liquid, opaque surface, water of water–alcohol mixtures): • • • • •

Superheated liquid layer thickness is some hundreds of nanometres.[104] Embryonic nucleation starts immediately after the temperature exceeds boiling temperature. [105, 106] Superheating temperatures range up to 250◦ C on atomically smooth silicon surfaces; on rough surfaces the superheating temperatures may be 2 times lower. [97, 80]; Bubble-growth induced pressures reach several MPa [89, 107] (Fig. 2.36). A vapour layer is formed near the heated surface that lifts a liquid disc from the surface (Fig. 2.37).

Both high-speed photography (Fig. 2.37) and molecular dynamics simulations (Figs 2.38 and 7.8) have revealed that in a typical steam laser cleaning process a liquid disc is ejected from the surface.

41

Cleaning

OTISCE T8000.IAX1

Figure 2.37 Image of liquid disc ejected from laser-heated surface. Snapshot was taken 8 µs after laser pulse [108]. © Koninklijke Brill NV, republished with permission.

Figure 2.38 Snapshots of molecular dynamics simulations of a 3.4 nm water film with 6.46 nm diameter particles on a rigid gold substrate, suddenly heated from 48.4 K to 193.6 K [109]. From left to right, the elapsed time is 0.22, 0.44, 0.66, 0.88 ps, respectively. Simulations with identical initial conditions did not result in particles removal in any case: the upper row shows a simulation where there was particle removal, while the lower row shows a simulation, at the same temperature, where particle removal did not occur, cf. Fig. 7.8. Reproduced with kind permission from Springer Science and Business Media.

Lang and Leiderer [107] measured the dynamics of the ejected liquid film by optical reflectivity with high precision (2 nm spatial and 0.2 ns time resolution) (Figs 2.39 and 2.40). Under assumption that the vapour follows the equation of state PV n = constant, where n is the polytropic exponent, and neglecting the compression of the liquid, the following equation of motion of the liquid layer was proposed [107]: P0 d2 d(t) = · dt 2 ρ·h

d0 d(t)

n −

Patm , ρ·h

(2.51)

where P0 is the initial pressure under the film, Patm is the atmospheric pressure, d0 is the initial distance of the film from the surface after the vapour formation, ρ is the density of liquid, and h is the thickness of the liquid film. For a case of an isopropanol film, the fitting of the experimental data using initial conditions d(t = 7.1 ns) = 8.7 nm and v(t = 7.1 ns) = 0 m/s, yielded P0 = (4.9 ± 0.2) MPa and n = 1.00, indicating an isothermal process.

42

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

2500

d (nm)

2000 1500 1000 500 0 0

20

40

60

80

110

120

140

160

t (ns)

Figure 2.39 Trajectory of an isopropanol film after laser heating of the substrate [107]. The solid line represents a parabol fit to the data points and corresponds to a constant acceleration of the film. © Institute of Physics, reproduced with permission.

120 100

d (nm)

80 60 40 20 0 6

7

8 t (ns)

9

10

Figure 2.40 Magnification of the first few nanoseconds of the ejection process in Fig. 2.39 [107]. The solid line corresponds to the same fit as in Figure 2.39. After the formation of a vapour layer in the first 700 ps (6.4–7.1 ns), the overlying liquid is accelerated away from the substrate for about 8.6 ns until the expansion causes the pressure under the film to drop below the pressure above. © Institute of Physics, reproduced with permission.

Ejection force Lu et al. [5, 110] estimated the force excerted by expanding vapours on a particle by Fc = πR 2 2ρc(Pv − P∞ )vf ,

(2.52)

where R is the particle radius, ρ is liquid density, c is transmit speed of the stress wave, Pv is vapour pressure inside the bubble, P∞ is ambient pressure, v is expansion velocity of the vapour, and f is volume fraction of vapour. The assumptions of the model were: (i) bubble generation is an inertia-controlled process; (ii) in the region near the liquid/substrate interface, the vapour layer created by the evaporation of the liquid acts as a plane piston, compressing the adjacent liquid and generating stress waves; (iii) the value of the volume fraction of

43

Cleaning

vapour inside the superheated liquid layer is less than 1; (iv) the expansion velocity of the vapour layer is equal to the growth velocity of the bubbles; and (v) the pressure inside the vapour layer is equal to the saturation vapour pressure of the superheated vapour layer due to the non-uniform temperature distribution in the liquid film (citation from the article by Wu et al. [111]). Wu et al. [111] presented a modified version of Eq. (2.52): Fc = πR 2

4

8 2 2 ρc f (Pv − P∞ )3 . 3

(2.53)

The same authors presented also a different laser wet cleaning theory, based on a model where the lasergenerated bubble growth in the fluid medium generates an explosive blast wave, and the particle is lifted by the pressure of this wave after reflection from the substrate surface. They found for upper limit of the particle removal force due to bubble generation:

where Prefl =

Fc = πR 2 Prefl ,

(2.54)

Pshock (8Pshock − P∞ ) ; Pshock + 4P∞

(2.55)

with notations: Prefl is reflected from the substrate surface overpressure and Pshock is shock-generated pressure. The other assumptions of the model were: (1) the shock-generated pressure is approximately equal to the vapour pressure in the vapour layer at the water/substrate interface, i.e. Pshock ≈ Pv (T ); T is the temperature in the vapour layer; (2) the temperature in the vapour layer is approximately equal to the temperature at the substrate surface; (3) the pressure inside the vapour layer is equal to the saturation vapour pressure of the superheated vapour layer due to the non-uniform temperature distribution in the liquid film and (4) the vapour layer thickness, limited by the thickness of the superheated liquid layer, may exceed the particle radius since the thermal penetration depth in water is of the order of 1 µm (citation from the article by Wu et al. [111]). A discussion of these ejection force models is given in the article by Leiderer et al. [80] It is pointed to, that the high superheating temperatures at smooth silicon surface, the finite temperature jump between the substrate and the liquid, and the thickness of the liquid film should be taken into account in the future models.

2.5.5 Hydrodynamic effects In the pioneering reports about water-assisted laser cleaning by Assendel’ft et al. [15, 16], laser-generated acoustic waves were used for removal of the particles form solid surfaces. Later, in studies of laser-generated bubbles collapse assisted particle removal from surfaces, the high-speed near-surface flow was found to be responsible for the cleaning process [18, 19]. Near-surface flow is also the main factor in megasonic cleaning. Zhang et al. [112] give following criterion for particles detachment from surfaces by a boundary flow (see notations in Fig. 2.41): RM = 1.339 ·

FD R > 1, Fa a

(2.56)

where RM is adhesion resisting moment, FD is the drag force, R is the radius of the particle, Fa is the adhesion force, and a is contact radius. Drag force on a spherical particle in a slow linear shear flow is expressed by: FD = 10.2πµR · U (R)

(2.57)

and for near wall sub-layer flow by: FD =

32µ (Re ∗ )2 , ρ

(2.58)

44

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Fel

U

Mr Fd 1.4R

R a

Ma Fa

Figure 2.41 Conditions at a particle in a surface flow. U is the liquid velocity, Fa is the adhesion force, Fel is the elastic force, Fd is the drift force, Ma is the adhesion moment, and Mr is the flow caused rotation moment.

where µ is the fluid viscosity, U (R) is the fluid velocity at a distance of R from the wall, ρ is the fluid density, and Re∗ is the shear Reynolds number and is given by: Re ∗ =

RU ∗ , v

where v is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid and U ∗ is the friction velocity:

2τ , U∗ = ρ

(2.59)

(2.60)

where τ is the shear stress, τ = F/A. A review of particle-wall hydrodynamics is given by Kim and Lawrence [113].

2.5.6 Particles removal threshold and efficiency in steam laser cleaning Threshold fluence Veiko and Shakhno [13] provided the following first-order criteria for particles removal thresholds for different situations in light transmission/absorption.

(a) Absorbing particle at a transparent substrate ρp cp hp (Tb − Tin ) , εth = Ap

(2.61)

where εth is the cleaning threshold, ρc is density of the particle, cp is specific heat of the particle, hp is the height of the particle, Ap is the average absorption coefficient of the particle, which includes the influence of the angle of incidence, Tb is boiling temperature of the liquid, and Tin is the initial temperature.

(b) Transparent particle at an absorbing substrate Particles detachment occurs when the substrate surface temperature Tm exceeds a critical value Tth , given by relation: √ as τ Tm − Tb · + R = hmin , (2.62) γ Tm − Tin where as is substrate, τ is laser pulse duration, γ is laser radiation absorbance, R is the height of unevenness of rough surface, and hmin is the bubble critical size.

45

Cleaning

0.1

0.3 1 3 Particle diameter (m)

10

0

Surface damage threshold

Cleaning threshold

Particle density

After cleaning

Cleaning efficiency (%)

100 Before cleaning

0

0.1

0.2 0.3 Laser fluence (J/cm2)

(a)

0.4

(b)

Figure 2.42 Schematical dependences of steam laser cleaning efficiency on particle size (a) and on laser fluence (b). (Schematically after Héroux et al.,[82] Meunier et al.,[85] Leiderer et al. [80]). For silicon the surface damage (melting) threshold is ∼275 mJ/cm2 (λ = 532 nm, τ = 8 ns) [115].

(c) Absorbing particle at an absorbing substrate The nature of the particle detachment process is judged by a criterion, ϕ: √ Ap a p ϕ= √ , A s as

(2.63)

where as is thermal diffusivity of the particle and As is absorption coefficient of the substrate. If ϕ > 1, the situation reduces to case (a), if ϕ < 1, to case b). Leiderer, Mosbacher et al. [114, 79, 115] have proved experimentally that the threshold fluence of steam laser cleaning of silicon wafers (110 mJ/cm2 ) is independent of particles material, size, and shape. Such universal threshold indicates that the particle removal forces are far larger than the adhesion forces. The universal threshold for SLC differs from bubble nucleation threshold for bulk water–silicon system, 80 mJ/cm2 (single 1064 nm pulse) [80].

Cleaning efficiency The typical steam laser cleaning efficiency dependences on particle size and on laser fluence for nanosecond laser pulses are given in (Fig. 2.42). The cleaning efficiency starts to decrease for particle size <100 nm. However, SLC is capable to remove particles as small as 60 nm with 90 per cent efficiency [80]. Laser cleaning efficiencies under concrete conditions can be found inTable 2.5. As a rule, cleaning efficiencies of 90–100 per cent have been achieved by a few cleaning cycles at laser fluences well under the substrate damage level (Fig. 2.43).

2.5.7 Effect of capillary condensed water in ‘dry’ laser cleaning Even if no liquid/steam has been applied, some amount of capillary condensed water between the particles and the substrate is present in most cases (Fig. 2.11). While heated by laser, the liquid vaporizes and provides an extra impulse to the particles (Fig. 2.44). Leiderer et al. [115] compared the laser cleaning thresholds and efficiencies in high vacuum and in ambient atmosphere. The cleaning threshold was lowered from ∼280 in vacuum to ∼120 mJ/cm2 in moist air. (500 nm SiO2 particles on silicon, laser 248 nm, 30 ns.) Figure 2.45 shows photographs of silicon surface, laser irradiated with a dust particles in vacuum and in ambient atmosphere. Table 2.5 presents a chronological reference of research about liquids-assisted laser removal of particles from solid surfaces, and Table 2.6 about liquids-assisted laser removal of surface layers from solids.

46

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

600 Partice densities (cm2)

CML Dry cleaning

500

Steam cleaning

400 300

SiO2

200 100

Al2O3

Al2O3 SiO2

PSL

0 Before cleaning

After cleaning

Figure 2.43 Particle densities before (grey bars) and after (white bars) laser cleaning. During DLC, the laser fluences for PSL, SiO2 , Al2 O3 , and CML were 326, 314, 326, and 353 mJ/cm2 , and 2, 4, 4, and 2 cleaning scanning cycles were used, respectively. During steam cleaning, the laser fluences for SiO2 and Al2 O3 were 180 and 154 mJ/cm2 , respectively, and 4 cleaning scanning cycles were used. PSL stands for polystyrene latex and CML for carboxylate-modified latex. Substrate–100 silicon. The diameters of the particles ranged from 0.1 to 2 µm. Laser used: KrF, 248 nm, 22 ns. © SPIE (1999), reproduced with permission from Ref. [85].

SiO2/Si

Threshold, fcl (mJ/cm2)

VAC RH

1.5Tbs 102 Tcl Tms

102

103 Radius, r (nm)

Figure 2.44 Comparison between the cleaning thresholds at 248 nm in vacuum ( filled symbols), and in RH = 94 per cent–97 per cent (open circles) [56]. Solid curve: threshold based on the evaporation of the substrate; dashed curve: threshold based on the critical temperature for water; Dash dotted curve: melting of the substrate. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media. Analogous diagram for polystyrene particles on silicon is presented in the article by Mosbacher et al. [97].

47

Cleaning

(a)

1 cm (b)

Figure 2.45 Photographs of a silicon surface with dust particles after exposure to 50 laser pulses: (a) in ambient air and (b) in vacuum. The difference in ablation craters may be attributed to the presence/absence of capillary water. © American Institute of Physics (1998), reprinted with permission from Ref. [103].

Table 2.5

Liquids-assisted laser removal of particles from surfaces and related experiments.

Substrates

Particles +

Liquids

Lasers and beam parameters +

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

n-Si [100]

K ions; also Na+ , Cu and Fe ions

Water

Ar , 514 nm, 100 mW/cm2

Si wafers were contaminated in salt solutions

Metal ions desorption from silicon surface under laser irradiation was observed; the desorption mechanism obviously involves photoexcitation of Si and subsequent recombination of excited electrons with metal ions

Beklemyshev (1987) [116]

Si

Phenol resin (photo-resist), 0.1–1 µm

Water

CO2 , 100 ns, 0.3 J, focused

Substrate immersed vertically or horizontally into water, water layer 1–10 mm

Particles were removed from surface due to acoustic wave generated by absorption of the laser light on the free surface of water; calculation of acoustic pressure needed for desorption of particles: 0.02–38 MPa (particle size 1–0.1 µm)

Assendel’ft (1988) [15, 16]

n-Si and p-Si

Phenol resin (photo-resist), 0.1–1 µm

Water

Ar+ , 488 nm, some mW/cm2 , some minutes

Substrates immersed into water

Due to laser irradiation the concentration of particles decreased ≈3 times (initial concentration 1.5 × 104 cm−2 ); conductivity type of the substrate did not affect considerably

Assendel’ft (1988) [117]

Si (111)

Water Al2 O3 , different sizes in micrometer range

CO2 , 10.6 µm, 1 µs total pulse length, 30 J/cm2

Fogged and liquid droplet film formed by water vapour condensation

Most of the particles were removed after 5 water adsorption–laser irradiation cycles; also capillary condensed moisture from laboratory air gave the same effect; without water film the particles were not removed; absorption length of laser light at 10.6 µm in water is 20 µm

Imen (1990) [118], (1991) [119]

Si (100)

Al2 O3 , 5 and 9.5 µm; PS 1 µm

Water

CO2 , 9.6 and 10.6 µm, 100 ns spike, ≈1µs tail, 2.63–13.15 J/cm2

Water vapour carried by N2 was blown onto the surface; 6 s vapour pulse, 3 s pause

Vaporization of water layer ejected the particles from surface; thresholds for particles removal: ≈2.2 J/cm2 at 9.6 µm wavelength and ≈1.5 J/cm2 at 10.6 µm

Lee (1991) [120], (1992) [121], (1993) [122]

Si (SC), PI, photoresist

Au,Al2 O3 , Si, latex; 0.1–10 µm

Water + 10% methanol, ethanol or IPA

KrF, 248 nm, 16 ns, 30–300 mJ/cm2 , Er:YAG, 2.94 µm, 10 ns–1 ms

Liquid film of few micrometer thick formed from pulsed vapour jet; film lasts ≈0.5 s (evaporates)

248 nm light (does not absorb in liquid but in the substrate) provided more efficient particle removal than 2.94 µm light absorbing in water surface; 10% ethanol solution was more effective than pure ethanol; cleaning efficiency of 10 ns pulses was much better than of 1 µs pulses, 1 ms pulses did not remove the particles at all at the same fluence

Tam (1991) [123], (1992) [3], Zapka (1991) [124], (1992) [125], (1993) [91, 92]

a-Si film (0.1 and 1 µm) on quartz

No

Water, ethanol, methanol, IPA, water + IPA

KrF, 248 nm, 16 ns, 8–78 mJ/cm2

Condensed from vapour liquid film on substrate

Studies of front side optical reflectance and transmission of liquid covered sample during KrF laser irradiation, estimation of substrate temperature from temperature dependence of a-Si optical parameters at 752 nm; spontaneous bubble nucleation times were 150–300 ns after laser pulse (water–IPA), independent on laser fluence in the used fluence range; solid–liquid interface temperatures were estimated to be up to 400◦ C at fluences up to 30 mJ/cm2

Water, IPA, ethanol, methanol, water + IPA

KrF, 248 nm, 16 ns

≈5 mm liquid layer above specimen

Transient reflectance and scattering measurements Yavas (1993) using a probe beam; s- and p-reflectances [126], (1994) computed for a case of 100 nm foamy layer [104] (various fractional volume of bubbles) at solid–liquid interface using Maxwell–Garnett theory; determined experimentally phase explosion thresholds range from 14.9 mJ/cm2 (ethanol) to 27.4 mJ/cm2 (water); the thresholds correlate well with boiling temperatures of liquids

Water

CO2 , 9.6 µm, 100 ns spike, ≈1 µs tail, 2.63–13.15 J/cm2

Condensed from vapour water film on substrate

Studies of deflection/scattering of probe laser beam (488 nm, parallel to substrate surface, 1.2–5 mm above) by shock wave and ejected vapour/particles; threshold for shock wave generation was 4.3 J/cm2 (particles removal threshold was 2.2 J/cm2 ), the shock wave energy was estimated to be 1.8 mJ (surface irradiation 30 mJ corresp. 7.9 J/cm2 ) and velocity up to 620 m/s at fluences up to 1.5 J/cm2

Lee (1993) [122, 127]

PI, a-C, a-Si

Water, IPA, ethanol, methanol

KrF, 248 nm, 16 ns, up to ≈62 mJ/cm2

Target immersed into liquid

Studies of photodeflection of a probe beam (633 nm) parallel to the target’s surface at distance ≈0.4 mm; longitudinal acoustic wave echos were found to be reliable indicators of liquid explosion

Do (1993) [128]

Cr layer (0.2 µm) on sapphire (250 µm)

Water, IPA, ethanol, methanol, water + IPA

KrF, 248 nm, 16 ns, up to 40 mJ/cm2

≈5 mm liquid layer above specimen

Transient optical reflectance/scattering and acoustic measurements; in addition to results reported above ( Yavas (1993) [126]), temperature evolution and temperature profile calculated

Yavas (1994) [104]

Cr layer (0.2 µm) on sapphire

Si

PS (1 µm),Al2 O3 (1, 5 and 9.5 µm)

Leung (1992) [90], Zapka (1993) [90, 92]

(Continued )

Table 2.5

(Continued)

Substrates

Particles

Liquids

Lasers and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

(1D-model); transient acoustic signals presented (oscillations at substrate resonance frequency), superheated liquid layer thickness estimated to be some hundreds of nanometer and bubble growth velocities ≈1.9 m/s (IPA) and ≈3.6 m/s (water) Cr

Si

Al2 O3 (as example)

Cr layer (0.15 µm) on poly-Si (0.1 µm) on fused quartz; bulk Ni Al-coated (80–100 nm) BK7 and Zerodur

Quartz sand (some few 100 µm), finger-prints, water-marks

Water, methanol, water + 0.5% NaCl (liquids in contact with atmosphere)

KrF, 248 nm, 1 ns

Sample immersed into water, inclined window

Long-term (hundreds of microseconds) ‘memory effect’ of acoustic cavitation observed: after collapse of laser heating generated bubble obviously metastable ultramicroscopic bubbles (nuclei) remain at solid–liquid interface and decrease the acoustic cavitation threshold; temporal decay of the memory effect reminds a diffusion process; the effect is enhanced in cases of NaCl additive to water and methanol, but N2 does not affect the effect

Yavas (1994) [10]

Water + 8% IPA

KrF, 248 nm, 16 ns, up to 300 Hz, up to 400 mJ/cm2 (typically 110 mJ/cm2 )

Condensed from vapour liquid film on substrate

A liquid-assisted laser tool for removal of particulate contaminants from surfaces is described; galvanometrically scanned beam provides cleaning rate over 200 cm2 /min; visual substrate damage was not observed even for 4 h irradiation at 150 mJ/cm2 , 100 Hz; calculated Si surface peak temperature 220◦ C (110 mJ/cm2 ); heated Si layer thickness ≈1 µm; induced in Si thermal stresses ≈70 MPa

Park (1994) [95, 129], Tam (1998) [86]

Water

KrF, 248 nm, 24 ns, up to ≈110 J/cm2

Target immersed into water

Photoacoustic deflection of a probe beam parallel to target’s surface was used for pressure measurements; at bubble nucleation threshold (49.8 J/cm2 ) the pressure was ≈0.37 MPa; at 100 J/cm2 the pressure reaches ≈1 MPa (Fig. 2.36)

Park (1996) [89], Grigoropoulos (2002) [98]

Atmospheric moisture, ethanol

193, 248, 308, 351 and 355 nm, 30 ns and 50–200 ns, 1–100 Hz, 0.05–1 J/cm2

Homogenized laser beam, 4 × 4 mm2 ; cleaning efficiency was determined from optical reflection

Optimal cleaning regime: 248 nm, 30 ns, <5 Hz, 160 mJ/cm2 ; after 3–5 laser pulses 80% of mirrors reflectivity was recovered; at high laser fluences fragmentation of particles was observed; in dry air the particles were not removed; ethanol film on surface enhanced the cleaning efficiency

Mann (1996) [6]

Water

CO2 , 10.6 µm, 0.25 µs, 0.9 J, 0.5–25 J/cm2

Surface to be cleaned mounted downwards, condensed from vapour film on substrate

Particle size distributions before and after cleaning presented, down to 0.1 µm particles were removed, but not all; optimal cleaning regimes: Si – 2.9–3.2 J/cm2 (threshold 0.65 J/cm2 ),Au and SiO2 – 3.2–6.7 J/cm2 ,Al >6.2 J/cm2 ; MgO particles were hard to remove from silicon surface obviously due to strongly positive ζ-potential of MgO in water; water drops on surface may act as lenses and cause high local light intensities

Héroux (1996) [82]

Hydrophilic Al2 O3 SiO2 on Si (0.1 µm), fumed silica (0.1–0.2 µm), PSL (0.1 µm)

Water

CO2 , 10.6 µm, 0.2 µs, 0.95 J, 0.5–3 J/cm2

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

Particle size distributions before and after cleaning presented; optimal cleaning regimes: 0.5–1.5 J/cm2 (SiO2 , PSL), 0.8–1 J/cm2 (Al2 O3 ); at >1.5 J/cm2 fluence optically visible surface damage observed; Al2 O3 particles were harder to remove from obviously due to positive ζ-potential of Al2 O3 while SiO2 surface has negative ζ-potential

Boughaba (1996) [130]

Cr layer (0.15 µm) on 0.35 µm p-Si; quartz substrate

Water, methanol

KrF, 248 nm, 16 ns, 15–82 mJ/cm2

Static pressure up to 100 at%

Transient temperature studies at laser irradiation of solid surface in water, using temperature dependence of p-Si reflectance (from both front and rear side, enabling more precise measurements in comparison with Leung (1992) [90]); embryonic nucleation starts immediately after temperature exceeds boiling temperature; max. superheat temperatures (bubble growth threshold) was measured to be ≈100◦ C (42.2 mJ/cm2 ); vaporized mass in of order 1%

Park (1996) [105, 106],

Ag layer (80 nm) on quartz

Water

KrF, 248 nm, 25 ns, up to 62 mJ/cm2

Arrangement for measuring transient pressures on nanosecond time scale using surface plasmons described; laser irradiation of solid–liquid interface generated pressures 1.8 MPa at 43 mJ/cm2 and 2.8 MPa at 62 mJ/cm2

Schilling (1996) [131], Leiderer (1998) [114]

Ag layer (53 nm)

Water

KrF, 248 nm, 25 ns, up to 60 mJ/cm2 , spot 1×1 cm2

Optical front-and rear-side transient reflection (SPP) studies; bubble nucleation was observed to start at 10.5 mJ/cm2 (superheating 11◦ C); fractional volume of bubbles in the superheated layer was estimated (using Maxwell–Garnett’s theory) to be ≈0.05–0.1; bubble-growth induced pressures were measured to range ≈1–5 MPa with a pressure pulse length ≈40 ns

Yavas (1997) [132]

Si (100), 100 nm layers of SiO2 ,Al and Au

Al2 O3 , MgO, SiC, CeO2 , BC, diamond (sizes 0.1–10 µm)

Target immersed into water, vessel covered by window

(Continued )

Table 2.5

(Continued)

Substrates

Particles

Cr layer (0.2 µm) and Ag layer (53 nm, for SPP)

Liquids

Lasers and beam parameters

Water, IPA, ethanol, methanol, water + IPA

KrF, 248 nm, 16 ns, up to 45 mJ/cm2

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Bubble nucleation studies by optical reflection, scattering, piezoelectric transducer and SPP; in water, embryonic bubbles nucleate at 9.5 mJ/cm2 (superheating 11◦ C); bubbles growth velocities: 4 m/s (water), 2.2 m/s (alcohols)

Yavas˛ (1997) [133], Leiderer (1998) [114]

Si

1–9 nm

Water

CO2 , 10.6 µm, 0.2 µs, up to 2 J/cm2

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

100% particle removal required 5–9 cleaning cycles; surface optical reflectivity measurement proved to be suitable for monitoring water film and droplets on surface

Allen (1997) [4]

Si wafer

Silica and PS spheres, 800 nm

Water + alcohol

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 7 ns, up to 180 mJ/cm2

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

Cleaning threshold 110 mJ/cm2 independent of particles material and size (down to 60 nm); at 170 mJ/cm2 , 90% of particles were removed with the first laser shot; surface damage threshold 320 mJ/cm2

Leiderer (1998) [114]

NiP

Al2 O3 (1 µm)

IPA

KrF, 248 nm, 23 ns

A IPA drop was applied onto surface

Particles removal threshold ≈30 mJ/cm2 ; at 50 mJ/cm2 ≈90% of particles were removed; theoretical estimation of bubble expansion generated force on particles and of cleaning threshold

Lu (1998) [5, 134, 135], (1999) [136], (2000) [137, 138], (2001) [110]

Si wafer

SiO2 (0.3 µm)

Water

Air saturated with moisture

In moisture saturated air ≈88% of particles were removed contra 12% in dry air

DeJule (1998) [139]

Si wafer

Fe2 O3 (0.5–2 µm)

Water, 2 µm layer

KrF, 248 nm, 22 ns, up to 200 mJ/cm2

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

At 200 mJ/cm2 , 90% of ≥0.3 µm particles were removed from surface; without water layer, no considerable cleaning occurred up to laser fluences 350 mJ/cm2

Beaudoin (1998) [140]

Si (100), thickness 380 µm; Fused silica

Al2 O3 (1–10 µm)

Capillary condensed water or opaque liquid layer (0.1 mm)

N2 , 337 nm, 10 ns, up to 50 Hz, 9 mJ, illuminated area 0.15 × 0.8 mm

SAW Rayleigh pulse of wavelength of 100 µm was formed

Theoretical and experimental investigation of surface acoustic waves (SAW) in Si wafers, generated by laser irradiation; accelerations needed for particles removal can be achieved at laser fluences of some mJ/cm2 (≈100 times less fluence needed than at direct irradiation); SAW-assisted cleaning in vacuum and in ambient air compared; in vacuum the cleaning process was more efficient

Kolomenskii (1998) [103]

Glass

Al2 O3 (0,1, 0.3, 1, 3 and 10 µm)

Capillary condensed water obviously present

2ω-Cu-vapour, 255.3 nm, 35 ns, in kHz range, up to 0.5 J/cm2

Focused laser beam, spot Threshold fluences needed for removal of <5 µm <0.1 mm;Al2 O3 particles particles were up to >1000 times lower than were partly agglomerated predicted by 1D thermal expansion theories and did not depend considerably on particle size; capillary condensed water may be a cause of lowering the cleaning threshold

p-Si (100)

Si3 N4 (0.2–2 µm), SiO2 (0.3–1 µm)

Water

KrF, 248 nm, ≈30 ns, up to 100 Hz. up to 300 mJ/cm2

Some samples were held in 100% RH air for some days

For 1 µm SiO2 particles, the RH of air during samples storage (40% or 100%) did not affect the cleaning efficiency considerably, but the removal of 0.3 µm particles (both Si3 N4 and SiO2 ) was many times more efficient for 100% RH case; laser beam angle of incidence of 10◦ provided highest efficiency of particles removal

Vereecke (1999) [142, 143]

NiP

Al2 O3 (0.3 µm)

IPA (8%) + water

Nd:YAG, 355 and 1064 nm, 6 ns, up to 86 mJ/cm2

Incident angle of laser beam 40◦ , liquid film condensed from vapour

Thresholds of complete removal of particles (10 cleaning cycles) were 86 mJ/cm2 (1064 nm) and 63 mJ/cm2 (355 nm); damage threshold was 100 mJ/cm2 for dry and 115 mJ/cm2 for wet surface; optical reflectance, photoacoustic deflection and high-speed photographical studies; pressure wavefront velocity was 350 m/s (355 nm, 51.9 mJ/cm2 ), ejection of multiple jets from liquid-covered surface was observed

She (1999) [144], Grigoropoulos (2002) [98, 145]

Si

Al2 O3 (0.3 and 1 µm)

Ethanol, acetone

248 nm, 80–120 J/cm2

0.1 µm liquid film

First-order theory of particles lift-off force presented, lying on bubble growth induced pressure and taking into account van der Waals and capillary adhesion forces; laser fluence dependence of lift-off force analysed, cleaning threshold fluences calculated: for 0.3 µm particles the threshold is lower in ethanol (110 J/cm2 ), for 1 µm particles the threshold is lower in acetone (80 J/cm2 )

Lu (1999) [146], (2001) [110]

Si (100)

PSL (0.1 µm), agglomerated Al2 O3 (0.1–0.2 µm) and SiO2 (0.2 µm), Fe2 O3

Water

KrF, 248 nm, 22 ns, up to 200 J/cm2

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

Steam-assisted cleaning in more effective and has lower threshold fluence than dry cleaning; for particles <0.3 µm the efficiency is lower than for greater particles (aggregates); removal of spherical particles is more effective than of irregularly shaped ones; adhesion forces and bubble removal forces calculated, taking into account van der Waals forces and hydrogen bonds; adhesion and removal forces (not in Wu (2000) [111]) dependence on particles size presented

Meunier (1999) [85], Wu (1999) [45], (2000) [111]

Halfpenny (1999) [141]

(Continued )

Table 2.5

(Continued)

Substrates Particles

Liquids

Si

PSL (0.1–3 µm), SiO2 (0.1–0.2 µm, agglomerated)

Water

Si

SiO2 ,Al2 O3 , PSL

Water, alcohols

Si wafer

PS, 800 nm

Water + 10% IPA

Lasers and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

KrF, 248 nm, 22 ns, up to 187 J/cm2

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

SiO2 particles 0.1–0.2 µm of size were efficiently removed, in contrast to DLC; photoacoustic measurements using a piezoelectric sensor on backside of the substrate were performed; in case of water film, the acoustic wave amplitude was twice greater than without film, and contained a higher frequency component; comparison of adhesion forces for dry and steam cleaning cases performed

Wu (1999) [147]

Theoretical evaluation of particles adhesion forces: hydrogen bond force is dominant in inorganic particles adhesion to hydrophilic silicon surface; hydrogen bonds make SiO2 and Al2 O3 particles harder to remove than PSL particles; hydrogen bonds formed with alcohol molecules have stronger interaction energies than with water

Wu (1999) [45]

For nanosecond pusles, the cleaning fluence threshold was 50 mJ/cm2 , independent of the pulse durations (2.5 ns and 8 ns) and the wavelengths (532 and 583 nm) used; for 30 ps pulses (583 nm) this threshold lowered to 20 mJ/cm2 ; both cleaning thresholds were ≈3 times lower than the melting thresholds for these laser parameters; cleaning efficiencies >90% were reached for both pulse durations

Mosbacher (1999) [148], Oltra (2000) [25]

In addition to results presented in Mosbacher (1999) [148], this work contains a description of a surface plasmon microscopy arrangement for observation of pressure distribution over the substrate’s area

Oltra (2000) [25]

A sharp threshold of the steam cleaning process at 110 mJ/cm2 (λ = 532 nm, FWHM = 7 ns) was observed, which was independent of the particles size and material; an efficiency above 90% after 20 cleaning steps was reached at a laser fluence of 170 mJ/cm2 ; experiments with irregularly shaped alumina particles exhibited the same threshold as for spherical particles

Mosbacher (2000) [79], Leiderer (2000) [115]

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 2.5 and 8 ns

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

Dye, 583 nm, 30 ps and 2.5 ns

Si wafer

Al2 O3 (300 nm mean), PS (60, 480, 500 and 800 nm), SiO2 (500 and 800 nm)

Water + 25% IPA, 200–400 nm film

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 7 ns, spot ≈1 mm

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

References

Si wafer

Al2 O3 , PS, SiO2 (see Mosbacher (2000) [79])

Si (3 µm SiO2 (250, thick mask, 500 and C-coated) 1200 nm); Al2 O3 (0,2–2 µm)

Water + 10% IPA

Various sources

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

In addition to results presented in Mosbacher (1999) [148], (2000) [79], this work contains a comparison of cleaning efficiencies at various fluences in vacuum and ambient air, calculated optical fields at particles and field concentration caused surface damage micrographs

Leiderer (2000) [115]

Water

KrF, 248 nm

Condensed from vapour film on substrate

Particles were effectively removed from masks; threshold fluences for Al2 O3 particles were 280–350 mJ/cm2 (XeCl laser) and 260–320 mJ/cm2 (KrF laser)

Zapka (2000) [149]

Studies of surface damage at DLC due to light intensity concentration at particles, damage may occur even at cleaning threshold; liquid-assisted laser cleaning is free of many of DLC problems: lower threshold fluence, field concentration avoidable by selection of laser wavelength or refractive index of the liquid

Mosbacher (2001) [11]

XeCl, 308 nm

Thresholds of wet laser removal of particles from surfaces Veiko (2000) calculated; the criterion being that the temperature of the [150], (2001) particle or of the substrate reaches the boiling [151] temperature of the liquid; various combinations of absorbing/transparent particles and absorbing/ transparent substrate are considered PI, PMMA PS (50 µm (0.11–1.7 µm), foils) SiO2 (0.4 and 0.8 µm)

Water, condensed from moisture

KrF, 248 nm, ≈31 ns, 1 Hz, up to 220 mJ/cm2

Cr film (0.3 µm) on quartz

Water

Water

Si (100)

Au (0.6–1.8 µm), Cu (0.5–5.5 µm), W (0.4–4 µm)

RH 24–27% (air) and ≈90% (N2 )

Raised humidity had no considerable effect for removal of 0.4 µm SiO2 particles from PMMA, but in case of PI substrate the cleaning threshold lowered from ≈15 to ≈10 J/cm2

Fourrier (2001) [152]

KrF, 248 nm, 24 ns, Target immersed into up to 106 mJ/cm2 liquid, target’s surface roughness 20 nm

Interferometric determination of laser-generated vapour layer effective thickness: maximum thickness, achieved at 100–400 ns after laser pulse, ranges 100–270 nm (at 53–68 mJ/cm2 ); order of magnitude of acoustic augmentation by vaporization was estimated to be ≈1 MPa

Kim (2001) [88], Grigoropoulos (2002) [98]

KrF, 248 nm, ≈30 ns, 0.3 J/cm2

Condensation of steam starts at particles resulting all particles to be immersed in water drops; ≈100% of metal particles were removed by 5 laser pulses (without water layer 100 pulses were needed); laser cleaning resulted both in dry and steam case in a fractional metal

Neves (2001) [153], (2002) [81]

Condensed from vapour water film on surface

(Continued )

Table 2.5

(Continued)

Substrates

Particles

Liquids

Lasers and beam Other features of parameters the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

monolayer on surface; the surface roughness was reduced in cleaning process, obviously due to removal of adsorbed contaminants

Glass microscopic slides, fused silica

Al2 O3 (0.1, 0.3, 1 and 3 µm)

Water, condensed from moisture

Al2 O3 (1 µm)

Glass microscopic slides

Al2 O3 (1 µm, reduced agglomeration)

Cu-vapour (CVL), 255 nm, 35 ns, highcoherent beam XeCl, 308 nm, 8 ns ns

Experiments were performed in RH > 50% laboratory air

KrF, 248 nm, 12 ns ns

Water, condensed from moisture

XeCl, 308 nm, 8 ns, up to ≈10 J/cm2

Particles were deposited by laser ablation (Kane (2002) [78])

History of steam laser cleaning of surfaces from particulates, with accent on work performed at IBM Research Laboratories; contain also new data about of liquid film dynamics, achieved by high-speed photography; at irradiation of Si/water-alcohol interface by KrF laser (180 mJ/cm2 ), a liquid disc of thickness 0,87 µm was formed, departing the substrate with velocity of 37–20 m/s (at distance from substrate’s surface 0–800 µm); liquid film acceleration was ≈4 × 10 m/s2 ; above the disc, an acoustic wavefront was observed, starting with 400 ns delay before laser pulse and propagating with velocity of 370 m/s

Zapka (2002) [94]

A review with 73 refs. about experimental research on both dry and wet laser cleaning of particles from surfaces; experiment conditions and main results tabulated

Kane (2002) [77]

Cleaning results did not depend considerably on the properties of two very different glasses in contrast with dry cleaning theory, obviously the cleaning was enhanced by capillary water and hydrocarbons from laboratory air; cleaning efficiencies 95–100% were achieved using a single laser pulse (CVL, ≈0.5 J/cm2 ); cleaning thresholds were ≈100 mJ/cm2 for CVL and 330–400 mJ/cm2 for excimer lasers, obviously due to coherence length difference

Kane (2002) [77]

A technique for deposition of microparticles by laser ablation of packed particles target in air was developed; the agglomeration of particles due to capillary forces was avoided

Kane (2002) [77]

Threshold fluence was measured ≈90 mJ/cm2 independent on particle surface density (effects of agglomerated particles were reduced)

Fernandes (2002) [154]

Si wafers

Diamond (5–20 nm and 5–7 nm)

Water + alcohol spot 0.1 × 0.1 mm, 0.8 J/cm2 50 pulses

KrF, 248 nm, 20 ns, 50 Hz,

NiP

Al2 O3

Water + IPA (30–50% vol), film thickness a few micrometer

Nd:YAG, 355 and 1064 nm, 6 ns

KrF, 248 nm, 24 ns

Incident angle of laser beam 40◦ , condensed from vapour film on substrate

A short review of the use of laser cleaning for removal of moulding flash on IC packages heat sinks (dry process), and of particles from MR head sliders (dry and steam assisted); steam cleaning efficiency was higher than of dry cleaning

Song (2002) [155]

Cleaning in liquid was more efficient and did not cause surface damage

Konov (2002) [7]

In addition to presented earlier results (She (1999) [144], Park (1996) [89], Kim (2001) [88]), a diagram of adhesion forces between 0.1–100 µm Al2 O3 particles and Ni substrate is presented and significance of inertial forces is highlighted: inertial forces on micrometre-sized particles should be taken into account also in laser wet cleaning

Grigoropoulos (2002) [98]

A review (56 pp., 27 figs., 79 refs.) of steam laser cleaning with accent on the research done at University Konstanz (see Leiderer,Yavas˛, Mosbacher, Schilling above); reflectivity of p-polarized probe light is much more sensitive than of s-polarized light for nucleated bubbles detection; bubble growth velocity for non-adiabatic case calculated; superheating temperatures for smooth and structured surfaced determined (smooth Si/water: 250◦ C; Si with nano-holes/water: 160◦ C, smooth Si/IPA: 116◦ C); heat transfer coefficients between Si and water/IPA determined: ξH2O = 3 × 107 W/m2 K, ξIPA = 1 × 107 W/m2 K; a critical comparison of wet laser cleaning theories presented

Leiderer (2002) [80]

An analytical expression for an attached to heated surface stable bubble shape obtained, taking into account temperature gradient in the liquid; wet cleaning threshold and superheating temperature are calculated from condition that critical bubble diameter equals to the heated up to boiling temperature liquid layer thickness (transparent particles on absorptive surface, water and ethanol); surface roughness is taken into account by roughness-dependent surface tension of liquids

Veiko (2002) [156]

(Continued )

Table 2.5

(Continued)

Substrates

Particles

Liquids

Lasers and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

A review (30 pp., 8 figs.) of physical mechanisms of dry and wet laser cleaning of particles and solid films from surfaces, see Veiko [150, 151, 156]

Veiko (2002) [13]

A general review (8 pp., 3 figs., 34 refs.) of laser removal of particles from surfaces, both dry and wet

Allen (2002) [157]

A review (13 pp., 3 figs., 59 refs.) of laser removal of particles from surfaces, mostly of dry process; with accent on adhesion and removal forces theory and light enhancement near particles

Lu (2002) [158]

A review (19 pp., 9 figs., 44 refs.) of laser removal of particles from Si wafers, both dry and wet, with accent on experimental work

Mosbacher (2002) [159]

A review (13 pp., 9 figs., 17 refs.) of laser removal of particles from Si wafers and Si membrane stencil masks

Zapka (2002) [108]

Si wafer, Ag film (50 nm) on glass

PS Water (bulk (0.11–4.1 µm) and capillary condensed)

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, up to ≈300 mJ/cm2

Experiments performed in water, vacuum and air (RH 30–40%)

Cleaning threshold Fth depends on particles radius r roughly as Fth (r) ≈ 1/r k , k = 1–2; the actual dependence Fth (r) included an oscillating component due to Mie resonances of light field; these resonances may enhance the light intensity at particles ≈30 times (computed) causing local surface damage; in air the cleaning threshold was lower for particles smaller than 800 nm up to ≈30%; at atomically smooth Si surface the water superheating temperature was close to theoretical value (250◦ C), on holy Si and rough Ag the superheating temperatures were 160 and 130◦ C

Mosbacher (2002) [97]

Steel, glass, Al, marble

Kaolin

Water

XeCl, 308 nm, 20 ns, 130–200 mJ

Condensed from vapour water film on surface

Optoacoustic transient 4–88 mm above the target’s surface recorded using probe beam (HeNe laser); evolution of signal’s amplitude and delay time as a function of number of cleaning cycles presented

Bregar (2002) [160]

Quartz

Red blood cells, PS spheres (10 µm)

Water solution

Er:YAG, 2,94 nm, 400 µs, 0.1–100 J/cm2 2ω-Nd:YAG 532 nm, 10 ns, 1–100 µJ

Laser irradiation from backside (see Fig. 2.2)

Cells and PS particles were successfully removed by backside 2.94 nm irradiation; backside irradiation was chosen in order to avoid cell damage due to overheating (absorption depth of 2.94 nm light in water ≈0.8 µm); in case of 532 nm light, jumping of some PS particles was observed, obviously due to thermal expansion generated forces

Zharov (2002) [14]

Si wafer

SiO2 (0.5 and 1.5 µm)

Water + IPA (10:1 and 4:1)

Cr film (0.3 µm) on quartz, NiP

Rigid Au substrate

Spherical particles 6.46 nm

Lennard–Jones liquid

Si wafer

PS (0.14–1.3 µm)

Water or IPA, (condensed steam)

Si wafer

Monodisp. SiO2 , PS and PMMA, 60–1000 nm

Si wafer

Meniscus growth observed at Si wafer – SiO2 particles contact during ‘storage time’ 100–1350 h observed (see Fig. 2.19); dry cleaning efficiency dependence on fluence and ‘storage time’ presented

Schrems (2003) [76]

Interferometrical and optical reflectance studies of processes at explosive vaporization of liquid; the covered by liquid film substrate performed a normal displacement up to 27 nm (at fluence 68 mJ/cm2 , dry surface <2 nm at 93 mJ/cm2 ); vapour plume propagation velocity was 25 m/s (4:1 solution) and 36 m/s (10:1 solution)

Lee (2003) [161], Kim (2003) [100]

Liquid layer thickness 1.02–23.8 nm

Molecular dynamics calculation of liquid-assisted laser removal of particles on surface; good qualitative match with experimental results; even a liquid monolayer had a clear effect on cleaning

Smith (2003) [109]

Liquid layer thickness was varied 0–255 nm

Experiments with precise control of liquid layer thickness: substantial particles removal was achieved only at film thickness >70 nm; in 90–130 nm thickness range particles redeposition occurred, due to light interference in liquid film, the film thickness affects the energy reaching the wafer surface; light field concentration at particles caused surface damage: in water for particles size over 840 nm in any case; in IPA at cleaning threshold damage free particles removal was observed; light focusing by liquid droplets may also contribute to surface damage

Lang (2003) [162]

A short review (2 pp.) of research on dry and steam laser cleaning recently done at University of Konstanz, Inst. de Optica (Madrid) and Univ. Linz (see Leiderer and Mosbacher above)

Leiderer (2003) [163]

Optical reflectivity and vapour plume transmission measurements (0.5–3 mm above the surface); initial velocity of plume expansion ranges 10–20 m/s; the initial velocity decreased with laser fluence increase due to the phenomenon, that at higher fluences the liquid in contact with substrate reaches the critical temp. faster and vapour layer hinders the further heat transfer from surface to liquid

Kudryashov (2003) [164]

KrF, 248 nm, 24 ns Nd:YAG, 355 and 1064 nm, 6 ns, up to 0.67 J/cm2

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, up to 250 mJ/cm2

Several sources, from 150 fs to several ns Water droplets on surface (condensed from steam)

KrF, 248 nm, 20 ns, up to 0.76 J/cm2

Laser beam focused by cylindrical lens

(Continued )

Table 2.5

(Continued) Lasers and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

IPA

KrF, 248 nm, 20 ns, up to 0.7 J/cm2

Condensed from vapour liquid film on surface

Results of photoacoustic investigations of laser irradiation generated IPA plume propagation presented and discussed; explosive vaporization threshold was 0.17 J/cm2

Kudryashov (2004) [164]

Substrates Particles

Liquids

Si wafer

References

Si wafer

SiO2

Water (capillary condensed from moisture)

KrF, 248 nm, 28 ns Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 6 ns

RH 94–97%; pressure 31–37 mbar (other gases <1 mbar); 23.5–27.5◦ C

Cleaning thresholds were calculated taking into account light field concentration at particles for particles radii 10 nm–100 µm; ablative cleaning model yields realistic threshold fluence dependence on particle size; high humidity improves cleaning for small particles, hinders that of particles of size 0.6–3 µm, and has no effect of larger ones

Arnold (2004) [56]

Si wafer

No

IPA film (90 nm)

KrF, 248 nm, 29 ns, 150 mJ/cm2

Condensed from vapour IPA film on surface

Dynamics of liquid film at laser-heated surface was recorded by optical reflectivity with 2 nm, 1 ns resolution; the acceleration of the film was found to be constant (10.5 × 10−8 m/s2 ), corresponding to a pressure difference of 740 hPa; at falling down the liquid film obviously disintegrated into droplets

Arnold (2004) [166]

Si wafer

SiO2 (1 µm), PS (51–110 nm)

Water; aqueous solutions of ethanol (up to 50%) and non-ionic surfactant (up to 12%)

KrF, 248 nm, 23 ns, 10 Hz, up to 10.7 J/cm2 , up to 100 pulses

Substrate immersed vertically into free surface liquid (Fig. 2.4)

Removal of particles from surface was achieved through laser-induced cavitation bubbles impact; laser beam distance from surface was varied 2–8 mm; nearly 100% cleaning efficiency of areas up to 64 mm2 was achieved without scanning; highest cleaning efficiency was achieved when the laser beam was focused in depth 0–4 mm and alcohol or surfactant were added to water (see also Ohl (2006) [19])

Song (2004) [18]

Glass, fused silica

Al2 O3 (0.1 nm, agglomerated)

Water (capillary condensed)

KrF, 248 nm, beam focused by cylindrical lens, line width 0.25–3 mm, 20–1000 mJ/cm2

Samples were held in humid environment before experiments

Cleaning threshold was lower for narrower laser beam: Fth ≈ 300–50 mJ/cm2 for beam width 3–0.25 mm; acceleration theory of dry cleaning does not explain the observed results

Fernandes (2006) [83]

Si wafer

No

Isopropanol

KrF, 248 nm, 29 ns,

Condensed from vapour liquid film on surface (90 nm)

Dynamics of liquid film on laser-heated surface was recorded by optical reflectometry with 2 nm, 1 ns resolution; the liquid film moved in interval 10–140 ns after laser pulse with constant acceleration

Lang (2004) [169]

Si wafer

Not specified

Water

OPO, 2.94 nm

Condensed from vapour water film on surface

A particle removal system for high-volume manufacturing system was developed and tested; an image analyzing system was used for detecting individual particles which were thereafter removed by local steam deposition, laser irradiation and suction; >4000 wafers were cleaned in 2 weeks

Wachs (2005) [87]

A review of research of dry and steam laser cleaning of particles from Si wafers done at Univ. Konstanz; in part of SLC (see Mosbacher (2000) [79], Lang (2003) [162],(2004) [169])

Graf (2005) [168]

PIV visualization of flow fields using 8 µm fluorescent particles

Liquid flow near a solid surface during laser-induced bubble growth and collapse was investigated by particle image velocimetry (PIV); tangential to surface flow velocity is highest during the time interval of jet impact: ≈10 m/s (bubble max size 2 mm); the high tangential velocity is obviously responsible for removal of particles from surface in cavitation-induced cleaning (see, e.g. Song (2004) [18])

Ohl (2006) [19]

Condensed from vapour IPA film on surface

Dynamics of liquid film at laser-heated surface was recorded by optical reflectivity with 2 nm, 0.2 ns resolution; estimated with aid of temperature calculations initial vapour pressure (at liquid film lift-off ) was ∼5 MPa; ejection velocity of liquid film varied from ∼50 m/s (97 nm film) to ∼40 m/s (227 nm film)

Lang (2006) [107]

Water (obviously)

Si wafer

No

IPA film (97–227 nm)

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 7 ns, 138 mJ/cm2 , spot several mm

(Continued )

Table 2.5

(Continued)

Substrates

Particles

Liquids

Si wafer

CuO (50 nm aver.),Al2 O3 (50 and 100 nm av)

Water + IPA (10:1)

Lasers and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

KrF, 248 nm, 25 ns 170 mJ/cm2 (for heating) Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 60 ns, 520 mJ (for shock generation)

Condensed from vapour liquid film on surface; cleaning was enhanced by shock wave generated in air above the substrate

Cleaning efficiency over 90% for Al2 O3 particles as small as 20 nm was achieved (20 cleaning cycles; scanned substrate); shadowgraph images of shock propagation and liquid film vaporization are presented

Jang (2006) [17]

A updated review of Kane (2002) [77] with 120 refs. about experimental research on both dry and wet laser cleaning of particles from surfaces; experiment conditions and main results tabulated

Fernandes (2006) [83]

A review with 60 refs. about the principles and theory of dry and wet/steam laser cleaning of surfaces from particles; surface nanopattering by particles arrays determined light fields, surface polishing by laser irradiation, and about PTFE surface modification for enhanced biocompatibility

Bäuerle (2006) [57]

References

Reports where only reactive liquids were used, are not refereed here; the entries are mostly in the original style;‘Si’ means single crystalline silicon wafer, as a rule; water was distilled and deionized as rule;Ar+ -lasers are usually CW; the energies and energy densities for pulsed laser beams are for one pulse; the experiments were performed at room temperature if not mentioned else. Notations SC: single crystalline; PS: polystyrene; PI: polyimide; PMMA: polymethylmethacrylate; IPA: isopropylalcohol (isopropanol); PSL: polystyrene latex; SPP: surface plasmon probe; RH: relative humidity; SAW: surface acoustic wave; OPO: optical parametric oscillator; PIV: particle image velocimetry; MR: magnetoresistive; CVL: copper vapour laser.

Table 2.6

Liquids-assisted laser removal of surface layers and related experiments (examples).

Substrate

Layer removed

Laser and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Fe

Native oxide

Aqueous solution of 0.1 M Na2 B4 O7 + 0.01 M NaCl

Dye, 15 ns, 20 Hz, 30 µJ, spot 5 µm, 150 J/cm2 , 1010 W/cm2

Process was carried out in situ in an electrolysis cell, 860 mV SCE

Oxide layer was removed by laser ablation in course to study the pit initiation process; diameter of the ablation crater was 5–10 µm, depth 1–2 µm

Ulrich (1981) [20], (1983) [170]

Stainless steel (CrNiMo Fe)

Native oxide

Water solution of NaCl (30 g/l)

Rhodamine 6G dye, 570–625 nm, 15 Hz

Specimen immersed into free-surface solution

Oxide layer was removed in situ by laser ablation in course to study the pit initiation process

Oltra (1986) [171]

Ni-coated Al, Au/Ni-coated Al, Be (mirrors)

Dust from laboratory air; frozen constituents of air, mainly H2 O and CO2 , (∼100–140 K)

No

CO2 , 2 µs, up to 15 J, some pulses Nd:YAG, 10 ns, 10 Hz, up to 1 J, irradiation time up to 240 s

Experiments were performed in vacuum 10−5 –10−6 Torr

A review of space optics (cryogenic optics) contamination problems and cleaning options is presented; CO2 laser was able to remove over 5 µm thick frozen layer from surfaces, but Nd:YAG laser only 0.1 µm

Piper (1990) [30]

Be

SiO2 , up to ∼10 µm Carbon particles, solvent residues

No

308 nm, 0.2 J/cm2 , (0.9 J/cm2 for SiO2 particles)

In air (Au also in vacuum at 35 K)

12 different contaminants were successfully removed from 14 different surfaces

Osiecki (1990) [172]

MgF2 -overcoated Al on quartz

Liquids

References

Au

Carbon particles, frozen water

Au-overcoated Ni on Al (mirror)

Water, CO2 , NH3 , vacuum pump oil, dust

No

CO2 , pulsed up to 25 Hz, 1.5 J

At 34 and 90 K

10 × 10 cm2 areas on mirrors were cleaned successfully in 15 min by a scanned laser beam

Pierce (1990) [31]

Fe

Native oxide

Water solution of HClO4 , pH 1

Nd:YAG, 6 ns, 1–40 MW/cm2

Flowing electrolyte, 1 cm/s, 300 mV SSE

Local depassivation of a Fe electrode by laser ablation for transient electrochemistry studies

Oltra (1993) [173]

(Continued )

Table 2.6

(Continued)

Substrate

Layer removed

Liquids

Laser and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Au and Au-coated mirrors

Solid H2 O (1–10 µm), O2 and CO2 (≈1 µm)

No

308 nm, 1.06 and 10.6 µm, nanosecond to microsecond pulse length

Substrates temperature ≈25 K

Solid cryofilms removed by laser irradiation; analytical expressions for 1D transient temperature distributions presented, taking into account temp. dependences of materials properties; bulk Au surface damage threshold was estimated to be 37 J/cm2 (10.6 µm, 200 ns) and 120 J/cm2 (10.6 µm, 2 µs)– close to measured values

Jette (1994) [174]

Limestone sculpture

Black crust, 0.05 mm

Water, 0.1 mm layer

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 6 ns, 0.4 and 0.8 J/cm2 , spot 5 mm

Water was brushed onto workpiece

Cleaning efficiency was higher when water was applied – dry cleaning needed 30 laser pulses, wet cleaning only 10 pulses (0.4 J/cm2 ); scattered in removed material plume probe light intensity and acoustic signal were proportional, thus acoustic signal may be used to control the cleaning process

Fe, steel

Native oxides, 0.1 µm

Boric acid, borate buffer and sodium hydroxide solutions

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 14 ns, 0.55–0.66 J/cm2 , 20 pulses

Laser light feed trough 1.5 mm optical fibre, distance to sample ≈1 mm

Efficient oxide removal without reoxidation achieved in basic solution at cathodic potential <−1.5V; etching starts without any incubation time

Yava¸s (1996) [8], Oltra (1996) [22, 176]

Silica glass (2 mm)

Hydroxyl groups

No

Cu-vapour, 255.3 nm, 35 ns, 4.25 kHz, 100–250 mW, spot ∼ 0.1 mm, 44–110 J/cm2

The samples were irradiated for 100 ms per each spot

Laser irradiation resulted in dehydroxylated surface and liberation of water; (SiOH concentration was reduced up to 56%); the adherence of 0.3 µm diameter Al2 O3 particles to the treated hydrophobic surface was reduced up to 80%;

Halfpenny (1997) [177], (2000) [36]

Cooper (1995) [175]

Al

Native anodic oxide

H3 BO3 0.5 kmol/m−3 +Na2 B4 O7 0.05 kmol/m−3

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 0,1–6W

Process was carried out in situ in an electrochemical cell

Anodic oxide films were removed locally by laser ablation in order to study repassivation process; the diameter of the ablated area was ∼0.5 mm

Sakairi (1998) [21]

Quartz

Solid nitrogen (100–600 nm)

No

N2 , 337.1 nm, 3 ns, 10 Hz, 1.5–8 MW/cm2

Experiment was performed in vacuum, 10−8 Torr

Ablation rate ∼0.3 molecules per photon was observed (8 MW/cm2 ); calculated temperature profiles during laser heating, and ablation rate dependence on film thickness and incident laser intensity are presented for solid nitrogen and water films

Ellegaard (1998) [178]

Si wafers

MCx Fy Oz , M=Ti,Al, Cu

IPA, acetone (some 100 µm layer)

KrF, 248 nm, 23 ns, up to 30 Hz

Samples were dipped into liquid

Surfaces and holes (diam. 0.6 µm, depth 0.8 µm) were cleaned by 120 laser pulses at 80 mJ/cm2 (IPA film); highly light-absorbing acetone did not enhance the cleaning; dry cleaning needed 200 mJ/cm2 , 120 pulses; bubbles obviously play important role in wet cleaning of holes

Lee (1998) [179]

Steel, 316L XC35, Inconel 600

Native oxides, 0.1– 10 µm

Water

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 13 ns, up to 1.2 J, spot 0.5–3 mm

Samples were immersed into liquid, liquid layer at least 5 mm

High-speed photographs of bubble dynamics; generation of multiple damage pits observed, resulting obviously from shock induced collapse of micro-bubbles (residue of disintegration of previous bubbles); in water, the oxides were removed from 60% larger area than in gas

Alloncle (1998) [180]

(Continued )

Table 2.6

(Continued)

Substrate

Layer removed

Liquids

Laser and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Fe

Native oxides: 20 nm Fe2 O3 +1 µm Fe3 O4

Aqueous solution of 0.075 M Na2 B4 O7 +0.05 M H3 BO3

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 14.5 ns, 0.5 J/cm2

Laser light feed trough 1.5 mm optical fibre, distance to sample ≈2 mm

Laser irradiation in solution under proper cathodic potential (e.g. −1.45 V/SCE) enhances the removal efficiency of oxide film, obviously due to diffusion and entrapment of hydrogen in the oxide film during the cathodic reduction process

Meja (1999) [23], Pasquet (1999) [24]

Fe

Native oxides: 20 nm Fe2 O3 +1 µm Fe3 O4

Aqueous solution of 0.075 M Na2 B4 O7 +0.05 M H3 BO3

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 7 ns, 0.38–0.7 J/cm2

40 min cathodic polarization −1.55 V before laser treatment

Studies of optical properties changes in Fe3 O4 film under cathodic polarization; after 40 min polarization at −1.55 V the extinction coefficient k of the oxide was reduced ≈ 10 times what explains the enhanced laser ablation efficiency (see also Meja (1999) [23])

Pasquet (1999) [24], Oltra (2000) [25]

AlMgSi1

Anodic oxide, 20 and 50 µm (transparant and opaque), water content ≈18%

Aqueous solution of 0.1 M Na2 SO4

XeCl, 308 nm, 17 ns, 1 Hz, 1–21 J/cm2

Workpiece immersed vertically into liquid, focused laser beam

Open circuit potential revealed defects in heat and shock affected zones in opaque coating; at ≈3 J/cm2 the shock affected zone was estimated to be ≈40 µm; no defects were found in transparent coatings; laser irradiation removed opaque coating slice by slice, but delaminated the transparent one

Cortona (2001) [26]

Fused silica, H2 O2 cleaned

Hydroxyl groups

No

KrF, 248 nm, 2–200 Hz, spot 3 × 7 mm, 0.1–1.2 J/cm2 , 450 and 900 pulses

The experiment was performed in air

Laser irradiation of silica surface reduced the concentration of surface silanol groups (decided by SIMS analysis) up to 10 times; dependencies of dehydroxylation efficiency on laser fluence, pulse repetition

Fernandes (2002) [181]

rate and total pulse number is presented; H2 O2 -cleaned samples were contaminated in laboratory air by hydrocarbons in a day Al

Graphite, 3 and 8 µm, 0–60% pores

Water layer

0.266, 0.355, 0.562 and 1.06 µm, 5–50 ns, up to 200 J/cm2

Water film was not found to affect the ablation of graphite

Marczak (2003) [182]

Includes a short review with over 10 references about laser irradiation effects of electrodes in electrolytes, incl. heating, desorption and ablation

Brennan (2003) [183]

AlMgSi16061

Anodic oxide, 30 and 70 µm (transparant and opaque)

Aqueous solution of Na2 SO4 0.1 M

XeCl, 308 nm, 17 ns, 0.5 Hz, 0.9–24 J/cm2

Workpiece immersed into liquid, distance to window 5 mm, focused laser beam

Laser irradiation removed the oxide slice by slice; repassivation current transients (lasting some milliseconds) during laser ablation recorded and modelled by a capacitance and a resistance

Kautek (2003) [184]

Low carbon steel, hot rolled at >800◦ C

Oxide scale (≈10 µm), composed of FeO, Fe2 O3 , Fe3 O4 , and machining oil

Water + HCl (5, 10 and 18%); 25 and 80◦ C; 1 mm layer over the workpiece

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 6 ns, spot ≈10 µm, up to 0.5 J/cm2

Workpiece immersed horizontally into freesurface solution, laser beam focused onto surface of the solution (Fig. 2.7)

The removal of the scale was enhanced by laser-generated mechanical impact in liquid, but only when the workpiece was held at least 10 s in the HCl solution before laser irradiation; use of laser enabled to remove the scale at HCl concentration of only 10%, instead of 18% in case of purely chemical treatment

Lim (2003) [32], (2004) [33]

(Continued )

Table 2.6

(Continued)

Substrate

Layer removed

Liquids

Laser and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Diamond particles (4 nm)

Non-diamond carbon layer

Water + HNO3 (≈1 ml for 10 ml solution)

YSGG:Cr : Yb3+ : Ho3+ , 2.92µm, ≈130 ns, 1 kHz, 10 J/cm2 Cu-vapour, 510 nm, 20 ns, 10 kHz, 2–3 J/cm2

Particles suspension irradiated by focused laser beam

Irradiation by YSGG:Cr : Yb3+ :Ho3+ laser removed the non-diamond carbon layer from particles, irradiation by Cu-vapour laser led to increase of the non-diamond carbon amount; the cleaning occurred obviously mainly as result of non-diamond carbon solvation in supercritical solution

Dolgaev (2004) [35]

Ni, Cu, Zn, SUS304

Tapping oil Sumitap super

Water

ArF, 193 nm, 30 Hz, 150 mJ

Laser beam focused on water surface (Fig. 2.8)

Removal of oil film from metal surfaces (plates and hole) was achieved using 18 000–36 000 laser pulses causing the water decomposition; the range of region cleaned was 5 mm around the focal point of the lens; the water decomposition products etched Zn, but not other metals

Hidai (2006) [34]

Fused silica, H2 O2 cleaned

Hydroxyl groups

No

KrF, 248 nm, 12 ns, 20–200 Hz, 0.1–1.2 J/cm2 , 300–10 000 pulses

The experiment was performed in air

A review (26 pp., 13 figs., 27 refs.) of silica surface structure and laser dehydroxylation experiments is presented; laser dehydroxylation was found to be mainly a thermal process; dependence of SiOH+ /Si+ ratio of dehydroxylated samples at SIMS analysis on laser fluence, pulse repetition rate and total pulse number is presented (see also Halfpenny (1997) [177] and Fernandes (2002) [181] in this table)

Fernandes (2006) [37]

3+

Reports where only reactive liquids were used, are not refereed here. Notations SCE – saturated calomel electrode; SSE – silver–silver chloride reference electrode; SUS304 – a kind of stainless steel; SIMS – secondary ion mass spectrometry.

3+

C H A P T E R

T H R E E

Shock Processing

Contents 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5

Introduction Residual Stresses and Their Measurement Laser Shock Peening Laser Shock Forming and Cladding Densification of Porous Materials

69 70 77 140 141

3.1 Introduction In laser shock processing (LSP), the mechanical recoil impulse of rapidly expanding vapour and plasma is utilized for introduction permanent changes in the workpiece (Fig. 3.1). The light power density on the workpiece surface is chosen to be so high (1–100 GW/cm2 ) that optical breakdown occurs and plasma is created. The rapid expansion of high-pressure plasma (velocity ∼1500 m/s and pressures over 2 GPa in water) creates a shock wave that, propagating through the material, creates dislocations and induces plastic deformations. A higher dislocation density results in higher surface hardness and strength, while plastic deformations reduce porosity and can create compressive surface stresses, the latter being responsible for increased fatigue and cavitation strength and stress corrosion resistance of the material. Also an increase of theYoung’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio, and grain refinement due to the shock has been reported. If the surface is covered by a transparent coating, solid or liquid (Table 3.1), the expansion of the vapour and plasma is suppressed and the pressure and impulse on the surface are considerably higher. As confinement Laser pulse Lens

Water

High-pressure plasma

Material

Figure 3.1 Principle of LSP. Sudden expansion of laser-generated plasma creates a pressure pulse that drives a shock wave into the workpiece. © ASME, reproduced with permission from Ref. [185].

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing ISBN-13: 978-0-08-044498-7

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

69

70

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Table 3.1

Comparison of different confinement media for LSP.

Confining medium

Advantages

Disadvantages

Inorganic solid (glass, quartz)

Highest pressure and impulse (due to highest acoustic impedance)

Not applicable to curved surfaces, glass pieces remain inside the machinery, multiple shocking troublesome

Polymer (acrylic, rubber)

Can be applied to curved surfaces

Multiple shocking is time- and material consuming

Liquid (water)

May be applied to curved surfaces, suits well for multiple shocking

Wet method, lower pulse pressure

41

(a)

(b) 44

A

42

40

(c)

(d)

38 46

(e)

Figure 3.2 Principles of: (a) shot peening; (b) deep rolling; (c) water cavitation peening; (d) ultrasonic shot peening (after Xing and Lu [187]) and (e) ultrasonic peening by strikers (after patent US2002037219 [188]).

medium (tamper layer) glass, water, and some polymeric materials have been used (see also Table 2.2 in the book by Ding and Ye. [186]). In LSP, only a mechanical impact on the workpiece is desired. Heating of the material by laser light is kept minimal by using short laser pulses and protective coatings (ablators). In technology, LSP has been applied for peening, densification, and forming of materials, the peening being of greatest importance. In many aspects similar to laser peening results may be achieved also by shot peening, water cavitation peening, and deep rolling (Fig. 3.2 and Table 3.2). In fundamental research of matter behaviour under shock loads, flyers and explosives are used as well.

3.2 Residual Stresses and Their Measurement Residual stresses play a critical role in fatigue, creep, wear, stress, corrosion, cracking, fracture, buckling, etc. [195]. Conversion of tensile residual stresses into compressive is the main goal of LSP and residual stresses are the most important process parameters of LSP. Research and process control of LSP rely to a great extent on the determination of surface and bulk residual stresses in the material. Harmful tensile surface residual stresses are created by majority of subtractive machining methods, including mechanical and chemical milling, turning, broaching, grinding, electro-discharge machining, and laser cutting.

71

Shock processing

Table 3.2 Comparison of some peening methods. There are several examples of SP and DR performance in Table 3.8 along with laser peening results. Method

Important characteristics

References

Shot peening (SP)

Simple, inexpensive; risk of introducing foreign material into the workpiece or its surroundings, roughens the surface

[189]

Laser peening (LSP)

Laser beam can access places non-accessible by accelerated shots; the impacts may be localized (down to micrometers), but also have large area (up to 100 mm2 ); well controllable, rapid, does not cause significant macroscopic deformation of the treated zone; strain rate up to 106 /s achievable, plastically affected zone 5–10 times deeper than in case of SP; does not increase surface roughness considerably; high cost of the equipment

Peyre (1996) [190] Hammersley (2000) [191]

Deep rolling (DR)

Better finish in comparison to LSP at equal plastically affected depth; workpiece geometry restricted, high load on workpiece

Nalla et al. (2003) [192]

Water (jet) cavitation peening (WCP)

Up to 1000 MPa residual compressive stresses were achieved in spring steel SAE 1070

Qin et al. (2006) [193]

Ultrasonic peening

Plastically affected depth from 0.3 mm (using shots) to 1.5 mm (using strikers)

Xing and Lu (2004) [187] Kudrjavtsev (2004) [194]

Macrostresses

Peening

Cold hole expansion

Bending

Welding

Figure 3.3 Some common cases of residual stress formation. © The Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining, reproduced with permission from Ref. [200].

72

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Table 3.3

Residual stress measurement techniques [196,201,200,198].

Technique

Restrictions to materials

X-ray diffraction

Penetration

Spatial resolution

Accuracy

Comments

Crystalline

5 µm (Ti), 50 µm (Al)

20 µm depth, 1 mm Lateral

±20 Mpa

Combined often with layer removal for greater depth

Synchrotron diffraction (hard X-rays)

Crystalline

>500 µm, 100 mm for Al

20 µm lateral to incident beam, 1 mm parallel to beam

±10 × 10−6 strain

Triaxial stress, access difficulties

Neutron diffraction

Crystalline

4 mm (Ti), 25 mm (Fe), 200 mm (Al)

500 µm

±50 × 10−6 strain

Triaxial, low data acquisition rate, access difficulties

Curvature/Layer removal

0.1–0.5 of thickness

0.05 of thickness

Hole-drilling

∼1.2 hole diameter

50 µm Depth

Stress field not uniquely determined ±50 Mpa

Flat surface needed (for strain gauges), semi-destructive

Slitting (crack compliance)

Flat surface needed, destructive

Surface contour

Simple and cheap, suits well for welds, destructive

Ultrasonic

Metals, ceramics

>10 cm

5 mm

10%

0.5–10 MHz

Magnetic

Magnetic

10 mm

1 mm

10%

Microstructure sensitive

Raman/ fluorescence/ birefringence

Ceramics, polymers

<1 µm

<1 µm approximately

50 Mpa

Not applicable directly for metals (feasible by using proper coatings)

Tensile stresses build up also at rod and wire drawing and in weld joints. On the other hand, compressive surface stresses develop for example at peening, nitriding, and sometimes in quenching [196–199] (Fig. 3.3). Table 3.3 and Fig. 3.4 present an overview of common residual stress measurement methods. Low penetration methods are often combined with layer removal in order to get information on stress profiles [198]. Layers may be removed for example by grinding or electro-polishing. Some chemical machining receipts can be found in the article by Flavenot [202].

X-ray diffraction Strain in crystalline materials causes shifts in X-ray diffraction angles. The sin2 ψ technique If the stress tensor is biaxial, strain in direction N (normal to a {hkl}-plane in a crystalline grain) εϕ,ψ becomes (Fig. 3.5) [196, 203]: εϕ,ψ =

1+v v σϕ sin2 ψ − (σ11 − σ22 ). E E

(3.1)

73

Shock processing

Depth (mm) 0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10 Neutrons

Measurement techniques

X-rays Nondestructive

100

Magnetic Ultrasonic Hole-drilling

Semidestructive

Ring core Crack compliance Layer removal

Destructive

Sectioning Thin films

Stresses produced by common processes

Machining, peening Welding, case hardening Cladding, heat treating, quenching Forming, casting, extruding Crack initiation Wear

Depth ranges that contribute to failure

Fatigue Fracture Distortion Buckling, creep

0.00004

0.0004

0.004 Depth (inches)

0.04

0.4

4

Figure 3.4 Depth ranges of residual stress measurement techniques compared with typically observed profiles and failure mechanisms. © ASME, reproduced with permission from Ref. [195].

If the strain in the probe volume is 1D or 2D and homogeneous, there is a linear dependence on εϕ,ψ on sin2 ψ, and the experimental data can conveniently be fitted by least square method. The sin2 ψ technique may fail in case of steep stress gradient near the surface [204]. X-ray diffraction method is non-destructive, but in case of LSP it suffers from small penetration depth. Modifications of the procedure like the layer removal technique by grinding or electro-polishing are no longer non-destructive and require long preparation times and complicated analysis to relate the measured strains to the original stresses of the component [196, 205].

Synchrotron diffraction (hard X-rays) Hard high-intensity X-rays from synchrotron sources allow fast measurements at greater depths comparable with those reached by neutron diffraction. However, due to the low scattering angles in synchrotron radiation X-ray diffraction experiments, the gauge volume is strongly elongated making the spatial resolution low in at least one of the three perpendicular sample directions. Therefore, the application of this technique is limited to cases where the stress state is essentially biaxial within the surface plane [206–207].

Neutron diffraction The significant advantages of neutron diffraction over other methods are the high penetration depth in engineering materials and a scattering angle near to 90◦ . This latter property allows strain data to be collected

74

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

x3 s33 33

{hk1}

Nw,c w,c

c

x2 s22 22 w x1

Figure 3.5

s11 11

sw

Definition of angles and stress/strain components in sin2 ψ technique.

essentially from the same sampling volume in three perpendicular specimen directions. The limitations of neutron diffraction method are low particle flux compared for example to the synchrotron X-ray method and the fact that beam divergence does not generally allow a very precise definition of the gauge volume (citation from the article by Bruno et al. [205]). If high resolution is needed or if the specimen are thick, the data accumulation takes a long time. ‘There are technical issues to be addressed when performing near-surface measurements. If the sampling (gauge) volume is not fully buried within the sample spurious readings of strain can be recorded. The use of a radial collimator in the incident beam can reduce this problem [208]. An alternative solution has been found by Edwards and Wang [209], who used a z-scan. This technique uses a very long gauge volume in at least one direction and consequently assumes the in-plane stress being is isotropic, which in most problems is not the case’ (citation from the article by Bruno et al. [205]).

Curvature/layer removal method Here, layers are removed from parallelepiped-shaped specimen and deflections or curvature changes induced by stress relaxation are measured [202]. Layers may be removed by mechanical or chemical machining. The technique is destructive, but of low cost.

Hole drilling (hole-drilling incremental method) and ring core methods In hole-drilling method, stress relaxation is achieved by drilling a small hole into the specimen. Changes in surface strain during drilling, measured commonly by a strain rosette, give information about residual stress distribution [210, 211] (Figs 3.6a and 3.7). In ring core method, stress relaxation is achieved by a ring core (Fig. 3.6b). From hole/ring core depth vs. strain data, the initial in-plane stress components depth profiles in the specimen can be computed. The hole is drilled by a conical shape mill and has diameter and depth ∼1–4 mm. To avoid production of additional residual stresses during the drilling process, high-speed drilling machines are recommended [212].

Slitting (crack compliance) method In slitting (crack compliance) method, stress relaxation is achieved by fabricating a slit into the specimen (Fig. 3.8). The slits are cut incrementally in-depth using wire electrical discharge machining (EDM). The strain vs. depth data is then used to compute the variation of the pre-slit residual stress component normal to the slit face with depth from the surface (i.e. the stress profile).

75

Shock processing

Strain gauge rosette

Strain gauge rosette

Hole

Ring core

(a)

(b)

Figure 3.6 Principles of (a) hole-drilling and (b) ring-core residual stress measurement techniques. © The Fairmont Press, Inc., reproduced with permission from Ref. [213]. (a)

(b) Strain gauge

Strain gauge

A B

B

Figure 3.7 Stress relaxation induced by drilling a hole into specimen: (a) before drilling and (b) after drilling. Changes in surface stress are usually measured by strain gauges (need a flat surface) alternatively, optical methods may be applied. © Michal Švantner (University of West Bohemia) reproduced with permission from Ref. [212]. Strain gauge

s

Lg w

a

Figure 3.8 Principle of the slitting method. A straight slit is incrementally cut into workpiece by EDM and surface stress is measured by strain gauges [214]. © Elsevier.

Surface contour method The principle of the contour method is that when a part containing residual stresses is cut in half along a straight line, the newly created free surface will deform as the stresses normal to the surface are released by cutting (Fig. 3.9). The deformations of the cut surface can be used to uniquely determine the initial residual stress acting normal to the cut plane using Bueckner’s superposition principle [215, 216]. Surface contour technique does not need strain gauges and suits well for mapping residual stress over a plane in weldings.

76

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

()

Tension Compression

Original part contains sxx(y)

()

Y

X

()

(a)

Cut in half (deformations exaggerated)

(b)

Force deformed surface flat to recover initial residual stress (sxx(y))

(c)

Figure 3.9 Principle of surface contour method. Residual stresses are computed from relaxed surface contour. No strain gauges are needed and stresses can be determined in the full extent of the specimen © ASME, reproduced with permission from Ref. [216].

One of the biggest limitations of the standard contour method is that it can only map a single residual stress component. In long prismatic specimen like weldings, the mentioned limitation may be overcome by cutting the specimen multiple at different angles towards the longitudinal axis – the multi-axis contour method [217].

Ultrasonic methods Stress-related changes in elastic wave velocity can be used for stress determination in solids [218]. Application to LSP needs wavelength of order 0.1 mm, which corresponds to frequencies over 10 MHz.

Magnetic methods For macroscopic stress measurements, the dependence of Barkhausen noise and magnetic permeability on mechanical stress have been used [219].

Raman spectroscopy Raman-active materials undergo a frequency shift of Raman spectra when the crystal lattice is strained. The resolution on the method is order of a few micrometers and it is capable to probe local non-uniform stress distribution [220, 221]. The method cannot be applied to metals and to materials that radiate fluorescence strongly. However, a Raman-inactive specimen can be coated by a Raman-active material like PbO. In the work by Miyagawa et al. [222] surface strains in epoxy, Al-alloy and stainless steel were determined this way in range ε = 0–0.4 with ±20 MPa scatter.

Fluorescence spectroscopy The method relies on piezospectroscopic properties of fluorescent materials – the shifts and broadening of optical fluorescence lines due to mechanical stresses. It can be applied to non-metallic single- and polycrystalline materials like Al2 O3 and MgO up to stresses at least 400 MPa [223].

77

Shock processing

Photoelastic coatings Changes in surface stresses may be visualized using photoelastic coatings which become birefringent under strain. The coating is applied onto a mirrored surface and illuminated by polarized light. The polarization state of the reflected light is dependent on the strain in the coating. High-sensitivity photoelastic materials are among other polycarbonate, glass, and epoxy resins [224, 225].

Moiré interferometry Moiré interferometry is an optical method, providing wholefield contour maps of in-plane displacements with subwavelength sensitivity. In this method, a high-frequency crossed-line diffraction grating is replicated on the surface of the specimen and it deforms together with the underlying specimen. Two coherent beams create a virtual reference grating in their zone of intersection. The deformed specimen grating and reference grating interact to produce the Moiré fringe pattern which represents contours of constant u and v displacements [226, 227]. The described optical methods can be used in laser peening research in conjunction with relaxation methods (instead of strain gauges).

3.3 Laser Shock Peening 3.3.1 Introduction Industrial applications targeted laser peening research started in 1968 at Batelle Columbus Laboratories (Columbus, USA), and the first published report dates from 1974 (J.A. Fox, US Army Mobility Equipment Research and Development Center, Fort Belvoir, USA) [228]. Other centres that have essentially contributed to laser peening research and development are Laboratoire pour l’Application des Lasers de Puissance (LALP) in France and Toshiba Corporation in Japan. The main purpose of LSP is the formation of a compressively stressed surface layer in the workpiece. Such compressive field is beneficial in many ways, first of all for improving fatigue and corrosion strength. In LSP, a high-intensity laser pulse irradiates the surface of the workpiece (optionally covered with a protective coating and/or a transparent overlay). The protective coating (ablator) or a thin surface layer of a bare workpiece is vaporized and the vapour partly ionized. The recoil pressure of free expanding or confined by the transparent overlay plasma generates a shock wave that propagates into the target. The depth of penetration of shock wave is about 2–3 mm, after that it converts into an acoustic wave [229]. The volume affected by the shock wave is plastically strained during its propagation (Fig. 3.10a). The surrounding material is opposed to this straining and therefore biaxial compressive residual stresses on a plane parallel to the surface develop (Fig. 3.10b) [190, 230].

3.3.2 Experimental techniques Majority of water confined laser peening research has been done using the scheme Fig. 3.11, which suits for treating of machine parts in a workshop. At laser peening of stationary constructions under water, or those filled with water-like nuclear reactors, the application of protective coating on surfaces may be troublesome. In 1995, a technology of laser peening P

(a)

(b)

Figure 3.10 Principle of the generation of compressive residual stresses with laser shock treatment: (a) during the interaction and (b) after the interaction (after Peyre et al. [190] © Elsevier).

78

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Water 0.5–5 mm

Workpiece Coating 20–120 m

Laser

Plasma During laser irradiation

Figure 3.11 Schematics of water confined laser shock peening with a protective layer (metallic foil or paint) on the surface. The function of the protective coating (ablator) is to avoid the heating of the workpiece by laser beam. Proper ablator (a material with low heat of vaporization and low shock impedance) can also increase the stress wave amplitude by 30–50% (Fig. 3.19). Mirror

Nd:YAG laser (Frequency doubled) XY table Test sample

Lens

Water jacket

Window

Figure 3.12 Experimental arrangement for laboratory studies of laser shock peening without coating (LPwC). © Trans Tech Publications Inc., republished with permission from Ref. [231].

without protective coating (LPwC) was invented at Toshiba Corporation, Japan. In essence, the workpiece is shocked by high-density laser impacts of relatively low fluence. Despite the surface initially remains tensile stressed, at repetitive shocking it becomes compressive-stressed as well (Fig. 3.26). An experimental arrangement used in laboratory studies of LPwC is presented in Fig. 3.12, and a system used for treatment of nuclear reactor components in Fig. 3.39. When thin sections are treated, the reflected from the rear side shock wave may reduce the residual stresses formed at the front side due to Bauschinger-effect. The solutions are the shocking of both sides of the workpiece simultaneously or to use a ‘momentum trap’ – a solid plate in contact with the backside of laser-shocked sample, avoiding the wave reflecting from the back. The momentum trap should have the same shock impedance that of the workpiece [232].

Lasers For shock peening in water confinement, the laser light should pass the water layer without significant absorption. If centimetre-sized areas need to be treated, the laser should be able to generate tens of Joules in

79

Shock processing

nanoseconds. These requirements are met economically at 1.06 µm Nd:YAG, Nd:glass, and other neodymium ion lasers whose overall energetic efficiency reaches tens of percents. In case of laser peening without protective coating (LPwC), bare metal surfaces reflect most of the 1.06 µm light, and shorter wavelength lasers are needed: frequency doubled Nd:YAG (532 nm) and copper vapour laser (∼510 nm). The absorption of light in water is also lower at these wavelengths. Because relatively low energy impacts are used (40–250 mJ), commercial low cost laser systems are applicable. In Table 3.8, the main laser beam parameters are given for every research report. A comparison of laser systems used for peening is given also in the book by Ding and Ye. [186].

Shock measurement techniques Shock pressure is commonly measured by piezoelectric quartz transducers (Fig. 3.13). X-cut quartz pressure transducers provide a linear response up to 4–6 GPa. The piezoelectric current i is related to pressure p as (p − p0 )dS i= , (3.2) t0 where p0 is pressure at the electrode opposing that of p, d is piezoelectric coefficient, d = 2.05 pC/N, S is the area of collecting electrodes, and t0 is the transit time of the pressure pulse through the quartz crystal, t0 =

g , v

(3.3)

where g is the thickness of the quartz crystal and v is the speed of the acoustic wave through the crystal, v = 5730 m/s [234–236]. Alternatively, piezoelectric polymers like PVDF (polyvinylidene fluoride) can be used as shock pressure transducers. The piezoelectric coefficient of poled thin films of the material is up to 6–7 pC/N. PVDF sensors were found to be able to measure accurately laser shock wave profiles in 0–200 GW/cm2 range [237].

Displacements measurement by EMV gauges Besides the pressure, the displacement of the target’s rear surface can give useful information about the shock, for example, the mechanical impulse can be directly calculated from the target’s velocity (Eq. (3.21)). Laser Glass overlay Aluminium foil Water Quartz crystal Screw Positive electrode Ground 50 Ohm structure (a)

(b)

Figure 3.13 Principle of shock pressure measurement by quartz transducers: (a) glass confinement and (b) water confinement. © American Institute of Physics (1990), reprinted with permission from Ref. [233].

80

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Laser

Thin foil

Water

Uf (m/s) Parallel pins

E (V)

B

Figure 3.14 Use of a EMV gauge for measurement of displacements of a laser-shocked target. The displacement of the target causes a change of the magnetic flux through a conductor loop and a electromagnetic force is generated. © Institute of Physics, reproduced with permission from Ref. [237].

Displacements may be conveniently measured by EMV gauges (Fig. 3.14). The technique was reported to be applicable at laser energy densities up to 20 GW/cm2 [237]. The electromagnetic force is related to the particle velocity u as [238] ε(t) = l · [u(t) × B]

(3.4)

where l is the length vector of the gauge, u is the particle velocity, and B is the magnetic field strength.

Displacements measurement by VISAR In VISAR interferometers (velocity interferometer system for any reflector), the Doppler shift of a laser beam reflected from the moving target is utilized (Fig. 3.15). The free-surface motion creates a Doppler shift of the light wavelength λ (formula 3.5) and the combination of two signals (a delayed and a non-delayed one) creates a fringe count F(t) which allows to access to the specimen free surface velocity vs. time Vs (t) (formula 3.6). The advantage of VISAR in laser shock research is that there are no pressure limits for this method (as for quartz gauges above 4–5 GPa) and that,

Ar laser

Optical fiber Photomultiplier tube M1 Target Beam splitter

Oscilloscope M2

Nd: YAG pulse laser

Computer

Figure 3.15 Schematics of target’s rear side displacement measurement by VISAR. The technique provides a time resolution of 1–2 ns. © American Institute of Physics (1998), reprinted with permission from Ref. [241].

81

Shock processing

contrary to electromagnetic systems, measurements can be performed on any kind of reflective surface, even on the ferromagnetic ones (citation from the article by Peyre et al. [239]) −2

λ λ(t) − λ0 Vs (t) = , = C λ0 λ0

(3.5)

λ0 F(t), (3.6) 2τ where C is constant and τ is the time difference of light paths in the interferometer [240, 239]. In case of shock transit time through the target being much greater than the laser pulse duration, the maximum pressure Pmax at the target can be calculated from free surface velocity profile Vs (t) as Vs (t) =

Pmax

Vs1 = ρ0 · C0 + S · 2

·

Vs1 2 + y0 + δP, 2 3

(3.7)

where ρ0 is the density, C0 is the bulk sound velocity, S is linear Hugoniot slope coefficient, Vs1 is first rear surface velocity peak, y0 is the initial yield strength, δP is empirical correction term, taking into account the pressure decay of the shock wave during the sample crossing (Fig. 3.21). For 250-µm thick Cu and Al samples δP = 2 kbar [241], for shock attenuation in steel, see the article by Peyre et al. [239]. Figure 3.19 presents an application example of VISAR technique. All the measuring methods described above are applicable to the rear side of the target only. For to get adequate information about the situation at the shocked side, the specimen should be thin enough (see Table 3.8). The phenomena inside the specimen can been investigated using mathematical models only.

3.3.3 Shock pressure Figure 3.16 presents calculated and Fig. 3.17 a measured by a quartz transducer pressure transient in a typical laser peening process. Note that the pressure lasts longer than the laser pulse and that water confinement increases the pressure amplitude many times. In Fig. 3.18 the dependences of the peak pressure on laser energy density and pulse duration are presented. Figure 3.19 illustrates the effect of a protective coating (ablator) on peak pressure. The theory of pressure formation is given in Section 3.3.6.1.

Plasma pressure (GPa)

3

In water 2

1

Laser power In air

0

10

20 30 Time (ns)

40

50

Figure 3.16 Calculated plasma pressures at laser shocks in air and in water near a solid boundary. Focal spot diameter 0.75 mm, laser fluence 22.6 J/cm2 , peak power density 4.5 GW/cm2 . The plasma pressure amplitude in water is 4–10 times greater than that in air and its duration is two- to three-fold compared to the laser pulse duration. (Adapted from the article by Sano et al. [242] © 1997 Elsevier.)

82

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Pressure pulse

Laser pulse 100

0

100

200

300

400

Time (ns)

Figure 3.17 Experimental pressure pulse submitted to the target, compared with the laser pulse [190]. Experimental conditions: Nd:glass laser, 1.06 µm, 25 ns (Gaussian), spot 5–12 mm, 1–8 GW/cm2 ; water layer 2–5 mm; target: Al-alloy. © Elsevier. 10

Pmax(0.6 ns) 9.5 GPa

Peak pressure (GPa)

Pmax(10 ns) 6 GPa Pmax(25 ns) 5 GPa

Analytical model (a 0.3)

25 ns 0.6 ns 10 ns

1 1

10 Incident laser intensity

100 (GW/cm2)

Figure 3.18 Influence of laser intensity and pulse duration on the plasma pressure generated in water confinement regime (laser wavelength λ = 1.06 µm)[243]. Analytical model corresponds to Eqs (3.13)–(3.17), α is thermal to internal energy ratio of the plasma, Eq. (3.12). The pressures saturate at high-laser intensities due to optical breakdown at water/air interface. At shorter laser wavelengths, the peak pressure saturates at lower laser intensities, for example ∼4.5 GPa for 0.532 µm and ∼3.5 GPa for 0.355 µm (both for 25 ns pulse length). © SPIE 1998, reproduced with permission from Ref. [243].

3.3.4 Shock propagation and wave phenomena A schematic presentation of wave propagation in a laser-shocked elasto-plastic body is given in Fig. 3.20, and corresponding dynamic stresses in Fig. 3.21. Sudden rise of plasma pressure creates a plane longitudinal wave at the surface, which propagates into material inducing plastic deformation εp of the form ε11 = ε22 = εp , ε33 = −2εp , εij = 0 (εp > 0). At the border of the impact, two types of release waves are created: a longitudinal or P wave, and a transverse or S wave created by the shear εrz occurring at the side of the impact. The interaction of P release wave with the surface creates a ‘head wave’ H, but the amplitude of both is too low to produce any permanent (i.e. plastic) deformation. On the other hand, the S wave strongly interacts with the surface to form a Rayleigh wave. As the Rayleigh wave approaches the centre of the impact, its amplitude rises as a result of the conservation of kinetic energy (see also model Eqs (3.45)–(3.51)). According to calculations by Dubrujeaud et al. [244] the P component creates deformations εp < 0 and thus reduces the plastic deformations left by the plane

83

Shock processing

8 316L steel 100 30 m Al

300

6 200

5 Bare 316L steel

4 3

Analytical model 2 2

Free velocity V(m/s)

Stress (GPa)

7

100

4 6 8 10 12 Peak power density f (GW/cm2)

Figure 3.19 Influence of an aluminium overlay on peak plasma pressure at water-confined laser peening (VISAR measurements) [239]. Target: 316L foil, water layer thickness 3–4 mm, laser wavelength 1.06 µm, pulse temporal shape Gaussian. © American Institute of Physics (1998), reprinted with permission from Ref. [239]. Pressure increase occurs if Zoverlay = ρoverlay · Us,overlay < Ztarget , where Z is shock impedance, ρ is density, and Us is shock velocity. S H

P P

S

RAY

RAY SP

Emission of plane wave P and release waves P an S. Interaction of P release wave with surface head wave H Interaction of the S release wave with the surface creation of Rayleigh wave (RAY). Propagation of Rayleigh wave Focusing of Rayleigh wave plastic flow of affected layer. Creation of residual stresses at centre

Figure 3.20 Schematics of wave phenomena in a laser-shocked elasto-plastic √ √ body. The released P and S waves move at a longitudinal velocity α = λ + 2µ/ρ and transverse velocity β = µ/ρ respectively, where λ and µ are Lamé constants, and ρ is the density [244]. © The Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining, reproduced with permission from Ref. [244].

wave. The S component produces a shearing plastic deformation εRay–S of the form ε13 = ε31 = εp,rz , all other components of the tensor being zero. Here, εp,rz is approximately a linear function of r for r < cR t0 /2. This induces a V-shaped plastic deformation of the surface near the centre of the impact zone. After the passage of the Rayleigh wave, the bulk of the substrate tends to react against the deformation created in the surface layer, flattening the V, then opening its vortex to create tensile stresses σrr and σθθ for r < cR t0 /2. Consequently the stress drop at the centre of the impact is a result of the effect of both the P and S components of the Rayleigh waves which are emitted at r = R and which reach the centre at the same time (citation from the article by Dubrujeaud et al. [244]). The residual stress drop in the centre caused by surface wave focusing (Fig. 3.22a) may be avoided by elliptical/square impacts or by overlapping impacts [245, 246, 190].

84

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

(a)

0

Dynamic stresses (MPa)

300 600 900 800 ns

1200

1800 0.0

Dynamic stresses (MPa)

(b)

Radial stress, rr

400 ns

1500

Axial stress, yy

200 ns 1.0

2.0

3.0 4.0 Depth y (mm)

5.0

6.0

5.0

6.0

0 yy

300

600

rr

900 400 ns

800 ns

200 ns

1200 1500 0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0 4.0 Surface r (mm)

Figure 3.21 Calculated numerically by Ding and Ye [186] dynamic stresses (a) in depth along centre line (r = 0), (b) on the surface of a 35CD4 30HRC steel target, laser shocked in water confinement by a triangular pressure pulse of 2.8 GPa amplitude and of 50 ns duration (FWHM) (see also op. cit., Figs 4.6 and 4.7 for dynamics of the energy components – internal, kinetic, elastically stored, viscously and plastically dissipated). © Woodhead Publishing Limited, reproduced with permission from Ref. [186].

3.3.5 Shock-induced changes in materials Residual stresses A typical residual stress distribution induced by a single macroscopic circular laser shot is given in Fig. 3.22. The residual stress drop in the centre is due to S release wave focusing as described in Section 3.3.4. In Fig. 3.23, the laser peening induced residual stresses are compared with shot peening ones. However, deep rolling may well drive the compressive stresses as deep as LSP [192]. Figures 3.24 and 3.25 present examples of the dependencies of plastically affected depth and maximum achievable surface stress on shock impulse and material static yield strength, respectively. In all of these experiments the targets had protective coatings.

85

Shock processing

rr

suu

100

500 400

Radial residual stress, MPa

Residual stress, MPa

600

srr

300 200 100 Impact 0

5

r 0 Radius, mm (a)

5

0 100

r 0 mm

0.5

200

1.0

1.5 Depth, mm

2.0

z

r 3 mm

300 400 500 (b)

Residual stress (MPa)

Figure 3.22 Residual stresses on Astroloy after a circular confined plasma laser shock [245] (τ0 = 40 ns, I = 5.9 GW/cm2 , P = 37 GPa); (a) Superficial residual stresses; (b) In depth profile of residual stresses. Copyright 1990 from “Laser shock surface treatment of Ni-based superalloys’’ by Forget P, Strudel JL, Jeandin M. Reproduced by permission of Taylor & Francis Group, LLC., http://www.taylorandfrancis.com 0 20

Shot peened

60

Laser-shot peened

100 140 180

Inconel 718

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Depth from surface (mm)

Figure 3.23 Comparison of depth profiles of residual stresses achieved by a typical shot peening and by a typical laser shock. Shot peening: FOD 0.010A; laser: 100 J/cm2 ; one pulse. Exact pulse length was not given (in range 10–100 ns). Adapted from the article by Hammersley et al. [191] © Elsevier Science Ltd (2001).

Plastically affected depth (mm)

1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 25 ns

0.2

2.5 ns 0.0 0

6 12 Impluse (Mbar ns)

Figure 3.24 Relation between impulse and plastically affected depth. Target: 35CD4 50HRC, water confinement (2 mm) [247]. © EDP Sciences, reproduced with permission from Ref [247].

86

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Residual surface stresses (MPa)

0

A356

200 400

7075-T7351

sres0.5.Y

316L

Astroloy 55C1

600

X12CrNiMo12-2-2

800

X35Cr4-50HRC 1000 First impact Maximum level

1200 1400

0

500

X100CrMo17

1000

1500

2000

Static yield strength (MPa)

Figure 3.25 Influence of the mechanical properties of the targets on the residual stress levels achievable by LSP (Compilation by Peyre et al. [243]). © SPIE (1998), reproduced with permission from Ref. [243].

Coverage:

0 % (ref.) 100 % 200 % 800 %

400 200 0 200 400 600 800

0

0.1

0.2

Depth from surface (mm)

0.3

600 Residual stresses, sy (MPa)

Residual stresses, sx (MPa)

600

Coverage:

400 200

0 % (ref.) 100 % 200 % 800 %

0 200 400 600 800

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

Depth from surface (mm)

Figure 3.26 Depth profiles of residual stress in SUS304 stainless steel laser shocked without protective coating in water (LPwC process). Laser: Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, spot ∼1 mm. The insets at bottom show the laser scanning pattern (lines) and the direction of the stresses (pile) [231]. © Trans Tech Publications Inc., reproduced with permission from Ref. [231].

An example of residual stress evolution at laser peening without protective coating is presented in Fig. 3.26. Although after first impacts the surface remains under tension, the deformations from subsequent shocks add to the previous ones until also the surface becomes compressively stressed. Because the laser peening induced residual stress/strain depends besides the shock-induced plastic deformations also on the specimen shape and dimensions, for unique characterization of the laser peening results, it is convenient to determine the eigenstrain (plastic strain) (Fig. 3.27) [248, 249].

Fatigue strength Laser peening induced compressive residual stresses can considerably inhibit the initiation and propagation of cracks (Fig. 3.28) and this way prolong the fatigue life of machine parts (Fig. 3.29).

87

Shock processing

Strain

0.004 0.003 Eigenstrain 0.002 0.001 0

0

1

2

Depth, mm 3

0.001 0.002

Residual elastic strain

0.003

Figure 3.27 [249].

Elastic and eigenstrain distribution in a laser peened titanium alloy. Schematically after Korsunsky

Edge of notch

Edge of notch

Shear lip

Laser shocked zone

(a)

(b)

Figure 3.28 Schematics of the crack propagation in a notched test sample (2024-T3, 6.4-mm thick), (a) unshocked, (b) – laser shocked simultaneously from both sides (Nd:glass, 30 ns, ∼12 × 109 GW/cm2 ) [232]. Dashed lines – river line patterns, solid lines – crack front contours. Reprinted with permission of ASM International®. All rights reserved. www.asminternational.org (see also the article by Fabbro et al. [250] for crack propagation speed measurements). 320 300

S–N curves at R 0.1

smax (MPa)

5

280 260

22 90

Laser shock

240 1

220 200 180 104

Untreated Shot - peening

2

236 MPa 215 MPa 195 MPa

105 106 107 Number of cycles (N )

108

Figure 3.29 Comparison of fatigue life σmax –N curves for unshocked, shot-peened, and laser shocked 7075-T7351 aluminium alloy. Notched samples of thickness 11 mm (see the inset) were tested using a three-point bending machine, stress ratio R = 0.1, frequency 40–50 Hz (adapted from the article by Peyre et al. [190]). © Elsevier.

88

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Table 3.4

Influence on laser peening on surface roughness. Confining medium/Coating

Changes in surface roughness

Reference

2024-T62

Glass (4.5 mm)/ black paint

Surface roughness lowered from Ra 6.3 µm to Ra 0.1 µm

Zhang (1999) [252]

A5083

Water/without coating

Surface roughness of laser-treated material increased with increase of laser power density and with decrease of scanning speed (scanning speed range was 0.1–15 mm/s), exceeding tens of µm Rz

Kusaka (2005) [253]

SUS304, SUS316L

Water/without coating

Surface roughness Ra was less than 2 µm (1.2–1.3 µm for 304 stainless steel)

Sano (2006) [254]

Materials

Hardness Laser peening has been found to increase the surface hardness in many materials, see Table 3.8 and the book by Ding and Ye [186] pp. 40–43. The following mechanisms responsible to hardness increase were reviewed by Peyre and Fabbro [230]: (1) Increase in dislocation density. (2) Phase transformations like γ–α in iron-based materials. (3) Structural modifications such as twinning in stainless steels.

Surface roughness Laser shocking tends to create a certain surface roughness/waveness (Table 3.4) independent on the initial state of the surface due to inhomogeneity and interference in high-intensity laser beams, see for example the articles by Colvin et al. [251] and Forget et al. [245]. Among competitive to laser peening methods, the shot peening introduces considerably higher surface roughness (is used for creating decorative surfaces) and deep rolling results in considerably lower surface roughness than laser peening [192].

3.3.6 Mathematical models of laser shock peening 3.3.6.1 Plasma processes and pressure generation Fairand and Clauer Fairand and Clauer [255] report about 1D-computer code called LILA for calculation of confined plasma pressure at laser peening. Absorption of light in plasma was accounted by Kramer’s formula for inverse Bremsstrahlung (7.82). No further details of plasma process modelling were given. The simulation agreed fairly good with the experiment in laser intensity range 1–4 GW/cm2 . Griffin, Justus, Campillo, Goldberg Griffin et al. [256] presented a 1D-model for ablation shock pressure in 1986, using the same assumptions as Fabbro et al. (see below), except that the laser pulse was Gaussian, I (t) = I0 exp −4 ln 2(t /τ)2

(3.8)

89

Shock processing

f10 J/cm2

Pressure (kbar)

3

2 P L

2 1 1

0

300

Plasma depth (m)

I

600

Time (ns)

Figure 3.30 Calculated by the 1D-model by Griffin et al. [256] plasma pressure P and plasma depth L for a Gaussian laser pulse I. The model parameters were β = 3, f = 0.1, φ = 10 J/cm2 , τ = 150 ns, I0 = 63 MW/cm2 , and Z = 63 kbar s/km. Plasma geometry was assumed the same that in Fig. 3.31. © American Institute of Physics (1986), reprinted from Ref. [256].

Differential equations for energy balance and for plasma opening width were solved numerically by Runge– Kutta method; an example is given in Fig. 3.30. According to the Griffin’s model, the peak shock pressure approximately equals γfZφ ∼ Ppeak = 0.95 (3.9) (1 + β)τ with Z =

Z1 Z2 , Z1 + Z 2

where φ is laser fluence and f is the fraction of the driver laser energy absorbed in an ideal gas, 4 γ= ln 2, π

(3.10)

(3.11)

β = 3/2, 5/2, or 3 for mono-, di-, and polyatomic gases, respectively.

Fabbro, Fournier, Ballard, Devaux, Virmon The widely used Fabbro’s model is based on Griffin’s model, but the assumption of constant energy density during the laser pulse enabled to get analytical solutions for plasma parameters (Fig. 3.31) [233, 230, 257]. Nomenclature: I (t) – laser power density I0 – laser power density of a rectangular pulse τ – laser pulse duration Elaser – laser energy Eint – internal energy of the plasma, Eint = Eth + Eioni Eth – thermal energy Eioni – ionization energy α – fraction of incident laser energy absorbed by the plasma and transformed into shock energy: α=

Eth ; Eint

(3.12)

90

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Laser beam

2 u2

Shock wave

Glass or water overlay D2

Opening of the L interface u1

Plasma Absorptive overlay

Shock wave D1

1

Metallic target

Figure 3.31 Geometry of the plasma in the models by Griffin et al. and Fabbro et al. [230]. Sudden increase of laser ablation plasma pressure creates two shock waves and drives the target and the confining medium into motion. The structure is assumed to be of infinite width and depth; u1 and u2 are the particle velocities and D1 and D2 are the shock velocities. Compare with laser cleaning process (Fig. 2.36). Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media.

the fraction (1 − α) is used for the generation and ionization of the plasma (α = 1 for a perfect gas) Z1 – shock impedance of the target, Z1 = ρ1 D1 Z2 – shock impedance of the confining medium, Z2 = ρ2 D2 ρ1 , ρ2 – densities of the target and confining medium, respectively m1 , m2 – masses of the target and of the confining medium D1 , D1 – shock velocities in the target and confining medium, respectively. (also U1 and U2 ) u1 , u2 – particle velocities (velocities of the opening boundaries) L – width of the plasma opening A – relative part of absorbed in the plasma laser energy Evap = mHvap – energy of vapourization of the target m – (experimental) ablated mass Hvap – enthalpy of vapourization of the target Assumptions (1) The model is 1D. (2) Laser pulse is rectangular of intensity I0 and duration τ. (3) Laser energy Elaser is totally converted into internal energy of the plasma Eint and the work of pressure forces to open the interface between the solid target and the confining medium; thermal losses on walls and radiative emission are negligible. (4) Plasma is an ideal gas in thermodynamical equilibrium so that the pressure (P) is related to the thermal energy by P = 2/3 Eth = 2/3 αEint. (5) Target and the confining medium have constant shock impedances Z1 and Z2. (6) Boundaries of the opening move with shock wave particle velocities u1 , u2. The model is based on two differential Eqs (3.13) and (3.13): (1) Energy conservation relation:

d Eint (t)L dL + ; I (t) = P(t) dt dt

(3.13)

(2) Expansion of the plasma opening: V (t) =

dL(t) = dt

1 1 + Z1 Z2

P(t).

(3.14)

91

Shock processing

Table 3.5 Approximate plasma absorption coefficient at 1.06 µm, measured in a quartz confinement. [233]. Laser intensity (GW/cm2 )

Plasma absorption (A)

0.1 1 10

65% 80% 97%

For a constant laser power density I0 and pulse duration τ, the integration of these equations gives the maximum pressure generated by the plasma: α P = A ZI0 (3.15) 2α + 3 Here A is a constant, Z is the combined shock impedance of the target material and the confinement medium, defined by 2 1 1 + , (3.16) = Z Z1 Z2 and I0 is the absorbed laser intensity. In practical units, the formula (3.15) becomes P(GPA) = 0.01

α Z(g/cm2 s) I0 (GW/cm2 ). 2α + 3

(3.17)

The parameter α should be determined from experiment or using a detailed plasma model. In laser peening regimes, values of α = 0.1–0.5 have been reported Berthe et al. [258, 257] and by Wu and Shin [259]. As pointed out by Wu and Shin [259], the low values of α account for neglected light reflection at water–plasma interface and plasma energy losses through conduction and radiation in simple models. For water confinement, the formula (3.17) is further simplified: P(GPA) = 1.02 I0 (GW/cm2 ).

(3.18)

The plasma thickness at the end of laser pulse is given as L(τ)(µm) = 2 × 103 · P(GPa)τ(ns)

(3.19)

According to Sollier et al. [260] the plasma thickness at the end of the laser pulse is 2–3 mm. The formula (3.17) may easily be modified to account to the absorption A of the plasma and the energy expended to ablate the target Evap : P(GPa) = 0.01

α

Z(g/cm2 s) AI (GW/cm2 ) − Evap (J/cm2 )/τ(ns) 2α + 3

(3.20)

Measured by Fabbro et al. [233] plasma absorption coefficients A for 3 and 30 ns laser pulses of wavelength of 1.06 µm are presented in Table 3.5. Impulse momentum, delivered to a unit mass/area target is given by √ J = m1V1 = 2Ek

m1 , 1 + m 1 m2

(3.21)

92

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

where Ek is the kinetic energy of the system, Ek =

m1V12 m2V22 + 2 2

(3.22)

As noted by Lee et al. [261] once the peak pressure exceeds the Hugoniot elastic limit, the impulse momentum is a better parameter than the pressure for estimating the result of laser peening (Fig. 3.24). According to the measurements by Fabbro et al. [233] in confined ablation regime the impulse is of order 1 Mbar ns at 1–10 J/cm2 and rises up to ∼10 Mbar ns at 100 J/cm2 . Thus Eq. (3.21) overestimates the impulse. For constant laser intensity I0 , the pressure at the end of the laser pulse τ is P(τ) =

m 1 I0 α 2τ(α + 1)

(3.23)

τ . m1

(3.24)

and the velocity of the target V1 (τ) = 2P(τ)

The last formula enables to calculate the plasma pressure from VISAR measurements of target velocity (e.g. Fig. 3.19). The model of Fabbro et al. includes two free variables to be determined from experiment or from advanced models: the ratio of plasma thermal energy to internal energy α and plasma absorption coefficient A.

Limitations of the Griffin’s and Fabbro’s models (after Griffin et al. [256]) (1) The details of the formation of the plasma have been ignored, that is the ideal gas was assumed to have existed prior to the laser pulse. In reality, a threshold fluence exists before the plasma is formed. (2) It was assumed that the mass of the plasma is constant and that it behaves as an ideal gas. However, the rates of vaporization, ionization, and recombination vary during the process. The experiments by Sakka et al. (see Table 7.6) have shown that water plasma at laser fluences around 10 J/cm2 starts to behave as a strongly coupled plasma. (3) The variation of shock impedance Z with pressure has been ignored. (4) The target was assumed to be very thick. (5) The only energy–loss mechanism included in these models is the work of expansion. Losses due to radiation, thermal conduction, and target deformation were ignored. Thermal conduction losses are expected to become significant at times much greater than 2τ. (6) The model is not valid in case of picosecond or shorter laser pulses, where the plasma does not have an opportunity to expand during laser excitation. Assuming ideal gas behaviour also in the picosecond case, the peak pressure is expected to vary linearly as also observed [256]. Sollier, Berthe, Fabbro, Peyre, Bartnicki In the article by Sollier et al. [262] the transmission of light by water plasma in the laser peening regimes was calculated numerically using the model in Sollier et al. [260] which takes into account the cascade and multiphoton ionization, and diffusion and recombination losses of electrons (see also Section 7.3). The plasma parameters (density, temperature, ionization) were calculated according to the mass balance equation

dn(t) 2 1 = nVabl (t) − P(t)n(t) , (3.25) dt L(t) Z where n is the density of the neutrals and Vabl is the ablation velocity from Hertz–Knudsen theory. The plasma was considered as a gas of neutrals from the target only, and thermal losses with cold materials (water and target)

93

Shock processing

2

3.1021

1.5

Te Z

2.1021 1.1021

1 0.5 0 100

0 0

20

40 60 Time (ns)

80

Pmax experimental

3

P

2.5

1

2

7 6 5 4

1.5

3

1

2

0.5 0

1 0 100

0

20

40 60 Time (ns)

80

1

Z Pression (GPa)

2.5

4.1021

Te (eV)

ne (cm3)

5.1021

3.5

3

ne

8

4

3.5

6.1021

u

7.1021

Figure 3.32 Example of simulation of confined laser peening plasma parameters [262]. Gaussian pulse τ = 15 ns, λ = 1064 nm, 5 GW/cm2 . Notations: ne is the electron density, Te is the electron temperature, Z is the reduced temperature, P is the plasma pressure, 1 is the coupling coefficient, θ is the degeneracy parameter. © SPIE (2003), reproduced with permission from Ref. [262].

were taken into account. Using experimentally determined absorption of laser light, the plasma parameters were calculated in 1D by the ACCIC code (Auto Consistent Confined Interaction Code) (Fig. 3.32). The calculations showed that the plasma was partly degenerated (θ close to 1) and correlated ( > 1). At 1064 nm, the breakdown process was found to be dominated by avalanche ionization whereas at 532 and 355 nm the multiphoton ionization played the dominant role [260].

Zhang, Yao, Noyan Zhang et al. [263] present a laser plasma model for the case of microscale laser impacts (spot size ∼10 µm) under the following conditions: (1) Plasma expands only in the axial direction in the early stage; density, internal energy, and pressure of the plasma are uniform within the plasma volume but can vary in time. (2) Plasma obeys ideal gas laws. (3) Only the coating layer is vaporized, the metal target experiences neglible thermal effects. (4) The coating layer is thin and well coupled with the metal target, thus the shock pressure and the particle velocities of the coating layer and the metal target are equal. The water–plasma target system was divided into six regions: unshocked water, shocked water, plasma, coating layer, shocked solid, and unshocked solid. The shocked and unshocked properties of water were related by mass, energy, momentum-conservation, and shock speed constitutive relations: ρw0 Uw − Uw0 =1− , ρw Dw − Dw0 Pw − Pw0 = ρw0 (Dw − Dw0 )(Uw − Uw0 ), 1 U2 U2 1 1 Ew + w − Ew0 + w0 = (Pw + Pw0 ) , − 2 2 2 ρw0 ρw

(3.26) (3.27)

Dw = Dw0 − Sw Uw ,

(3.28) (3.29)

where U denotes the particle velocity, D the shock velocity, with subscripts w0 for unshocked and w for shocked water. Mass and energy conservation equations for plasma were used in form: t ρP (t)

(UpL 0

t + UpR )dt = (MFw + MFc )dt, 0

(3.30)

94

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

where UL is the particle velocity near water, UR is the particle velocity near target, MF w is the mass flow from water into plasma, and MF c is the mass flow from the coating into plasma; and t Ept + Wp − EMF =

AP × I (t)dt,

(3.31)

0

where Ept is the total energy stored in the plasma, Wp is the work done by the plasma, EMF is energy exchanged through mass flow, and AP is fraction of the energy absorbed by the plasma (determined from experiments). The set of equations was solved numerically, using mass and energy conservation relations at interfaces.

Colvin, Ault, King, Zimmerman Colvin et al. [251] developed a computational model for pressure generation in case of solid dielectric confinement, accounting for the initial absorption of light onto a metal surface, low-intensity photoionization absorption in neutral vapour, collisional ionization, recombination, dielectric breakdown and band gap collapse of the dielectric, electron conductivity, thermal transport, and constitutive properties of the materials. Analytical Quotidian EOS (Eq. 3.64) was used for all of the materials. The model was incorporated into a 2D-radiation–hydrodynamics code LASNEX. No free variables were needed. Simulations showed that most of the laser energy is absorbed in the dielectric tamper (fused silica or sapphire), and a little part in the ablator (Al or Zn). Wu and Shin Wu and Shin [259] presented a self-closed thermal model for LSP under water confinement. The model considered laser ablation of the coating layer, water evaporation, plasma ionization and expansion, energy loss of plasma through radiation and electron conduction, laser absorption by plasma through inverse Bremsstrahlung effect and photoionisation, and reflection of laser beam at the air–water interface and plasma-water interface. No free variables were needed. Assumptions taken in the model are the following: (1) The physical processes were considered 1D. (2) Plasma state variables as temperature, density, etc. are uniform in space, but vary with time. (3) The main mechanisms of laser absorption by plasma are electron-ion and electron-atom inverse Bremsstrahlung absorption and photoionization. (4) All the free electrons in the plasma were assumed to have the same temperature Te , and all the particles (atoms and ions) in it were also assumed to have the same temperature Ti (two temperature model). (5) Water molecules were assumed to be completely dissociated into H and O atoms immediately after evaporation. The receding velocities of coating and water surface due to evaporation were calculated from Hertz–Knudsen equation (Eq. 7.58). The plasma pressure caused moving velocities of the water and the coating surface were calculated separately through the momentum–conservation equation and shock speed constitutive relations, the same way as in (Eqs 3.26–3.27): uw,pre =

P P = , ρw D w ρw (Dw0 + Sw uw,pre )

(3.32)

P P = , ρc D c ρc (Dc0 + Sc uc,pre )

(3.33)

uc,pre =

where ρw and ρc are densities, and Dw and Dc are shock velocities of water and coating, respectively. Dw0 , Sw , and Dc0 , Sc are material property constants (cf. Eq. 7.119) for shock velocity calculations. The total receding velocities of the water and the coating surface were taken as a sum of the evaporation and plasma pressure caused boundary velocities. The calculation by this model peak plasma pressure was in good agreement with experiments (less than ±10 per cent difference) in range of laser power densities 1–10 GW/cm2 and for different combinations of

95

Shock processing

pulse shape, wavelength and duration: (Gaussian, 25 ns, 1064 nm), (Gaussian, 25 ns, 532 nm), (Gaussian, 0.6 ns, 1064 nm), (short-rise-time pulse, 30 ns, 1064 nm). At power densities more than 25 GW/cm2 the measured pressure was lower than the calculated one. The calculations demonstrated that the reflection of laser light at water–plasma interface ranges up to ∼35 per cent for 1064 nm light and up to 8 per cent at 532 nm, and that the stable value of α is ∼0.5.

3.3.6.2 Models for residual stresses Nomenclature a – edge of square-shaped impacts r0 – radius of circle-shaped impacts τ – pressure pulse duration P – shock pressure ρ – density of the target λ, µ – Lamé constants v – Poisson’s ratio ε – strain ε – strain tensor, also strain vector εp – plastic strain εp – plastic strain tensor σ – stress σ – stress tensor, also stress vector σ0 – initial residual stress σY ,YS – uniaxial compressive static yield strength (elastic static limit) σsurf – surface (superficial) residual stress PH , Ph, HEL = Hugoniot elastic limit = yield strength under a uniaxial shock condition Lp – plastically affected depth Ce – speed of elastic longitudinal waves Cp – speed of plastic longitudinal waves

Ballard’s model Ballard’s model describes analytically the plastic deformation and the magnitude and depth of induced residual stresses in a laser-shocked body [264, 265, 190, 230]. Assumptions (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

The shocked body is a elastic-perfectly plastic half-plane. Shock waves are longitudinal and plane. Plastic strain follows a von Mises yielding criterion, |σr − σx | = σ0 + σY . The applied strain is uniform over the impacted area. Duration of the impact is sufficiently small, satisfying the relationship: τ r0

ρ (λ + 2µ) 4µ(λ + µ)

(3.34)

In such case, the induced waves can be considered longitudinal and plane. (6) Applied pressure pulse is rectangular (P is constant); the pressure is uniform on the impacted surface. (7) Viscous effects in the material are negligible. This assumption is applicable for steels and aluminium alloys at laser pulse durations greater than 1 ns [265]. (8) Work hardening of the material is ignored. Under these assumptions, the shock may be described by propagating into the depth independent elastic and plastic waves (Fig. 3.33).

96

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Elastic recoil waves (2HEL amplitude)

Plastic waves Peak pressure

Z

Stress profiles Elastic waves (HEL amplitude)

Figure 3.33

Schematics of waves propagation in the Ballard model, after Peyre et al. [190] © Elsevier.

In cylindrical coordinates r, θ, z, the tensors of applied strain and stress and of induced plastic strain become 0 0 0 ε= 0 0 0 , (3.35) 0 0 ε σr 0 0 (3.36) σ = 0 σr 0 , 0 0 σz ⎤ ⎡ 0 0 −εp 2 εp = ⎣0 (3.37) −εp 2 0 ⎦. 0 0 εp From generalized Hooke’s formula, σ = λ tr(ε) + 2µ(ε − εp ),

(3.38)

σr = λε

(3.39)

the radial stresses are expressed as σz = (λ + 2µ)ε

Plastic strain induced by LSP, ε p

σz = (λ + 2µ)ε − 2µεp

0

(elastic) σr = λε + µεp

Elastic PH deformation

Hugoniot limit straining condition

(elastic–plastic).

2PH

(3.40)

P Bounding condition Reverse straining with surface release waves

2PH 3l2m bounded plastic strain

Plastic deformation bounding

Figure 3.34 Surface plastic strain dependence on peak pressure induced by a laser impact. Below PH , no plastification occurs; between PH and 2PH , plastic strain occurs with a purely elastic reverse strain; above 2PH , elastic reverse strain is bounded to 2PH and plastic strain is also bounded to 2PH /(3λ + 2µ). Above 2.5 PH , in reality, surface release waves focus and amplify from the edges of the impacts thus modifying the residual stress field (see Fig. 3.20). Schematically after Ballard [264] and Peyre et al. [190,230].

97

Shock processing

From von Mises yielding criterion in a biaxial condition, |σr −σx | = σY − σ0 , the Hugoniot limit PH becomes λ 1−v PH = 1 + (3.41) · (σY − σ0 ) = (σY − σ0 ) 2µ 1 − 2v Without initial stresses, the introduction of plastic strain in the Ballard’s model can be schematically represented as shown in Figs 3.34 and 3.35. Table 3.6 presents a summary of Ballard’s theory results, and Fig. 3.36 compares the experimental values of HEL with theoretical ones. sx

2

P

YS

oad ing stic

PH

1

Elastic loading 4

r

YS

Magnitude of elastic release waves

unl

Plastic loading

Ela

Impact pressure

2PH

0

x

3 Plastic unloading

YS

sr

P 2PH

von Mises criterion

Figure 3.35 Surface stress excursion during pressure transient at laser peening according to the model by Ballard [230]. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media. 3 Previous studies This study

2.5

55C1 steel (ferritic)

2 HEL (GPa)

X12CrNi12-2 (martensitic)

1.5 316L stainless steel (austenitic)

1

7075

HEL 0.5

(1v) s (12v) Y

AI-12%Si AI-7%Si

0 0

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Static yield strength sY (GPa)

1

Figure 3.36 Dependence of the Hugoniot elastic limit (HEL) of various materials under laser shock loading on the corresponding static values [239]. American Institute of Physics (1998), reprinted with permission from Ref. [239].

98

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Table 3.6 Analytical expressions for mechanical effects induced by a fast laser shock impact on an elastic-perfectly plastic material. After Ballard [264], Dubouchet [266], and Peyre et al. [190, 230, 267]. Calculated value Plastic strain condition (Hugoniot elastic limit – HEL) PH

Equation number Comments

Analytical formula λ (σY − σ0 ) PH = 1 + 2µ

(3.42)

Peak pressure condition λ P = 2P (σY − σ0 ) = 2 1 + sat H (saturated plastic strain) 2µ Plastic deformation

εp = −

Optimal pressure

P = 2–2.5 PH

Plastified depth (triangular pressure pulse)

Cel Cpl τ L= Cel − Cpl

Superficial residual stresses (square impact)

σsurf

Superficial residual stresses (circular impact)

2PH 3λ + 2µ

σsurf

(3.43)

P −1 PH

P − (σY − σ0 ) 1 + λ 2µ 2σY 1 + λ 2µ

√ Lp 1+ν 4 2 = σ0 − µεp + σ0 (1 + ν) 1− 1−ν π a

1+ν = σ0 − µεp + σ0 1−ν

For a pure uniaxial deformation; increases with σ0 < 0

(3.44)

Starts at PH , saturates at 2PH and depends linearly on P

(3.45)

Drives εp to saturation

(3.46)

Depends linearly on the pressure duration τ

(3.47)

√ (3.48) Lp 4 2 1− (1 + ν) √ π r0 2

Increases with εp Decreases with Lp Increases with σ0 < σ Increases with the size of the impact

Nomenclature a – square-shaped impact edge r0 – circle-shaped impact radius τ – pressure pulse duration (FWHM) P – shock pressure λ, µ – Lamé constants ν – Poisson’s ratio σ0 – initial residual stress (for unshocked material) σY – static yield strength (actually, the dynamic yield strength should be used [229], see Fig. 3.37) σsurf – surface residual stress εp – plastic deformation induced by LSP Lp – plastically affected depth Ce and Cp , the speeds of elastic and plastic longitudinal waves in the target [268]. Cel =

λ + 2µ = ρ

1 (1 − ν)E · , (1 + ν)(1 − 2ν) ρ

Cpl =

λ + 2µ/3 = ρ

1 E · 3(1 − 2ν) ρ

(3.49) and (3.50)

Chen, Hua, Cai Chen et al. [269] assume the residual axial stress profile exponential and the same over the shocked area, σz (z) = EkPmax e −bz/E ,

(3.51)

where Pmax is peak shock pressure at the surface, and k and b are empirical constants. It follows for in-plane stress Eν σx (z) = σy (z) = kPmax e −bz/E (3.52) ν−1

99

Shock processing

For 35CD4 steel, k = 2.3 × 10−6 MPa−1 and b = 2.16 × 108 MPa/m. The plastically affected depth becomes:

Pmax −9 −6 −1 zpl = 4.63 × 10 · E · ln 2.3 × 10 · (ν − 1) · E · ν · (3.53) σY

Forget, Strudel, Jeandin Forget et al. [245] presented an analytical model of surface residual stress distribution for circular impacts. The main assumptions taken in this model were: (1) (2) (3) (4)

2D-model, planar uniform circular loading. Neither yield strength nor Hugoniot elastic limit were considered. Energy dissipation (friction and plastic deformation losses) was not taken into account. When subjected to a stress loading σ, the material instantaneously reacts according to Hooke’s law: σ = εe ,

(3.54)

where is the stress tensor. (5) Plastic flow appears progressively with time, εp being proportional of the time and the deviatoric part of the stress tensor: εp = C s dt, (3.55) where C is a proportionality coefficient depending on the material and s is the deviatoric part of the stress tensor. The matter in the shock area deforms according to ε = εe + εp ,

(3.56)

where the only non-zero value is εzz (planar shock). (6) At the impact boundary, two cylindrical waves are created, one of whose propagates towards the centre of the impact at speed c. The amplitude of the waves was estimated by ur =

w (r − r0 + ct)f (r) c

for r0 − ct < r < r0 ,

(3.57)

ur =

w (r0 − r + ct)f (r) c

for r0 < r < r0 + ct,

(3.58)

where w =

ν 2ρc(1 − ν)

(3.59)

and f (r) =

r0 r

(3.60)

with notations: r0 is radius of the impact, is plasma pressure, ν is Poisson’s ratio, ρ is density of the target. (7) Kinetic energy during the wave movement was assumed constant (no energy dissipation occurs), therefore the displacement increases as the wave approaches the centre resulting in a wave focusing and residual stress drop formation.

100

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Yield stress (MPa)

1600

800 Mayer, Tension Mayer, Compression Follansbee, Compression Maiden & Green , Compression LSP analysis model

0 1.E03

1.E00

1.E03

1.E06

Strain rate (per second)

Figure 3.37 Titanium-6Al-4V yield strength strain-rate dependence [270]. © Elsevier.

Despite its simplicity, the model realistically predicted the magnitude and distribution of surface residual stresses in an Astroloy sample.

Numerical models Numerical models enable to take into account dynamic and non-linear phenomena, additional material parameters, real shape of the workpiece, and coupling between mechanical and thermal phenomena, including damping, viscosity, work hardening, thermal stresses, and strain rate effects (Fig. 3.37). Using numerical models, it is possible to study the phenomena inside the workpiece, not accessible to measurements. Equations of state Mie–Grüneisen equation of state (EOS) is frequently used for solids and liquids. It establishes an hydrostatic relationship between pressure P and internal energy E with reference to the material Hugoniot curve: ρ0 C02 η η p = p0 (1 − η) + · 1 − (3.61) + ρ0 (e − e0 ), (1 − sη)2 2 where ρ0 , ρ

V ∂T β =− · = , T ∂V S κ · ρ · cV η=1−

(3.62) (3.63)

with notations: ρ0 is the density, C0 is the speed of the sound, = 0 is the dimensionless Grüneisen coefficient in normal state, e − e0 is specific internal energy (per unit mass), s is the linear Hugoniot slope coefficient s = dUs /dup , β is the volumetric thermal expansion coefficient, κ is isothermal compressibility, cV is the heat capacity at constant volume. Mie–Grüneisen EOS is used for example in SHYLAC code and in laser peening simulations by Peyre et al. [229]. Quotidian equation of state (QEOS) Quotidian equation of state is a general-purpose analytical equation of state model for use in hydrodynamic simulation of high-pressure phenomena. Electronic properties are obtained from a modified Thomas–Fermi statistical model, while ion thermal motion is described by a multiphase equation of state combining Debye,

101

Shock processing

Grüneisen, Lindemann, and fluid-scaling laws. The theory gives smooth and usable predictions for ionisation state, pressure, energy, entropy, and Helmholtz free energy. When necessary, the results may be modified by a temperature-dependant pressure multiplier which greatly extends the class of materials that can be treated with reasonable accuracy. (citation from the article by More et al. [271]). The QEOS is applicable for both solid and gaseous states. Quotidian equation of state is presented through Helmholtz free energy per mass unit F(ρ, Te , Ti ) = Fi (ρ, Ti ) + Fe (ρ, Te ) + Fb (ρ, Te ),

(3.64)

where ρ is density, Te is electron temperature, Ti is ion temperature, Fi is ion free energy, Fe is electron free energy, and Fb is a correction for chemical bonding effects that can also represent exchange or other quantum effects. The expressions for the terms of Eq. (3.64) and application examples are given in the op. cit. [271]. Quotidian EOS was used for simulation of laser peening by Colvin et al. [251]. Linear equation of state is given by P = KV ,

(3.65)

where K is the bulk modulus, K = E/3(1 − 2ν) This EOS was used by Braisted and Brockman [270] in a 2D-axisymmetric numeric simulation of laser shock propagation and residual stresses in Ti-6Al-4V and 35CD.

Stress–strain constitutive relations Johnson–Cook law To reproduce the stress–strain dependence at high strain rate, the Johnson–Cook plasticity law with isotropic work hardening was used in FEM-simulations by Peyre et al. [272 , 229] and Fan et al. [273] The Johnson–Cook law enabled to take into account the strain rate dependence of the stress between ε0 = 10−2 /s (quasi-static load) and ε = 106 /s occurring at the laser shock. The stress σ is expressed as σ=

ε˙ T − T0 m 1 + C ln × 1− , ε˙ 0 Tm − T 0

(A + Bεneq )

(3.66)

where A, B, C, and n are material constants (e.g. for pure aluminium A = 120 MPa, B = 300 MPa, n = 0.35, and C = 0.1), εeq is equivalent plastic strain, and ε˙ is strain rate, ε˙ 0 is strain rate under quasi-static loading, T0 is the reference temperature (e.g. 20◦ C), and Tm is the melting temperature. Steinberg–Cochran—Guinan model The constitutive relations for G and Y as functions of ε, P, and T for high ε˙ in this model are [274]

G = G0 1 +

Gp G0

P + √ 3 η

Y = Y0 [1 + β(ε + εi )] × 1 + n

Yp Y0

GT G0

(T − 300) ,

P + √ 3 η

GT G0

(3.67)

(T − 300) ,

(3.68)

subject to limitation that Y = Y0 [1 + β(ε + εi )]n ≤ Ymax .

(3.69)

102

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Notations: G is the shear modulus, Y is the yield strength (in the von Mises sense), P is the pressure, Y0 and G0 are the values of reference state (e.g. T = 300 K, P = 0 Pa, ε = 0), η is the volume compression coefficient, defined as the initial specific volume v0 divided by the specific volume, v, β, and n are the work-hardening parameters, εi is the initial plastic strain, normally equal to zero. Primed parameters are defined as: GP =

dG , dP

GT =

dG , dT

YP =

dY , dP

G YP ≈ P. Y0 G0

(3.70)

Tabulated values of this model’s parameters for 14 materials are given in the op. cit. [274]. Steinberg–Cochran–Guinan model does not take into account strain rate effects. It was used by Zhang and Yao [275] at modelling of laser shocking by micrometer-sized impacts at pressures above 10 GPa, where rate-dependent effects played a minor role, but the pressure effects were of importance.

Selected numerical LSP modelling codes and cases SHYLAC SHYLAC code (Simulation Hydrodynamique Lagrangienne des Chocs) was developed at Laboratoire de Combustion et de Détonique (LCD), ENSMA, Poitiers, France [241, 276]. It enables 1D-simulation of elasto-plastic and hydrodynamic response of materials under a laser-driven loading. The code includes a Mie– Grüneisen equation of state referenced to the linearized Hugoniot curve, and elasto-plastic behaviour for solid materials. The SHYLAC code can also simulate the spallation process. The data required for the simulations are the laser–matter interaction pressure profile and the mechanical properties of the material: density, yield strength, shear modulus, Mie–Grüneisen coefficient, bulk sound velocity, and linear Hugoniot slope coefficient. Braisted and Brockman Braisted and Brockman [270] performed a 2D-axisymmetric numeric simulation of laser shock propagation and residual stresses using ABAQUS software. The materials (Ti-6Al-4V and 35CD4) were modelled as elastic-perfectly plastic with a yield strength defined by Y = HEL(1 − 2ν)/(1 − ν). Thus, it was assumed that all the plastic deformation occurs at roughly the same high strain rate. From consideration, that the pressure levels induced during LSP are generally less than 3 times the HEL, a linear equation of state was used (see above). The materials were specified by four constants, ν, E, HEL, and ρ, only. Sano, Yoda, Mukai, Obata, Kanno, Shima Sano et al. [277,278] conducted 3D-axisymmetric and spherical FEM simulations of shock propagation and residual stresses at laser peening of SUS304 stainless steel, taking into account adiabatic cooling of the plasma, realistic stress–strain relation (without idealizations), and strain hardening. Ding and Ye Ding andYe [186] considered the target elastic-perfectly plastic, but took damping and materials viscosity into account. The damping was accounted by a ‘damping stress:’ σd = βR Del ε˙ ,

(3.71)

where βR is constant, Del is elastic stiffness, and ε˙ is the strain rate. Viscosity was introduced with purpose to improve the modelling of high strain rate phenomena (to limit numerical oscillations). The ABAQUS/Explicit algorithm contains: (a) Linear bulk viscosity stress σ1 = b1 ρCd L e ε˙ ,

(3.72)

103

Shock processing

where b1 is a damping coefficient, ρ is density, Cd is dilatational wave speed, L e is element characteristic length and (b) Quadratic bulk viscosity σ2 = ρ(b2 L e )2 |εvol | min(0, ε˙ vol ),

(3.73)

where b1 is a damping coefficient and ε˙ vol is the volumetric strain rate (was applied only when the volumetric strain rate was compressive). The simulations were performed by ABAQUS in up to 3D.

Zhang, Yao, Noyan Zhang et al. [263] performed ABAQUS simulations of laser micro-shocking of copper/silicon bilayer structures with copper layer thickness of 1, 1.5, and 3 µm, and silicon thickness of 20 µm. Laser spot diameter was 12 µm. At simulation of tangential sliding at interface, the Coulomb’s friction law was used τ = µσn ,

(3.74)

where τ is the frictional shear stress, µ is the friction coefficient, and σn is the normal (compressive) stress. The plasma pressure model developed in this work was described above.

Fan, Wang, Vukelic, Yao Fan et al. [273] report about an explicit/implicit finite element simulation (using ABAQUS) of microscale materials processing by laser-generated shock waves. Explicit dynamic analysis was implemented for shock wave propagation in strain-rate dependent and elastic–plastic solids, and implicit analysis was applied for relaxation of pressured materials. The Mie–Grüneisen equation of state was implemented; the materials were 5-mm thick Al samples (simulation of peening) and 100-µm thick copper sheets (simulation of forming). Peyre, Chaieb, Braham In the recent work by Peyre, et al. [229] 2D-axisymmetric shock propagation and residual stresses in 12Cr and 316L stainless steels were simulated by ABAQUS/Explicit software (12 000 elements). The materials were assumed to follow the Grüneisen EOS and Johnson–Cook’s plasticity model. The simulation agreed with experiment rather well except a 50–100 µm thick surface region, probably due to the ignorance of initial stresses and surface waves phenomena, or due to inadequacy of X-ray stress measurements.

3.3.7 Applications of laser peening There are two important applications of laser peening: the treatment of aeroplane components, and of nuclear reactor components. In both cases water confinement is used.

Aeroplane components Turbine blades, rotor components, fastener holes, etc. have been treated with laser shocks with purpose to enhance/restore their fatigue strength. A running water curtain on the workpiece has been commonly used (Fig. 3.38) and the productivity reaches 1 m2 /h [191] (see also the book by Ding and Ye [186], pp. 43–44 for a short overview).

Nuclear reactor components Laser peening technology for in situ treatment of nuclear reactor components against stress corrosion cracking (SCC) was developed in 1990s by Toshiba Corporation in Japan and has since been applied to reactor core shrouds and nozzle welds of 10 nuclear power reactors in Japan [280] (Fig. 3.39). LPwC process is applied (Tables 3.7 and 3.8).

104

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

134 Workpiece 119

Water

Water 20 103

AX2

Laser beam

16 121

05

AX1 102

A1 145

A2 153

Laser beam

152 LD

Figure 3.38

Schematics of simultaneous dual-sided laser shock peening process (after EP1088903 [279]). Optical fiber

Laser system

Controller

Shroud

Remote handling system

CRD stub tube

Figure 3.39 Fibre-delivered laser peening system for control rod drive (CRD) stub tube of boiling water reactor (BWR) [281]. © ASME, reproduced with permission from Ref. [282]. Table 3.7 Comparison of laser peening process parameters in aerospace industries and in nuclear reactor maintenance (after Sano et al. [282]). Parameter

Aerospace industry

Nuclear reactor maintenance

Protective coating (ablator)

Yes

No

Laser wavelength

1064 nm

532 nm

Pulse duration

<100 ns

<10 ns

Pulse energy

≤100 J

40–250 mJ

Pulse repetition rate

≤10 Hz

≤300 Hz

Spot size

≤10 mm

≤1.2 mm

Impact overlap (coverage)

≤300%

≤8000%

Delivery system

Mirror

Fiber of mirror

Table 3.8

Laser shock peening

Numerical values indicate: Processed materials/targets: (thickness in mm): Confining/absorbing layers or environment; (thickness in mm); Lasers and beam properties: wavelength in nm or µm; pulse length, usually FWHM, in fs, ps, ns, or µs; pulse repetition rate, Hz; pulse energy, µJ, mJ, or J; laser spot size on the surface of workpiece, µm or mm, or spot area, mm2 ; maximum pulse energy density, J/cm2 , maximum pulse power density, W/cm2 , GW/cm2 , or TW/cm2 ; plasma pressure in MPa or GPa. The coverage is defined as (πD2 /4) × N d , where D is the diameter of the laser spot and N d is the number of laser spots in unit area. Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Generation of momentum on solid targets by recoil pressure of laser evaporated materials is proposed, possible applications being the acceleration of bodies and generation of ultrasound

Askar’yan (1963) [283]

Duraluminium

Black coating (optionally)

Ruby ≈500 µs

A pressure pulse corresponding to laser pulse and not explainable by light pressure was observed; black coating Enhanced the pressure

White (1963) [284]

Cu,Al, Pb,Ta, steel, brass, porcelain

Vacuum

50 ns, 0.32 J

Momentum achieved by target was measured by piezoelectric transducer; moments up to 0.36 dyn s were recorded ≈4 decades more that the momentum of light

Neuman (1964) [285]

Be, C (graphite), Al, Zn,Ag,W

Vacuum

Ruby, 7.5 ns, up to ≈4 × 1010 W/cm2 , spot 3.4–29 cm2

Momentum achieved by target was measured by a pendulum; the momentum has maximum at laser energy density ≈1 GW/cm2 , depending on target

Gregg (1966) [286]

Al and Cu (films 0.1–152 µm)

Transparent material (not specified)

Q-switched 20 ns, 5 J

Damage of targets observed; pressures measured by piezoelectric transducer reached tens of kbar; pressure pulse duration was 100 ns

Anderholm (1968) [287]

Ta,Ag, Sn, Si, Pb,V, Hf, Zn, 6061-T6,AISI 304

Vacuum (for avoiding breakdown)

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 60 ns, 60 J, 1 GW

Momentum achieved by target was measured by a pendulum; estimated shock pressure 7–36 kbar depending on target material

Skeen (1968) [288]

Al (0.5 µm film on back side of a quartz plate)

Quartz (6 mm)

Ruby, 12 ns, 7 J, spot 6 mm

Measurements of laser pulse induced pressure transients by quartz gauge, epoxy bonded to the Al film; maximum pressure of 34 kbar was recorded; pressure pulse was longer than the laser pulse; experiments were performed in vacuum chamber

Anderholm (1970) [288]

Ni,V (50 µm foils)

?

Ruby, 694.3 nm, spot 3 mm

Laser irradiation generated crystal lattice vacancies in targets, up to 1 at%, probably due to shock waves; no ablation crater, but some surface damage and slight depression of the foils were observed

Metz (1971) [290]

Al (100 µm layer on glass)

Glass (5.1 mm)

Ruby, up to 4 J

Laser irradiation caused detonation of various explosives (PETN, RDX, tetryl) in contact with the Al layer; the shock strength of these explosives was 7–15 kbar

Yang (1971) [291]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

7075 T73 and 7075 T6 Al alloys

Glass (1 mm) with Na2 SiO3 contact layer

1100-0 Al alloy (0.76 mm)

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Nd:glass, 32 ns, up to 72 J/cm2

The 0.2% offset yield strengths of materials were increased up to 30% over unshocked values; microstructural analyses showed that laser shocking induced a tangled dislocation substructure similar to explosively shocked aluminium

Fairand (1972) [292]

Silicone adhesive (25 µm) or Duco cement (63 µm)

Nd:glass, ≈50 ns, up to 91 J/cm2

Recorded by piezoelectric gauge pressures reached 7.9 kbar (Duco cement layer on surface); pressure on coated targets was over 10 times larger than on bare targets; pressure dependence on laser fluence presented; the experiments were performed in vacuum

O’Keefe (1972) [293]

2024 T3 Al alloy

Air?

Ruby, 694 nm, 1 ms, 4 J, spot 9.53 mm

Surroundings of a small hole (3.175 mm diameter) were treated by laser pulse; fatigue life of the treated workpiece was enhanced; fatigue life improvement corresponded to compressive stress 55.2 MN/m2

Hsu (1973) [294]

Stainless steel (0.63 and 0.76 mm), Al (0.41 mm)

Plexiglass or fused silica/Al (1 µm) + adhesive or Mylar film

Nd:glass, 25–55 ns, up to 1.7 GW/cm2

Permanent local deformation was observed in the targets; estimated specific impulse > 3000 dyns/cm2 and pressure up to 30 kbar; deformation occurs in some µs (determined by a probe beam); discussion of deformation mechanism on the basis of elastic/ plastic wave propagation in the targets presented; the experiments were performed in vacuum

O’Keefe (1973) [295]

Fe-3 wt% Si alloy (rolled, 92.7–300 µm); Fe (14 µm – for pressure measurement)

Fused silica (3 mm)

Nd:glass, 20–30 ns, up to 31.2 J/cm2

Peak pressures at backside of samples up to 56.6 kbar (Fe, 14 µm) recorded; pressure absorption in samples compared with calculations

Fairand (1974) [296]

Plexiglass (3.2–12.7 mm), 1100-series Al (0.17 mm), 6061-T6 Al (1 mm)

Water droplet and/or black paint

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 1.5 and ≈30 ns, spot 2.8 mm, up to 500 J/cm2

Target’s surface damage and effects of confining/absorbing layers on induced by laser pressure investigated; greatest pressure (3.8 kbar peak – 1 mm Al, 10 J/cm2 ) were observed in case of water confinement in conjunction with black paint absorber

Fox (1974) [228]

B, C, Mg,AI, Si,Ti, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Ge, Zr, Mo,Ag, In, Sn,

Borosilicate glass (5.2 mm)

Ruby, 5 J, up to 14 kJ/cm2

Target films were confined between two glass plates (5.2 and 1.9 mm); pressures up to 20 kbar were recorded, the pressure depend nearly linearly on laser fluence

Yang (1974) [297]

Sb, Pt,Au, Pb, Bi (25–1100 µm foils or films on glass) A theory of blow-off vapour-generated shock fracture of brittle and ductile materials is presented; the theory considers the degree of ionization of the plasma and shock attenuation;

Steverding (1976) [298]

5086 H32 and 6061-T6 Al alloys (welded zones)

Fused quartz (2 mm on one side of the target or 3 mm on both sides)

Nd:glass, 25 and 185 ns, up to 2.16 × 109 W/cm2 ; irradiation also from both sides of the sample (also simultaneously and of overlapped areas)

After laser shocking the tensile yield strength of 5086-H32 was raised to the bulk level and the yield strength of 6061-T6 was raised midway between the welded and bulk levels; the increases in ultimate tensile strength and hardness were smaller than the increases in the yield strength; the microstroctures after shocking showed heavy dislocation tangles typical of cold working (micrographs presented); melted surface layer thickness was 5–50 µm; shrinkage cracks in melted layer were observed

Clauer (1976) [299]

Al (25.4 µm foil and 3 µm layer on quartz), Zn (12.8 µm foil)

Water (2 mm)/ black paint (optionally on some Al targets)

Nd:glass, 20 and 30 ns, up to 30 J/cm2 , up to 1.2 × 109 W/cm2

The foils were pressed onto pressure gauge (quartz) surface with a vacuum grease sealant; peak pressures >2 GPa were recorded; peak pressure rises nearly linearly with laser power density; paint coating had significant effect on peak pressure only at power densities <109 W/cm2 ; grease sealant had little effect on peak power (20 ns laser pulse)

Fairand (1976) [300]

Aluminium alloys, foils, and films

Fused quartz, water

Nd:glass

A short review (19 refs., 5 figs) on LSP techniques and results; quartz overlay provides up to 40% higher peak pressure than water overlay; for ≈30 ns laser pulses the pressure pulse was up to ≈7 times longer than the laser pulse; yield strength of weld zones in 5086 H32 and 6061 T6 Al-alloys was increased after laser treatment to the bulk value (weld zone micrographs presented)

Fairand (1976) [301]

Fe-3 wt% Si alloy (≈0.15–3 mm), Fe (film 14 µm)

Fused quartz (3 mm) and/or Pb (10 µm foil, optionally)

Nd:glass, 25–200 ns, up to 101 J/cm2 ,up to 101 J/cm2 , up to 4.04 × 109 W/cm2 , spot 1.3–2.7 mm

Shock pressures measured at backside of samples reached to 56.6 kbar (14 µm Fe film), but attenuated to ≈10 kbar in 1.5-mm thick samples; shock-induced dislocations on cross-sections of samples studied (many micrographs presented); mainly slip but also twinning was observed; surface melting occurred in case of 200 ns laser pulses only; for specimen of thickness over 0.2 mm the central zone remained less deformed; Pb sublayer enhances the plasma pressure and deformations at low energy densities, but reduces them at energy densities over 109 W/cm2

Clauer (1977) [302]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

7075 T73, 7075 T6, 2024 T3, 2024 T8, 5086 H32, 6061 T6, AISI 304, Fe-3 wt% Si,Ti- and TiV-alloys

Water, quartz, plastic

Zn,Al (both 3 µm, vacuum deposited onto quartz pressure transducer), black Krylon paint (8–10 µm)

Quartz, water (both 3 mm)

2024-T351, 2024-T851, 7075-T6, 7075-T73, 7075-T651 (0.9–3 mm)

Quartz or water/black paint

2024-T3 (6,4 mm)

Water, quartz, acrylic (both 6.4 mm)/metal primer + black paint

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Nd:glass, 22 and ≈40 ns,

LSP resulted in increased surface hardness, yield and fatigue strength of homogeneous samples, weld zones and fastened joint specimens; multiple shock treatment (five shocks) was advantageous for AISI 304 (surface hardness increased for 40%); results of calculation of transient temperatures and pressures by LILA code presented – Zn coating on Al target should enhance both temperature and pressure; microstructure photos of unshocked/shocked aluminium alloys and steels presented

Fairand (1979) [303]

Nd:glass, 20–40 ns, up to 4 × 109 W/cm2

Peak pressures reached 6 GPa at 4 × 109 W/cm2 ; peak case of pressures below 109 W/cm2 were greater in Zn target in comparison with Al; calculations showed that pressure on target may be raised by use of low thermal conductivity low heat of vapourization coatings like Pb, or by acoustic impedance mismatch and stress-waves superposition techniques (examples provided)

Fairand (1979) [255]

Laser shocking increased considerably hardness of 2024-T351, tensile strength of 7075-T73, 2024-T351, and fatigue life of 7075-T6; irradiation of samples from both sides simultaneously gives better results

Clauer (1979) [304]

A review (28 pp., 31 ref.) of physics of LSP and of results achieved on at Batelle Columbus Laboratories, see Fairand and Clauer above

Clauer (1981) [305]

One and two-sided (simultaneous and subsequent, also with ‘momentum trap’ (see notations at the end of the table) shock processing compared; hole surroundings processed by annular beam as well; best results were achieved by simultaneous two- sided shocking, but the use of momentum trap provided nearly the same results; fatigue life of plates with hole was increased up to 40 times due to shock processing; fractographs and fracture propagation schemes presented (Fig. 3.28)

Clauer (1983) [232]

Nd:glass, 30 ns, up to 12 × 109 W/cm2 , spot 1.1–1.6 mm, also annular beam

Cu (40–250 µm foils, also with oxidized surface)

Fused silica

Nd:glass, 10 ps, 1.054 µm, 1–10 J/cm2 , spot 0.5 mm

Targets were confined between two-fused silica plates and sealed with mineral oil; movement of the target was recorded inteferometrically from backside; estimated shock pressure reached ≈20 kbar; the pressure dependence on fluence was observed to be linear and the temporal profile of the wave had a rapid rise (≈2 ns) and a tail which followed at t −½ dependence, consistent with a simple model

Schoen (1984) [306]

Al, PE (20–250 µm foils)

Fused silica

Nd:YAG, ≈150 ns, 0.05–1 GW/cm2

Targets were confined between two fused silica plates and sealed with mineral oil; movement of the target was recorded inteferometrically from backside; peak pressures were estimated to reach ≈3 kbar; a first-order theory of plasma pressure presented

Griffin (1986) [256]

1.06 and 0,53 µm, 0.6–3 ns, up to 1010 Wcm2

Irradiation with 0.53 µm light provided ≈40% greater shock pressure than with 1.06 µm; melted layer thickness on surface was ≈1 µm; no improvement of materials properties was observed

Fabbro (1986) [307]

1.06 µm, 20 ns, 2.5 kJ/cm2

Plasma temperature was 100 000–300 000 K (by radiometer measurement); damage was observed in all materials

Walters (1987) [308]

Nd:glass, 1,06 µm, 2.8 and 3 ns, spot 1 cm2 , 25 GW/cm2

Target was shocked by 50 kbar pulses; shock caused dislocations and plastic deformations up to 1%; TEM micrographs of dislocations presented

Ayrault (1987) [309]

Carbon steel (0.18–0.9% C, perlitic or martensitic) Kevlar/epoxy, fibreglass/epoxy, and graphite/epoxy composites (1.5 mm)

Transparent overlay and/or black Krylon paint

CMSX-2 (single crystalline [001]) Cu (0.2 and 4 mm)

glass

Nd:glass, 0.53 and 1.06 µm, up to ≈ 60 J/cm2

Momentum generated by confined and free expanding plasma determined as function of laser fluence for 0.53 and 1.06 µm; for confined ablation, the momentum was ≈100 times larger than in case of free ablation; 0.53 µm wavelength provided ≈20% greater momentum than 1.06 µm

Fournier (1987) [310]

Fe (single and polycrystalline)

Air?

Nd-ion, 1.06 and 0.26 µm, 0.5, 2.5, and 25 ns, spot 90 µm, 31–111 J, 0.6–32 × 1014 W/cm2

Estimated shock pressures were 0.6–60 Mbar; a spherical crater of 140–450 µm in diameter was formed on the surface of specimen; twin dislocations, martensitic phase, and melted material were found in the process zone; the microhardness was enhanced by laser shock

Hallouin (1987) [311]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Vacuum

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

A laser-target scaling model which permits approximate prediction of the dependence of ablation pressure, mechanical coupling coefficient, and related parameters in vacuum upon single-pulse laser intensity, wavelength, and pulse width over broad ranges is presented; the results of corresponding Los Alamos experiments are reported

Phipps (1988) [312]

Al (foil 26.5 µm), Cu (foil 26 µm), Au (foil 25.5 µm)

260 nm, 0.5 ns, spot 50 µm (half-energy), ≈0.3 × 1015 and 1 × 1015 W/cm2

Movement of the rear side of foils was recorded by streak camera; comparison with numerical simulations by SHYLAC2 code showed that the laser ablation peak pressures were 2.5TPa (0.3 × 1015 W/cm2 ) and 5TPa (1 × 1015 W/cm2 )

Cottet (1988) [313]

35CD4 stainless steel

3 and 30 ns

A 1D-analytical model for calculation the thickness of plastically affected zone (PAZ) in laser-shocked half-plane solid presented (see section 3.3.6.2); residual stress profile and plastically affected zone thickness presented for lasershocked 35CD4 alloy; the simulation yielded twice deeper PAZ than observed in the experiment

Ballard (1988) [314], (1991) [265]

Cu (20 µm to 10 mm), Al (5 µm foil)

BK7 glass (6 mm) with vacuum grease sealant (≈10 µm)

1.06 and 0.53 µm, 0.6, 3, and 30 ns, spot ≈6 mm (90% of energy), up to ≈800 GW/cm2

Absorption of laser light by Cu plasma and impulse momentum were measured for different conditions at target (vacuum, air, confined) at light intensities 0.03–100 GW/cm2 ; at intensities over ≈1 GW/cm2 the absorbance reaches ≈100%; confined ablation provides 4–10 times larger plasma pressure than free-surface ablation; the pressures are limited by optical breakdown of confining media; a 1D-analytical model for calculation of plasma layer thickness and pressure during both has been developed (see Section 3.3.6.1), heating and subsequent adiabatic cooling are dealt separately; the theory accords with exp. results at light intensities >≈1 GW/cm2

Fabbro (1990) [233]

CMSX-2,AM1 (both single crystalline), Astroloy (polycrystalline)

Water/black paint

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 0.6–40 ns Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 25 ns

Combustion turbine blade materials (Ni-based) processed; spot diameter mostly 8 mm; diffraction patterns observed on shocked surface; shock-induced residual surface stresses were ≈3 times lower in the middle of the shocked area (Fig 3.22); central stress drop was avoided by overlapping shocks; surface roughness was practically unaffected by laser shocks; a 2D analytical model for residual stresses explaining also the central stress drop is presented

Forget (1990) [245]

18 Ni(250) maraging steel (4.15 mm), also weld zones

Water (≈3.5 mm)/ black paint (≈0.1 mm)

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 100 ps, 20 mJ, 8 Hz, spot ≈0.1 mm, ∼1012 W/cm2 , scanned beam

LSP results have been compared with shot peening (20 min with chopped steel fibres of 0.5 mm diameter and of 1.5 mm length in a 0.54 MPa air, 100% coverage) results; the modified depth (raised hardness and compressive residual stresses) were 0.05 and 0.25 mm for LSP and SP, respectively, the residual stresses in weldments – 416 and 893 MPa, and the fatigue strength of welded samples (2 × 106 cycles) 380 and 587 MPa, respectively

18 Ni(250) maraging steel

Water (≈3.5 mm)/ black paint (≈0.1 mm)

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 150 ps, 8 Hz, spot ≈0.1 mm, scanning with shot overlapping

Shock processing increased the hardness and fatigue strength (17%) of weldments; plastically affected depth was ≈50 µm, containing reverted austenite phase and increased dislocation density (according to TEM studies)

Bana´s (1990) [316]

Al (foils 10–300 µm)

Glass

108 –1010 W/cm2

Reports about an 1D-code and results of calculation of plasma pressure and velocity of confined laser-shocked foils; the simulation code is based on Mie-Grüneisen equation and elastic–plastic behaviour of materials; best fit with experiment was achieved using α ≈ 0.1 for 15–40 ns laser pulses and α ≈ 0.01 for 3 ns pulses (α – fraction of incident laser energy absorbed by the plasma and transformed into shock energy); calculated pressure and velocity transients presented for Al foils confined by glass

Romain (1990) [317]

35CD4, XC38

Glass or water (2 mm)/ black paint

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 2.5, 3, 25 and 30 ns (Gaussian or asymmetrical), spot 8 mm, up to 70 GW/cm2

Residual stress distribution vs. depth for irradiance power densities 1–70 GW/cm2 presented; repeated shocks increase the plastically affected depth but decrease the surface stress (1–6 laser pulses); laser peening increased fatigue strength 40% and did not affect the surface roughness

Fournier (1991) [247]

35CD4 50 HRC steel

Water

30 ns, 8–10 GW/cm2

The theory presented in Ballard (1988) [314] is laid out in more detail; measured residual stresses and plastically affected zone depth agreed fairly with the calculations

Ballard (1991) [265]

304 steel

No/black paint

Nd:glass, 0.6, 2.5 and 25 ns, spot 1 and 4 mm, 0.1–5TW/cm2 up to 55 Gpa

Maximum microhardness (∼400 kg/mm2 ) was achieved at ∼20 GPa (25 ns) respectively ∼40 GPa (0.6 and 2.5 ns); the maximum hardness depended little on laser pulse length; twin density increased with increasing shock pressure (histograms for 1–4 twin systems presented); α-phase embryos were found in material shocked by 25 GPa pulses

Hallouin (1991) [318]

Bana´s (1990) [215]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Waspaloy (SC <001> with γ -precipitates, 4 mm)

Glass (5 mm)/ Al foil or Sellotape

7075-T6, 2024-T3, and 5456 Al alloys; 1026 and 4340 steels

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 20–30 ns, 60 J, spot 4, 5 and 8 mm, 0.5–9.5 GW/cm2

Measured peak shock pressure was ∼4 GPa; shearing configurations involving superlattice stacking faults were observed in the shocked zone; the shock propagation was simulated by EFHYD code – the physical model used in EFHYD code is explained in detail

Décamps (1991) [319], Puig (1992) [320]

Mostly water/ black paint

1.06 µm, ≈20 ns, spot 5–10 mm

Data about residual stress distribution, fatigue life and surface hardness of laser-shocked samples presented

Clauer (1991), (1992) [321, 322], Vaccari (1992) [323]

Fe–Ni alloy (TRIP alloy, 30% Ni), 2-mm thick sample

Vacuum

0.53 µm, 1 ns, 4 kJ, spot 4.3 and 25 mm, 1011 and 1013 W/cm2

Martensitic transformation close to the back face of the sample observed, obviously induced by the expansion wave generated at wave reflection from the back face; nearly sinusoidal depth distribution of residual stresses (period ≈150 µm) was observed

Grevey (1992) [324]

AISI 316L

No/black paint

0.6 ns, 80 J, spot 7.2 mm, 0.3TW/cm2 , 18 GPa

LP was compared with explosive shock treatment (1–2 GPa, 1 µs); the formed microstructures and hardness profiles were quite similar; surface mirohardness was raised from 180 HV to ∼300 HV in both cases, the surface hardness of LP processed samples was somewhat higher (345 HV) but the hardness decrease was more faster than in explosively treated material; the residual stresses in both cases were stable during a whole cycling of a plastic fatigue test (constant plastic strain rate 2 × 10−3 s−1 ), contrary to SP processed material

Gerland (1992) [325]

Al (foil 25–150 µm and 1 µm layer on quartz)

Water (2–3 mm), quartz (6 mm)

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 3 and 30 ns (Gaussian and short-rise pulses), spot 5–6 mm

Measurements of the pressure induced by the plasma performed; for 1–10 GW/cm2 laser energy density the measured pressure agrees particularly well with an analytical model; at high-power densities (10W/cm2 ), the dielectric breakdown appears to be the main limiting process of the confining method; for shorter laser pulses the breakdown threshold was higher; short-rise-time laser pulse provided greater peak pressure than Gaussian pulse

Devaux (1993) [326]

304 austenitic steel (foil)

No/black paint

Nd:glass, 0.6 ns, spot 3–6 mm,

Surface hardness increased with peak shock pressure up to 25 GPa (0.5TW/cm2 ), then remained rather constant

Gerland (1994) [327]

0.25–1.62TW/cm2 , 15–60 GPa

up to 55 GPa (1.5TW/cm2 ), then decreased at higher pressures; twins were present at any shock pressure, the number of twin sets increased with pressure up to 25 GPa, then decreased, but the mean twin spacing continuously decreased; α-phase embryos were only present in the pressure range 15–25 GPa; histograms of the dependence of twin density on twin spacing for 1–4 twin systems are presented A review (17 pp., 22 ref.) of techniques, theory and applications of laser shock treatment of materials

Peyre (1995) [230]

7075-T7351

Water/Al self-adhesive foil (0.1 mm)

Nd:glass, ∼25 ns, spot 0.5–1 mm (square and circular), 1–7 GW/cm2

Residual stress and hardness profiles, and fatigue resistance were determined for both laser shocked and shot peened (0.6 mm steel beads,Almen intensity F20-23A/F23-27A, coverage rate 125%) samples; LSP was found to provide greater improvement of fatigue limit than SP; combined SP + LSP treatment was found to be beneficial; the experimental results are compared with analytical and numerical (SHYLAC 1D) models predictions

Peyre (1995) [328]

AM1 (SC, [001], [111] and [110]), Inconel 718

Water/black adhesive tape

17–40 ns, spot 8 mm, up to 16.9 GW/cm2

Superficial micro-roughness of laser-shocked samples studied; variation of deformations with distance from centre of the spot is explained by release wave propagation and formation of residual stresses

Forget (1995) [329]

≈8 GW/cm−2 , overlap 66%, 1–3 passes

Virmoux (1996) LSP processed samples were fatigue-contact tested [330] (107 cycles) in cryogenic conditions (−195◦ C); nearly 50% increase in the maximum sustainable contact force (from 8 to 11.5 GPa) and huge reduction of oxidation was achieved; surface hardness of shocked samples was enhanced up to a depth of ≈1 mm (3 passes) (see also Fabbro (1998) [250])

Nd:glass, 1.054 µm, 0.6 ns, 100 J, spot 3–3.5 mm, 2.4×1012 W/cm2

LSP caused extensive formation of ε hexagonal close-packed (hcp) martensite (35 vol%) and caused up to a 130% increase of surface hardness; the LSP strengthening effect was attributed to the combined effects of the partial dislocation/stacking fault arrays and the grain refinement due to the presence of the ε-hcp martensite; a comparison with shot peening is presented; SEM/TEM micrographs of materials structure (11 photos) are presented and discussed

Z100CD17 (martensitic)

Hadfield manganese steel (1%C-14%Mn, 3.3 mm)

Vacuum/black paint (40–50 µm)

Chu (1995) [331]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

0.55% C steel

Water or glass

SUS304 (austenitic, 20 mm)

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 25 ns, spot 5 mm (circle and square), 1.7–10 GW/cm2 , 25% overlap

Residual compressive stresses down to depth of 1.1 mm exceeding up to –350 MPa on surface were formed; shocked surface depression was up to 7 µm; the surface hardness was not modified; the central stress drop was present in case of circular laser spot, but was absent in case of square spot

Masse (1995) [246]

Air and water (specimen were immersed into water)

Cu-vapour (511 nm) and Nd:YAG (532 nm), 5–50 ns, spot 0.2–1.1 mm, 75–375 J/cm2 , 15–75TW/m2

The specimen were laser peened using scanned beam, coverage 500–8000%; surface compressive residual stresses of 200–400 MPa were built up; the depth of compressive residual stresses was over 200 µm; the peened sample’s surface was oxidized down to a depth of 3 µm; high-speed photographs of plasma radiation in air and in water presented – in water the plasma lasted ∼10 ns; plasma expansion velocity in water was ∼1500 m/s, in air ∼7700 m/s

Mukai (1995) [332]

A356-T6,Al12Si-T6, 7075-T7351 (Al alloys)

Water (2–5 mm)

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 25 ns (Gaussian), spot 5–12 mm, 1–8 GW/cm2 ; up to four impacts (square, ellipse or circle, up to 67% overlapping)

Laser shock-induced residual compressive stress field extended to depth more than 1 mm, surface hardening was limited to +10% of the initial value, half of the increase achievable by conventional SP (+22%); in contrast to SP, laser shocking did not affect the surface roughness of the materials; fatigue life (107 cycle tests) of lasershocked specimen exceeded these of shot peened; a review of LSP theory with reference to the theses of Ballard (1991) [264] and Dubouchet (1993) [266] is included

Peyre (1996) [190]

55C1 steel

Water (3–5 mm)/ paint (100 µm)

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 20–25 ns, spot 1–2 mm, 1 shot every 1.5 min

It was demonstrated that LSP with 1–2 mm spot-size range could provide at least as beneficial surface effects as larger ones but limited to about 0.8 mm in depth whereas large impacts affected more than 1.2 mm at the same power densities; simulation by SHYLAC demonstrated that the shock wave from small impacts decayed earlier because of spherical attenuation

Peyre (1996) [333]

55C1 steel (10 mm)

Glass/PMn treated surface

Nd:glass, 1014 W/m2 6 GPa

Quenched by 5 kW CO 2 laser in Ar atmosphere sample was shocked by Nd:glass laser; a 50% increase of surface stresses (−280 to −420 MPa) and a suppression of the tensile peak at depth of ∼500 µm was observed; the physical processes and analytical modelling of LSP are reviewed

Peyre (1996) [267]

Al (457 µm foil, optionally supported by BK7 glass plate)

Water (3–4 mm)

Nd:glass, 1.064 µm, 20 ns, ≈40 J, spot 3 mm, up to 28 GW/cm2

Shock pressure dependence on laser fluence determined by comparison the measured by VISAR rear side velocity (exceeds 250 m/s at 2 GW/cm2 ) of the target with theory; as confirmed by high-speed photography of plasma radiation, the pressure saturates at light intensities ≈10 GW/cm2 due to optical breakdown at the water surface; due to the breakdown, the laser pulse length at target shortens; numerical simulations of target velocity by SHYLAC are compared with VISAR measurements

Berthe (1996) [334], (1997) [335]

SUS304

Water

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 5 ns, 10 Hz, spot 0.75 mm

Konagai (1996) [336]

Cu-vapour, 511 nm, 60 ns, 4 kHz, spot 0.5 mm

Relatively large pulse frequencies were used resulting in large shot coverage factors of 500–8000%; peak power densities ranged 15–75TW/cm2 ; residual compressive stresses exceeding 400 MPa were developed over 100 µm in depth; in case of 60 ns, 4 kHz laser irradiation, a 10 µm surface layer exhibited tensile stresses

SUS304, Inconel 600

Water

2ω-Nd:YAG, spot 0.75 mm, 230 kJ/m2 , 50TW/m2

Compressive residual stresses over 100 MPa were created Sano (1996) [337] by laser shocking

Al, Cu (20–120 µm foils)

Water (on both sides of the foils)

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, ≈20 ns, ≈4 GW/cm2

Experimental, numerical, and analytical study results of Romain (1997) [338] the acceleration and deceleration process of thin metallic foils presented; peak velocities reached 650 m/s and shock pressures ≈2.5 GPa

SUS304

Water

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 5 ns, spot 0.75 mm, 45TW/m2

Compressive residual stresses over 200 MPa were created Sano (1997), (1998) by laser shocking; plasma radiation photographs at 5, 15, [242, 339] and 25 ns in air and in water presented; plasma expansion velocity was ≈1500 m/s in water and ≈7500 m/s in air; 20% of the plasma energy was estimated to be converted into thermal energy; and plasma pressure to exceed 2 GPa; the measured values were compared with calculated ones (Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Plane and surface waves propagation in lasershocked workpiece and their interaction is discussed in detail; contains also a short review of principles of LSP and its applications

Dubrujeaud (1997) [244]

A review (13 pp., 11 figs.) of LSP with accent to residual stress distribution and fatigue properties; in soft alloys a slight surface depression about 6 µm occurs while laser shocked

Clauer (1997) [340]

AISI 316L (austenitic), Z12 CNDV 12.02 (martensitic)

Water or glass/ metallic paint or foil

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 2.3 and 20 ns, spot 6 mm, up to 40 GW/cm2 , up to 12 shots

Evolution of plastically affected depth, surface hardness, residual stresses with the number of laser shots (up to 12 shots, 316L steel) presented; laser impacts overlapping of 66% provided even distribution of residual stresses (Z12 steel); corrosion properties of Z12 steel were advantageously modified in course of LSP: free potentials were shifted to anodic values and passive current densities reduces; when the pressure pulse length was 0.6 ns, the breakdown in water occurred at ∼120 GW/cm2

Scherpereel (1997) [341]

Al (200 µm foil), AISI 316L (200 and 500 µm), 55C1 (360 µm and notched samples), 7075-T7351 (1.6 mm)

Water/Al-based paint or adhesive (90–140 µm)

Up to 8.5 GW/cm2 , spot sizes 1 and 6 mm

VISAR-measurements of back free velocities (BFV) behind foil targets (up to 500 m/s at ≈6 GPa) agreed well with SHYLAC-simulations; paint/adhesive layers enhanced the shock pressure for ≈50%; HEL of materials was determined from BFV at elastic-plastic inflection point (1.2 σY for 7075; 2.3 σY for 316L and 55C1); using small impacts (1 mm, 25% overlap) the achieved residual stresses were higher, but surface waviness was ≈2 times greater (1,3 µm) than in case of 6 mm impacts (50% overlap) and ≈20 times greater than that of untreated material (55C1 steel); fatigue life of 55C1 was improved for ≈30% at R = σ min /σ max = 0.1

Peyre (1997) (1998) [342, 343]

A review (10 pp., 8 figs., 10 refs.) of LSP physics and applications (shock pressure, residual stresses, and fatigue life); comparison of maximum residual stress achieved in different materials presented (Fig. 3.25)

Peyre (1997) [344]

Metal plate

Water

Nd:glass, 1.064 µm, 25–30 ns, spot 3–4 mm, up to 25 GW/cm2

Optical breakdown at the water surface was investigated by transient transmission of a probe beam (514 nm): transmission cut-off occurred at ≈6 GW/cm2 , above 10 GW/cm2 , the power density transmitted by the plasma is limited to 10 GW/cm2 ; the laser pulse transmitted by the plasma corresponds approximately to the part of the incident laser pulse preceding the transmission cut-off

Berthe (1997) (1998) [345, 346]

Ti-6Al-4V (Inconnel)

Not specified

30 ns, 200 J/cm2

Laser shock-induced residual stress profiles for single and dual impacts are presented; construction and operation principles of the LLNL new 100 J, 6 Hz Nd:glass laser are laid out in detail

Dane (1998) [347, 348]

316L (200 µm), 55C1, 12%Cr (martensitic)

Water/Al paint (140 µm) or Al adhesive (100 µm)

0.6, 2.3, and 10–25 ns; spot 1 and 7 mm; up to 40 GW/cm2

For 55C1 steel, small impacts (1 mm) provided 30% greater fatigue limit (490 MPa at R = σmin / σmax = 0.1) than 7 mm impacts; for 12% Cr steel, corrosion tests were performed (10 mM NaCl + 10 mM Na2 SO4 ): LSP reduced the passive current density from 1.2 to 0.5 µA/cm2 , kept the pitting potential almost constant, and prevented anticipated initiations of pits or inclusions at lower potentials; the article also includes a concise review of LSP mechanisms, experimental techniques and applications

Peyre (1998) [349]

X12CrNiMo12-2-2 (martensitic, 0.2–1.29 mm); 316L (austenitic, 0.2–1.25 mm)

Water (3–4 mm)/ Al paint (70 µm) or Al adhesive (70 µm)

Nd:glass, 1.064 µm, 8–10 ns, spot 3–4 mm, 10 GW/cm2 , coverage rate up to 300%

Stress loadings close to 7 GPa, 20 ns were created at the surface of the targets;VISAR-measurements were used for determination of shock wave decay and for estimation, through the determination of elastic precursors, the dynamic yield strengths at strain rates approaching 106 /s; some 50–100% increases could be found between dynamic yield strengths and static plastic flow limits at 10−3 /s; simulation of attenuation of shock waves in depth matched well with experiments for 316 L steel but not for X12CrNiMo12-2-2; it was shown on 316 L that shock decays could be reduced on materials exhibiting a large work-hardening level such as shot-peened surfaces

Peyre (1998) [239]

Al,Ta, Cu, Mo (50 and 250 µm foils)

Air?

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 25 ns, spot 1–3 mm, 1010 –5×1011 W/cm2

Precise data concerning the pressure loading induced by pulsed laser irradiation at the front face of a solid material were obtained in the laser intensity range of 10– 500 GW/cm2 ; the pressure amplitudes determined in function of incident laser intensity, reached 60 kbar

Tollier (1998) [241]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Al, 316L, 55C1, X12CrNiMo12-2-2

Water/Al-based coating (70–130 µm, optionally)

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 0.6–20 ns Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 6–7 ns, 10 Hz XeCl, 308 nm, 40 ns, 5 Hz

SUS 304

Water (sample immersed into water)

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 5 ns, 100 mJ, spot 0.75 mm, 230 kJ/m2

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Shorter laser pulse duration provides greater peak plasma pressures (up to 9.5 GPa at 0.6 ns); shorter wavelength provides somewhat greater pressure, but water breakdown occurs at lower laser intensities;Al-based protective coating enhances plasma pressure ≈50%; surface hardness of laser shock peened surfaces remained lower than of shot peened surfaces; LSP increased the corrosion resistance of X12CrNiMo12-2-2 steel; comparison of results with other steels and Al and Ni-alloys is provided graphically

Peyre (1998) [243]

Experimental investigations of LSP physics: on part of laser pulse length and wavelength dependence of peak plasma pressure, see Ref. [243]; on part of water breakdown, see Ref.[345] and Ref. [346].

Berthe (1998) [350]

In addition to the results presented in Sano (1992) [242], this article presents the results of FEM-simulation (2D cylindrical coordinates) of shock wave propagation and residual stresses

Sano (1998) [339]

A comprehensive up to date review (15 pp., 33 figs., 52 refs.) of LSP

Fabbro (1998) [250]

2024-T62 (2.5 mm)

Glass (4.5 mm)/ black paint (0.1 mm)

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 30 ns, spot 7 mm, 0.7–1.75 GW/cm2

2 mm diameter hole area was shock treated from both sides separately; as a result of laser shock treatment the fatigue life of the sample was enhanced for ≈6 times (R = 0.1, 13 Hz); surface roughness lowered from Ra 6.3 µm to 0.1 µm; dislocation density increased and 110 µm deep dip was formed onto surface

Zhang (1999) [252]

Al

Water

1.064 µm, 3 ns, up to ≈50 GW/cm2

Laser beam interaction with water in typical LSP regime has been investigated experimentally by recording reflected laser light and water breakdown plasma radiation; the threshold of generation of confined plasma was 5 GW/cm2 and its absorption near 80%; the thickness of ablated matter was about 2 µm per

Berthe (1999) [351]

pulse at 23 GW/m2 ; the estimated (by comparison with simulations by ACCIC) temperature of plasma was ≈1 eV, electronic density 2 × 1022 / cm3 , and the coupling parameter ≈6 corresponding to strongly coupled plasma Al (150–200 µm foils, with open backside of on 5 mm BK7 glass)

Water

Nd:glass, 1,064, 0.532 and 0.355 µm, 25–30 ns, spot 1–3 mm, 1–20 GW/cm2

Comparison of laser wavelength dependence of plasma peak pressure and pressure pulse duration; shorter wavelengths provided ≈30% larger peak pressures, but water surface breakdown thresholds were lower; it was concluded that shorter wavelengths are advantageous for LSP

Berthe (1999) [258]

AISI 316L

Water/Al adhesive (40 or 80 µm)

3 and 10 ns, spot 12–13 mm, 6 and 20 GW/cm2 , 3 and 7 impacts

Despite no chemical changes at the lasershocked surface were detected (SIMS, EPMA), a corrosion improvement was obtained in NaCl 0.05 M; anodic shifts on pitting potentials nearly +100 mV were observed after treatment, together with increases of repassivating potentials during cathodic polarizations

Peyre (1999) [352]

Ti-6Al-4V (airfoil geometry sample)

Water curtain/paint

Spot 5.6 mm, overlap 30%

The narrower edge of the sample (0.75-mm thick) was laser shock processed from both sides simultaneously; results of fatigue crack growth rate and fractographic investigations are presented

Ruschau (1999) [353]

SAE1010 (ferritic, 1.3 mm)

Vacuum/black paint (40–50 µm)

Nd:glass, 1.054 µm, 0.6 ns, 120 J, spot 3 mm, 2.4 × 1012 W/cm2

LSP caused the surface to be recessed for ≈1.5 µm and resulted in extensive formation of dislocations; modified depth was ≈100 µm; surface hardness increased ≈80%; comparison with shot peening is presented

Chu (1999) [354]

50 ns, spot 8 mm. 2.8–5 GPa

2D-axisymmetric numeric simulation of laser shock propagation and residual stresses using ABAQUS software; pressure pulse was assumed to be whether triangular (for Ti-6Al-4V) or Gaussian (for 35CD4); the model realistically predicted the residual stress distribution, thereby the central stress drop

Braisted (1999) [270]

20 ns, 50 J

Laser shock stress amplitudes on the back of the targets were monitored with VISAR using LiF as the window material; the peak shock stress produced in LiF (titanium thickness zero) was measured to be 16 ± 1 GPa; the laser shock amplitude decays to about 2.7 GPa while propagating through 3-mm thick disk of titanium 6-4.

Brar (2000) [355]

Ti-6Al-4V, 35CD4

Ti-6-4 (0.1–3.05 mm, glued to 6.35 mm LiF)

Water (flowing)/ black paint

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

A review (10 pp., 14 figs., 24 refs.) of achievements in LSP during 1995–1999: influence of laser intensity, wavelength and pulse length on LSP, effect of different protective coatings, optical breakdown in water, effect of LSP on materials residual stresses, fatigue, and corrosion properties

Fabbro (2000) [356]

SUS 304 (20% cold worked, 10 mm)

Water (sample immersed into water)

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 200 mJ, spot 0.8 mm, 36 impacts/mm2

Surface tensile stresses converted to compressive up to depth of ≈1 mm; corrosion tests performed (water, 561 K, O2 8 ppm, 500 h,), LSP totally inhibited the stress corrosion cracking; FEM-simulation results (2D cylindrical coordinates) of shock wave propagation and residual stresses presented; a system for in situ processing of nuclear reactor core shrouds in water is described

Sano (2000) [277; 278]

SUS 304 (0–30% cold worked)

Water/no

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, 100–300 mJ, spot 0.4–1.2 mm, 1800–5400 impacts/cm2

Residual surface compressive stresses were ∼40% greater in the laser beam scanning direction than in the transverse direction; surface residual stress had a maximum value at spot size 0.8 mm (constant pulse energy 200 mJ, 3600 pulses/cm2 ); at fixed spot size 0.8 mm the surface residual stresses had a minimum value at ∼200 mJ laser pulse; cold working rate had little influence on the residual stresses; the material’s surface was oxidized up to a depth of 1.2 µm

Obata (2000) [357]

SUS 304 (20% cold worked, 10 mm)

Water/no

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, 200 mJ, spot 0.8 mm, coverage 1800%

Laser peening was applied in order to simulate neutron irradiation hardening; shocking with multiple laser pulses extends the stress-improved depth to ∼1 mm; numerical simulation (3D axisymmetric and spherical) results of shock propagation and residual stresses are presented; the agreement with the experiments was reasonable

Sano (2000) [277]

Al (polished)

Water

Nd:glass, 1.064 µm, 3 and 15 ns, spot 5–6 mm, 1–50 GW/cm2

Laser beam interaction with water in typical LSPregime has been investigated experimentally by recording reflected laser light and water breakdown plasma radiation; depending on laser pulse duration, the absorption of the confined plasma was 80–90%; the ablated thickness was 1.1 µm (3 ns squared pulse,

Berthe (2000) [257]

20 GW/cm2 ) and 0.75 µm (15 ns Gaussian pulse, 1 GW/cm2 ); plasma parameters were estimated with aid of an updated theory as follows: density range of heavy particles 3.4–4.6 × 1021 /cm3 , degree of ionization 0.39– 1.3, temperature 1.7–4.0 eV; coupling parameter of confined plasmas 0.2–1 Al (200, 457 and 1000 µm foils)

Water

XeCl, 0,308 µm, 50 and 150 ns, spot 1 × 4 mm, 0.1–6 GW/cm2

Peak pressures up to 2.5 GPa were generated, limited by optical breakdown in water at >1–2 GW/cm2 ; the plasma thermal to internal energy ratio α was estimated to equal 0.4 (at 1.06 µm, α ≈ 0.25)

Berthe (2000) [358]

AISI 316L (austenitic, 8 mm), G10380 (ferritic, 8 mm), G41400 (martensitic, 8 mm)

Water/Al based coating (0.1 mm)

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 10–20 ns, up to 30 J, spot 6–7 mm, 1 shot/min

Laser-shocked G10380 and G41400 were corrosion tested in an acid HKSO4 -0.3 M solution; only in the case of G41400 martensitic steel was a reduction of the corrosion current observed, depending on the degree of work hardening and the amplitude of compressive stresses; laser shocking of AISI 316L suppressed extensively stress corrosion cracking during 24 h in MgCl2 44%, 153 ◦ C solution

Peyre (2000) [359]

AISI 316L (austenitic, 13 mm

Water (2–5 mm, flowing)/Al adhesive (100 µm)

1.06 µm, 10 ns Gaussian, up to GW/cm2 1.06 µm, 3 ns, 0.2 ns rise time, up to 20 GW/cm2

Structural changes in material are compared with those induced by shot peening (microphographs presented); surface residual stress of laser shocked material reaches ∼−500 MPa (6 GW/cm2 , 12 impacts) and hardness 250 HV (8 GW/cm2 , 6 impacts); laser-shocked surface layer was contaminated by C, O, and H for 0.4 µm in depth; corrosion tests in NaCl (30 g/l) showed an improvement of corrosion behaviour of both shot peened and laser shock processed samples

Peyre (2000) [360]

Al (50 and 100 µm), 316L (75 µm),Al12Si

Water (2–5 mm)/Al paint (12–60 µm)

1.06 µm, 0.6 ns (Gaussian) or 3.2 ns (rise time 0.2 ns), spot 6–10 mm, 0–200 GW/cm2

EMV and PVDF gauges as shock wave sensors were compared; the operation range of EMV gauge was 0–20 GW/cm2 and this of PVDF gauge 0–160 GW/cm2 ; both 0.6 and 3.2 ns laser pulses provided the same ∼9.5 GPa maximum pressure, limited by water breakdown; water breakdown threshold was ∼60–100 J/cm2 (0.6–10 ns) depending sublinearly on laser pulse duration; optimum Al overlay thickness was 12 µm, providing 25% more intense plastification of the target; maximum remanent surface deformation of Al12Si was ∼10 µm independent on laser pulse length

Peyre (2000) [237]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

AISI304 (20% cold-worked, 10 mm)

Water (flowing)

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 5 ns, 10 Hz, 100 mJ, spot 0.6–0.7 mm

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Laser light was fed through silica fibre (core diameter 1.5 mm, length 5 m); tensile near-surface stresses (up to 400 MPa) were converted to compressive stresses (down to −700 MPa, peak ∼30 µm below the surface, irradiation 21 J/cm2 /4.2 GW/cm2 , 10 000 pulses/cm2 )

Schmidt–Uhlig (2000), (2001) [361, 362]

A review (11 pp., 7 figs., 7 refs.) of both shot peening and laser shock peening; procedure of calibration of shot peening machines using ‘Almen strips’ is described; laser and shot peening techniques and performances are compared; achievements in high-power pulsed lasers development at LLNL are overviewed

Hammersley (2000) [191]

Zhang (2000) [275]

Al 1100 (70 µm foil)

Water (3 mm)/Al foil (16 µm) and vacuum grease (∼10 µm)

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 50 ns, spot ∼12 µm, 4 GW/cm2

Microscale LSP studies; ∼100–200 µm diameter dents on laser-shocked surface proved that shocking caused plastic deformation of the sample; process variables as shock pressure and plastic strain have been calculated in cylindrical coordinates (3D-simulation) by ABAQUS software, using Steinberg constitutive model taking into (account pressure effects but not strain rate effects)

2024-T62 (2.5 mm)

K9 glass/black paint

Nd:glass, 1,06 µm, 30 ns, 8.1–20.2 J, spot 7 mm, 0.7–1.75 GW/cm2

As result of LSP, the fatigue life of the specimen Tang (2000) [363] increased by 2.2–8.7 times (different specimen, tensile test, R = 0.1), hardness ∼30%, and surface residual compressive stress was ∼−30 MPa; fracture surface micrographs are presented

6061-T6 (6 mm, welded by 5083 and 5356)

Water (1–3 mm)/black paint

1064 nm, ∼40 ns, 6–8 J, 100 and 200 J/cm2 , spot ∼ 1.8 and 2.75 mm, 2.5 and 5 GW/cm2

Laser shocking increased the hardness down to 3 mm in depth; the elastic modulus of material was decreased in the bulk peak-aged material, but increased in the overaged metal in the HAZ and weld zone; the changes in elastic modulus were from −5% to +10% and in hardness from +4% to +76%; measured hardness and elastic modulus profiles are presented

Montross (2000) [364]

Al single crystal (111), 400 atomic layers

A review (22 pp., 23 figs., 36 refs.) of LSP, includes a description of processing equipment at LSP Technologies, Inc.

Clauer (2001) [365]

The transmission of breakdown plasma in water during LSP experiments was investigated theoretically for laser wavelengths from 355 to 1064 nm and pulse length of 25 ns; at 1064 nm the breakdown process was found to be dominated by avalanche ionization, but at 355 and 532 nm by multiphoton ionization

Sollier (2001) [260]

4ω-Nd:YAG, 266 nm, 1.5 and ps, spot 27.8 nm, 100 and 200 GW/cm2

Impact of an intense laser pulse on Al target was simulated by molecular dynamics method; ablation, shock wave formation and stress and dislocations generation has been simulated on ps-timescale

Fukumoto (2001) [366]

6061-T6 (6 mm)

Water (curtain 1–3 mm)/black paint

1.064 µm, ∼40 ns, 100 and 200 J/cm2 , spot 1.8 and 2.75 mm, 2.5 and 5 GW/cm2

A single impact of 2.5 GW/cm2 (3.5 GPa) increased the hardness at the surface from 1.19 to 1.34 GPa to a depth of 1.75 mm, and 5 repetitions did not significantly change the surface hardness or depth of shock wave property modification; a single impact of 5 GW/cm2 (6 GPa) increased the surface hardness to a value greater than that achieved with one or five repetitions with 3.5 GPa shock waves and five repetitions at 6 GPa significantly increased the surface hardness and shock wave property modification depth over one repetition at 6 GPa

Montross (2001) [367]

AISI 316L

Water/Al adhesive (50 µm, in case of 2.5 ns pulses) or bare surface (7 ns pulses)

2.5 ns, 80 J, spot 13 mm, 25 GW/cm2 , 3 or 5 impacts 7 ns, 0.2 J, spot 0.8 mm, 4 GW/cm2 , 16 impacts

Influence of LP and laser surface melting (CW, 954 nm, 1 kW, 25 kW/cm2 ) on pitting corrosion resistance in 50 mM Na+ Cl− was investigated; anodic shifts of pitting potentials were + 100 mV in case of LP and + 220 mV in case of laser surface melting; it was assumed that LP-induced compressive stresses promote the growth kinetics of the passive film (dual oxide and hydroxide composition) thus reducing the sensitivity to pitting; LP without protective coating resulted in cathodic shift in pitting potential

Peyre (2001) [368]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Ti-sapphire, 210 fs and 6 ns, 50 mJ, spot 0.09 mm2 , 260TW/cm2 and 9 GW/cm2 Excimer lasers, 45 and 50 ns, 1–1.5 J, spot ∼2 mm2 , ∼1 GW/cm2

Distinct and long-range hardening was observed only at LSP with nanosecond pulses under confined ablation conditions using a thermoprotective coating; in material modification regime, slip and deformation twinning was observed in all the bcc metals investigated; in Mo and Fe, the laser-shock induced hardening was ascribed to raised dislocation density and not to the formation of deformation twins; the defect density in Mo and Fe saturated after about 6 and 24 impacts, respectively; SEM and TEM micrographs of treated surfaces are presented

Kaspar (2001) [369]

2024-T3 (2 mm)

Water/black paint

Nd:glass, 1.054 µm, 18 ns (∼Gaussian), spot 10 mm, 5 GW/cm2

Specimen with a fastener (5 mm) hole and with 2 or 6 crack stop-holes (1.5 mm) were laser shocked from both sides; fatigue tests were performed at R = 0.1, 10 Hz, σmax = 100 MPa; crack length vs. number of cycles diagrams are presented; due to LSP, the crack initiation life was increased ∼2–6 times, and fatigue life ∼10 times

Yang (2001) [370]

Cu (90 µm and 0.8 mm), Ni (120 µm)

Water (3 mm)/Al foil (25 µm) and vacuum grease (∼10 µm)

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 50 ns, 1 kHz, spot 12 µm, 2.83–4.24 GW/cm2

Microstucture studies by orientation imaging microscopy revealed that LSP improved grain size uniformity and increased texture; fatigue test (0.8 mm Cu, axial load 110–220 MPa, 80 Hz) showed a 2 times fatigue lifetime improvement of laser-shocked samples; results of numerical simulation of plasma pressure and stress/strain phenomena in the target are presented

Zhang (2001), [371, 372]

2024-T62 (2.5 mm)

Glass/black coating

Nd:glass, 30 ns, 40 J, spot 7 mm, 0.5–2.3 GW/cm2

Both sides of the sample were shocked successively; ultrasound velocity measurements were used for determination of C11 , λ, and Poisson’s ratio distribution in shocked samples; all these elastic constants had raised values (12–24%) at the centre of the laser impact; yield strength, tensile strength and surface hardness increased (13–117%) as result of LSP, saturating at power laser density ∼1.5 GW/cm2

Zhang (2001) [373, 374]

1.064 µm, 40 ns, spot 1.8 mm, 100 and 200 J/cm2 , 2.5 and 5 GW/cm2 (3.5 and 6 GPa)

Investigation of the effect of various coatings on LSP; self-adhesive Al-foil was superior to other coatings in sense of adherence, withstanding 100 J/cm2 fluence; as result of LSP, the hardness of samples surface increased by 7.5–15%, the elastic module was reduced for 5–12%;

Montross (2001) [375]

SUS304, HT1000, S15C Water/no coating (12 mm)

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 60 and 200 mJ, spot 0.4–1 mm, coverage 1696–10603%

The LSP-induced residual stress in laser beam scanning direction were lower than in transverse direction; a steep stress gradient with negative sign form surface to inner part of the specimen was discovered; this gradient cannot be detected by using sin2 ψ method only; compressive residual stresses were formed till 500 µm in depth

Yoshioka (2002) [204]

100Cr6 steel (38 mm)

Water

10 ns, 22 J, spot 7 mm, 5.5 GW/cm2 , 4 GPa, overlap 25%

LSP caused an enhancement of surface compressive stresses (up to ∼−400 MPa) and of surface hardness (from 270 to 350 HV), an increase of the surface waviness, a decrease of friction coefficient and of wear rate (rolling–sliding contact, 75 MPa)

Yakimets (2002), (2004) [376, 377]

Alloy 600 (pipes of 1D 15 mm)

Water

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 130 mJ, 20–50TW/m2 , spot 0.7 mm, 18–27 impacts/mm2

A system for LSP treatment of pipes inner surface underwater is described, laser beam being fed through a gas-filled tube; LSP experiments on similar conditions with Alloy 600 plates and pipes showed the feasibility of generation of surface compressive stresses up to −800 MPa in up to 1 mm depth

Sano (2002) [378]

Cu (90 µm)

Water (3 mm)/Al foil (16 µm) and vacuum grease (∼10 µm)

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 1 kHz, 50 ns, spot 12 µm, 160–240 µJ, 2.83–4.24 GW/cm2

The samples were shocked by up to six laser impacts at each location; dents of depth ∼1 µm and of diameter ∼50 µm were formed into sample’s surface; shock propagation and deformations were calculated by ABAQUS (stress and strain distribution graphs presented), calculated surface compressive residual stresses were up to 165 MPa (single pulse 240 µJ)

Zhang (2002) [378]

2024-T62 (2.5 mm)

Glass (4.5 mm)/black coating (100 µm)

Nd:glass, 30 ns, 30 J, spot 7 mm

Extended version of the report by Zhang (2001) [373]; due to laser impact, a crater of depth 275 µm was formed in the surface of the sample; formulae for calculation of laser shock generated displacement waves are presented; ultrasonic velocity distributions and surface micrographs are presented

Zhang (2002) [380]

2011-T3 (10 mm)

Water (flowing, 1–3 mm)/ automotive primers and black paint (0.1 mm) or Al foil (0.11 mm)

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Al, Cu,Ti, 40C130 steel (1.5 mm)

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Glass (3 mm)/black paint + vacuum grease

Lasers and beam properties

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 80 ns (Gaussian), 6 J, spot 2 mm, 2.39 GW/cm2

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

A review (16 pp., 15 figs., 87 refs.), covering LSP techniques, residual stress distribution, LSP effect on fatigue and hardness, and applications of LSP

Montross (2002) [381]

Pressure transients for direct and confined ablation for various targets are presented; the peak pressure was ∼0.3 GPa for direct ablation and ∼4 GPa for confined ablation for all the targets used; the surface hardness of the targets was enhanced ∼30–50% by direct and ∼50–120% by confined ablation, the changes were largest in Al

Oros (2002) [236]

A review (13 pp., 12 figs., 24 refs.) of research in LSP during 1996–2000, containing also information from doctoral theses, research project reports, and conference proceedings; the review covers the shock pressure dependence on laser pulse length and wavelength, confined LSP with and without protective coating, influence of LSP on corrosion resistance, fatigue life and wear of steel and aluminium alloys

Peyre (2002) [382]

7049-T73 (9.5 and 25 mm)

Water?

Nd:glass, 12–18 ns, spot 3.2–5 mm, 45 and 60 J/cm2 , overlap 10% and 50%

Residual stress distribution was measured by slitting method using 0.79 mm long strain gauges; effects of 14 different combinations of 2 laser shots of different spot size, fluence, pulse width and location were compared with each other and with shot peening; the results are presented in 10 graphs and discussed extensively

Rankin (2002), (2003) [214, 383]

Stainless steel

Water/Al paint (60 µm)

1064 nm, 3 ns, 10 GW/cm2

Simulation results of plasma pressure and temperature by ACCIC and of residual stresses by ABAQUS are presented and compared with experimental results; graphs presenting plasma pressure, temperature, electron density, impedance, coupling, and degeneracy parameters are given (Fig. 3.32); plasma peak temperature at LSP ranges 4000–7000 K

Sollier (2003) [262]

12% Cr steel,Al, 7075-T7351

Pressure pulse 2.5, 10, or 25 ns

Fe, SS304

2024-T351

Ti-6AL-4V (rod of diameter 7 mm)

Water/Al coating (70 µm)

Water?

Nd:YAG, 0.532 µm, 6–7 ns, ∼1.3 J, spot 2 mm, 10 GW/cm2 (∼5 GPa), 50% overlap

18 ns, 7 GW/cm2 , spot 2.6 × 2.6 mm, to both sides simultaneously coverage 200%

Axisymmetric 3D-FEM-simulation of laser peening induced residual stresses; Johnson–Cook plasticity law with isotropic hardening, taking into account strain rate dependence of the stress was applied; pressure pulse and HEL were taken from experiments; shock propagation and residual stresses distributions are presented for single and multiple laser impacts; simulation describes the central stress drop

Peyre (2003) [272]

Analytical models in cylindrical coordinates for LSP plasma temperature, pressure, and thermal stresses for ramp-up, ramp-down, and rectangular laser pulses, including confined ablation with coating (see Fig. 7.13 for calculated temperatures)

Thorslund (2003) [384]

Residual stress and hardness profiles and fatigue life vs. maximum surface stress for SP (intensity 4A, incident angle 45◦ , coverage 200%) and LSP (2 and 3 passes) processed specimens presented; LSP provided hardness increase and compressive residual stresses to a larger depth; combined SP and LSP was proved to be advantageous for fatigue life extension; fractographic analysis results, and fracture surface microphotographs are presented

Rodopoulos (2003) [385]

A computer program, LSP-1D, for solving by FD-method the elasto-plastic wave propagation in solids, is described; a hypo-elastic rate-dependent plastic deformation is assumed for modelling the material behaviour; examples of calculated shock propagation and stress fields are presented

Arif (2003) [386]

Deep rolling (roll diameter 6.6 mm, 150 bar, feed 0.1125 mm/revol.) is compared with LSP; DR provided up to 40% longer fatigue life than LSP, obviously due to a higher magnitude of induced compressive stresses, a higher degree of work hardening, and significant decrease in the surface roughness

Nalla (2003) [192]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

AISI 304, Ti-6AL-4V (20 mm)

Water?

Ti-6Al-4V (20 mm)

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

See the entry for Nalla (2003) [192]

Fatigue lifetime of deep rolled specimens was investigated up to 600◦ C; in the whole temperature region, the lifetime of rolled specimen was higher than that of untreated one; microstucture of both DR and LSP processed AISI 304 was investigated up to 900◦ C (micrographs presented), the near-surface work-hardened zones were stable up to 650 ◦ C (deep rolled) and ∼800◦ C (laser shocked)

Altenberger (2003) [387]

?

18 ns, spot 2 × 3 mm, 7 GW/cm2 , coverage 200%

Comparison of LSL and deep rolling (roll diameter 6.6 mm, 150 bar, feed 0.1125 mm/revol.); maximum residual stresses were over −400 MPa (LSP) vs. over −900 MPa (DR); DR provided somewhat longer fatigue life than LSP; at fatigue tests at 450◦ C the compressive residual stresses relaxed to about −200 MPa in both cases, however, the fatigue properties remained improved, obviously due to more stable nanocrystalline surface structure formed at DR and LSP

Altenberger (2003) [388]

304 stainless steel and mild steel (both 4 mm)

Glass (0.1 mm)

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 9 ns, 10 Hz, 0.5 J, spot ∼1.5–2 mm

The hardness of lasershocked materials was ∼20% (mild steel), respectively 70% (SS) higher than that of untreated materials; the modified depth was 450 µm; shock pressure and elastic–plastic wave propagation were calculated numerically assuming Maxwell velocity distribution of vapour molecules and linearly elastic, power-law work-hardening plastic stress–strain relationship of the target material

Yilbas (2003) [389]

35 CD4 50 HRC

Water/black paint

30 ns, spot 5 × 5 mm, 8 GW/cm2 , 3 GPa

Numerical simulation of the experiment by Ballard (1991) [264], using a 3D-model in ABAQUS, assuming pressure pulse square in time and uniform over laser spot, and the plastic strain following von Mises yielding criterion with dynamic yield strength HEL(1–2 ν)/(1–ν); calculated dynamic stresses and residual stress profiles are presented for different shock pressures, shock duration, and the number of impacts

Ding (2003) [390]

1Cr18Ni9Ti (1.2 mm), GH30 (1.6 mm)

Quartz (4 mm)/black paint

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 20–50 ns, 10–50 J, spot 3–7 mm, ∼4 GW/cm2

As result of LSP, materials hardness was enhanced down to the depth of 0.7 mm;TEM micrographs of treated material are presented: laser shocking induced martensitic transformation in 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel and dense dislocations and twins in GH30 superalloy

Wang (2003) [391]

UNS N06022 (20 and 33 mm, weldments)

Water (1 mm)/Al tape (120 µm)

25 ns, 10 GW/cm2 , up to 20 peening layers

Plastically affected depth up to 12 mm was observed; near-surface residual compressive stresses were larger than −300 MPa and the depth of compressive stresses was up to 7.7 mm

Hill (2003) [392]

LSP technology at LLNL-MIC is described, cases demonstrating the usefulness of LSP for processing of aircraft parts are presented (see also Hill (2003) [392]); the magnitude of residual compressive stresses in Ti-6Al-4V was found to be largely independent of laser beam incident angle in range 0–60◦

Hill (2003) [393]

Ti-6Al-4V (8,7 mm)

?

ns-pulses, 180 J/cm2 , 200% coverage

Compressive residual stresses up to −800 MPa were induced at the specimen surface, balancing tensile residual stresses were located 2 mm deep beneath the material’s surface; residual stress distribution was determined by neutron diffraction

Evans (2003) [394]

Ti-6Al-44V (1,6 mm)

Water?

Nd:glass, 18 ns, spot 2.5 × 2.5 mm, 126 J/cm2 , 3 layers, both sides simultaneously

Residual stress distribution was determined by slitting method – the methodology is laid out in detail, the number and positions of strain gauges were optimized; the near-edge compressive residual stress reached 98% of the material’s yield strength, but extended over 38% of the laser peened area

Rankin (2003) [395]

Cu

Fused silica/Al (50 µm) or sapphire/Zn (0.5 µm)

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 20–50 ns, spot 9 mm (super Gaussian) up to 60 J/cm2

A 2D-computational model, incorporated into LASNEX code, is presented; the model accounts for the initial absorption onto a metal surface, low-intensity photoionization absorption in neutral vapour, collisional ionization, recombination, dielectric breakdown, band gap collapse of the tamper, electron conductivity, thermal transport, and constitutive properties of the materials; most of the laser energy is absorbed in the dielectric tamper, not the ablator; the simulations agreed well with the experimental results

Colvin (2003) [251]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties 2

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

BS L65 l, 2024-T351

?

10 ns, 22 J, spot 0.75 cm , 3 GW/cm2 , 67% overlap, 3 GPa

A fractal dimension determination methodology for analysis of fracture surfaces of laser peened and fatigued specimen is described; for fractal fracture mechanics see the review by Cherepanov et al. [397]

Shaniavski (2004) [396]

Alloy 22 (13.5 and 20 mm; welds in 33 mm plate)

Flowing water (1 mm)/Al tape (120 µm)

25 ns, 6 Hz, 20 J, 7–13 GW/cm2 , up to 20 layers

Residual stress distribution was determined by slitting and contour methods; the depth of compressive residual stresses varied from 4.3–7.7 mm

DeWald (2004) [216], Hill (2005) [398]

316 stainless steel (2 mm)

Overlay (0.1 mm)

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 8 ns, 10 kHz, 450 mJ, spot 2.5 mm, 15 impacts

Laser shocking enhanced the surface hardness of the workpiece for 80%; the dislocation density of treated areas exceeded 2–8 × 1011 /cm2 ; calculated recoil pressure vs. laser intensity, and stress transients are presented; the numerical model is described (see the entry for Yilbas, 2003 [389])

Yilbas (2004) [399]

Ti-6Al-4V (2 mm)

Overlay (0.1 mm)

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 8 ns, 10 kHz, 450 mJ, spot 2.5 mm, 15 impacts

Laser shocking enhanced the surface hardness of the Yilbas (2004) [400] workpiece for ∼50%; calculated peak surface temperature was over 5000 K; calculated stress profiles in the material at different times are presented; the numerical model is described (see the entry for Yilbas, 2003 [389])

Cu (1 and 3 µm) on Si (111)

Water curtain/Al foil (16 µm) + vacuum grease

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 50 ns, spot ∼10 µm, (∼209 and 244 µJ, 3.67 and 4.31 GW/cm2

Laser shocking induced stress in Cu layer has been evaluated from structure curvature measurements (∼300 MPa for 3 µm Cu); a improved analytical model for plasma pressure is presented, taking in to account both axial and radial effects (important for small pot size); the stress/strain analysis was performed by ABAQUS software (stress and strain distributions are presented)

Zhang (2004) [263]

Cu (1, 1.5, and 3 µm films on 0.5 mm Si <004>)

Water?/Al foil (16 µm) + vacuum grease

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 50 ns, spot 12 µm, 174, 209, and 244 µJ; 3.08, 3.67, and 4.31 GW/cm2

Hardness and stress/strain field of lasershocked areas was investigated by X-ray microdiffraction and nanoindentation; hardness of shocked regions was increased by 11%; compressive residual stresses were found in shocked material; simulated (by the model described in Zhang (2004) [263]) strain energy distribution is presented

Zhang (2004) [401]

Al (110), Cu (001), both 5 mm thick

Water (5 mm)/Al foil (16 µm) + vacuum grease

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 50 ns, 10 kHz, spot 12 µm, ∼4 GW/cm2

Laser shock-induced lattice rotation was measured by electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) method; maximum in-plane rotation was ∼3◦ in Al and ∼2◦ in Cu sample; the measured rotation distributions are compared with numerical simulation data; the Al sample surface was deformed up to ∼1.3 µm in depth

Chen (2004) [402]

Al (001), Cu (110), both 5 mm thick

(3 mm)/Al foil (16 µm) + vacuum grease

See the entry for Chen (2004) [402]

Microdiffraction measurements (X-ray beam size 5–7 µm) of residual stress in lasershocked samples are described; compressive residual surface stresses up to −100 MPa were found; asymmetry of diffraction peaks indicated dislocation cell structure formation

Chen (2004) [403]

6061-T6 (6.3 mm)

Water

Nd:YAG, 1.064 µm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, 1.2 J, spot 1.5 mm

The specimen were laser shocked by 900, 1350, and 2500 pulses/cm2 ; surface hardness was increased up to 10%, residual compressive stresses up to −280 MPa were formed (below the surface), and fatigue crack growth rate K was reduced by 20 MPa(m)1/2

Rubio–González (2004) [404]

QT700-2 (10 mm)

?/LTV silicone rubber film

Nd:glass, 1.064 µm, 25 ns (∼Gaussian), 10–30 J, spot 7 mm

Yang (2004) [405] The parameters of LP were optimized by an ANN method; the depth of hardened layer was 0.31–1.4 mm (1–4 impacts); the hardness was increased by 45–82%; peak compressive residual surface stresses ranged from −165 to −410 MPa (12–20 J); laser shock treatment-induced dense dislocations and refined grains

AISI 304 (rod, 7 mm in diameter)

Water?

18 ns, spot 2.5 × 2.5 mm (sq.), 10 GW/cm2 , 200% coverage

LSP was compared with deep rolling (spherical rolling element of diameter 6.6 mm, 150 kbar); both treatments produced almost identical fatigue lifetime enhancements in temperature range 25–600◦ C; residual compressive stress relaxation was fastest between RT and 100◦ C, but near-surface work hardening started to anneal out only at over 400◦ C

Nikitin (2004), (2005) [406, 407]

SUS304

Water

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, spot 0.8, and 1 mm, coverage up to 800%

LSP was performed without protective coating; at successive impacts (at rising coverage rate), the residual tensile surface stresses were gradually converted into compressive (see Fig. 3.26)

Akita (2005) [231]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

A mathematical model of pressure generation at water confined LSP is described; the model considers the processes to be 1D, the plasma homogeneous and two-temperature laser beam absorption due to el.-ion and el.-atom IB and photoionization only, and Hertz–Knudsen surface evaporation; the model was in good agreement with experimental data at 532 and 1064 nm, 0.6–25 ns, and 1–10 GW/cm2 ; the calculations give insight into plasma parameters as the density of species, light transmission, thermal to internal energy ratio, water–plasma interface reflectivity, and energy balance

Wu (2005) [259]

Al (5 mm)

Water (3 mm)/Al foil (16 µm) + vacuum grease

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 50 ns, spot 12 µm, 226 µJ, 4 GW/cm2

Residual compressive stresses up to −80 MPa and dents of depth down to 1.8 µm were created in the surface of specimen; shock propagation and deformation simulation results are presented

Fan (2005) [273]

Ti-6Al-4V (12.7 mm)

Flowing water/black vinyl tape

Nd:glass, 1.054 µm, 20 ns, spot 5.3 mm, 8 GW/cm2

Laser shocks were applied simultaneously to both sides of the samples; shot peening was investigated as well (6–8A using cast steel shots and 6–9 N using glass beads); LSP resulted in ∼−600 MPa surface residual stresses; a linear elastic fracture mechanics analysis of crack growth threshold is presented; LSP proved to be superior over SP

Shepard (2005) [408]

A5083

Water (22◦ C)/no coating

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 6–7 ns, 10 Hz, 10–250 mJ, spot 0.4 mm, 12–310 MW/mm2

At a fixed scanning speed 2 mm/s the maximum compressive stress (∼−250 MPa) was achieved at laser power density of 31 MW/mm2 ; at fixed power density of 61 MW/mm2 the same maximum compressive stress was achieved at 1 mm/s; ablated depth was ∼100 µm at 61 MW/mm2 and 0.1 mm/s; at 2 mm/s the average ablated depth did not exceed 6 µm (10–310 MW/mm2 ); surface roughness of laser treated material increased with increase of laser power density and with decrease of scanning speed (scanning speed range was 0.1–15 mm/s), exceeding tens of µm Rz

Kusaka (2005) [253]

SUS304

Water

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 6–10 ns, 120 and 300 Hz, 60–250 mJ, spot 0.4–1.2 mm, 36 and 70 pulse/mm2

A laser peening system for in situ treatment of boiling water nuclear reactor (BWR) cores is described; the laser beam was transported whether by mirrors or by light guide; optical schemes of the system are presented; focusing system is described in detail

Mukai (2005) [409]

1080 carbon steel

?

?

Four kinds of laser surface modifications were compared: laser shock peened only, laser glazed only, laser glazed then shock peened, and laser shock peened then glazed; the latter provided maximum friction reduction 43% in a dry pin-on-disc test against alumina

Aldajah (2005) [410]

A review (6 pp) of the work at University of Kassel, see Altenberger, Nalla, Nikitin above; LSP is compared with shot peening (SP) and deep rolling (DR); highest fatigue strength can be obtained by thermomechanical surface treatment (SP or DR) at elevated temperatures (300◦ C)

Altenberger (2005) [411]

Ti-6Al-4V (10 and 15 mm)

?

?

Residual stress vs. depth profiles of laser-shocked samples were measured by neutron diffraction; compressive stress from LSP reached 1.25 mm in depth; the maximum of tensile stresses (160 MPa) located at a depth of 2.6 mm

King (2005) [412]

Cu ([011] and [134], 3–5 mm), CuAl ([011] and [134], 3–5 mm)

?

2.5 ns, 40–300 J, spot 3 mm, 15–70 MJ/m2 , 12–40 GPa/cm2

Slip-twinning transition was determined quantitatively and predicted as a function of orientation, temperature, and stacking fault energy; the experimentally determined threshold twinning stress for pure copper in the [0 0 1] orientation was 25 GPa, whereas the one for the [1 3 4] orientation was between 40 and 60 GPa.

Schneider (2005) [413]

Si (SC)

SiO2 -glass/Cu (0.05–0.3 mm)

KrF, 248 nm, 10–50 ns, 1.33–6 GW/cm2

Dislocations structure and dynamics in SC Si during LSP at temperatures 850–1073 K was studied by numerical simulation; it was concluded, that LSP process can generate plastic flow in brittle materials

Cheng (2005) [414]

Al (110) and (001), Cu (110)

Water (3 mm)/Al foil (16 µm) + vacuum grease

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 1 kHz, spot 10 µm, 4 GW/cm2

LSP-induced dislocations were studied by synchrotron XRD (beam size 5–7 µm); data about measured distribution of average mosaic size, strain and dislocations density are given and are compared with FEM-simulations; material with (001) orientation and material with higher stack fault energy (Al) showed higher dislocation density under LSP

Chen (2005) [415]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

6061-T6, 2024

Water

Nd:YAG, 1.064 µm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, spot 0.8 and 1.5 mm

The specimen were laser shocked by 2500 (6061-T6) and 5000 impacts/cm2 (2024); compressive residual stresses up to −1600 MPa were produced in 6061-T6 alloy and up to −1400 MPa in 2024 alloy;

Gomez-Rosas (2005) [416]

Nd:YAG, 10 ns, spot 0.75 mm, 0.3–1 J, 900 impacts/cm2

A 3D-LSP simulation computer program, SHOCKLAS, was developed; examples of simulation the residual stress distribution of given materials at given regime are presented

Morales (2005) [417]

Nd:YAG, 12 ns, 4 Hz, 0.8 J, spot 1 mm, 100 J/cm2 , scanned beam

It was found that the laser spot scanning of the surface during processing resulted in a system of column-like microstructure, which was tilted in the direction of scanning; spherical nanoparticles formation with diameter of ∼60 nm was observed during LSP

Bugayev (2005) [418], Bugayev (2006) [419]

A solution has been presented of a axisymmetric problem about elastic deformation of a flexible plate due to a prescribed distribution of eigenstrains, such as may be generated during shot peening treatment; the spatial variation of residual stresses and strains through the plate thickness, and the deformed plate shape, can be predicted using this technique; the approach may be applied also for case of LSP as demonstrated by Korsunsky (2006) [421]

Korsunsky (2006) [420]

A 1D-Lagrangian hydrodynamic code, HYADES, was adopted for simulation of plasma pressure and of propagation of laser shock in Al;Al was considered as an elastic-perfectly plastic material; the propagation of the shock wave inside the metal was found to be mainly influenced by the laser fluence, not by laser intensity; calculated plasma peak pressure, impulse and shock velocity dependence on laser pulse risetime (1–17 ns) and intensity/fluence are presented

Lee (2006) [261]

Ti-6Al-4V, Al2024

Inconel 600, 316L (5 mm)

Al

Water (3–10 mm)

Water

1.064 µm, trapezoidal pulse, 8–50 J/cm2 , 2–10 GW/cm2

Inconel 132, Inconel 182, also weldments with SUS304 and Inconel 600

Ti-6Al-4V (BSTOA, 15 mm)

Water

Flowing water/Al tape

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 100 mJ, spot 0.6–1 mm, 36–70 impacts/mm2

18 ns, spot 3 mm, 12 GW/cm2

Compressive residual stresses up to −1000 MPa at surface and up to ∼1 mm in depth were formed in the LSP-treated materials; corrosion tests (561 K, dissolved O2 8 ppm, conductivity 0.1 mS/m, 500 h) demonstrated complete suppression of stress corrosion cracking by LSP

Sano (2006) [422]

New empirical formulae for estimation of residual stress distribution in laser-shocked materials is presented (see section 3.3.6.2); the calculations matched well with experimental data for 40Cr and 45# steels

Chen (2006) [269]

Slip steps were observed within grains oriented with their c axis nearly parallel to the specimen surface normal; grains with slip steps had the lowest Taylor factors; all the localized lattice rotations were concentrated about the steps, with almost no orientation variations in between slip steps

El-Dasher (2006) [423]

Wu (2006) [426] Laser beam transmission through water breakdown plasma in LSP regime was simulated by solving an electron rate equation coupled with Maxwell’s wave equation; the calculated with aid of this model transmitted laser peak power density, transmitted laser pulse length, peak pressure, and pressure duration as function of incident power density agreed well with the experimental data from literature 6061-T6 (6.3 mm)

Water

Nd:YAG, 1.064 µm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, spot 1.5 mm

The specimen laser shocked by 900, 2500, and 5000 pulses/cm2 were tested for wear and friction by roll-on-flat tribometer; wear rate was reduced about 68% using 5000 pulse/cm2 ; with LSP the time to reach the same wear depth was increased by as much as 100%, depending on the applied load and pulse density; wear mechanisms included adhesive wear, abrasive wear, and wear due to plastic deformation

Sánchez-Santana (2006) [425]

SUS304, SUS316L

Water/no protective layer

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 60–200 mJ, spot 0.4–1 mm, 9.5–100TW/m2

The specimen were laser shocked by 36–135 impacts/mm2 ; the shocked surface of SUS304 was oxidized for ∼1 µm depth and surface roughness Ra was less than 2 µm; the depth of LPPC-induced compressive residual stress exceeded 1 mm from the

Sano (2006) [254]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

surface for both materials; LPPC completely prohibited the initiation of SCC and the propagation of small pre-cracks on SUS304 in an environment that accelerates SCC (water 561 K, dissolved O2 8 ppm, 500 h); rotating bending fatigue tests showed that LPPC enhanced the fatigue strength of SUS316L by a factor of 1.4–1.7 at 108 cycles 35CD4 50 HRC

Water/black paint

30 ns, spot 5 × 5 mm, 8 GW/cm2

3D-FEM analysis of single and multiple LSP by LS-DYNA and ANSYS commercial software is described; the target material was assumed to be perfectly elastic–plastic and the plastic strain to follow the von Mises yielding criterion and the dyn dynamic yield strength be σY = HEL(1–2ν)/(1–ν); calculated residual stress distribution (also 3D) and deformed surface profiles are presented for the experimental conditions of Ballard (1991) [264]

Hu (2006) [426]

Ti-6Al-4V (aeroengine fan blade contact surfaces)

Water?

9 GW/cm2 , coverage 200%

In-plane residual stresses of order 700–800 MPa were introduced by laser shock peening near surface, the compressive region extending to a depth of ∼1.5 mm; a tensile peak residual stress of 250 MPa was located at a depth of around 2.5 mm; fretting fatigue loading of Dovetail Biaxial Rig samples treated with combined LSP and SP on their contact surface causes significant stress relaxation extending to a depth of 0.5 mm; FEM has been used to determine the profile of plastic misfit (eigenstrain) introduced by peening responsible for the observed distributions of elastic strain

King (2006) [427]

35CD4 30 HRC (15 mm)

Water

50 ns (Gaussian), spot 8 mm, 2.8 GPa

Laser shock propagation in the specimen and residual stresses were calculated by ABAQUS using a 2D axisymmetric model; calculated residual stress distributions are compared with analytical and experimental results of Peyre (1998) [239] and Ballard (1991) [264] (diagrams presented); the size of residual stress field and the depth of the plastic deformation increases clearly when the diameter of the spot is increased from 2 to 8 mm

Ding (2006) [428]

6061-T6 (5 and 6.3 mm)

Water jet/black paint (13 µm)

Nd:YAG, 1.064 µm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, spot 1.5 mm, 2500 pulse/cm2

Without absorptive coating, the maximum compressive residual stress in samples was reached at a depth about 0.7 mm; the corresponding value for coated samples was between 0.1 and 0.2 mm (stress profiles given); superficial grooves along the scan direction were observed

Rubio–González (2006) [429]

Ti-6Al-4V (8.5 mm)

?

Nd;YAG, 355 nm, 20 ns, spot ∼2 × 3 mm, ∼7 GW/cm2 , coverage 200%

LSP-induced residual elastic strain profiles were measured by synchrotron radiation (∼60 keV) diffraction; microstrain values up to −4000 were measured; plastically affected depth was over 3 mm; difference between hcp α-phase (00.2) and (11.0) peak strains displayed the greatest sensitivity to plastic deformation; strain measurement methodology by the presented method is laid out in detail

Korsunsky (2006) [430]

Ti-6Al-4V (8.5 mm)

?

see Korsunsky (2006) [430]

The measured in Korsunsky (2006) [430] residual elastic strain distributions were modelled using a distribution of laser shock-induced eigenstrain near the surface; and the most likely eigenstrain profile was deduced using a variational matching procedure; the mathematical framework of this approach is presented and discussed

Korsunsky (2006)[421]

35CD4 30HRC, Ti-6Al-4V, 7050-T7451

The first book about LSP (162 pp., 85 figs., 123 refs.); main topics covered: physical and mechanical mechanisms of LSP, simulation methodology, 2D/3D-simulation of single and multiple LSP (examples presented for 35CD4 30HRC), 2D-simulation of two-sided LSP on thin sections (examples presented for Ti-6Al-4V); simulation of LSP on cylindrical surface (examples presented for 7050-T7451); history of mechanical energies and distribution of dynamic and residual stresses in workpiece are presented for various LSP conditions; ABAQUS software was used in all simulations

Ding (2006) [186]

Ti-6Al-4V, 316L

A multi-axial contour method for determination of residual stresses in continuously processed materials is described and applied to laser-shocked specimen

DeWald (2006) [217]

(Continued)

Table 3.8

(Continued)

Processed materials/ targets

Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

SKD61, SUS304, SUS316L,Ti-6Al-4V, AC4CH

Water/no coating

SKD61, SK3, SUS304,AC4CH

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 60–200 mJ, spot 0.6–0.8 mm, up to 200 pulse/mm2

A overview of recent advances in LPwCtechnology: residual stress profiles in laser peened SKD61 and SUS304 are presented; the achieved stress profile in SUS304 was quite stable even at thermal loading up to 673 K; rotating-bending and push–pull fatigue life of SUS316L,Ti-6Al-4V and AC4CH was improved significantly despite of increase of surface roughness; SSC (accelerated tests) in SUS304 was completely eliminated in result of laser peening

Sano (2006) [282]

Water/no coating

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 70–200 mJ, spot 0.6–0.8 mm, up to 100 pulse/mm2

A overview of recent advances in LPwCtechnology: in addition to the material presented by Sano (2006) [282], LPwC treatment of 9.5 mm inner diameter SK3 steel tubes, and investigation of crack propagation in AC4CH by X-ray micro tomography is described; fibre delivery of laser beam and autofocus system are also described

Sano (2006) [280]

Alloy 600

Water/no coating

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 80 mJ, spot 0.4 mm, 70 pulse/mm2

Residual stress profiles in laser peened Alloy 600 samples are presented; laser peening operations of welds in PWR nuclear reactors are described in detail

Yoda (2006) [185]

12Cr steel, 316L (4 mm)

Water/Al (70–80 µm, optional)

Pressure duration 6–50 ns, peak pressure 3–5 GPa, impact size 1.6 and 5 mm

FEM calculation (2D axisymmetric, by ABAQUS) of shock propagation and residual stresses; materials were given by hydrodynamic Grüneisen EOS and Johnson–Cook’s plasticity model; effects of impact pressure and diameter, pressure pulse duration, number of impacts and of sacrificial overlay were studied numerically; without sacrificial layer, the heating of workpiece by plasma was found to last several microseconds and thermally affected depth was ∼30 µm (6 ns pressure pulse)

Peyre (2007) [229]

Notations FWHM – full-width half maximum CW – continuous wave (laser) SP – shot peening LSP – laser shock processing, laser shock peening LP – laser peening LPPC, LPwC – laser peening without protective coating SC – single crystalline, single crystal HAZ – heat affected zone PAZ – plastically affected zone SHYLAC – Simulation Hydrodynamique Lagrangienne des Chocs – a computer code for hydrodynamic simulation of fluid motion and shock wave propagation, developed at LCD-ENSMA Poitiers, France TEM – transmission electron microscope SEM – scanning electron microscope SIMS – secondary ion mass spectrometry EPMA – electron probe microanalysis ‘momentum trap’ – a solid plate in contact with the backside of laser-shocked sample, in purpose to avoid wave reflecting from back side of the sample (see Clauer et al. [232]) PE – polyethylene LLNL – Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory MIC – Metal Improvement Company BFV – back-free velocity, the velocity of target’s free back side ACCIC (Auto Consistent Confined Interaction Code) – a code for simulation of laser – confined target interaction, developed at CLEA-LALP,Arcueil, France EMV – electromagnetic displacement gauge, the operation relies on change of magnetic flux due to change of current carrying loop area PVDF – polyvinylidene fluoride, a high performance piezoelectric polymer ABAQUS – a commercial general-purpose finite element program, designed primarily to model the behaviour of solids and structures under externally applied loading ANSYS – a commercial multiphysics finite element simulation program FEM – finite element method, finite element modelling FD – finite difference ANN – artificial neural network ID – inner diameter 1D, 2D, 3D – one-dimensional, two-dimensional, three-dimensional HV – Vickers hardness DR – deep rolling SS – stainless steel HEL – Hugoniot elastic limit (see Glossary) RT – room temperature (∼20–25◦ C) IB – inverse Bremsstrahlung XRD – X-ray diffraction BSTOA – beta solution treated and overaged SCC – stress corrosion cracking PWR – pressurized water reactor EOS – equation of state

140

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

3.4 Laser Shock Forming and Cladding 3.4.1 Forming Deformation of thin metal foils due to laser plasma pressure was observed already by O’Keefe and Skeen [295] and Ageev [431] in the 1970s. Later the process was developed by Dubrujeaud and Jeardin, Zhang et al. Zhou et al. [432–439] who all used solid confinement layers. Water confinement has been applied only recently, by Fan et al. [273] for micro forming. Laser shock forming (also called laser peen forming) has considered as an alternative to other dynamic forming methods like explosive and magnetic forming. It is a convenient tool for introducing microscale deformations into materials (Fig. 3.40) [273].

3.4.2 Cladding Laser cladding is an alternative to explosive cladding, capable to join dissimilar materials with uneven surfaces. Laser process has been implemented using a glass confinement layer only so far. In the work by Dubrujeaud and Jeandin [432], a grooved 2024 aluminium alloy specimen was clad by an 20-µm thick aluminium foil; 6 ns laser pulses of fluence 350 J/cm2 were used, the estimated pressure being 6 GPa (Fig. 3.41). The process was carried out in vacuum. Melted material was found at the bottom of the grooves, obviously due to shock wave focusing. Pulsed laser

Transparent overlay Vapourized opaque material (explosive pressure) Opaque material Shock compressive wave Metal sheet Deformation

fdl

Pulsed laser Top press plate Transparent layer Black paint Metal sheet Bottom base

fdb

Figure 3.40

Schematics of confined laser shock forming [434]. © Elsevier.

Laser Glass Black paint

Metal foil Workpiece

Figure 3.41 Principle of laser shock cladding [432]. The process may principally carried out also in water confinement, but the space between foil and the workpiece should be evacuated.

141

Shock processing

3.5 Densiﬁcation of Porous Materials Fabrication of machine parts by powder compacting (powder metallurgy) is attractive because ‘near-net’ shaped parts are ready achieved, and because complicated-shaped parts of hard materials like carbides may be easily fabricated. However, the porosity of compacted from powder parts causes a reduction of their strength and an increase of friction and wear. In some cases, however, the porosity is a benefit. Porosity may be reduced by compacting the material by flyers or explosives [440–442]. The laser shock process (Fig. 3.42), is a less dangerous and easier to control alternative here. Some laser process examples are given in Table 3.9. The process has been carried out mostly using glass confinement [230, 244, 443–447], and to a less extent in water confinement [448, 449, 445]. The compacted depths achieved were about 0.5 mm and the surface residual porosities some per cents (Table 3.9). Numerical simulation of shock phenomena and residual porosity profiles are reported in the article by de Rességuier and Romain [450]. A computational model of shock compression of loose (also metal) powders can be found in the work by Benson et al. [451].

Improved wear properties Laser impact

Confining medium (glass)

Shock waves attenuation

Porosities

Densified depth

Figure 3.42 Principle of surface densification of porous materials by confined laser shocks [230]. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media.

Table 3.9

Laser shock densification of porous materials. Confining/absorbing layers or environment

Lasers and beam properties

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Al-alloy (5 wt% Cu, 1 wt% Pb, 1 wt% Mg, 1 wt% Mn, 0.5 wt% Fe, 10-mm thick)

Water/Al adhesive (100 µm)

Nd:glass, 8–10 ns, 0.011 Hz, spot 6 mm, 5 and 8 GW/cm2 , overlapped impacts

LSP rendered the surfaces slightly more homogeneous and smooth, and less porous; but the wear of treated surfaces was greater than of untreated

Schnick (1999) [448]

Al-SiC (50–50%, HVOF-sprayed, ∼400-µm thick)

Al (10-mm thick)

Water/Al foil 100 µm

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, 5–20 ns, spot 6 mm, 10 GW/cm2

Laser shock treated samples exhibited lower porosity and better contacts between Al and SiC reinforcement; plastic deformation of Al matrix and dislocations generation was observed; sliding wear resistance of shocked surface was somewhat greater that of unshocked one

Podlesak (2000) [449]

Distaloy AE (sintered porous steel, 190–570-µm thick, void volume 15% and 28%)

no

A drop of water

Nd:glass, 1.06 µm, ∼20 ns, ∼20 J, spot 5 mm, 5 GW/cm2

After laser shocking, the porosity near the shocked side was reduced up to 3 times; the depth of porosity reduction was up to hundreds of µm; calculated porosity profiles agreed reasonable with experimental results; cross-section micrographs of the material before and after shock are presented; Hugoniot curves of the materials and rear-side pressure transients are presented

de Rességuier (2001) [450]

Porous material

Substrate

Al-SiC (100–410 µm, thermal sprayed, 15 and 50 wt% SiC, 3.5–45 µm thick)

Notation HVOF – high velocity oxy-fuel

References

C H A P T E R

F O U R

Subtractive Processing

Contents 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6

Frontside Machining Liquid-Jet-Guided Laser Beam Machining Water at Backside of an Opaque Material Backside Machining of Transparent Materials Machining of Liquid-Containing Materials Laser Cleaving of Crystals in Water and of Water-Containing Crystals

143 171 177 177 202 203

4.1 Frontside Machining 4.1.1 Introduction Laser machining (drilling, cutting, carving, etc.) has been recognized to be useful and competitive in case of hard materials, curved surfaces, hard to access places (inside of tubes, etc.), rapid prototyping, carving of complex patterns onto surfaces, micromachining, etc. The process is non-contact, can be carried out at atmospheric pressure, and is easy to control. However, laser machining is a thermal process where the material removal occurs via melting and vaporisation. Looking, for example, at a laser cut in a metal, all typical to thermal processes imperfections like taper, structural changes, recast, debris, and burr can be found (Figs 4.1 and 4.2).

Debris

Taper

Recast

fs/pspulses or in liquid

ns-pulses

Burr

HAZ (a)

(b)

Figure 4.1 Imperfections of a laser cut in a metal (schematically). The cut quality may significantly be improved by presence of a liquid without a need for ultrashort laser pulses or vacuum.

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing ISBN-13: 978-0-08-044498-7

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

143

144

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Konventionelle Strukturiering: HE = 9 J/cm2. ff = 20 Hz

200 m

Strukturiering unter Flussigkeit: 200 m HE = 9 J/cm2. ff = 20 H z

(a)

(b)

Figure 4.2 Effect of water film on laser carving results in Si3 N4 ceramics. (a) Process performed in air and (b) a water film was sprayed onto surface. Laser: KrF, 248 nm, energy density 9 J/cm2 , pulse frequency 20 Hz, 500 pulses. The pattern was created by mask projection technique. Courtesy by Stephan Roth, Bayerisches Laser Zentrum GmbH (BLZ), Germany. © Stephan Roth, published with permission. See also the article by Roth and Geiger [452] for a similar experiment with SiC.

Techniques of avoiding redeposition of laser ablation debris and its removal • • • • •

Ablation in vacuum. Purging the ablation zone by a high-speed gas jet. Aftercleaning of the workpiece by solvents, detergent solutions, reactive oxygen plasma or in ultrasonic bath. Using water-soluble protective coatings like polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) [453]. Machining in liquids or having a liquid film on the surface of the workpiece.

Reasons why liquids are applied in laser machining • • • • • • •

Little or no debris and/or recast, less melt, reduced HAZ depth, less taper, and burr. Contamination of the ambient atmosphere by aerosols and gases is extensively avoided. Lower thermal load on heat-sensitive materials, for example, decomposition of heat-sensitive materials like HgCdTe can be avoided [454]. Cracking of brittle materials (e.g. SiN) is reduced or avoided [455]. Graphitization of diamond can be avoided; graphitic layer is electrically conducting and decreases the catalytic activity of diamond in metal deposition [456–458]. Silicon layer formation on an SiC surface can be avoided; silicon layer leads to a reduction of catalytic activity of SiC in metal deposition [459–461]. In water, it was possible to capture and fix latex microparticles to be machined by optical tweezers [462].

Possible disadvantages and hazards of liquids-assisted laser machining • •

Contamination of the workpiece surfaces by liquid dissociation products (oxygen and hydrogen from water, carbon from organic solvents, nitrogen from liquid nitrogen, etc.). Vapours of the liquids and their decomposition products may be harmful for personal and electronic equipment.

For frontside laser machining, non-toxic transparent to laser light liquids have been commonly used. Molten NaCl and NH4 Cl were tested as self-focusing media for laser drilling by Ramanathan and Molian [463], molten NaNO3 and KNO3 jets were proposed for guiding the laser light in DE10238339 [464] (Table 4.1). Addition of salts and bases to water was found to improve the finish [465] and to enhance the etch rate [466] in some cases. Organic additives are used for improving the wetting of thin water film on the surfaces [467]. Soapy additives were tested by Roth and Geiger [452], but no effect on the machining results was observed. Water with a saccharose additive was applied as a micromachining mask [468] (see section 4.1.2.7). The main parameters of lasers used for subtractive processing are given in Tables 4.2, 4.3, 4.6 and 4.9–4.11. For frontside micromachining, nanosecond-pulsed UV–VIS–NIR lasers of wavelengths in liquids transparency

145

Subtractive processing

Table 4.1 Liquids and their additives used at frontside laser machining (for backside machining, see Table 4.9). Liquids

Additives

Water, heptane, perfluorocarbons, benzene, o-xylol, p-xylol, ethanol, glycerin, ether, DMSO, DMFA, N2 H4 , liquid nitrogen. molten NaCl, NH4 Cl, NaNO3 and KNO3

H2 O2 , NaCl, CaCl2 , NaNO3 , KNO3 , Na2 SO4 , K2 SO4 , CuSO4 , KOH, methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, soapy additives, saccharose

Notations DMFA – dimethylformamide DMSO – dimethylsulfoxide (CH3 )2 SO

window are commonly used. In high-power applications, cheap and energetically effective CO2 lasers are the choice.

4.1.2 Frontside micromachining 4.1.2.1 Experimental arrangements Figure 4.3 schematically depicts the main methods of providing the working zone with liquids. In Figs 4.4 and 4.5 two more sophisticated systems including means for process monitoring and control are shown.

4.1.2.2 Phenomenology and mechanisms: nanosecond-laser pulses Ablation mechanisms Similar to the ablation in gases, in liquids the major ablation mechanisms are melting and vaporization of the material. In addition, some phenomena that are of second order in gas and vacuum become more pronounced in liquids, because the cooling rate and the density of chemically active species is larger in liquids (see also Section 4.1.2.3).

Pressure effects Many times higher vapour and plasma pressures in confined ablation in comparison with ablation in vacuum and in gas are believed to be responsible for high ablation rate in liquids, but the detailed mechanism has not been clarified yet. Fatigue damage At low laser fluences (surface temperature below the melting point of the material), fatigue damage was observed in single-crystal silicon [471, 474, 475]. Xia et al. [476] calculated thermal stresses in laser-heated single-crystalline Si and Ge (below ablation threshold) to be ∼1 GPa (laser: 1.06 µm, 10 ns, 6.4 GW/cm2 ), that is, larger than the stress thresholds for fracture in these materials. Cavitation impact Isselin et al. [477] have studied the surface damage of metals due to bubble collapse (cavitation erosion) in relation to the bubble diameter (0.9–3.8 mm) and the distance of bubbles from the surface. They estimated the peak shock wave pressure to be 120–160 MPa, the microjet impact pressure to be 1–7 MPa, and the pressure influence time to be about 300 ns. Geiger et al. [469] also found evidence of Water

(a)

(b)

(c)

Steam

(d)

(e)

Figure 4.3 Methods for providing liquid into the working zone during laser micro machining. These method were used, for example in: (a) Geiger et al. [469], (b) Sakka et al. [470], (c) Shafeev and Simakin [471], (d) Dupont et al. [472], (e) Geiger et al. [469]. In the cases (d) and (e), laser light not well transmitted by the liquid can be used. The thickness of the liquid layer over the target in the case (a) has typically been 1 mm. Besides focused laser beam, mask projection pattering has been widely used as well.

146

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Compressed air Timing control unit

Air filter

Flow controller

Translation stage Sample

Nozzle

Aperture

Beamsplitter

Energy meter

Heater

Temperature controller

Nd:YAG laser (λ = 1064 nm FWHM = 6 ns)

Thermocouple

Figure 4.4 Schematics of a steam-assisted laser ablation system. A liquid film is formed on the workpiece surface through vapour condensation [473]. © Elsevier.

Photodetector Interference filter Lens HeNe laser

Target Nd:YAG laser pulse Microphone Liquid film

Lens Lens Photodetector

HeNe laser

Figure 4.5 Techniques of monitoring of liquid-assisted laser machining process by surface reflectivity, photoacoustic deflection and acoustic emission techniques. Onset and intensity of vaporization, and the velocity of acoustic and shock waves can be determined this way [473]. © Elsevier.

147

Subtractive processing

mechanical damage in A12 O3 ceramics laser etched in water. Shafeev et al. [458] assumed that the microjets (Fig. 7.10) damage the graphite layer at diamond etching in water, resulting in high catalytic activity of the etched diamond for electroless metal deposition.

Dissolution Dissolution of workpiece in laser-generated supercritical water was deemed to contribute to machining of Si3 N4 in the work by Hidai and Tokura [478] and of Al2 O3 in the work by Dolgaev et al. [479]. Physical conditions at laser micromachining in liquids Pressure The pressure dynamics at laser etching of solids in water was investigated by Ageev et al. [480] and Zweig [481]. Ageev et al. [480] recorded, using a piezoelectrical sensor, the oscillations of pressure in the etching vessel (laser: pulse length ∼500 µs, pulse energy some J). They estimated by calculations the peak pressure to be 10 GPa and measured the bubble diameters to be 0.55–0.58 mm (irradiation power density 1.2 × 107 W/cm2 ). Zweig [481] measured, optically, the velocity of the shock wave near the surface of a polyimide sheet target at distances up to 1 mm from the target and calculated the corresponding pressures. He got a pressure value >10 kbar (1 GPa) at the target’s surface at laser fluence of 90 J/cm2 . Shock pressure varied as a square root of the incident laser fluence of up to 90 J/cm2 . Bubble generation started at 8 mJ/cm2 , and pressure waves were detected beginning at 50 mJ/cm2 . The dependence of pressure on fluence was in good agreement with the ideal gas model. Zhu et al. [482] using the theory of Fabbro et al. [233] estimated that the pressures at ablation in water are 5.8 times greater than at ablation in air (4.5 J/cm2 , 23 ns). As reported by Daminelli et al. [483] at machining by nanosecond-laser pulses, 50–70 per cent of the incoming energy may be coupled into photoacoustic phenomena, such as shock wave pressure and cavitation bubbles; for 30-ps pulses the conversion of laser energy into mechanical effects is about 18 per cent and for 100-fs pulses 7 per cent.

Vapour and plasma dynamics Many researchers have photographed the liquid, vapour, and plasma dynamics at laser etching in water, thereby using high-speed cameras [452, 469, 472, 480, 484]. Roth et al. [452] report that in case of a sprayed water film on surface the vapour phase lasts for about 500 µs (laser fluence 25 J/cm2 ), but in case of dry ablation the plasma relaxes in 2.5 µs; Geiger et al. [469] measured for the duration of the vapour phase under water ∼800 µs (20 J/cm2 , water level 10 mm); Dupont et al. [472] photographed the plasma luminescence both in air and in water. The duration of the luminescence was about 80 µs in air, and about 25 µs in case of a vertically flowing water film (laser: 17 J/cm2 , 24 × 109 W/cm2 ). Acoustic emission Roth and Geiger et al. [452, 485] reported that both the brightness of plasma and the emitted sound were significantly lower at laser ablation under water compared to these in air (laser fluence up to 30 J/cm2 , sprayed water film on the workpiece surface). In contrast, Zhu et al. [482] found that sound was 25 per cent stronger at ablation in water compared to the ablation in air (2–5 J/cm2 , 1-mm water film). Mechanisms responsible for debris removal Laser heating generated thermal gradients and bubbles cause a convection of the liquid, whereas drag forces on particles are much larger than in gases. On the other hand, the settling velocity for particles is considerably lower in liquids. Thus, the debris is effectively removed from the working zone, and fabrication of deep trenches and long channels by ablation in a neutral liquid becomes possible (Figs 4.6 to 4.8). Drag force on small spheres in an incompressible viscous fluid is given by Stokes formula [486]: FD = 3πµ dv,

(4.1)

and gravitational settling velocity by: 1 g (ρ1 − ρ) d 2 , (4.2) 18 µ where µ is (dynamic) viscosity of the fluid, d is diameter of the sphere, v is velocity, g is gravitational acceleration, ρ1 is density of the sphere, and ρ is density of the fluid. For example, the viscosity of air is 18.3 µPa s and of water is 0.89 mPa s (25◦ C), thus the drag force is 48 times larger and settling velocity is 48 times lower in water than in air. Despite the settling time of debris is much longer in liquids, a circulation of the liquid is recommended, because the suspending debris scatters and absorbs the laser light. v=

148

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Laser

Laser

Window Workpiece

(a)

Heated zone

(b)

Figure 4.6 Thermal (a) and bubble-driven (b) convection of liquid in laser irradiated zones. (Schematically after Shafeev et al. [471] and Ohara et al. [484].) When the liquid has a free surface, the Marangoni convection may contribute essentially. In air

a

b

c

100 m

Figure 4.7 Effect of liquid ambient becomes especially pronounced at machining of deep grooves and blind holes. Here, grooves machined in a NdFeB magnet in air and in water are compared [487]. Laser: 1.064 µm, 180 ns, 1.8 mJ, 1 kHz (feed rate in mm/s)/(number of passes): (a) 0.8/6; (b) 0.8/8; (c) 0.08/8; (d) 0.08/2; (e) 0.08/4; (f) 0.08/8. © Elsevier.

Ohara et al. [484] estimate the rate of bubble generation by the formula: E = ρ[(tv − tR )C + Hv ],

(4.3)

where ρ is specific gravity (g/cm3 ), tv is vaporization temperature, tR is initial liquid temperature, C is specific heat, and Hv is latent heat of vaporization; and the discharge rate of produced bubbles by the formula dv 6η = g − 2 v, dt a ρ

(4.4)

where g is the constant of gravity, η is the coefficient of viscosity, and a is the radius of the bubble. For Cu and Al etching in water, EtOH and PFC, the observed etching rates correlated with calculated by Eqs. (4.3) and (4.4) bubble generation and discharge rates (0–10 mJ laser pulses, 10 µm spot size): it was concluded, that the more the bubbles were generated and the faster they were discharged, the faster was the removal of debris and the higher the etching rate. Shafeev et al. [471] presented photographs of the convective flow of a 300-µm-thick horizontal liquid layer between the target and the window, and estimated flow velocity to be about 1 cm/s (water, DMFA, or DMSO, irradiation power densities up to some kW/cm2 ).

Chemical processes at laser ablation in liquids At laser-induced plasma temperatures, thousands of kelvins, and due to plasma UV radiation, liquids molecules may be excited, ionized, and dissociated and thus become chemically active. In many investigations, the formation of oxides in laser plasma [470] and on the workpiece surface [459–461, 471, 472, 475] were observed at laser ablation in water. Shafeev et al. [458] suppose that released from the liquid hydrogen contributes to laser etching of diamond in water and in (CH3 )2 SO.

149

Subtractive processing

0459

6KV

10mm ×400

16mm

Figure 4.8 A trench in oxidized (111) silicon laser cut under still water layer [488]. Laser: Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 180 ns, 1 kHz, ∼1,7W average, spot 50 µm, scanning speed 0.1–2 mm/s. No debris is left, but the quality of the cut is poor for this pulse length. © SPIE (1999), republished with permission. 2

1

Ablation rate (m/pulse)

Al2O3 1,6

2 In water 3

1,2 0,8 0,4 In air 0 1

10

20 25 30 Laser fluence (J/cm2)

35

Figure 4.9 Dependence of the ablation rate on the laser fluence at laser etching of Al2 O3 in water and in air [469]. Laser wavelength: 308 nm (XeCl laser); pulse duration: 50 ns; pulse frequency 2 Hz. Curves: 1: sprayed water; 2: 2-mm-thick water layer; 3: 10-mm-thick water layer. Al2 O3 exhibits an exceptionally high etching rate in water. Elsevier Science Ltd (1996). + Hidai and Tokura [478] identified hydrothermal reaction products, NH+ 4 , NH4 –N, and silica ion/boric ion after laser ablation of Si3 N4 /cBN in water (Table 4.9, Hidai 2001). Also Dolgaev et al. [479] found evidence that laser ablation of sapphire in water and electrolyte solutions (see Table 4.9, Dolgaev 2001) was assisted by dissolution of the material in supercritical liquid. Ablation rate was dependent on type and concentration of cations, but independent of anions. Miyazawa and Murakawa [489] report about formation of CO, CO2 , CH4 , and misty particles of K2 CO3 at laser cutting of diamond in aqueous KOH solution. Chemical reactions at laser ablation of carbon in organic solvents and water are reported in Section 7.5.

4.1.2.3 Ablation efficiency In most cases the ablation rate by nanosecond-laser pulses has been larger in liquids than in gases (see Fig. 4.9 and Table 4.2). This is explained by the following: •

Increased energy-coupling efficiency by optical matching: since the refractive index of water is greater than that of air, the overall optical absorptivity of air–water–aluminium system was found to be larger than that at the air–aluminium interface [467].

150

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Ablation rate (volume), m3

70 000 60 000

Dry surface H2O-coated surface

50 000 40 000 30 000 20 000 10 000 0 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 2 Normalized laser fluence (F/Fd)

Figure 4.10 Ablation rates of dry and liquid-coated aluminium (100-µm-thick foil) as a function of laser fluence normalized by the ablation threshold of a dry surface Fd . © American Institute of Physics (2001), reprinted with permission from Ref. [467].

• • • •

• •

The bubbles carry the debris effectively away, thus avoiding the absorption of laser light on debris. High temperature of confined plasma [459, 482]. Liquid prevents the expansion of plasma and thus enhances the action of laser radiation. Mechanical impact of microjets generated at collapse of vapour bubbles [467]. Shock waves, originating from plasma expansion, collapse of gas bubbles and from microjet impacts can destroy passive layers on the target surface: for example, graphite layer on the diamond [456–458]; Si and SiO2 layers from an SiC surface [460, 461]. Shafeev et al. [471] observed that when bubbles were generated, there was always some surface damage of single-crystal silicon. Geiger et al. [469] suppose that shock creates cracks in ceramic workpieces. Dissolution of workpiece and debris in supercritical water [478, 479]. Laser-enhanced electrochemical dissolution in neutral salt solutions: metal dissolution may set in due to localized breakdown/dissolution of the passive film induced by the laser beam [465]. Occasionally, the etch rate may be lower in liquids than in gases/in vacuum, due to:

• • •

reduction of the transparency of the liquid due to accumulation of debris in suspension [459]; scattering of light by bubbles, lowering this way the energy density at workpiece; hardening of the material due to laser shocks (observed e.g. in steel 304 AISI) [472].

Ablation threshold and incubation effect A higher etching threshold in liquids compared to this in air has been commonly observed and explained by larger heat losses in the liquid (Figs 4.9–4.11). In single-crystalline materials, the etching rate (both in gases and liquids) has been observed to increase with the number of laser pulses (Fig. 4.12) [474, 475, 483]. This phenomenon, called incubation, is explained by enhancement of laser–material interaction due to defect accumulation (see also Section 4.4.2.1). According to Jee et al. [490] the threshold fluence Fth decreases with pulse number N as: Fth (N ) = Fth (1) × N ξ−1 ,

(4.5)

where ξ is the incubation coefficient. For example in silicon ablation with 800 nm, 130-fs pulses, ξ = 0.83 ± 0.04 and ξ = 0.82 ± 0.02, for water and air, respectively [483].

151

Subtractive processing

14 000

Ablation depth (nm)

12 000 10 000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0

0

0.5

1 Fluence (J/cm2)

1.5

2

2.5

0

0.5

1 Fluence (J/cm2)

1.5

2

2.5

(a) 14 000

Ablation depth (nm)

12 000 10 000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 (b)

Figure 4.11 Variation of silicon ablation depth with laser fluence for different number of pulses in air (a) and under water (b) [491]. () 5000 pulses (×), 4000 pulses, () 3000 pulses, (×) 2000 pulses, (+) 1000 pulses, and () 500 pulses. Laser: 248 nm, 25 ns. © Elsevier.

Influence of liquid layer thickness Influence of water and water/IPA film thickness in micrometre range on 6 ns Nd:YAG laser ablation of aluminium was studied by Kim and Lee [467] The ablation rate was found to be strongly dependent on the liquid film thickness and to increase with the film thickness for both liquids. However, once the thickness exceeded a certain critical value, typically few microns, the ablation rate saturated and then decreased slightly as bulk liquid layers of thickness ≈1 mm were applied [467].

4.1.2.4 Surface quality As a rule, the higher ablation rate in liquids is accompanied by increased surface roughness and in some cases also increased porosity (Figs 4.13 and 4.14). Geiger et al. [485] measured the change in the flexure strength of ceramics after etching in water and in air. After processing in water, Si3 N4 was stronger but Al2 O3 was weaker in comparison with specimens processed in air. They also report that the surface roughness of all materials was greater when etched in water compared to etching in air. Shafeev et al. [471] and Kruusing et al. [488] observed pores formation on a single-crystal Si surface laser irradiated in water. Laser-assisted etching of various materials in salt, base, or acid solutions is known to yield smoother surfaces than etching in pure water [465, 489, 493, 494]. Also etching of SiC in N2 H4 resulted in a smoother surface than etching in water [461].

152

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

14 000 12 000 Ablation depth (nm)

10 000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0

1000

2000 3000 Number of pulses

4000

5000

0

1000 2000 3000 Number of pulses

4000

5000

(a) 14 000 12 000 Ablation depth (nm)

10 000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0

(b)

Figure 4.12 Variation of silicon ablation depth with the number of pulses at various laser fluences in air (a) and under water (b) [491]. () 1.7 J/cm2 , (×) 1.8 J/cm2 , () 1.9 J/cm2 , (×) 2.0 J/cm2 , (+) 2.1 J/cm2 , and () 2.2 J/cm2 . Laser: 248 nm, 25 ns. © Elsevier.

100 m

Figure 4.13 Rutile target surface etched by laser under water. Laser: 266 nm, spot 40 µm, 100 J/cm2 . © American Chemical Society (2004), reprinted with permission from Ref. [492].

153

Subtractive processing

nm 50

x Profile

nm 600

30

320

10

40

−10 −30 −50

−240 −520 −800

0

79

238 159 micrometer

318

397

x Profile

0

79

20 pulses

(a)

159 238 micrometer

318

397

(b)

Figure 4.14 Cross-sectional profiles of silicon surface etched by laser in air (a) and under water (b) [491]. Laser: 248 nm, 25 ns. © Elsevier.

4.1.2.5 Machining by ps/fs-laser pulses In comparison with nanosecond pulses, ablation with fs/ps-pulses has differences in etch rate and in machined surface morphology.

Ablation rate and crater shape Compared with nanosecond pulses, in case of fs/ps pulses the ablation rate at the same laser fluence is lower, probably due to weaker conversion of incoming energy into mechanical effects [483]. Ablated surfaces are at least at moderate fluences better defined and smoother in case of nanosecond pulses, even in high thermal conductivity materials like gold and silver (Figs 4.15 and 4.16). Formation of ripples and rings on ablated surface Irradiation of single-crystalline silicon by femtosecond laser pulses in known to produce short-period surface ripples [497]. In water, the period of the ripples is smaller, 100 nm vs. 700 nm in air (Fig. 4.17). Katayama et al. [498] observed formation of concentric ring patterns at laser irradiation of silicon surface by 200 fs 15 mJ/cm2 pulses under water (Fig. 4.18). Their formation was explained by bubbles oscillation induced acoustic waves impact on liquid silicon.

4.1.2.6 Laser beam autofocusing in liquid At high laser intensities, some liquids may act as focusing lens, a phenomenon called autofocusing [499]. Ramanathan and Molian [463] used laser beam autofocusing for drilling of micrometre-sized holes in 316 stainless steel. A two-fold decrease in the hole size and reduced taper was achieved in comparison with traditional solid focusing optics. Polarization effects were also substantially reduced (Fig. 4.19). Best results were achieved using carbon disulfide (CS2 ), a well-known optically nonlinear liquid. Selffocusing of a light beam is due to increase of the refractive index (decrease of the speed of light) with laser field intensity: |E|2 , (4.6) 2 where n0 is linear refractive index of the medium, n is refractive index change, n2 is nonlinear refractive index, I is the intensity of the light, and E is the amplitude of the electric field. For carbon disulfide at 1064 nm, n = 9.0 × 106 + 9.6 × 10−12 × |E|2 (in esu units; n2 [esu units] = (c × n0 /40π)γ [SI units], where c is the speed of light in vacuum). Self-focusing length (distance at which the beam shrinkage occurs) is [500]: n = n0 + n = n0 + γI = n0 + n2

l=

n0 D D · = δn 2E 2

n0 , 2n2 I0

(4.7)

154

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

In water (900 shots) 120 fs

(a)

Diameter (100 m/div)

(b)

Diameter (100 m/div)

In air (450 shots) 8 ns

Depth (20m/div)

Depth (20 m/div)

120 fs

(c)

100 m

Depth (20 m/div)

Depth (20 m/div)

8 ns

Diameter (100 m/div)

(d)

Diameter (100 m/div)

Figure 4.15 SEM (Scanning electron microscope) images and depth profiles of craters in silver targets generated in various ablation conditions [495]. Focusing condition was adjusted for each ablation condition; 900 and 450 pulses were applied to targets in water and those in air, respectively. © Elsevier.

155

Subtractive processing

(a)

(b)

Figure 4.16 Typical craters in a gold target in water after 5000 laser pulses at F = 60 J/cm2 (a) and F = 1000 J/cm2 (b). Laser: 800 nm, 110 fs. Dimensions of the craters/scale of the images were not given. © American Institute of Physics (2003), reprinted with permission from Ref. [496]. Air

Water

2.5 m

2.5 m

(a)

(b) Air

Water

2.5 m

2.5 m

(c)

(d)

Figure 4.17 Femtosecond laser irradiated silicon surface: comparison of ripple periodicities observed in water and air experiments (SEM view) [483]. (a) F = 1.6 J cm−2 (7 × Fth ), N = 100, specimen vertically; (b) F = (0.20 ± 0.02) J cm−2 (1 × Fth ), N = 100; (c) F = 1.5 J cm−2 (8 × Fth ), N = 1000, specimen vertically; (d) F = (0.45 ± 0.06) J cm−2 (4 × Fth ), N = 1000. Laser: 800 nm, 130 fs. © Elsevier.

where D is the initial diameter of the beam and I0 is the maximum intensity. In the work by Ramanathan and Molian [463], l = 40 mm. Critical power needed to self-focus the beam is [501]: Pcr =

π(1.22λ)2 ε0 c , 32n2

(4.8)

where λ is wavelength of the laser beam, ε0 is dielectric permittivity of vacuum, and c is speed of light in vacuum. For carbon disulfide the calculated critical power for self-focusing is 11.32 kW (at 1064 nm wavelength).

156

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

10 m

Figure 4.18 A typical AFM image of a silicon surface after irradiation by a single-laser pulse in water. Laser: 800 nm, 200 fs, 15 mJ/cm2 . © American Institute of Physics (2003), reprinted with permission from Ref. [498].

Laser

Prism and Solid Lens

Liquid optics

Stainless steel X–Y Stage

Figure 4.19 Experimental setup for nonlinear liquid-assisted laser drilling. Laser: 1064 nm, 15 ns, 1 Hz, 400 mJ. © American Institute of Physics (2001), reprinted with permission from Ref. [463].

Besides CS2 , another candidate nonlinear liquid for laser machining is benzene with n = 8.5 × 106 + 5.4 × −12 10 × |E|2 , and critical power of 20.12 kW (at 1064 nm). The holes drilled by 316 stainless steel with the solid optics [463] were distorted in shape due to the linear polarization of the Nd:YAG beam. Using liquid optics, the polarization effects were considerably reduced. In addition, the number of pulses required to drill through the sample with liquid optics was much less than that required with solid optics (Fig. 4.20).

4.1.2.7 Liquid as micromachining mask In the work by Lapczyna and Stuke [468], a droplet of saturated saccharose solution in water was used as an ablation mask in laser etching of circular structures on the surface of PMMA (Fig. 4.21). Ablation was performed with an F2 laser (157 nm) in vacuum. The mask surface remained smooth even after more than 1 h of pumping at 10−2 mbar. The diameters of the mesas (Fig. 4.22a) were about 10 µm and their height about 6 µm. The surface roughness of the ablated areas was below 100 nm. By injecting an air bubble into the masking fluid (Fig. 4.22b), rings with an outer diameter of 650 µm and an inner diameter of 350 µm were achieved. The high surface tension of solution provided a regular shape of the droplets and thus of ablated areas as well.

157

Subtractive processing

Hole diameter (microns)

180

Entrance 4–8 pulses

160 140 Solid optics

120 100

Entrance 1 pulse

80 60 40

Exit

Liquid optics

20 180

210

240

270 300 Energy (mJ)

330

360

Figure 4.20 Variation of hole diameter in 316 stainless steel with pulse energy for solid and liquid optics (CS2 ). Laser: 1064 nm, 15 ns, 10 Hz. © American Institute of Physics (2001), reprinted with permission from Ref. [463].

Air bubble

Liquid mask

Substrate

Result

(a)

(b)

Figure 4.21 Formation of surface relief on PMMA using a liquid droplet as an ablation mask [468]. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media.

Acc.V Spot Magn WD 5.00 kV 4.0 5000x 8.9

5m PMMA. 157nm

(a)

Acc.V Spot Magn WD 5.00 kV 5.0 150x 8.5

200m PMMA. 157nm

(b)

Figure 4.22 Circular (a) and annular (b) mesas ablated in PMMA using liquid droplet as ablation mask. The micro trench (vertical line in (b)) was etched through a silicon contact mask prior to the ring. The horizontal line crossing the ring in the lower part of the picture indicates a step ablated subsequent to the ring, again by means of a silicon mask [468]. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media.

Table 4.2

Liquids-assisted frontside laser micromachining and related experiments. (reports where only reactive liquids were used, are not refereed here).

Materials machined

Liquids/gases in contact with specimen

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Sn, Pb, Zn, Bi, Mg, Air, water, heptane, benzol, Al, Cu, Mn, Mo, spirit, p-xylol, o-xylol, Ta,W ether, glycerin

Nd: glass, 140 µs, 10 J, 106 –1010 W/cm2

Focused beam, no The etching rate in water was about half of that in air; Ageev (1975) scanning, specimen correlation between thermal parameters of targets and [431] immersed into water formed crater dimensions tabulated for ablation in air and in water

Precision tool steel, 304 stainless steel

Ar+ , CW

Focused beam, 3.3 × 105 W/cm2 specimen immersed vertically into water

Etch rate up to 4 µm/s (0.5 M NaNO3 ); crystallization of salt observed; etch craters are irregular and having melted surface in water, but of relatively good morphology in salt solutions

Ti sheet 60 µm; Zr Air, water, ethanol, liquid plate 0.5 mm nitrogen (LN2 )

Nd:YAG, 100W

Focused beam, 1–30 mm water layer over the specimen

Arzuov Dependence of through-hole drilling time on laser power and water layer thickness presented; drilling in (1987) [502] liquids is slower than in air and faster in water than in ethanol; bubble generation and contamination of surfaces by oxygen and carbon and observed in water and ethanol; in LN2 intensive boiling and nitride film formation observed

Silicon nitride ceramics

Nd:YAG, 100 ns, up to 50 kHz

Specimen immersed About 100-µm diameter holes drilled in air and in water; in water with 100-ns pulses below 10 kHz no into circulating water, focused beam recast layer and cracks were observed 0.3 mm, up to 7.1× 107 W/cm2

1-ms pulsed laser, 120 Hz

Focused beam Optically tweezered particles of diameters 4–7 µm

Water, water solutions of NaNO3 , K2 SO4 , NaCl

Air, water

Pyrene-doped PMMA latex

Water

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 7 ns

Mn0.6 Zn0.4 Fe2.3 O4 ferrite

Water, KOH and CaCl2 solutions

Ar+ , 514 nm, 1W peak, Specimen under a CW, pulse modulated liquid layer (2 mm) Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 25 ns, 6 kHz

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Datta (1987) [465]

Morita (1988) [455]

Through-holes of sub-micrometre diameter drilled; the role of water was to enable optical tweezering

Misawa (1990) [462]

Studies of bubble growth in water depending on pulse width and frequency; in KOH solution the bubbles were smaller and did not adhere to sample’s surface; addition of salt did not enhance the etch rate in case of Cu-vapour laser

Hussey (1991) [503]

Hgx Cd1-xTe

Water, DMSO, DMFA, Br-containing etchants

Cu-vapour

Specimen under a steady or flowing liquid layer, scanning by focused beam

Cooling by liquids avoids decomposition of HgCdTe; in comparison with laser etching in reactive solutions the non-irradiated areas are not etched; generation of particles of diameter <0.5 µm observed

Brook (1992) [454]

Si (SC)

Water, DMSO, DMFA

Cu-vapour, 20 ns, 10 kHz, 1–50 mW average

Specimen immersed vertically into liquid, or having glass covered liquid layer above it, focused laser beam

In DMSO and DMFA the etching rate was 2–3 times higher than in water; at low laser fluences (surface temperature below the melting point of the material) fatigue damage was observed; bubbles cause always surface damage; pores formation and oxidation observed; photographs of the convective flow presented

Shafeev (1992) [471]

PI, Si, C,TiC, SiC, glass ceramics, Al2 O3 -based ceramics, stainless steel

Water–ethanol mixture (1:1)

KrF, up to 1.3 J/cm2 , focused beam

Some micrometre-thick liquid film formed by vapour condensation

Etching rate up to 80 nm/pulse (PI, 140 mJ/cm2 ); in case of Si etch incubation phenomenon observed; water film was used for enhancement of acoustical signals from ablation zone: acoustical signals at different laser fluences and different angles presented (mostly PI, but also Si)

Leung (1992) [504]

PI (25 µm)

Water

XeCl, 308 nm, 20 ns, 0.15–90 J/cm2 , 4.5 GW/cm2

Specimen immersed vertically into water

At laser fluences <20 J/cm2 , the ablation rate was in water the same that in air; >20 J/cm2 , deformation of the foil was observed; shock velocity measured by probe beams, an analytical model of shock pressure presented

Zweig (1992) [481]

Si [100] and [111]

Water, DMSO, DMFA, HF, HNO3

Cu-vapour, 10 ns, 10 kHz, 1–50 mW average

1-mm liquid layer over the specimen, scanned laser beam and mask-defined irradiation; up to 0.85 J/cm2

Irradiation below the melting point of Si causes material removal; reflected light transients recorded; 0.5 µm particles formed; etch incubation phenomena caused by dislocation accumulation observed

Shafeev (1994) [474]

Diamond

Air, water, 10 wt% KOH solution

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 5 kHz

Free-surface liquid layer over the specimen, scanned focused beam of diameter 80 µm, 2.5 × 104 W/cm2

No carbon contamination of the surface (as in oxygen atmosphere); bubbles and particles generation observed; grooves fabricated in water were irregular and not uniform in contrast to KOH

Miyazawa (1994) [493]

Alumina, silica, stainless steel 304 AISI

Air, water

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns; XeCl, 308 nm, 30 ns; 2ω-Nd:YAG, 1064 and 532 nm, 7 ns

Falling free-surface water film on vertical surface of the specimen; 0.1–30 J/cm2

Etching rates up to 12 µm/pulse (alumina, 1064 nm, 15 J/cm2 ) – many times greater than in air; high-speed photography studies of plasma; formation of oxides on the steel surface observed; no deposits around the crater

Dupont (1995) [472]

(Continued )

Table 4.2

(Continued)

Materials machined

Liquids/gases in contact with specimen

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Si (SC) [100] and [111]

Water, DMSO, DMFA, HF, HNO3

Cu-vapour, 511 nm, 15 ns, 10 kHz

Poly-SiC

Air, water, DMSO

96% alumina ceramics

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

1-mm liquid layer over the specimen, scanned laser beam and mask-defined irradiation

Etching incubation time as a function of the fluence presented (in region 70–90 J/cm2 )

Simakin (1995) [475]

Cu-vapour, 510 nm, 15 ns, 8 kHz

1–2-mm steady free-surface liquid layer over the specimen, focused laser beam, static and scanned; up to 16 J/cm2

100-µm deep grooves etched; etch rate was greater Voronov than in air; X-ray diffraction studies; intense evolution of (1996) [459] gas microbubbles and generation of particles observed; Dolgaev etched surfaces were catalytically active due to ≈30 nm (1996) [460] elemental Si particles on them

Air, water

XeCl, 308 nm, 50 ns, 20 Hz, 2 J

Mask-defined irradiation, up to 35 J/cm2 ; water sprayed onto specimen or 1–20-mm water layer over the sample

Ablation rate was highest when water was sprayed onto surface – about 10 times higher than in air; 10-µm particles generated; photographs of bubbles presented

Geiger (1996) [469]

Al2 O3TiC, polycrystal

Water, water + KOH (0.1–20 M)

Ar+ , CW,TEM00 , 514.5 nm, 100–960 mW, spot size down to 4 µm

≈2-mm liquid layer above the specimen, focused laser beam

≈10-µm wide and 25-µm deep trenches etched at beam scanning speed 3 µm/s; in comparison with etching in KOH solution, the etches surface quality and etch rate were significantly lower in pure water

Lu (1996) [494]

SiC ceramics

Air, water, DMSO, N2 H4

Cu-vapour, 510 nm, 10 ns, 8 kHz

1–2 mm liquid layer over the specimen, scanned laser beam, up to 16 J/cm2

No debris on etched surfaces; N2 H4 etched surface was smoother than in water; 33 nm Si clusters on surface; surface etched in water was oxidized

Dolgaev (1997) [461]

Diamond (synthetic SC and CVD films on Si)

Air, water, DMSO

Cu-vapour, 510 nm, 10 ns, 8 kHz

1 mm liquid layer over the specimen, scanned laser beam, 20 µm spot

Etched surfaces were almost without graphitic layer; threshold fluences and incubation times several times higher than in air; etching rate up to 100 nm/pulse (DMSO, 18 J/cm2 ); hydrodynamic impact probably removes the graphitized layer

Shafeev (1997) [456], Shafeev (1997) [457] (1998) [458]

Nd:glass, 140–900 µs, 0.5–1.5 J Ruby, 500 µs, 1–5 J

Specimen immersed into water, focused beam, no scanning, 1.2 × 107 W/cm2

Dependence of ablated mass on thermal parameters of materials in analytical form presented; shock pressure measured 5–60 MPa

Ageev (1997) [480]

Sn, Pb, Zn, Bi, Mg, Air, water Al, Cu, Mn, Mo, Ta,W, Ni

Cu

Water, ethyl alcohol, perfluorocarbon (PFC)

Ceramics Al2 O3 , Air, water ZrO2 , AlN, Si3 N4 , SiC; glass, stainless steel, polyamid

Nd:YLF, 1047 nm, 10 ns, 10 mW average

Sample immersed into liquid, scanning by focused beam, spot size 10 µm

No debris; etching rate in water greater than in air; etching in PFC is faster and in ethyl alcohol slower than in water; etching rate is greater for liquids with low vaporization energy, low viscosity and high specific gravity

KrF, 248 nm XeCl, 308 nm

Almost total avoidance of redeposition of the ablated Water film sprayed material; melting of the irradiated material is reduced; onto surface, focused laser beam, surface roughness is greater (≈1 µm) if machined under water film (except Al2 O3 ); ablation rates were about 2 up to 12.5 J/cm2 times lower than in air, with exception of Al2 O3 – up to 1.4 µm/pulse in water contra 0.1 µm/pulse in air (XeCl laser, 12.5 J/cm2 ); threshold fluences (Si3 N4 , 248 nm: 1·6 J/cm2 , Al2 O3 , 308 nm: 4 J/cm2 ) are higher than in air;less plasma and sound emission;strength studies

Ohara (1997) [484]

Geiger (1998) [485]

A review of laser etching in both neutral and reactive liquids

von Gutfeld (1998) [505]

PMMA

Concentrated solution of saccharose in water

F2 , 157 nm, 20 ns, 2 Hz, 0.4 J/cm2 , scanned focused beam 80 µm/s

Experiment was performed in vacuum, <0.01 mbar

Circular and annular mesas were ablated into PMMA using a water/saccharose droplet as mask for laser light (see Figs 4.21 and 4.22)

Lapczyna (1998) [468]

Si (SC), (111), oxide and nitride coated

Air, water

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 180 ns, 1 kHz , 1–2W average

5–6-mm water layer (covered by window) over the sample, scanning by focused beam, spot 50 µm, 0.1–2 mm/s

Trenches of width of 20–30 µm fabricated; cracks and pores at etched surfaces observed

Kruusing (1999) [488]

Al

Water

1.064 µm, 3 ns, up to ≈50 GW/cm2

Workpiece immersed into free-surface water

The thickness of ablated matter was 2.2 µm per pulse at 23 GW/m2 ; less than calculated by ACCIC code (3.6 µm)

Berthe (1999) [351]

Ceramics:Al2 O3 (99.7%), Si3 N4 , SiC; ZrO2 , high-speed steel 1.3343

Air, water, water + 5% methanol, water + 5% ethanol, water with soapy additives

KrF, 248 nm, up to 800 mJ and 150 Hz XeCl, 308 nm, up to 2 J and 20 Hz

Water film sprayed onto surface, mask-defined ablation, up to 30 J/cm2 ; alcohol added to water in course to enhance wetting

Ablation rate in water at 248 nm up to 0.1 µm/pulse (ZrO2 , SiC, Si3 O4 , – lower than in air); up to 0.9 µm/pulse for Al2 O3 (more than in air); fog and ablated material plume photographed – plume decays after 500 µs (Al2 O3 , 308 nm, 25 J/cm2 ); plasma emission was faint in water; additives in water had little effect

Roth (2000) [452]

(Continued )

Table 4.2

(Continued)

Materials machined

Liquids/gases in contact with specimen

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Diamond, SC and sintered by Co, grain size ≈25 µm; c-BN sintered by TiN and Al2 O3 , grain size 3 µm

Air, water, KOH (5–30%), KNO3 (5 and 10%), NaNO3 (10–30%), H2 O2

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 40 µs, 5 kHz, 1.6W average Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 450 µs, 1.15–1.4 J, 60 Hz

Al (polished)

Water

Al 1100 (70 µm foil)

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Workpiece immersed into liquid, covered by window, local transverse submerged jet, scanning by focused laser beam 10 and 20 mm/min

Grooves up to 120 µm in depth fabricated (30 scans); liquid flow (by jet) is essential for good etch; best results for sintered materials were achieved in 10% and 30% KOH solutions; surface roughness of etched in solutions sintered materials was up to 4.5 µm (Ra ); chip breaker grooves fabricated into sintered diamond and c-BN cutting inserts, providing 55% longer life

Miyazawa (2000) [489]

Nd:glass, 1.064 µm, 3 and 15 ns, spot 5–6 mm

Workpiece immersed into free-surface water

The ablated thickness was 1.1 µm/pulse (3 ns squared pulse, 20 GW/cm2 ) and 0.75 µm/pulse (15 ns Gaussian pulse, 1 GW/cm2 )

Berthe (2000) [257]

Water (3-mm layer above the sample)

2ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 50 ns, spot ∼12 µm, 4 GW/cm2

Workpiece was coated by Al foil (16 µm) attached by vacuum grease (∼10 µm)

A hole of ∼30 µm in diameter was drilled into 70 µm Al foil by 45 laser pulses; compared with drilling in air, the taper was small and the redeposition around the hole was reduced

Zhang (2000) [275]

Si

Air, water

KrF, 248 nm, 100 Hz

Workpiece immersed into water, layer thickness 3 mm, scanned focused beam 0.2 mm/s

Grooves about 30 µm in width fabricated; etching in water was slower than in air, but much better finish was achieved (no debris, better surface quality)

Li (2001) [506]

Ceramics: Si3 N4 and cBN (SC and polycrystal)

Water, steam, vacuum, air, oxygen

Ar-ion, multiline (455–529 nm), 3–24W, spot 80 µm, 0.5 and 30 s

In water: water layer thickness 2 mm, local transverse submerged jet

Si3 N4 ablation threshold was lower in water and steam compared to that in gases; ablation crater in SC cBN was in water 2 times and in steam 6 times greater than that in air (laser: 20W, 30 s); hydrothermal reactions + products NH+ 4 , NH4 N and SiO2 ion were found in + water after Si3 N4 ablation, and NH+ 4 , NH4 —N and and boric ion after BN ablation

Hidai (2001) [478]

Si

Water, air

KrF, 248 nm, 23 ns, up to 5 J/cm2

1-mm steady free-surface water layer over the surface, focused laser beam

Ablation rate was 2 times higher in water than in air; acoustic signals recorded

Zhu (2001) [482]

Si

Water, air

KrF, 248 nm, 23 ns

Water layer thickness 1.1 mm provides largest ablation 1–2.2-mm water layer over the surface rate 62 nm/pulse, more than in case of condensed layer, or condensed from 19 nm/pulse (3.1 J/cm2 ); dependence of sound spectral vapour water film on peaks (3.5 and 10.6 kHz) on water layer thickness the surface, focused presented laser beam

316 stainless steel (0.1 mm)

Air, CS2 , acetone, methanol, NaCl, NH4 Cl

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 15 ns, 1 Hz, 400 mJ, initial beam diam. 4 mm

Height of the liquid column ∼16 mm; gap between the liquid and the sample was 4 mm

Holes 40–60 µm in diameter were drilled by single-laser pulse using self-focusing effect of the laser beam in the liquids (the liquids were not in contact with the workpiece); best results were achieved using CS2 (Figs 4.19 and 4.20)

Ramanathan (2001) [463]

Al: 100 µm foils and 100 nm films on Si

Air, water, water–isopropanol mixture (50 %vol)

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 6 ns, apertured beam

Condensed from vapour liquid film of few micrometre thickness, laser fluence up to 1.5 J/cm2 (details of experiment setup presented in Kim (2004) [473])

Measurements of sound, surface reflection and photoacoustic beam deflection above the specimen; in case of water film, the ablation rate is ≈10 times higher and the threshold fluence is 20–40% lower (0.5 J/cm2 for foil); ablation rate is greatest for liquid film thickness of a few micrometres

Kim (2001) [467], (2004) [473]

Cu

Air, water

Ti:sapphire, 790 nm, 0.25 ps, 1 and 1000 Hz, up to 1.1 mJ

Steady free-surface water layer 0.9–1.5 mm over the specimen, steady and scanned focused laser beam (diam. ≈50 µm)

Holes and grooves machined; at presence of water the ablation rate was about 3 times lower than in air (focus was not adjusted in water); ≈10 µm diameter local crater at the edge of the main crater; at 1000 Hz pulse rate a ridge around the hole

Sun (2001) [508]

Al films (10–150 nm)

Water (15 µm)

Ar-ion, 488 nm, up to 30 mW, spot ∼250 nm

Water was covered by glass, scanning rate up to 33 µm/s

The desired effect was the oxidation of Al, but formation of grooves as narrow as 266 nm (at depth 10 nm) and of depth up to 200 nm (at width 450 nm) was also observed

Haefliger (2002) [509]

Si, Cu,‘mould components for IC packaging’

Air, water

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns

Dozens of micrometres thick water film on surface, condensed from steam; focused laser beam, 2.5–13.5 J/cm2

Ablation rates of Si and Cu were about 2 times higher than in air (for Cu up to 15 nm/pulse, 13.5 J/cm2 ); ablation rate saturates at ≈10 J/cm2 ; having water film on surface the emitted sound was weaker and light emission was lower and shorter (50 ns vs. 100 ns in air)

Koh (2002) [510], Hong (2002) [511]

Zhu (2001) [507]

(Continued )

Table 4.2

(Continued)

Materials machined

Liquids/gases in contact with specimen

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Iron

Air, water

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 30 ns, 92 mJ

Target immersed Ablation rate in water 5 times greater than in air; force vertically into water, generated at laser ablation detected optically from focused laser beam specimen’s rear surface displacement – peak force about 8 times greater than in air

Au

Water

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 110 fs, 1 kHz, 60–1000 J/cm2

Target immersed vertically into free-surface water, water layer 10 mm, rotating vessel, focused laser beam

Ablation threshold in water 5 times larger than in vacuum; at fluences over 100 J/cm2 the crater were of irregular shape and there was molten material, obviously due to plasma heating (Fig 4.16)

Kabashin (2003) [496]

SC Si (111)

Water

2ω-Ti:sapphire, 400 nm, 200 fs, 1 kHz, 10 µJ/pulse

Target immersed into water, focused laser beam, focus above the sample, 15 mJ/cm2 , also a striped irradiation from two crossed beams

Silicon melting depth was ≈20 nm; ring patterns (Fig. 4.18) were found on irradiated surface, obviously caused by acoustic wave, generated due to bubble oscillations

Katayama (2003) [498]

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Organic ARL on Water Si (60 and 300 nm)

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, Water layer (running The purpose of the process was to open the ARL at ∼30 ns, 58 mJ/cm2 , slit ∼4 m/s) above the alignment marks on the Si chip; considerations for beam (3 µm) workpiece achieving fine ablation area and low particles generation rate are presented; dome- and glove-shaped bubbles have been observed

Ag

Water

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 120 fs, 10 Hz, 4 mJ, 30 min OPO, 800 nm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, 4 mJ, 30 min

316 stainless steel

Air, water solution of NaCl, from 5% up to saturation

2ω-Nd:YVO4 , 532 nm, Target immersed horizontally into 25 kHz, water, steady or 2.6W scanned focused Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, laser beam, spot 0.3–2 ms, 20–30 Hz, ≈20 µm, peak power 4–7 kW ≈1.2 kJ/cm2 , 50–150 µm/s (numerical data for case Nd:YVO4 )

Target immersed horizontally into stirred free-surface water, focused laser beam

References Chen (2003) [512], Lu (2004) [513]

Ito (2003) [514]

Craters ablated into material; fs pulses remove in water Tsuji (2003) less material than in air; nanosecond pulses remove in [495] water more material than in air; in water the ablated surfaces are smoother (see Fig. 4.15); at fs-laser ablation in water continuum white light observed Case Nd:YVO4 : grooves 25–45 µm in width and 60–160 µm in depth fabricated; in solution no detectable HAZ or recast; material removal rate 3 times greater than in air; NaCl concentration 80% provides at slow scanning speed greatest ablation rate; aspect ratio is greater if machined in solution; discussion of material removal chemistry

Li (2004) [466]

SC Si

Air, water

KrF, 248 nm, 25 ns, 10 Hz maximum

Workpiece immersed horizontally into free-surface water, water layer ≈3 mm, mask projection irradiation, 1–2.23 J/cm2 , 1–5000 pulses

In water: absence of thermal damage, rougher surface, dendritic solidified molten silicon, more uniform material removal, no shoulder on the periphery, threshold fluence ≈1.7 J/cm2 (more than in air), material removal rate less than in air and more sensitive to laser fluence (Figs 4.11 and 4.12)

Choo (2004) [491]

Cu, Fe,Al

Air, water

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 25–250 mJ

Target immersed vertically into water, focused laser beam

Mechanical impact of ablation pressure and bubble collapse jet were recorded by piezo transducer; both were of MPa magnitude; the ablation force on target was in water 4.5 times greater than in air

Chen (2004) [515]

Cu, Fe,Al, stainless steel

Air, water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 20 ns, up to 20 Hz, up to 242 mJ

Target immersed Time to penetrate 0.1–0.3-mm-thick plates was in vertically into water, water 2–5 times lower than in air (other results focused laser previously reported in Chen (2003) [512]) beam, spot 100 µm

SC Si (111), n-doped

Water, water solution of Na2 SO4 0.1 M

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 130 fs, 1–1000 Hz, 3–250 µJ

Workpiece immersed horizontally into free-surface water (spot 27 µm) or vertically into solution (spot 37 µm), liquid layer 5 mm in both cases, mechanical perturbation optionally applied; focused laser beam up to 15 J/cm2

In water: threshold of surface modification greater, material removal rate lower; similar incubation coefficients than in air; elongated craters; 100-nm-period ripples on irradiated surface; at low intensities (E) and pulse numbers (N ) reddish light emission, at high E and N brilliant light and loud sound; colloidal Si and SiO2 particles generated

Daminelli (2004) [483]

TiO2 (rutile, SC)

Water

4ω-Nd:YAG, 266 nm, 10 Hz

Workpiece immersed into water, focused laser beam, spot 100 µm, spot 40 µm, 100 J/cm2

Crater with rough surface formed with small grains piled up on the periphery (see Fig. 4.13)

Iwabuchi (2004) [492]

Lu (2004) [513]

(Continued )

Table 4.2

(Continued)

Materials machined

Liquids/gases in contact with specimen

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Cu, brass (40Zn60Cu), bronze (8Sn92Cu), SC W

Water, ethanol (95%)

Nd:YAG, 1,06 µm, 130 ns, 1–5 kHz, 5W average Cu-vapour, 511 nm, 20 ns, 7.5 kHz, 3W average

Si (100)

Air, water

ZnSe (SC)

Water (1.2 mm layer)

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Workpiece immersed horizontally into steady of flowing water, steady or scanned focused laser beam, spot 10–60 µm, 20–50 J/cm2

In case of moving laser beam conical surface relief formed with period of 10–50 µm depending linearly on the diameter of laser spot

Kazakevitš (2005) [516]

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, ≈100 fs, 1 kHz, spot ≈65 µm, up to 1014 W/cm2 Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 5 ns, 10 Hz, spot ≈80 µm, up to 7 × 1010 W/cm2

Vertical flowing water curtain 0.6–0.7-mm thick, 72 µl/s, steady focused beam

Craters of depth down to 50 µm fabricated; ablation rate in water was about 2 times greater than in air; in water, the cavity confinement increases the laser-energy coupling to target; ablation rate saturation at high fluences corresponds to optical breakdown threshold; oxidized layer thickness in water ≈30 nm, in air 1200 nm

Ren (2005) [517]

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 130 fs, 1 kHz, 0.7 mJ

Sample was immersed horizontally into water

Craters of diameter of 100 µm and grooves of width of 5 µm were fabricated into the sample’s surface (see Fig. 5.23)

Jia (2007) [518]

Notations ACCIC – a code for simulation of laser – confined target interaction, developed at CLEA-LALP,Arcueil, France ARL – anti-reflective layer; in the article by Ito et al. [514] regarding to a layer below the photoresist layer in semiconductor integrated circuits fabrication process CVD – chemical vapour deposition CW – continuous wave (laser) PI – polyimide PMMA – poly(methyl methacrylate) SC – single crystalline.

167

Subtractive processing

4.1.3 High-power laser underwater and water-assisted cutting 4.1.3.1 Arrangements with axial symmetry The machining techniques using high-power lasers differ considerably from low-power ones. The laser beam, along with shielding gas and/or water, is fed to the workpiece through a special cutting head (Fig. 4.23). The thickness of the materials cut through may range up to 50 mm, the lasers are CW or millisecond pulsed with power up to some kilowatts. The CO2 lasers are preferentially used because of their high energetic efficiency. Water is the choice for cooling liquid for its low price and safety. Because CO2 laser light (10.6 µm) is strongly absorbed in water, a local dry zone is provided as a rule (Fig. 4.24). Cooling of the workpiece by liquid reduces heat-affected zone (HAZ), avoids the redeposition of the debris, and reduces the emission of waste gases and particles into the atmosphere. There are also applications where water is already present at the workpiece, like at dismantling and repair of nuclear reactors parts [519–521].

H2O

(a)

H2O

Air O2

O2

H2O O2

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Figure 4.23 Schemes of underwater and water-assisted laser cutting. Literature examples: (a) Alfille et al. [520], (b) Matsumoto et al. [519], (c) Konagai et al. [366], (d) Haferkamp et al. [522], (e) Richerzhagen et al. [523], When CO2 lasers are used, a dry zone at the workpiece surface is needed (a), (b), (d), because water does not transmit well 10.6 µm radiation. In the case on Nd3+ -based lasers (about 1 µm wavelength) light may be transmitted through water (c) or even along a water jet (e). Typical consumption of water: (d) 15 ml/min [522], (e) 50 ml/min [524].

Laser

Pulsed gas flow Nozzle

Water

Workpiece

Assist gas flow

Dry zone

Gas Vortices

Vortices

Water intake due to vortices Nozzle Water

Workpiece

Figure 4.24 Schematics of CO2 laser cutting with water cooling from frontside [522]. Due to high absorption of 10.6 µm light in water, local dry zone is used. Water may be provided to the working zone using pulsed assisted gas of by vortices-induced pulsation. © Laser Zentrum Hannover, reproduced with permission.

168

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

1.cw-Atmosphäre P = 1000 W

2. cw-Unter Wasser P = 1000 W h = 1000 W

3. cw-Atmosphäre Leistungsregelung

Pmax = 1000 W Pmin = 300W

4.gepulstAtmosphäre PLP = 1000 W = 40 % f = 500 Hz

Figure 4.25 V-cut contours in a 1-mm-thick X5CrNi1810 stainless steel sheet [522]. Gas: oxygen; cutting speed 3.5 m/min, CO2 laser. (1) P = 1000W, CW, cutting in ambient air; (2) P = 1000W, CW, cutting under water; (3), CW, power controlled, cutting in ambient air; (4) pulsed 500 Hz, P = 1000W, τ = 40 per cent, cutting in ambient air. P: laser beam power, τ: duty ratio. Water-assisted cutting by a CW laser provided nearly the same cut quality as cutting by pulsed lasers in gas [522]. © Laser Zentrum Hannover, republished with permission.

Figure 4.25 demonstrates the effect of water cooling on laser cut quality. Because at cut corners the beam feed rate slows down, there is a hazard of burnout of material due to excessive heat accumulation. CW laser cutting with water cooling (2) provides a better cut quality than cutting in dry gas (1), although not equally good quality as cutting by a pulsed laser beam in dry gas (4). Alternatively, the burnout may be reduced by dynamic control of the laser power (3). Under circumstances, the maximum cutting speed at the presence of water may be higher or lower than the maximum cutting speed in gas ambient. For example, Haferkamp et al. [522] report a higher cutting speed under water, while Alfille et al. [520] report a lower cutting speed for similar lasers and materials (CO2 lasers, stainless steel) (see also Table 4.3).

4.1.3.2 Arrangements with separate laser beam and water jet Such arrangements are simple and economical, because no special working head or immersion of the workpiece into liquid is needed, but a general purpose laser cutting device can be easily upgraded with a water jet.

Water jet advancing laser beam In patent US5068513 [525], a combined water jet/laser beam web slitter is described (Fig. 4.26). A highpressure water jet is used in conjunction with a relatively low-power laser to produce a smooth cut in a travelling web. The cutting procedure produces a relatively small amount of fibre dust in the atmosphere surrounding the cutting operation. The water jet serves the travelling web into separate parts, and the laser is directed to the severed edges to burn away the protruding ends of the paper fibres to produce a uniform, smooth cut in both severed edges (original summary from Ref. [525]). Water jet and laser beam directed to the same point Directing water jet to the fusion zone (Fig. 4.27), the cooling and melt removal effects are most pronounced, resulting in best cut quality and highest cutting speed. Alternatively, the workpiece may be immersed into water, in which case also the water jet is submerged JP11000786 [526] and JP11000787 [527].

169

Subtractive processing

48a P

46a

32a 42a 34a

Laser beam

44a

Water jet

45a

26a Web 24a 36a

24a 38a

28

40

Water

30

Figure 4.26

Schematics of a water jet slitter with laser finish (Patent US5068513 [525]). 5

7

4

5 8

1

6

6

3

8

3

9

9

2 2a

2 3a

12

1

13 11 10 (a)

(b)

Figure 4.27 Combined water jet/laser beam cutting devices. After patents: (a) JP2001062652 [528], see also JP2003062683 [529], JP2002146669 [530], JP2000317659 [531]; see also (b) JP11000780 [532], see also JP 11000841 [533].

Water jet following the laser beam In the work by Schüning and Rothe [534], a water jet was used with purpose to confine the assist gas jet, increasing the gas flow velocity and improving this way the melt removal from the gap (Fig. 4.28). Because the water does not enter the fusion zone, the system is proper to be effectively used also with CO2 lasers. Water also cools the workpiece. Systems where a water jet follows the laser beam, are described also in JP11000774 [535] and JP4053699 [536].

Table 4.3

High-power laser machining assisted by liquids or performed underwater.

Materials machined

Liquids

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Steel C45 sheets (3 mm); steel St 37-2 (3 mm, also EPO coated); X5CrNi1810; reinforced plastics

Water

CO2 , 1 kW, CW and pulsed

Local dry zone or water applied though the working head nozzle (Wasserdüse), 15 cm3 /min; different assist gases

Less burr, better tolerances; HAZ is 10–20% narrower at cutting in water; the plastic layer on steel was not detached or burnt near the cut; the emission of gases was reduced by 10–30%

Bach (1988), [537] Haferkamp (1989) [538], Haferkamp (1990) [522]

AISI 304 stainless steel, 10 mm

Water

CO2 , 5 kW

Local dry zone (air)

2 times less aerosols and debris, 15 times more H2 emission

Matsumoto (1992) [519]

Stainless steel 316, 2–8 mm stainless steel 10–30 mm;

Air, water

CO2 , 0.5 kW CO2 , 0.5 and 5 kW

0.5 and 7 m below the water surface; local dry zone (oxygen) above the workpiece

In water: the cutting speed was ∼40% lower and the kerf width at exit side narrower (1 mm contra 1.5 mm in air); the cut was of better quality at water depth of 7 m than at depth 0.5 m

Alfille (1993) [539]

Stainless steel 304L, 10–50 mm

Water

CO2 , 5 kW Nd:YAG, 1.2 kW, pulsed

Local dry zone (oxygen)

Narrower and more regular kerf (1 mm) than in gas, 6 times less aerosols and 40% less sedimented dross at underwater cutting

Alfille (1996) [520], (1997) [521]

SUS 304 austenitic stainless steel, up to 20 mm

Water

Cu-vapour, 511 nm, 80 ns, 110W average

Laser beam transmitted through water, focusing lens in water

Material removal rate 10 µg/J

Konagai (1996) [336]

Al2 O3 -based glazed ceramic tiles, 8.5 and 9.2 mm

Water

CO2 , 530W, pulsed 1–2 ms pulses and intervals

Local dry zone (oxygen) above the specimen; rear side in contact with water; 50 mm/min

Burnout was greatly reduced

Black (1997) [540]

45# carbon steel

Water

CO2 , 10.6 µm, pulsed, 300–800W

Local dry zone (oxygen) above the specimen; rear side in contact with water; 200–700 mm/min

A groove mesh was fabricated by laser on a cylindrical surface; the laser grooved component had ∼15% lower tensile strength than the mechanically milled one

Li (1999) [541]

A water jet followed laser beam (in gas jet) in order to avoid the expansion of the of gas jet within the cutting gap, increasing the gas flow velocity along the cutting front; the optimized gas jet allowed a higher impulse transfer to the gap material in deeper levels as conventional systems, resulting in better material cut quality, higher possible efficiency rate and a greater process window

Schüning (2000) [534]

171

Subtractive processing

Laser beam Gas jet Supporting water jet

Cutting gap modell

Figure 4.28 permission.

Method of laser cutting supported with a water jet [534]. © IEEE (2000), reproduced with

4.2 Liquid-Jet-Guided Laser Beam Machining First written report about light guiding by a water jet is from 1842 [542].The phenomenon was later extensively used in illuminated fountains. In 1870, John Tyndall experimented with sunlight guiding in a stream of water. First experiment of guiding a laser beam by a water jet was obviously performed in 1976 by Amarnath Kshatriya at British Columbia Institute of Technology, Burnaby, Canada (Fig. 4.29). First materials technology report where a liquid-guided laser beam was used is obviously the article by von Gutfeld et al. [544] (Fig. 4.30). The full potential of guiding a laser beam by a liquid jet in materials processing was recognized only in 1993 by Bernold Richerzhagen at Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland [545]. The essential understanding was that a water jet as thin as tens of micrometres can transmit hundreds of watts of laser power capable to cut millimetre-thick materials with high precision. The technology named Laser MicroJet® was commercialized in 1999 by Synova SA (Table 4.4). Similar methods and devices are described also in patents of other companies, WO2004094096 [546], JP2003173988 [547], JP11000780 [548], JP2004122173 [549], JP2000317661 [550], etc. (at least 40 patents were issued up to the end of year 2006). Figure 4.31 presents the typical arrangement of laser light-guiding water jet system. A laser beam is focused into a nozzle while passing through a pressurized water chamber. The low-pressure water jet emitted from the sapphire or diamond nozzle guides the laser beam via total internal reflection at the water/air interface. Stable length zb (Fig. 4.32) of a cylindrical thin jet of an inviscid incompressible liquid is given by the following relations (gravity forces and surrounding gas effects are neglected) [554]: zb = utb , tb =

1 βmax

ln

βmax = 0.34

(4.9) R0 , δ0

(4.10)

σ , ρR03

(4.11)

172

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

C

B

LASER A Water tap

Figure 4.29 Schematic of the total internal reflection demonstration using a laser and a water jet. © American Institute of Physics, (1976), reprinted with permission from Ref. [543]. -

+ JET

Anode

re

Cathode r

Nozzle

(a)

Inlet Anode

Cathode

Circulating pump

Potentiostat

Laser Beam expander

Quartz window

Nozzle Drain Electrolyte reservoir Heater stage

(b)

Figure 4.30 Schematics of solution jet-guided laser-enhanced electroplating experiment. © American Institute of Physics (1983), reprinted with permission from Ref. [544]. Table 4.4 Technical characteristics of water jet guided laser systems by Synova S.A. Lasers

Nd:YAG, 1064, 532 or 355 nm, <100 µs

Liquid

Filtered and deionised water

Water pressure

20–500 bar

Jet speed

Up to 300 m/s (at 500 bar) ∗

Orifice diameter

20–150 µm

Water flow rate

5–100 ml/min

∗ The diameter of the jet is some 10–20% smaller than the nozzle diameter because of the vena contracta effect [552].

173

Subtractive processing

Y

Z

Laser in 632 nm Focusing objective

X

Sapphire nozzle

Quartz window

X=0

Water inlet

Chamber

Jet

Metallic holder

Figure 4.31 Schematic of the coupling unit of laser light-guiding water jet (Synova’s Laser MicroJet®Technology). The laser light is focused onto orifice and transmitted along a the jet due to total internal reflection. The diameter of the jet is commonly 65–100 µm, the jet speed at 200 bar pressure is about 200 m/s. A 50 mm long jet is able to transport up to 700W light power, corresponding to 21 MW/cm2 . Source: ‘Fig. 1 of water jet as a multimode waveguide – theoretical and experimental investigation of modal noise and beam propagation in material processing with laser microjet’ © Laser Institute of America, Orlando, Florida (2006), reproduced with permission from Ref. [551]. The Laser Institute of America disclaims any responsibility or liability resulting from the placement and use in the described manner. www.laserinstitute.org. All rights reserved.

200 Stable jet length (mm)

Orifice diameter 100 m 150 75 m 100 50 m

50

250

500 750 Pressure (bar)

1000

Figure 4.32 The stable jet length measured from the nozzle inlet to the position where the first drop is formed [553]. The maximum working distance of water-jet-guided laser cutting is closely correlated to this value and varies analogously concerning nozzle diameter and pressure. © Coherent GmbH, reproduced with permission.

where u is liquid mean velocity in jet, tb is the time required for a disturbance in jet radius to grow from δ0 to R0 , βmax is the frequency of most rapidly growing disturbance, R0 is the radius of the jet, δ0 is amplitude of the initial disturbance, σ is liquid surface tension, and ρ is liquid density. For practical calculations, the initial disturbance may be taken 10−3 –10−4 of the undisturbed jet radius R0 . As reported by Spiegel et al. [555], at large energy densities, >100 MW/cm2 , the transmission of 532-nm, 180-ns-laser light was reduced by Raman scattering (peak value at 653 nm) in water. For example, at 410MW/cm2 input peak intensity, the transmission of an 8-cm-long water jet decreased by 26.7 per cent (from 86 to 63 per cent).

174

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Table 4.5 Water-jet-guided laser cutting speed dependence on silicon wafer thickness [524, 556]. Wafer thickness (µm)

Cutting speed (mm/s)

100

120

200

80

300

40

500

20

700

10

1000

6

1500

3

2000

1

4.2.1 Applications and performance Water-jet-guided lasers beam technology has been developed so far for precision machining at moderate laser power, the main application areas being dicing, drilling, and slotting of semiconductor wafers (Si, GaAs, InP, and SiC), fabrication of solder masks (stencils) and endoscope parts, cutting of ferrite cores and super hard materials (silicon nitride, diamond). Table 4.5 gives an example about the efficiency of the method. Advantages of water-jet-guided lasers beam machining in semiconductor industry (in comparison with abrasive and dry laser machining): • • • • •

The dissipation of harmful to photolithography and semiconductor structures particulates is extensively avoided. No debris or microcracks left; no change in the nature of the surface material by heat damage; high-quality cut with constant width and parallel walls. The kerf is effectively cooled, resulting in negligible heat-affected zone. The mechanical force applied by the water jet on the work piece is very low (<0.1 N). Water-jet-guided laser device has much lower operating costs than a corresponding diamond saw (but much higher investments).

Surface roughness Surface roughness of water-jet-guided laser cuts in 660-µm-thick silicon is reported to be Ra 3 µm, what is at the same level that in diamond-edged blade cuts [557].

Limitations of water-jet-guided laser machining • •

It is hard to cut well reflecting materials; only thin foils of Cu and Au can be cut. However, thin Cu and Au coatings on absorptive materials do not matter. It is hard to cut transparent or little absorbing materials; for example, the cutting speed is low for 99% Al2 O3 ceramics, but moderate for 96% Al2 O3 ceramics [558].

A list of over 200 technical articles (1996–2007) about Synova’s Laser MicroJet®technology can be found on Internet site http://www.synova.ch/pub_articles.php [559]. See also Table 4.6.

4.2.2 Molten salt-jet-guided laser beam In patent DE10238339 [464], the use of molten salt jets (e.g. NaNO3 and KNO3 ) for laser light guiding was proposed. The advantages of molten salts instead of water are higher heat capacity and higher oxygen content that facilitate the removal of the material in oxidation cutting.

Table 4.6

Liquid-guided laser beam processing (examples).

Materials machined

Liquids

Nozzle and jet parameters

Laser type and beam parameters

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

He-Ne, 1 mW

Demonstration of laser light guiding through a water jet

Kshatriya (1976) [543]

Galvanic Au plating

Water solution, containing Au cyanide

Nozzle diameter 0.35 and 0.5 mm, length 5 mm, jet velocity 10 m/s

Ar-ion, CW, up to 25W

Jet provided a rapid re-supply of fresh ions into the region of plating; plating rates up to ∼30 µm/s were achieved (1–16A/cm2 , 60◦ C)

von Gutfeld (1983) [544]

Galvanic Cu plating

Water solution, containing CuSO4

Nozzle diameter 0.2–0.5 mm, velocity 5–10 m/s

Ar-ion, CW, 2–10 kW/cm2 , scanned beam

Electroplating speed up to 50 µm/s was achieved (at ∼150A/cm2 ); the resistivity of achieved coatings was near to bulk value of Cu

von Gutfeld (1985) [560]

Cu,Al, Ni,Au,Ag, stainless steel, Si, Ge, GaAs, InP,Al2 O3 , Si3 N4 , SiC, polyimide a.o.

Distilled water, 50–500 bar, ∼1 l/h

Jet diameter 20–1000 µm; length up to 150 mm, velocity up to 450 m/s

Nd:YAG, 1064, 532, 355 nm, 15 ns – CW, 100–700W average

Laser MicroJet® technology is described; the advantages are: no focusing problems; suits for cutting of sheet materials of thickness in mm, Ra down to 3 µm achievable (SC Si)

Richerzhagen (2001) [524]

IC packages (mould compound and Cu frame)

Water

Nozzle diameter 60–100 µm

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 230–360 ns, 30–60 kHz, 0.4–1.7 mJ

A two-step process for singulation of IC packages Wagner (2002) by water-jet-guided laser beam is proposed: first, the [561] mould compound is removed at 29–42 MW/cm2 , then copper is cut at 310 MW/cm2 (Continued )

Table 4.6

(Continued)

Materials machined

Liquids

Nozzle and jet parameters

Laser type and beam parameters

Stainless steel (150 µm)

Water

Jet diameter 50 and 75 µm, 5–50 MPa

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 0.4 µs, 25 kHz , 22W average

Using water-jet-guided laser beam, burr-free, slightly Wagner (2003) tapered cuts without distinguishable heat-affected zone [562] were achieved; up to 40 000 high-quality apertures per hour can be fabricated in stencil masks

Water

Jet diameters 19 and 40 µm, 60–325 m/s

He-Ne (for jet breakup studies)

jet breakup length (jet diameter 19 µm) saturated to ∼80 mm at velocities over 250 m/s

Vágó (2003) [563]

Water

Jet diameter 48 µm, 94–209 m/s

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 20 kHz, 13W average

Growth of laser-induced disturbances of water jet was investigated both experimentally and by numerical simulation using FLUENT software

Couty (2004) [552]

Cu

Water (30◦ C)

Nozzle diameter 60 µm, jet diameter 47 nm, 250 bar, stable jet length 60–80 mm

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 180 ns, 10 kHz, 10 mJ, 100W average, 90 kW peak, 1.3 GW/cm2

Strong stimulated Raman scattering (653 nm) was observed at irradiances >100 MW/cm2 ; it causes the decrease of transmitted to the workpiece light: the transmission of an 8-cm-long water jet might drop by 26.7% (from 86% to 63%) when the input beam has a peak intensity of only 410 MW/cm2

Spiegel (2004) [555]

Steel (0.4 mm)

Water

Nozzle 150 µm, NA = 0.03

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, M2 = 1.2, 50 ns, 1.5 kHz, 7W average

Mode structure of laser light in water jet was studied both experimentally and theoretically; speckle grain size around 20 mm was both predicted and observed

Battaglia (2006) [551]

Notations IC – integrated circuit.

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

177

Subtractive processing

4.3 Water at Backside of an Opaque Material Water at backside cools the workpiece, avoids the adhesion of debris and dross on the workpiece, and avoids the deposition of debris on the opposite parts. Liquid at backside is not on the laser light path, so CO2 lasers may used in conjunction with water. In Fig. 4.33, three typical configurations of water–workpiece system are shown. A modification of the arrangement in Fig. 4.33b is described in JP11058049 [564]: a frozen liquid at the backside with aim to reduce the assist gas consumption (not shown in Fig. 4.33). Water-at-backside drilling is useful for precision drilling of small holes into injection needles (WO8903274 [565]) and engine fuel injectors (WO0069594 [566]). Laser

Laser

Workpiece

Workpiece

Laser Workpiece Gel

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 4.33 Laser cutting of tubes and sheet materials with water at backside. a) Liquid protects the opposite wall of a tube from melt deposition, JP2052188 [567]; (b) Liquid prevents the adhesion of debris and dross at the backside of the workpiece, JP8132270 [568], JP2002018586 [569]; (c) Having water-containing gel at the backside of a silicon wafer, JP2004042082 [570].

4.4 Backside Machining of Transparent Materials 4.4.1 Introduction If the material to be machined is transparent to laser light, then it is possible to supply the laser beam through the workpiece. This principle has been utilized in laser soldering, cleaning (Fig. 2.2), and also in subtractive processing as described in this section. First published report about laser backside modification of a transparent material in contact with liquid is probably the article by Leonov et al. from 1975 [571]. The authors report that the damage and the optical breakdown threshold at a glass plate in contact with water were 2.5 times higher compared to these in air. Later, in 1980, Davidson and Emmony [572] studied cracking and ablation of ZnSe windows in contact with water due to CO2 laser irradiation (Fig. 4.34). The damage was attributed to the action of a shock wave, generated due to rapid expansion of water vapour. More recently (1996–1999), Ikeno, Dolgaev, Simakin and Lyalin fabricated holes and grooves in various optical materials using aqueous salt solutions and carbon suspensions for laser beam absorption enhancement (see Fig. 4.35 and Table 4.9). Interest to laser backside machining increased considerably after Wang et al. reported in 1999 that optically smooth surfaces with nanometre resolution can be fabricated by this technique in hard UV-transparent materials. They used pyrene solution in acetone and an excimer laser (Fig. 4.36). Inorganic optical materials: glass, fused silica, quartz, sapphire, fluorides, diamond, etc. are hard, brittle, and thermally and chemically resistant, which makes them difficult to machine with conventional methods such as electron-beam lithography and photolithographically defined HF etching or plasma etching. These methods suffer also from low aspect ratios [575]. High aspect ratio structuring of quartz by ion track etching has been demonstrated [576], but a MeV ion accelerator is needed for implementation of it. All the mentioned micromachining methods need a vacuum system. Grinding and ultrasonic machining suffer from geometrical restrictions and unsufficient for optical devices finish (Table 4.7).

178

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Cu mirror

CO2 Laser

Laser pulse

ZnSe a

c

b

ZnSe t

Water

v w

Water

Figure 4.34 Scheme of experiment (a) and shock wave propagation (b) at CO2 laser irradiation of ZnSe plate in contact with water. Material’s fracture corresponded to the shock wave pattern shown in the figure. © Taylor and Francis Ltd., republished with permission from Ref. [572]. http://www.informaworld.com Laser Beam

Vetch

Vsc Sapphire Liquid

Figure 4.35 Sketch of etching of inclined channels in sapphire by a scanned laser beam [573]. vetch , vsc are etching rate and scanning velocity respectively. Liquid: toluene with carbon suspension. Laser beam was scanned at constant speed; formation of absorptive carbon film on the surface led to self-modulation of the etching process and formation of separate channels. Laser: Cu-vapour, 510 nm, 10 ns, 8 kHz,≈0.5W average, 2 mm/s. © Elsevier.

Inorganic optical materials are also difficult to machine with conventional lasers because of low absorption of the light, resulting in low surface quality. High-quality microstructuring can only be achieved by ablation with VUV-, ps-, and fs-laser pulses [577, 578]. LIBWE offers a opportunity to reach optical surface quality by conventional laser systems of low cost. In comparison with photolithographical techniques, there is no need to fabricate expensive photomasks. Laser backside etching in organic solutions (Table 4.8) needs about 10 times less energy than direct UV etching in air and the machined surfaces are smoother [579]. Main applications of liquids-assisted laser backside etching are micro-optical and microfluidic components (Figs 4.37, 4.51 to 4.54).

Considerations for the choice of liquids • •

Water is more safe than organic solvents. Solubility of absorbing additives in the solvent should be as high as possible; for example, in case of pyrene, acetone is a better solvent than THF [587].

179

Subtractive processing

Transparent material

Pattern mask

Lens

Pyrene acetone solution

KrF Excimer Laser

Acetone CH3COCH3

Pyrene

Figure 4.36 Setup for laser backside etching (LIBWE) of a fused silica by KrF laser [574]. Laser irradiation causes vaporisation and ionization of the solution in contact with the workpiece. High temperature and plasma irradiation modify the surface layer of the workpiece so that it starts also absorb the light. In steady regime the temperature of the workpiece reaches boiling point. High-pressure transient and bubble collapse-induced microjet probably contribute to the materials removal. © Elsevier. Table 4.7

Comparison of glass and silica micromachining methods.

Method

• •

Threshold fluence

Processing speed

Surface roughness

Micro sandblasting [584]

4–110 µm/s

30–90 nm (Ra )

Ultrasonic machining [581]

8.4 µm/s (quartz)

1.5 µm (Ra , quartz)

Dry reactive plasma etching [584]

20 µm/min

>10 nm

Laser ablation in air, nanosecond pulses [582]

>10 J/cm2

200–300 nm/pulse

>10 nm

Laser ablation in air, fs/ps-pulses [582, 583]

6 J/cm2 (1.2 ps)

20–40 nm/pulse

>10 nm

Laser ablation in air, VUV, nanosecond pulses [580, 582]

1 J/cm2 (157 nm)

20–40 nm/pulse

4–8 nm (r.m.s.)

LIBWE, organic solutions [586]

0.3 J/cm2

5–30 nm/pulse

0.23–10 nm

LIBWE, liquid metals [585]

1.3 J/cm2 (248 nm) 7 J/cm2 (1064 nm)

Up to 600 nm/pulse

1.5–7 nm (r.m.s.)

Halogenated hydrocarbons have reduced liquid decomposition effects (reduced incubation phenomena, less debris) [588]. Liquid metals (Hg, Ga) do not show neither incubation effect nor produce debris, they provide high etch rate and enable the use of longer wavelength lasers [585].

Considerations for the choice of additives • • •

High light absorption at the laser wavelength ensuring that only a micrometre-thick layer of the liquid in contact with the workpiece is heated. Little debris from decomposition and chemical reactions. High photostability and absence of luminescence (was the argument for choice of K2 CrO4 in the work by Paraskevopoulos et al. [589]).

180

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Figure 4.37 Surface morphology of a calcium fluoride plate etched with 500 pulses of KrF laser at 900 mJ/cm2 , using an acetone solution containing pyrene at a concentration of 0.4 mol/dm3 [574]. © Elsevier. Table 4.8

Liquids and additives used in backside laser machining of transparent materials.

Liquids

Additives

Cyclohexane, tetrachloromethylene, tetrachloroethylene, benzene, toluene, cumene, t-butylbenzene, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, chlorobenzene, dichlorobenzene, fluorobenzene, isopropanol (IPA), tetrahydrofuran, methylmethacrylate, methyl benzoate, acetone, mercury, gallium

NiSO4 , CrO3 , KMnO4 , CrO3 , FeCl3 , KMnO4 , KNO3 , K2 CrO4 , carbon particles, pyrene, pyranine, benzil, naphthalene, phenanthrene, anthracene, 9-methyl-anthracene, 9,10-dimethyl-anthracene, 9-phenyl-anthracene, fluoranthrene, Rose Bengal dye, Np(SO3 Na)3

Cheng et al. [590] present a table of etching thresholds, extinction coefficients and fluorescence quantum yields for 8 additives (pyrene, naphthalene, phenanthrene, anthracene, 9-methyl-anthracene, 9,10-dimethylanthracene, 9-phenyl-anthracene, fluoranthrene) to organic solvents.

Choice of the laser Nanosecond lasers are effective for LIBWE in organic solvents only in the UV region of wavelength. Femtosecond lasers are applicable also in NIR region [584]. Cheng et al. [591] succeeded in backside etching of glass with a 532-nm, 15-ns laser in conjunction with Rose Bengal dye solution in acetone. In case of liquid metals as absorbents, low-cost VIS and IR lasers can be applied.

Advantages of liquids-assisted laser backside etching • • • • • • •

Etching threshold may be 10–20 times lower than in gas. Etching occurs well below the optical damage threshold of the materials (for example, the damage threshold of quartz is ≈20 J/cm2 for direct laser irradiation [587, 592]). Low surface roughness in comparison with VUV and fs/ps-laser ablation in air, and with reactive plasma etching [580]. Low debris, no microcracks. One-step method in comparison with lithography. Fabrication of long and bent channels is easier than in gases because of more efficient debris removal by liquid motion and debris dissolution. There is no plasma shielding of laser light at backside etching.

Subtractive processing

181

Disadvantages of liquids-assisted laser backside etching • •

The surface may be contaminated by liquid and solute decomposition/reaction products like carbon, chlorine [593], and chromium oxide [573, 594, 595]. Etching rate in organic solutions may be significantly lower than the etching rate in gas by fs/ps- or VUV lasers (Table 4.7).

However, a low etching rate is an advantage in fabrication of sub micrometre features in optical materials, because the process control is easier.

Backside etching due to laser-generated hydrofluoric acid In the experiments by Murahara [596], backside etching (polishing) of fused silica occurred due to hydrofluoric acid, generated at laser irradiation of fluoroethylenepropylene in water (see Table 4.9, Murahara 2001). The chemical surface reaction is similar to this presented in Fig. 6.1.

4.4.2 Technologies, phenomenology, and etching mechanisms 4.4.2.1 Organic and aqueous solutions at backside of the workpiece Absorption of laser light For efficient coupling of laser light into a workpiece, high absorption coefficient of the liquid at laser wavelength is needed along with short heat diffusion length. Most widely used additives to organic solvents, like pyrene and pyranine start to absorb considerably only in the UV region (Figs 4.38 and 4.39), whereas used in the work by Cheng et al. [591]. Rose Bengal dye has the absorption maximum in yellow (Fig. 4.40). Etching mechanisms Laser etching of inorganic transparent materials with organic or aqueous solutions at backside of the workpiece is supposed to proceed in the following way.

(1) Absorption of light Absorption of light in solute following energy transfer to solvent and to workpiece. In pyrene, there is a strong evidence that multiphotonic absorption is the primary mechanism of absorption [574, 599, 600] (Figs 4.41 and 4.42). Typical absorption coefficients of used hydrocarbon solutions at UV wavelengths are about 104 cm−1 [590, 585], thus the heated by nanosecond-laser pulses depth is about 1 µm [479].

(2) Modifications of the workpiece surface At laser irradiation, the workpiece surface may undergo changes that enhance the light absorption. This leads to so called incubation effect (Figs 4.47 and 4.48), where ablation is absent or ablation rate is low for the first laser pulses and increases thereafter. Zimmer et al. [601] found, that at backside ablation of silica glass in pyrene/toluene solution, a surface layer of ∼30–50 nm became amorphous and its absorption coefficient at 248 nm raised up to 104 –105 cm−1 . Total 10–30 per cent of incident laser energy was absorbed in this modified layer. Organic solvents decompose due to laser heating (e.g. the decomposition temperature of acetone is around 700 K [587]); the decomposition products like carbon adhere on the surface and enhance its absorption (Fig. 4.49). Dolgaev et al. observed thermal decomposition of CrO3 near the solid–liquid interface resulting in formation of water-insoluble of Cr2 O3 suspension [595] and film of Cr2 O3 [594] on the workpiece. Using carbon suspension in toluene, a thin carbon film was deposited on the workpiece, that led to self-modulation of the depth of etching of sapphire by a scanned laser beam (Fig. 4.35). Vass et al. [602] point that naphthalene methacrylate as working liquid may polymerize under action of laser light and form an absorptive layer on the surface. (3) Heat transfer and temperature rise Heat and temperature rise generated in liquid and in the absorptive surface layer is transferred into bulk of the liquid and into the workpiece, causing thermal stresses/softening of the solid, and melting/vaporization of both materials at higher temperature levels.

182

Absorption (a.u.)

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

0 200

0 200

300

400

250

300

500 600 700 Wavelength (nm)

800

900

Figure 4.38 Spectrum of linear absorption of a 0.5 M pyrene/toluene solution [597]. The inset shows a more detailed view of the UV range. © Institute of Physics, reproduced with permission.

Molar absorption coefficient (cm−1dm3 mol−1)

104

SO3Na

3 NAO3S SO3Na

2 OH

1

0 200

400 Wavelength (nm)

600

Figure 4.39 Optical absorption spectrum of 32 µM aqueous solutions of pyranine (8-hydroxy-1, 3,6-pyrenetrisulfonic acid trisodium salt) before (solid line) and after (broken line) irradiation with 5000 pulses from a KrF laser at fluence of 1.5 J/cm2 [598]. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media.

Several researchers have calculated the temperature distribution at laser backside etching of fused silica [603– 605]. However, as shown by Zimmer et al. [601] the neglecting of light absorption in the modified surface layer of silica may lead to a considerable underestimation of the peak temperature. Considering absorption, they calculated for maximal interface temperature 6860 and 12 010 K at 950 mJ/cm2 fluence and wavelengths of 351 and 248 nm, respectively; while without absorption the maximum temperature was only 1079 K. For reference, the melting and boiling temperatures of fused silica are Tm = 1983◦ C and Tb = 2250◦ C.

(4) Thermal stresses Dolgaev et al. [595] attributed the ablation of sapphire below the melting threshold to the cracking of the surface due to thermal stresses between the sapphire and formed onto it Cr2 O3 layer. (5) Plasma effects High temperatures in the working zone cause thermal dissociation and ionization of solvent and target vapours. Laser heats the plasma due to inverse Bremsstrahlung absorption, and the heated plasma causes further heating of the sample. Bombardment of the workpiece by ions and electrons from plasma generates impurities, defects, defect-trapped and free electrons. In organic solvents, carbon species in plasma

183

Subtractive processing

Cl

0.6

Cl

Cl O

Absorbance

Cl

C

0.4

ONa l

l

NaO

O

O l

l

0.2

450

500

550 600 650 Wavelength (nm)

700

Figure 4.40 An absorption spectrum of 5 µM Rose Bengal (RB) in acetone [591]. The inset shows the chemical structure of RB. © Institute of Physics, reproduced with permission.

Sn Tm

S1 T1

S0

Figure 4.41 Excitation of pyrene and photophysical process: possible mechanism for cyclic multiphotonic absorption [574]. © Elsevier.

[Pyrene]** [Pyrene] Laser (pulse)

Figure 4.42

Cyclic multiphotonic absorption

Rapid internal conversion

Super-heated liquid

[Pyrene]*

Plausible mechanism for LIBWE by cyclic multiphotonic absorption [574]. © Elsevier.

emit light from visible to extreme UV, thus capable to excite the electrons in optical materials like silica to defect or vacuum levels, giving rise to an increase of absorption of laser light by the material [606].

(6) Pressure, bubbles, and shock Rapid heating of liquid by laser generates high-pressure transients and shock waves in both the workpiece and in the liquid. Thereafter a vapour bubble starts to expand, reaching maximum size in ∼100 µs and shrinking then again [607] (Fig. 7.5). During the collapse of the bubble, a microjet forms and strikes the solid surface at speed of 100–200 m/s (Fig. 7.10). Both the pressure inside the bubble and microjet impact are believed to contribute to the modification of the material and to its removal from the workpiece [601].

184

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

0.6 M 0.4 M

Each rate (nm/pulse)

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

Fluence (J/cm2)

Figure 4.43 Etch rate dependence on the laser fluence at backside etching of fused silica in aqueous solution of Np(SO3 Na)3 by a 30 ns KrF laser [608]. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media. 45

Etch rate (nm/pulse)

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Laser Fluence (J/cm2)

1.4

1.6

Figure 4.44 Etch rate vs. laser fluence of a 30 ns KrF laser etching of silica glass: () pure toluene liquid; () pyrene in acetone solution (concentration: 0.4 mol dm−3 ) [607]. © Elsevier.

Ding et al. [608] measured the instant velocity of the jet that formed at the collapse of an R = 0.8 mm bubble to be 200 m/s at a delay time of 100 ns. The impact pressure of the liquid jet was estimated using the formula [609] P = ρCVjet ,

(4.12)

where ρ and C are the density of water and the acoustic velocity in water, respectively. A jet velocity of 200 m/s corresponds to a pressure of 300 MPa. Böhme and Zimmer [610] explained by bubble size the influence of the laser spot size on the etch rate of fused silica in pyrene/toluene. Large bubbles persist a longer time and more solvent is decomposed and deposited onto surface of the workpiece, thus the etch rate should be larger for larger laser spot size.

(7) Dissolution of workpiece in supercritical solution Dolgaev et al. [479] pointed to a possible hydrothermal dissolution mechanism in laser backside etching of sapphire. Vass et al. [605] observed that

185

Subtractive processing

28 60

BaF2 quartz

24 Etch rate (nm/pulse)

Etch rate (nm/pulse)

70

50 40 30 20

(a)

160 140

20

120

16

100

12

80 60

8

40 4

10 0

180

CaF2 Sapphire

0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.0 3.3 Fluence (J/cm2)

0 0.8 (b)

20 0 1.2

1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 Fluence (J/cm2)

3.2

3.6

Figure 4.45 Etch rates vs. laser fluences at LIBWE (a) for BaF2 and quartz, (b) for CaF2 and sapphire [612]. Solution: 0.4 M pyrene in acetone; laser: XeCl, 25 ns. © Elsevier.

Etch depth after one pulse (nm)

250 200

Fused silica

150

Laser

Carbon layer

Liquid medium

100 50 0 0

1000

2000 3000 4000 Laser fluence (mJ/cm2)

5000

Figure 4.46 Etch depth – laser fluence dependence in case of a predeposited carbon layer on the surface [606]. Liquid: water, carbon layer thickness: 26 nm, 22 nm. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media.

at lower energy densities (210 mJ/cm2 ) no melted silica droplets were found in the working zone, despite the etching occurred. Dissolution rates of some materials in high-temperature high-pressure water are given in Table 7.4.

Etch rate Etch rate dependence on laser fluence at LIBWE in aqueous and organic solutions is characterized by a twoslope curve (Figs 4.43 to 4.45). Similar dependencies were found also at etching of fused silica in pyrene/acetone [611], BaF2 and quartz in pyrene/acetone [612], and fused silica in naphthalene/methyl-methacrylate [605]. Vass et al. [605] found by calculations that the breaking point corresponds to the onset of melting of silica. Figure 4.46 presents the results of an experiment where a carbon layer was predeposited onto the surface of the workpiece, in order to get support to the liquid decomposition etching mechanism. In cases of metals or a solution of Rose Bengal dye in acetone at the backside of the workpiece [591], the etch depth was found to depend linearly on the laser fluence over all used range of laser fluences.

186

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

C 0.4 M (Pyrene/Acetone)

Number of incubation pulses

800 700 B

600 500 400 300 1

200

2

100 0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 Fluence (J/cm2)

2.0

2.2

Figure 4.47 Number of pulses required to initiate etching of quartz [587]. © SPIE (2004), reproduced with permission from Ref. [587].

Incubation effect A characteristic feature of laser backside etching using organic solutions (both bulk and absorbed layer [592]) is that at low fluences the etching rate tends to increase with time (Figs 4.47 and 4.48). The incubation process can be explained by modification of the etched material due to high temperature and plasma irradiation (e.g. amorphization of fused silica) or by formation of an carbon layer due to decomposition of organic substances (Fig. 4.49). The raised absorption coefficient of interface confines the absorption of the laser energy into a thinner layer, which increases the magnitude of the temperature jump [587, 593, 601]. Similar phenomena have been observed also at laser etching of polymers and fused silica in air [613]. The incubation effect is greatly reduced in case of halogenated organic solvents [586, 606] and does not occur in case of liquid metals.

Surface roughness At LIBWE in organic solutions, three distinct laser fluence regions with different surface relief can be distinguished (Fig. 4.50). In case of quartz, the mechanisms responsible for etch rate and surface profile formation are explained as follows [587]: Region 1: low fluences, low etch rates, high surface roughness. Here the laser softens the material but does not melt it. The mechanical impact of collapsing bubbles and mechanical stresses in case of a carbon deposit are responsible for high surface roughness. Region 2: intermediate fluences, low surface roughness. The melting temperature of quartz (2000 K) is reached. The higher laser-induced temperature will also generate a stronger pressure jump, compared to the lower fluences, which removes the molten material with a single-laser pulse. Region 3: high etch rates, high surface roughness. A further increase of the etch rates and surface roughness in the high fluence range may be due to plasma formation in solution. Kopitkovas et al. [587] observed that at larger pyrene concentrations the surface roughness and incubation time decreased. A possible high pyrene concentration (1.4 mol/l) was found to be beneficial for laser backside etching of quartz. Böhme et al. [614] suppose that more efficient heating of surface peaks in contrast to the valleys results in higher etch rates of first, and leads to a smooth surface this way. The smoothing effect is determined by the thermal diffusion length. On the other side, the described mechanism rounds the corners of small structures, which may be undesirable in some applications. For surface roughness of samples, backside etched in toluene vapours, see Fig. 4.61.

187

Subtractive processing

Average each rate (nm/pulse)

30

650 mJ/cm2 As 650 650 m2 As 200 200 m2 As 100 100 m2 As 30 30 m2

25 20

1000 mJ/cm2 As 100 100 m2

15 10 5 0 1

10

(a) 30 Average each rate (nm/pulse)

100

1000

Pulse number

650 mJ/cm2

As 650 650 m2 As 200 200 m2 As 100 100 m2 As 30 30 m2

25 20

1000 mJ/cm2 As 100 100 m2

15 10 5 0 1

(b)

10

100

1000

Pulse number

Figure 4.48 (a) Averaged etch rate in dependence on the applied pulse number for different spot sizes determined from the final depth of the etch pits using 0.5 M pyrene/toluene. (b) Calculated ‘real’ etch rate per laser pulse. (The lines are used to guide the eyes.) Workpiece: fused silica; solution: 0.5 M pyrene in toluene; laser: KrF, 30 ns [610]. © Elsevier. Toulene: C7H8 C•(s)CyHz(g) Acetone: C3H6O

C•(s)CyHz (g)?CO2(g)

C2Cl4: C2Cl4

C•(s)CyHz (g,l)?Cl-

1m (a)

(b)

Figure 4.49 (a) SEM picture of a thin film around the etched area in fused silica as a result of decomposition process and (b) possible decomposition reactions of the solvents used for LIBWE processing [593]. © Elsevier.

188

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

45

C = 0.4 M (Pyrene/acetone)

35 A

30 25 20 15 10

1

3

Etch roughness (nm)

Etch rate (nm/pulse)

40

2

5 0 0.8

1.2

1.6 2.0 2.4 Fluence (J/cm2)

2.8

Figure 4.50 Etch rate and surface roughness of quartz, laser backside etched using 0.4 mol/l pyrene in acetone solutions as etching media. © SPIE (2004), reproduced with permission from Ref. [587].

Application examples (Figs 4.51–4.54)

Figure 4.51 Array of micro-sized blind holes etched in fused silica by LIBWE [611]. Such arrays are useful for microtiter plates. © Elsevier.

Figure 4.52 SEM picture of a cylindrical structure etched into fused silica employing the scanning contour mask technique [611]. The bottom of the structure is very smooth as shown in the inset. © Elsevier.

189

Subtractive processing

0 –2

19.3 m 0 100 m 200 m 300 m 400 m (a)

–4

m

500 m 400 m 300 m

Depth (m)

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

–6 –8 –10 –12 –14 –16 –18

200 m 100 m

(b)

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Position (m)

Figure 4.53 (a) 3D-profilometer scan of a Fresnel lens etched in CaF2 by LIBWE using a XeCl excimer laser and (b) line scan of etched profile [612]. © Elsevier.

10 m 750 m

750 m

Figure 4.54 Confocal scanning laser microscopic image of an etched grating pattern on the surface of a fused silica plate fabricated by 400 pulses of KrF irradiation at 1.0 J/cm2 and 4 Hz using a solution of pyrene in acetone with a concentration of 0.5 mol/dm3 [615]. © Elsevier.

Deep trenches and channels Effective provision of fresh solution and removal of debris by the motion of bubbles enables etching of deep trenches and channels in transparent materials, useful for example for microfuidic devices (Figs 4.55 and 4.56). The process may be further enhanced by ultrasound agitation (Figs 4.57 and 4.58).

4.4.2.2 Backside etching with an adsorbed liquid layer on the workpiece (LESAL) Using instead of bulk liquid an adsorbed liquid layer on the workpiece (Fig. 4.59), the relaxation time of the system after laser pulse is greatly reduced. Thus, in the experiments by Böhme et al. [616] the etch rate did not depend on the laser pulse repetition rate up to 100 Hz. Another distinct feature is the occurrence of a region where the etch rate does not depend on the laser fluence (Fig. 4.60). It is believed, that in this region, higher laser fluences more intensively desorb the liquid from the surface, so that the amount of absorbed laser energy per unit area remains constant [617]. Otherwise, the etching mechanism and surface properties remain to a great extent similar as at LIBWE (Fig. 4.61).

190

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Laser-absorbing region

Organic solution

Laser beam

Silica glass

Etch front by LIBWE

Figure 4.55 Principle of laser backside deep wet etching of transparent materials [575]. © Institute of Pure and Applied Physics, republished with permission.

180 m

40 m

XY microstage

Figure 4.56 Cross-sectional SEM images of deep trenches on silica glass fabricated by the LIBWE method using 12 000 pulses at 10 Hz for a trench about 9 µm wide. A saturated pyrene/acetone solution was in contact with the silica glass plate, and a KrF excimer laser beam was irradiated at F = 1 J/cm2 per pulse. Before SEM observation, the silica plates were cut perpendicular to the deep trenches [575]. © Institute of Pure and Applied Physics, republished with permission. Glass cuvette

50X Objective NA 0.42

fs laser pulses

Z microstage Water Ultrasonic transducer Ultrasonic cleaner

Figure 4.57 Schematics of ultrasound assisted LIBWE [584]. The negative pressure driven by ultrasonic waves generates many tiny cavitation bubbles. As these cavitation bubbles collapse, they release high-frequency energy, which detaches trapped bubbles near the entrance of the machined hole. Furthermore, the frequent growth and collapse of cavitation bubbles cause pressure fluctuations that scrape residual bubble mixtures from the channel cavity. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media.

191

Subtractive processing

100 µm

Circular bentholes: t1100 ms, t21 ms, 4 µm/s, 33 µJ pulse energy.

Figure 4.58 Examples of bent channels fabricated in a glass sample in contact with methanol by ultrasound-assisted LIBWE [584]. Magnified views of vertical holes are on the right-hand side of the picture. Etching was performed by 800 nm, 100 fs, 1 kHz laser pulse packets of period t1 and of length t2 . Feed rate was 4 µm/s. Reproduced with kind permission of Springer Science and Business Media. Laser beam

Transparent material

Laser-induced surface modification

Absorbed layer

Vaporized toluene

Air

Heater Theater Tvapour Tsample Tcondensation

Figure 4.59 Principal experimental set up for LESAL processing [616]. One of the main requirements for LESAL process is that the sample temperature (Tsample ) is higher than temperature for condensation of vapour medium (Tcondensation ). © Elsevier. Etch rate at 75˚C chamber temperature

Each rate (nm/pulse)

100 10

Low fluence region

Saturation region High fluence region

1 0.1 0.01 1E.3 1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

Laser fluence (J/cm2)

Figure 4.60 Etch rates on fused silica in dependence on the laser fluence at a chamber temperature of 75◦ C using an adsorbed toluene layer (the line is used for guide the eyes [592] The splitting into three fluence regions is pointed out. Laser: 248 nm, 30 ns © Elsevier. Similar dependencies were observed also at etching of sapphire and MgF2 [616].

192

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Chamber temperature 75˚C

1000

100

100

10

10

1

1 0.1

0.1 RMS, interference microscope RMS,AFM Etch rate

0.01 1E.3 0.0

Each rate (nm/pulse)

Roughness, rms (nm)

1000

0.01 1E.3

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

Laser fluence (J/cm2)

Figure 4.61 Surface roughness and etch rate of a LESAL-etched fused silica using an adsorbed toluene layer [592]. Laser: 248 nm, 30 ns. The surface roughness is lowest on the constant etch rate plateau. © Elsevier. 700 30 (a) Each rate (nm/pulse)

600

0.5 M pyrene/toluene

20

500

(b)

10

400 0

300

0.5

1.0

1.5

Gallium

200 100 0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Laser fluence (J/cm2)

Figure 4.62 Etch rate in dependence on the laser fluence at backside etching of fused silica using (a) 0.5 M pyrene/toluene solution and (b) gallium as absorbing metallic liquid [620]. Laser: KrF, 20 ns. © Elsevier.

4.4.2.3 Liquid metals at backside In comparison with etching in organic and aqueous solutions, etching with metals (Hg, Ga) at backside of the workpiece has following distinctive features: no incubation effect, high etching threshold and etching rate and linear dependence of the etching rate on laser fluence (Fig. 4.62). No UV lasers are needed: a 1.06 µm Nd:YAG laser was successfully applied in the experiments by Zimmer et al. [618, 619]. The process occurs essentially the same way as in solutions: laser heats of the metal, heat is transferred by conduction to the workpiece, and molten and/or evaporated material is ejected [620]. High etching threshold was explained by high reflectivity and high thermal conductivity of the metals. For example, the reflectivity of gallium is about 80 per cent and thermal conductivity is ∼300 times higher compared to toluene. Rapid growth of the etching rate at higher fluences may originate from a change in the mechanism of the etching, for instance, due to the beginning of the gallium evaporation. Because the absorption coefficients of mercury and gallium are about 10 times higher (α > 105 cm−1 ) than of hydrocarbon solutions, the possible modification of the absorption of the workpiece has less influence on the process and an incubation phenomenon is not observed [585].

Table 4.9

Laser-induced backside wet etching of transparent materials (LIBWE, LESAL, etc.) and related experiments.

Target or etched material(s)

Liquids

Additives

Laser type and beam parameters

Etch rate

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments 2

Reference(s)

Glass K-8

Water

No

Neodymium, 40 ns

Threshold of surface damage 25–65 J/cm (at spot diameter 1.15–0.32 mm); shock pressure measured and calculated (up to 100 MPa at distance ≤1 mm)

Leonov (1975) [571]

ZnSe

Water

No

CO2 , 10.6 µm, 100 ns, 50 J/cm2

Circular symmetric cracks in ZnSe observed, shock waves in water photographed

Davidson (1980) [572]

Fused silica

Water

NiSO4 , 2 mol/l

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 1 ms

40 µm/pulse (3 J/pulse)

0.2 mm diameter holes drilled into 1.5 mm plate; bent microchannels fabricated

Ikeno (1989) [621]

Sapphire (α-Al2 O3 )

Water

CrO3 (1.5 g/ml); KMnO4 (saturated)

Cu-vapour, 510 nm, 10 ns, 8 kHz, ≈0.5W average

Up to 300 nm/pulse = 2 mm/s

Dolgaev (1996) [593, 594]

Toluene

4–5 nm carbon particles

Drilling, beam scanning, and mask projection machining with spatial resolution of 3 µm; isolated tilted channels formed while scanning; decomposition of toluene and release of gas bubbles of 10–100 µm size observed; C2 O3 correspondingly carbon film on etched surface

Sapphire

Water

CrO3 (6 mol/l); FeCl3 (2 mol/l), KMnO4 (1 mol/l)

Cu-vapour, 10 ns, 8 kHz

Up to 300 nm/pulse

Epitaxial growth of Cr2 O3 , FeO3 and MnO2 on surface observed

Dolgaev (1997) [595]

Glass, fused silica, Al2 O3 , CaF2

Benzene, toluene

Glassy carbon particles (4–5 nm)

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 8 kHz, 0.2–1.5 J/cm2

0.2 Å/pulse (glass), 0.4 Å/pulse (fused silica), 4.5 Å/pulse (CaF2 ), 1.1 Å/pulse (Al2 O3 ) [all at 1.1 J/cm2 ]

Grooves of depth up to 140 nm were etched in glass by 4500 laser pulses (in benzene, 0.2 J/cm2 ); calculated peak temperature during laser pulse was 600 K (sapphire substrate with DLC film, 1.1 J/cm2 )

Simakin (1999) [622]

Glass, fused silica, Toluene, sapphire benzene, cumene

Carbon nanoparticles (3–4 nm)

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 8 kHz, spot 50 µm, up to 1.5 J/cm2

Grooves of depth ∼0.5 µm were etched into glass by a scanned beam (0.8 J/cm2 , 1.2 mm/s)

Lyalin (1999) [623]

510 nm,

(Continued )

Table 4.9

(Continued)

Target or etched material(s)

Liquids

Additives

Laser type and beam parameters

Fused silica

Acetone

Pyrene, 0,4 mol/dm3

PEP

Etch rate

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Reference(s)

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 2 Hz

5–25 nm/pulse (0.4–1.3 J/cm2 ; etch threshold 0.24 J/cm2 )

10 µm lines etched by mask projection

Wang (1999) [624, 579], (2000) [574, 625], (2001) [599],Yabe (2001) [600]

TetraPyrene, hydrofuran 1 mol/dm3 (THF)

XeCl, 308 nm, 30 ns, up to 0.5 J/cm2

5–20 nm/pulse (0.16– 0.5 J/cm2 , etch threshold 0.1 J/cm2 )

Grooves with wavy surface etched by mask projection; Wang (1999) absorption length of solution at laser wavelength was [626] 0.4 µm

Quartz (c-SiO2 )

Acetone

Pyrene, 0.4 mol/dm3

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 2 Hz

5–25 nm/pulse (0.4–1.3 J/cm2 ; etch threshold 0.24 J/cm2 )

10 µm lines etched by mask projection; etch depth 3.5 µm, no debris or cracks

Wang (1999) [627], (2000) [625],Wang (2001) [599]

CaF2 (single crystal)

Acetone

Pyrene, 0.4 mol/dm3

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 2 Hz

1–15 (0.7–1.3 J/cm2 ; etch threshold 0.74 J/cm2

10 µm lines etched by mask projection

Wang (1999) [579], (2000) [574, 625], (2001) [599], Yabe (2001) [600]

Fused silica

Pyrene, 0.1– Tetrahydrofuran 1 mol/dm3 (THF) Acetone Benzil, 0.8 mol/dm3 MethylNo additives benzoate

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns

5–34 nm/pulse (0.4– 1.3 J/cm2 )

Estimated light absorption depth 0.48–2.9 µm; estimated maximum liquid temperatures from 1900 K (acetone/pyrene) up to 4410 K (acetone/benzil); at various solute concentrations 0.1–1 mol/dm3

Wang 2000 [603]

Al2 O3 , LiF (single crystal)

Acetone

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns

No etching up to the fluence 1.5 J/cm2

Pyrene, 0.4 mol/dm3

Wang (2000) [603]

Pyrene, 1.0 mol/dm3

XeCl, 308 nm, 20 ns, 2 Hz

Up to 36 nm/pulse (0.1–0.6 J/cm2 ; etch threshold 0.045 J/cm2 )

10 µm lines etched by mask projection

Wang (2000) [625], (2001) [599],Yabe (2001) [600]

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 8 kHz, up to >1.5 J/cm2

Etch threshold 0.5 J/cm2

Smooth etched surfaces; etch rate of sapphire was greater than of glass and fused silica

Simakin (2000) [628, 629]

Transient reflectivity studies of water–quartz interface; reflectivity decreases rapidly when pulse energy density exceeds 1000 J/cm3 , probably due to supercritical state of the solution

Nikiforov (2000) [630]

Surface roughness 1 nm was achieved at laser fluence 25 mJ/cm2 and processing time 60 min; the chemical reaction where HF is generated, is similar to this in Fig. 6.1

Murahara (2001) [596]

Bent channels of diameters 4 µm and length up to 200 µm (at 60 J/cm2 ) respectively, diameter 21 µm and length up to 600 µm (at 600 J/cm2 ) etched

Li (2001) [631]

PEP

Tetrahydrofuran

Soda-lime glass, Pyrex, sapphire

Toluene, benzene, cumene, also with addition of glassy carbon particles, 3–5 nm

Quartz

Water

K2 CrO4

KrF, 248 nm, 16 ns, up to 1 J/cm2

Fused silica

Water

HF (generated in a photochemical reaction between water and FEP)

ArF, 193 nm, 10 ns, 100 Hz, up to 50 mJ/cm2

Silica glass

Water

No

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 120 fs, 1 kHz, 1–10 µJ/pulse

Sample was grind using FEP turntable with a water layer between; laser light irradiated the turntable through sample

(Continued )

Table 4.9

(Continued)

Target or etched material(s)

Liquids

Additives

Laser type and beam parameters

Sapphire

Water

KOH, KCl or Na2 CO3 (up to 7 mol/l)

Fused silica

Acetone

Fused silica

Etch rate

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Reference(s)

Cr,Yb,Ho:YSGG, 2.92 µm, 130 ns, 1 Hz, spot 100 µm, 120 J/cm2

Up to 2.4 µm/pulse (KOH, 7 mol/l); 0.24 µm/pulse in pure water

Ablation rate had linear dependence on electrolyte concentration; dissolution of sapphire in supercritical solution obviously contributes to high ablation rate

Dolgaev (2001) [479]

Pyrene, 0.4 mol/dm3

XeCl, 308 nm, 20 ns, 5 Hz, 0.2–1.5 J/cm2

Up to 22 nm/pulse (0.4– 1.5 J/cm2 ); threshold fluence <0.5 J/cm2

Etch rate ≈2 times lower than in case of KrF laser; incubation phenomenon observed; 10 µm wide lines etched by mask projection; no cracks or debris

Yasui (2002) [632]

Water

Pyranine, 0.5–1.0 mol/ dm3

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 5 Hz; XeF, 351 nm, 5 Hz

0.02–0.12 nm/ pulse (KrF, 0.6– 1.67 J/cm2 ; etch threshold 0.4–0.5 J/cm2 )

15 µm lines and 12 × 12 µm holes etched by mask projection; 0.5 µm depth; gas generation observed, obviously due to pyranine decomposition

Ding (2002) [598]

Fused silica

Water

Np(SO3 Na)3 0.4–1.0 mol/ dm3

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 5 Hz

≈0.1 nm/pulse (<1.3– 1.5 J/cm2 ); 0.1–0.9 nm/ pulse (<1.3– 1.5 J/cm2 )

Distinction between two etching regions: in low etch rate region the surface r.m.s. – roughness was ≈0.03 µm, in high etch rate region the surface roughness was up to 1 µm; bubbles, microjet and shock wave studied (images presented); dye particles formation observed

Ding (2002) [608]

Fused silica

Acetone, Pyrene, tetrachloro- 0.4–0.6 mol/l ethylene, toluene

KrF, 248 nm, ≈20 ns, 100 Hz

Up to Sinusoidal gratings (period 780 nm, depth 180 nm, 16 nm/pulse surface roughness less than 5 nm r.m.s.) fabricated by (0.96 J/cm2 , phase grating projection toluene + 0.5 M pyrene)

Fused silica, sapphire, CaF2 , MgF2

Acetone, Pyrene, cyclo0–0.4 mol/l hexane, tetrachloroethylene

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns

Up to 230 nm/pulse (fluences up to 3.5 J/cm2 )

Channelling RBS studies; at 3.5 J/cm2 the surface is amorphous and if etched tetrachloroethylene, it contains chlorine; 40 × 40 µm holes of depth 25 µm fabricated in fused silica by mask projection; curved surfaces fabricated by contour mask technique; surface roughness <10 nm

Zimmer (2002) [633]

Böhme (2002) [611]

Fused silica, different glasses

Acetone, Pyrene, toluene, 0.1–0.4 mol/l tetrachloromethylene

XeF, 351 nm, 30 ns

6–10 nm/pulse in glasses (1 J/cm2 ); threshold fluence 0.5 J/cm2

Mask projection etching; surface roughness 4 nm at etch depth 3.7 µm for Corning 7059 glass achieved; etch incubation effect observed

Silica glass

Toluene

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 5 Hz, up to 1.4 J/cm2

≈15 nm/pulse (0.72 J/cm2 ); threshold fluence 0.19 J/cm2

Linear dependence of etch rate on laser fluence and Niino (2003) the number of shots; carbon soot generated in liquid; [607] time-resolved images of interface presented; grid pattern with <10 µm features etched by mask projection method

Silica glass

Toluene

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 1.6 J/cm2

Silica glass, quartz, sapphire, CaF2 , PEP

Acetone, THF, toluene, water

Pyrene, pyranine

KrF, XeCl

Silica glass

Water

No

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 130 fs, 1 kHz, 1–10 µJ

Fused silica

Toluene (adsorbed layer)

No

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, up to 7.5 J/cm2

Up to 200 nm/pulse Constant etch rate of about 1.3 nm/pulse in a fluence Zimmer (2004) (0.7–7.5 J/cm2 ); interval from 2 to 5 J/cm2 , surface roughness down to [617], Böhme threshold fluence 0.23 nm at etch depth of 400 nm (Böhme (2004) [592]) (2004) [592] 0.7 J/cm2

Glass

Water, No methanol, isopropanol

fs laser, 800 nm, 100 fs, 1 kHz , 3–33 µJ

Up to 30 µm/s

0.1–30 nm/ pulse

Zimmer (2003) [634]

Shock wave and bubble images presented; shock expansion velocity 1400 m/s and of bubble 200 m/s

Niino (2003) [607, 635]

A short summary of the previous work done at AIST, see (Wang, Ding,Yabe) in this table

Niino (2003) [636]

Holes of 8 µm in diameter and >200 µm in length or Itoh (2003) 21 µm in diameter and >600 µm in length, but also [637] bent and circular channels were drilled into glass using laser pulse packets, á 16 pulses, three packets every 1 s

Channels of tens of micrometres in diameter, of up to Hwang (2004) ≈40:1 aspect ratio, were fabricated; trapped in channels [584] bubbles cause inhomogeneities; ultrasonic agitation of liquid enhances the etching thanks to bubbles removal (Continued )

Table 4.9

(Continued)

Target or etched material(s) Liquids

Additives

Laser type and beam parameters

Etch rate

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Reference(s)

Silica glass

Water

NaphthaleneKrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 1,3,6-trisulfonic 5 Hz, 1.6 J/cm2 maskdefined patterns acid trisodium salt, up to 1 M

Ding (2004) 248 nm light penetration depth of 1 M solution: 3.2 µm; hole and groove arrays with 1 µm features [615] size fabricated, maximum depth 2.4 µm; time-resolved shock wave and bubble images at backside laser irradiation of glass–toluene interface presented: shock wave velocity 1.4 km/s, bubble growth velocity 200 m/s

Fused silica

Toluene

No

KrF, 248 nm, 20 ns, 1 J/cm2

Bubble and shock wave images presented; transient peak pressure measured 11.1–30.4 MPa (at distances 1–0.1 mm); initial peak pressure estimated 10–200 MPa

CaF2 , BaF2 , sapphire, quartz

Acetone

Pyrene, 0.4 M

XeCl, 308 nm, 25 ns, 4 Hz

Quartz

Acetone, tetrahydrofuran

Pyrene, 0.4–1.4 M

XeCl, 308 nm, 30 ns, 4 Hz

Fused silica

Methylmethacrylate

Naphthalene, 0–1.71 mol/dm3

ArF, 193 nm, 20 ns, 1.5 Hz

Fused silica

Methylmethacrylate

Naphthalene, 0.85 mol/dm3

ArF, 193 nm, 20 ns, 1.5 Hz, 0.11–0.86 J/cm2

Pressure and temperature calculations (numerical, 1D) Vass (2004) [605] confirm the melting mechanism of etching

Fused silica, quartz

Toluene, C2 Cl4

Pyrene, 0.5 M

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, up to 1.4 J/cm2

Surface characterization by RBS/channelling, XPS Böhme (2004) and Raman spectroscopy; quartz surface is amorphized [593] (1.2–60 nm in depth) and contaminated by chlorine and carbon (not with carbon if scanned spot etched in C2 Cl4 )

Kawaguchi (2004) [638], (2005) [639]

Up to 67 nm/pulse Diffractive grey tone phase mask projection of patterns; Kopitkovas (BaF2 , 3.4 J/cm2 ); Fresnel microlens etched in CaF2 , surface roughness (2004) [612] threshold fluences: ranges from 5 nm to several micrometres quartz – 0.5 J/cm2 ; BaF2 – 0.4 J/cm2 ; CaF2 – 0.8 J/cm2 ; sapphire – 2.3 J/cm2 Etch incubation investigated; luminescence spectra recorded; plano-convex and diffractive microlens arrays fabricated in quartz Up to 50 nm/pulse (860 J/cm2 , 0.85 mol/dm3 ); threshold fluence between 0.11– 0.21 J/cm2

Kopitkovas (2004) [587]

Absorption depth of solution measured: 39 Vass (2004) [604] 400–62 300 cm−1 ; light penetration depths estimated 0.16 – 0.25 µm; molten silica droplets observed; molten silica depth calculated numerically using 1D-model with temperature-varying materials properties

Shock pressure dependence on distance d follows the relationship p ≈ d −0.33

Fused silica

Toluene

No

KrF, 248 nm, 20 ns, 1 J/cm2

Silica glass

Acetone

Pyrene, saturated

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 1 J/cm2 , up to 80 Hz

17 nm/pulse average (1 J/cm2 )

Fused silica

Toluene, Pyrene, tetra0.5 mol/l chloroethylene

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns

Dependence of Binary gratings and freeform surfaces fabricated; etch depth on pulse discussion about proper masks number given

Fused silica

Toluene, C2 Cl4 ,

Pyrene, 0.5 mol/l

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns

Up to 20 nm/pulse (1.2 J/cm2 )

Fused silica

Toluene

Pyrene, 0.5 mol/l

KrF, 248 nm, 25 ns, up to 1.87 J/cm2

Kawaguchi (2005) [639]

Micro trench about 7 µm wide and 420 µm deep Kawaguchi in silica glass with a maximum aspect ratio of 60 (2005) [575] fabricated Zimmer (2005) [640]

Etch rate evolution in time studied: after incubation Böhme (2005) period the etch rate remains constant; at greater spot [610] sizes the etch rate increases Sinusoidal gratings (period 760 nm) etched; smoothing Böhme (2005) of surface relief at homogeneous irradiation studied [614] A short review (1 page) of the LIBWE and the earlier work by Böhme and Zimmer

Böhme (2005) [586]

Borofloat glass

Acetone

Pyrene, 0.4 mol/l

4ω-Nd:YAG, 266 nm, 10 ns, 78 µJ, up to 50 kHz

Focused beam scanning, trenches of depth about 10 µm for microreactors/microconcentrators fabricated; threshold fluences for 11 lightabsorbing organic substances/solutions measured

Cheng (2005) [590]

Fused silica

Acetone

Pyrene, 0.4 mol/l

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, Up to 55 nm/pulse 2 Hz; dye/KrF, 248 nm, (30 ns pulses, 0.6 ns, 2 Hz 1.7 J/cm2 )

Maximum bubble pressures estimated to exceed up to 75 MPa

Vass (2006) [602]

Adherent carbon deposit around the etched area (removable by oxygen plasma); ripples on etched surface, ripple period about 120 nm

Böhme (2006) [597, 641]

MethylNaphthalene, methacrylate 0.85 and 1.71 mol/l Fused silica

Toluene

Pyrene, 0.5 mol/l

Dye/KrF, 248 nm, 0.5 ns, 5 kHz, 20 mJ

≈0.1 nm/pulse (≈0.2 J/cm2 ), threshold ≈0.07 J/cm2

(Continued )

Table 4.9

(Continued)

Target or etched material(s) Liquids

Additives

Laser type and beam parameters

Fused silica

Toluene

No

Fused silica, quartz, sapphire, MgF2

Toluene (adsorbed layer)

No

Fused silica

Pyrene, Toluene, 0.5 mol/l fluorobenzene, tetrachloroethylene

Etch rate

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Reference(s)

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns

Up to 22 nm/pulse (1.5 J/cm2 ),

Liquid–solid interface transient reflectivity measurements; discussion on etch mechanisms in different fluence regions

Böhme (2006) [642]

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns

Fused silica: up to 600 nm/pulse (0.7– 7.5 J/cm2 ); threshold 0.75 J/cm2 (12 J/cm2 in air)

Study of chamber temperature effect on etch rate; no pulse repetition rate dependence of etching at least up to 100 Hz; crystal structure of SiO2 does not affect the etching process

Böhme (2006) [616]

Ti:sapphire, 775 nm, 130 fs, 1 kHz

1.1–6.5 nm/pulse (pyrene/toluene, 0.3–0.5 J/cm2 )

Deposits around the etched area; ripples on etched surface: ripple period about 550 nm, orientation perpendicular to the electric field of laser light

Böhme (2006) [597]

Fused silica Water coated by carbon

No

KrF, 248 nm, single pulses

Up to 230 nm/ one pulse (0.4–4.8 J/cm2 )

Ablation in air and in water compared; material removal mechanisms discussed; similarity with etching of virgin silica observed

Böhme (2006) [606]

Fused silica

Toluene, C6 H5 F, C6 H5 Cl, C6 H4 Cl2

Pyrene, 0.5 mol/l

KrF, 248 nm, 10 Hz

Up to 27 nm/pulse, Comparison of etching in various halogenated (0.3–1.6 J/cm2 ) solvents; halogenation lowers the etch rate and incubation effects, small holes found in otherwise smooth etched surface

Böhme (2006) [588]

Fused silica

Gallium

No

KrF, 248 nm, 10 Hz

Up to 600 nm/pulse, (up to 8 J/cm2 ); threshold fluence 1.3 J/cm2

Fused silica

Gallium

No

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 18 ns, 2 kHz

Zimmer (2006) Almost linear dependence of etch rate on pulse Up to 350 (12 J/cm2 ); thresh- number and fluence; etched surface roughness 1.5 nm; [618], (2007) [619] old fluence 3 J/cm2 no incubation effects; almost no rim or redeposited material; maximum temperature at interface was Up to 300 estimated ∼2500 K (absorption coefficient of Ga: (28 J/cm2 ); thresh- >105 cm−1 ) old fluence 7 J/cm2

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 73 ns, 1 kHz

Almost linear dependence of etch rate on pulse number and fluence; etched surface roughness 7 nm r.m.s.; no incubation effects

Zimmer (2006) [585]

Up to 70 nm/pulse Absorption depth 330 µm; trenches down to 65 µm Cheng (2006) in depth and of aspect ratio 3.6 etched; crack-free [591] (6–13 J/cm2 ); surfaces threshold fluence 5.7 J/cm2

Soda-lime glass

Acetone

Rose Bengal dye, 1.2 mM (saturated)

532 nm, 15 ns, 5 kHz, 40–90 µJ

Fused silica

Mercury

No

KrF, 248 nm, 25 ns, Up to 650 nm/pulse 10 Hz, mask projection (0.75–11 J/cm2 ); threshold fluence 0.76 J/cm2

Silica glass

Water

No

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 0.3 ps, 1 kHz , spot 1.5 µm

≈100 µm3 /s (80 J/cm2 , scanned beam)

Rectangular trenches and chambers and their An (2006) [644] combinations etched, minimal width 5 µm, maximal size 75 µm

Fused silica (1 mm)

MethylNaphthalene methacrylate (1.85 mol/dm3 )

Nd:YAG, 532 and 266 nm, 10 ns, 10 Hz, 285–680 mJ/cm2

The sample was irradiated by interference pattern of two laser beams

Good quality gratings having period/depth of 154/3, Vass (2006) [645] 266/20, and 550/120 nm were etched by 50 laser pulses into fused silica surface;AFM images of the gratings are presented

Fused silica

Toluene

Pyrene (0.5 mol/l)

KrF, 248 nm, 25 ns, 10 Hz, spot 3 × 3 mm, 600–950 mJ/cm2

Fused silica

Toluene

Pyrene (0.5 mol/l)

Gallium

No

KrF, 248 nm, 20 ns, 10 Hz, spot 100 × 100 µm, up to 7.85 J/cm2

Notations PEP – poly(tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene) FEP – fluoroethylenepropylene pyranine – 8-hydroxy-1,3,6-pyrenetrisulfonic acid trisodium salt Np(SO3 Na)3 – naphthalene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid trisodium salt AFM – atomic force microscpe DLC – dry laser cleaning RBS – Rutherford-backscattering spectrometry XPS – X-ray-photoelectron spectroscopy

Linear dependence of etch rate on pulse number Zimmer (2006) and fluence; etched surface roughness 2.2 nm r.m.s.; no [643] incubation effects; etched surfaces waviness 20–30 µm (at 2.5 µm depth)

Laser irradiation caused amorphization a of ∼35-nm- Zimmer (2007) thick surface layer of silica glass (absorption coefficient [601] 104 –105 cm−1 ), according to calculations, the surface layer may be heated up to 12 000 K (950 J/cm2 ) Pyrene/toluene: 35 nm/pulse (1.7 J/cm2 ); Ga: 620 nm/pulse (8.75 J/cm2 ), threshold 1.3 J/cm2

Etching of fused silica using toluene/pyrene and liquid Böhme (2007) gallium are compared; the threshold fluence for Ga [620] (1.3 J/cm2 ) corresponds roughly to the boiling temperature of fused silica (calculations)

202

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

4.5 Machining of Liquid-Containing Materials Porous hydrophilic inorganic and organic materials contain a significant amount of water under normal conditions, which influences the laser machining process. If the laser light is absorbed mostly in water (e.g. of CO2 laser), the material disintegration and removal occurs mainly due to water vapours pressure and the thermal load on the matrix remains low. Thus, changes in material properties can be avoided. For example, Sugimoto et al. [646] report that at laser cutting of soaked in water marble, the formation of white lines at the cutting edges in the material was eliminated. Laser removal of water-containing coatings is described in Section 2.2.

4.5.1 Rock drilling Rock, dependent on its porosity (Table 4.10), may contain a significant amount of water, which plays a significant role at laser processing. For a decade, there has been an interest to drill gas wells by lasers. Gas wells are up to 3 km deep and replacing of drill bits takes a considerable time. It has been estimated that using lasers, a 3 km deep well can be drilled in 10 days instead of 100 days using the conventional technology. In 1995, preliminary studies about the perspectives of use of lasers for gas well drilling started at Gas Technology Institute (GTI), Des Plaines IL, USA and in 1997 first proof-of-principle experiments were carried out. In 1999, Argonne National Laboratory, Gas Research Institute and the Colorado School of Mines started joint fundamental research on laser rock drilling. A commercial product is expected in 2010–2012 [648].

Potential benefits of laser drilling of rock • • • • • •

More rapid rock penetration No need to buy and install well casing No need to replace drill bits Faster retrieval of downhole data Reduced on-site drilling time Reduced environmental impact

Table 4.10 Porosity of some rocks [647]. In ambient, the pores are usually filled by water. Rock

Porosity (%)

Sandstone

0.5–40

Quartzite and ferruginous quartzite

0.2–20

Phyllite

0.5–0.6

Flint

1–6

Limestone

0.5–48

Marble

0.1–2.2

Granite

0.2–7.4

Copper ore

0.2–7

Subtractive processing

203

Lasers having potential for rock drilling: 2–6-kW CO2 10.6 µm 5 kW-Yb fibre 1.04 µm 0.2–2-kW Nd:YAG 1.06 µm Energy density at workpiece 10–10 000 J/cm3 The mechanisms of material removal in rock drilling are thermal spalling, melting, and vaporization. Thermal spallation is the most effective rock removal mechanism, because smallest specific energy is needed [649].

4.5.2 Biological materials Materials of biological origin like wood, paper, food, etc. contain a significant amount of water, which determines to a great extent their light absorption spectra (resembles this of water) and the material removal processes in laser machining. Examples of laser machining of some biological materials are given in the Table 4.12. For example, in the patent EP0930012 [661], a method of cutting of dough sheets into pellets by carbon dioxide laser, operating at wavelengths and wavelength bands 2000–2100 nm (especially 2064–2096 nm) is described. A jet of water steam is delivered to the cutting point together with the laser beam, so that the dough is kept moist during cutting. The method overcomes some disadvantages of commonly used punching technology: the form of the pellets can be operatively changed, the use of the dough sheet area is better, and there are no problems with sticking of the dough to the punches. Laser machining and treatment of living organisms and tissues, in vivo and in vitro, is out of the scope of this book. References to relevant literature were given in Introduction.

4.6 Laser Cleaving of Crystals in Water and of Water-Containing Crystals 4.6.1 Breaking of single-crystal silicon wafers In the article by Kurobe et al. [667] laser-induced breaking of single-crystal silicon wafers, with the backside in contact with water, was described. An Nd:YAG was used at powers up to 80W and feed rates of 0.4–20 mm/s. The use of water was reported to result in nearly twice lower crack deviation, damage depth, and branching crack length. The authors explain these benefits by the cooling effect. Water is known to assist crack propagation in glasses, oxides, fluorides, selenides, etc., but not in silicon [668, 669].

4.6.2 Cleaving of protein crystals Crystallized proteins are needed for determination of their structure by X-ray diffraction. Because the crystals may grow polycrystalline, have regions of poor crystallinity or be of improper shape, there is a need for separation of well crystallized portions. Protein crystals contain 23–90 per cent of solvent (water, acetone, etc.) and it is advantageous to perform cleaving in the same solvent. The common practice of cutting of protein crystals by micro-hand tools does often not yield good enough results because the protein crystals are soft and fragile. Cleaving of protein crystals by laser can be a favourable alternative here [670, 671]. In the studies by Kashii et al. [670] a 150 fs Ti:sapphire laser (800 nm) was found to be able to cleave millimetre-sized hen egg white lysozyme (HEWL) crystals neatly. The needed laser fluence was ∼1.5 J/cm2 . The process has been referred to as fs-CACO: femtosecond laser-induced cut and cleave operation. Table 4.11 presents the essentials of selected research reports about laser machining of liquid-containing materials.

Table 4.11

Laser machining of liquid-containing materials and related research (examples) (see also Table 2.6)

Materials machined

Liquids/their content

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Marble, granite

Water

CO2 , 2–2.3 kW, pulsed, duty 55–60%

Mg(OH)2 · 4MgCO3 · 5H2 O, Mg(OH)2 , Mg(NO3 )2 · 6H2 O

Water (chemically bonded)

Concrete

Cement and concrete (also doped with CsCl and SrCl2 )

Concrete (60/40 sand/Portland cement weight ratio)

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

The materials were soaked with water

A wall mosaic 3.5 × 30 m was engraved; better cut quality than of dry material was achieved; formation of white lines in marble was avoided

Sugimoto (1996) [646]

355 and 532 nm, 10 ns, 30–70 mJ

Experiment was performed in vacuum

Solvated Mg and MgO clusters [Mg(MgO)n (H2 O)m ]+ , n = 0 and 1, m = 0–3, and [H(MgO)n (H2 O)m ]+ , n = 0–5, m = 0–9, were formed in ablation plume; the cluster nucleation and growth obviously occurs through addition of MgO and H2 O molecules to Mg+ of H+ ions

Liu (1997) [650]

Water layer on surface

No

Voltage between electrodes 20–140 kV, 0.8–7 kJ/pulse, 4–40 µs, 2–40 Hz

Surface layer (4–30 mm) of concrete was removed (∼5 m2 /h) by electric discharge through water or through concrete under water; energy consumption was 1.5 kJ/cm3 (discharge in water) and 0.8 kJ/cm3 (discharge in concrete)

Goldfarb (1997) [651]

Water in cement samples: 5% labile, 20%–30% hydrated

Nd:YAG, 1.6 kW, 0.5 ms, 400 Hz, 2 J, spot 0.55 mm

Laser beam was fibre delivered, scanning rate 10 cm/s (∼50% overlap)

The goal of the work was to investigate the possibilities of laser decontamination and decommissioning of nuclear facilities; cement matrix was observed to melt, dehydrate and vaporize, while sand and aggregate material was found to be fractured and dislodged without melting

Savina (1998) [27]

Discusses the choice of lasers for petroleum well drilling

O’Brien (1999) [652]

Concrete ablation efficiency was 0.23 mg/J independently of peak laser irradiance over a range from 0.2 to 4.4 MW/cm2 ; pulse overlap >60% caused a significant decrease of ablation efficiency by inducing melting; most abundant generated aerosol size was ∼8 µm

Savina (2000) [28]

Nd:YAG, 1.6 kW, 0.5–1 ms, up to 800 Hz, up to 30 J, spot 0.55– 0.96 mm, up to 4.4 MW/cm2

Laser beam was delivered via 1 mm diameter fibre, 10 m in length, linear pulse overlap up to 90%

Portland cement

Granite

Specimen immersed into water

Sandstone, shale, limestone

Au particles (5.3 nm in average, 1.9%vol) in toluene

No

Nd:YAG, 0.5–2 ms, 50–800 Hz, 1–12 J, 680–1200W

Toluene (binder of the ink)

Ar-ion, 514 nm, 0.85W, 10–50 µs, 100 Hz, spot 30 µm

Electric pulse between electrodes: peak voltage 950 kV, peak current 30 kA, 18–54 kJ

Shield gas – nitrogen

Laser beam was applied at a incident angle of 45◦ , scanning rate 0.5 mm/s

Optical absorption coefficient of ordinary Portland cement was determined to be 470 ± 22 µm at 10.6 µm wavelength and 177 ± 15 µm at 0.81 µm wavelength

Lawrence (2000) [653]

Material removal rates up to 180 cm3 /pulse and effectiveness 180 J/cm2 were achieved

Inoue (2000) [654]

Reports about the research on laser ablation of radioactive concrete at Argonne National laboratory (see Savina (2000) [28])

Robinson (2001) [29]

Laser beam irradiance required for producing the thermal spallation zones was around 920W/cm2 for Berea gray sandstone and 784W/cm2 far shale, specific energies ranged 0.5–2.2 kJ/cm3 (shale) Principles of C-CUIP method for numerical simulation of laser spallation of rock are outlined; spallation criterion is that the laser-induced stress just beneath the surface reaches the critical strength of the rock

Xu (2003) [649]

Printed Au ink was cured by laser beam; using laser curing the thermal load to flexible polymeric remains low

Chung (2005) [656], Bieri (2005) [657]

Xu (2005) [655]

(Continued )

Table 4.11

(Continued)

Materials machined

Liquids/their content

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment 2

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Concrete

Liquids were not applied

CO2 , CW/100 and 500 Hz, 50% pulsed, 3.5 and 10 kW

Spot 1.6–16 cm (CW), 35 × 24 cm2 (pulsed); 40–3700W/cm2 (CW), 115W/cm2 (pulsed)

Scanning speed was 60–2400 mm/min; spalling, drilling, and glazing experiments were performed; spalling depth 2–12 mm was observed (at 600–6000 J/cm2 )

Rao (2005) [658]

PS-b-P4VP film: native and TCPP doped

Methanol

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, up to 0.17 J/cm2

Samples immersed into methanol

In methanol, only the P4VP-island parts doped with TCPP were ablated, obviously because the swollen state of P4VP there; ablated craters were less than 50 nm in width and up to 12 nm in depth

Wang (2005) [659]

Reports the methodology and results of simulation of laser spallation of rock by CCUP procedure; transient temperature and density profiles are presented

Bybee (2006) [660]

Rock

1 ms, 800W, spot 10 mm

Notations PS-b-P4VP – polystyrene-block-poly(4-vinylpyridine) diblock copolymer TCPP – tetrakis(4-carboxyphenyl)porphine CCUP (C-CUIP) procedure – CIP combined and unified procedure: a FD-based numerical procedure for simulation of large deformation of materials, fragmentation, multiphase problems and fluid–structure interaction CIP – constrained interpolation profile

Table 4.12

Laser machining or treatment of some materials of biological origin (examples).

Materials machined

Liquids

Dough sheet

Water (steam)

Cellulose and paper

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

CO2 , 2000–2100 nm

Focused scanned laser beam, a steam jet is directed into the cutting zone

In comparison with the punching technology, the EP0930012 (1999) [661] form of the dough pellets can be operatively changed, the use of the dough sheet area is better, and there are no problems with sticking of the dough to the punches

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 6 ns, 20 Hz, 1 J/cm2 , 125 MW peak

Relative humidity of environment was 65%

The treatment did not change the mechanical properties of the paper, but caused yellowing; formation of ether cross-links and dehydration of the cellulose was observed; the yellowing was explained by formation of chromophores due to carbon–cellulose interactions

Kolar (2002) [662]

References

HEWL crystals

Solvent content 39%

193 nm, 1 ns, 1 kHz, Focused scanned laser 1 µJ, spot 25 µm, beam 50 mJ/cm2

A technique called PULSA for laser cutting and milling of millimetre-sized protein crystals with little thermal damage was developed; ablation rate 0.1 µm/pulse

Kitano (2004) [663, 664], Murakami (2004) [665]

Particleboard, birch plywood, pine

12% humidity (pine)

CO2 , up to 2 kW

HAZ width could be controlled in range of 14–70 µm; laser generated pyrolysis products (aerosols and at cut surface) were identified

Barcikowski (2006) [666]

Notations HEWL – hen egg white lysozyme PULSA – pulsed UV laser soft abalation HAZ – heat-affected zone.

Feed rate up to 5 m/s, 10–45 kJ/m

C h a p t e r

F i v e

Generation and Modiﬁcation of Particles

Contents 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8

Introduction Optical Properties of Small Particles Experimental Techniques of Particles Generation Metal Particles Inorganic Compound Particles Silicon and Amorphous Carbon Particles Diamond and DLC Particles and Films Organic Particles

209 210 213 214 240 250 250 258

5.1 Introduction Formation of small particles at laser ablation of solid in liquids is an inevitable phenomenon at both shock processing and machining. When a solid target is vaporized, the vapour tends to condensate as small particles. When ablation is carried out in liquid, the particles remain in liquid as a suspension (Fig. 5.1). Particles of 2–1000 nm in size do not settle under normal conditions and are called colloids. Aqueous colloids are called hydrosols. Using laser ablation of solids in liquids, colloidal particles of a large variety of materials has been fabricated in the recent years, in course of overall interest rise to nanoscale sciences and nanofabrication. 1 ns

1 ms

100 ms

1 ms

1 mm (a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 5.1 Temporal sequence of physical phenomena at irradiation of solids in transparent liquids with laser pulses of fluences in range 10–100 J/cm2 (a) energy absorption; (b) plasma and shock wave formation; (c) bubble at its maximum size, condensation of vapours; and (d) relaxation. All these phenomena have been used for materials processing (scaled after Geiger et al. [469] and Tsuji et al. [672]).

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing ISBN-13: 978-0-08-044498-7

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

209

210

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

Table 5.1

Liquids and their additives used at particles generation.

Liquids

Additives

Water, D2 O, pentane, hexane, cyclohexane, heptane, octane, nonane, decane, chloroform, methanol, ethanol, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, 1-propanol, 2-propanol (IPA), isobutanol, n-hexanol, 2-ethoxyethanol, acetone, liquid He II

NaCl, KCl, MgCl2 ,AgNO3 , NaBH4 , I+ , CN− , phtalazine, citric acid, sodium citrate, dodecanethiol, gelatine, cyclodextrines, PVP, SDS, SHS, SOS, SDBS, CTAB, sodium polyacrylate, tetraalkyl-ammonium bromide salts

(The abbreviations are defined at the end of Table 5.4)

Compared with other methods of fabrication of nanoparticles, laser ablation in liquid has following advantages: • • •

There are no problems with the collection of the particles, compared with fabrication in gas [673]. Compared with spark method, the target may be isolating [674]. Laser ablation yields principally cleaner particles, because no other substances are involved in the process than the target and the liquid. For example, the chemical methods need a stabilizer as a rule that modifies the surface of the achieved particles.

The main disadvantage of laser method is its small productivity (of order of some mg/h) and expensive equipment (laser). Up to today, about 20 different liquids have been used as the ablation media in particle fabrication (Table 5.1) ranging from organic solvents and water to liquid helium in fundamental research of neutral atoms and clusters. Various additives have been applied in order to control the particles size and size distribution.

Average size Laser-generated particles vary in size. The average size is calculated commonly as: N0

dav =

di w i

i N0

,

(5.1)

wi

i

πdi3 , 6 where di is the diameter of the ith particle and N0 is the total number of particles in sight [675]. wi =

(5.2)

Stability of colloids Colloids may aggregate as they collide with each other. In electrolyte solutions, however, the particles are carrying a charge, proportional to their ζ-potentials, that hinders them to come near to each other. The colloids are considered unstable when their ζ-potential lies between −30 and +30 mV, and stable when the ζ-potentials are more positive than +30 mV or more negative than −30 mV (see also Section 2.3.1). For example, silver colloids of size less than 50 nm are unstable in pure water [676]. Large particles may settle due to gravitation force (Eq. (4.2)).

5.2 Optical Properties of Small Particles Optical methods, first of all total absorbance measurement and absorption spectroscopy, are convenient methods for characterization of colloidal particles. In addition, many important applications of laser-generated particles rely on their optical properties.

211

Generation and modification of particles

100 Ti

Ag Au

Absorption (a.u.)

80 Pt

60 40

Cu

20

Pd

0 200

300

400 500 600 700 Wavelength in vacuo (nm)

800

900

Figure 5.2 Calculated absorption spectra of some 10 nm in diameter metal hydrosols at room temperature [678]. The main absorption peak centre wavelength is determined by the dipole plasma resonance frequency (Mie resonance) and the surroundings, while the width of the peak is determined by the collision frequency of electrons in the particle, and depends on the particle size. Reproduced by permission of The Royal Society of Chemistry from Ref. [678]. Table 5.2 Interband absorption threshold energies for some metals on interest to laser particle generation [679]. Material

Threshold energy (eV)

Cu

2.08–2.1

Ag

3.86–3.9

Au

2.38–2.45

Figure 5.2 presents the optical absorption spectra of some important metal colloids. The sharp peak at longer wavelengths is due to electron plasma resonance, the rise of absorption at shorter wavelengths is due to interband absorption (Table 5.2). Examples of absorption spectra of nanorods and core-shell particles are presented in Figs 5.16 and 5.17. Examples of extinction spectra for spheroidal and trigonal prismatic silver nanoparticles can be found in the article by Kelly et al. [677]. Interest to silver and gold colloids is to a great extent due to their absorption maximum in visible region.

Plasma resonance Plasma resonance is the collective oscillations of the free electron gas in the metal. The two lowest modes of such oscillations in case of spherical particles are presented in Fig. 5.3. The dominant peaks in Fig. 5.2 correspond to dipole resonance; the quadrupole resonance peak is for nanoparticles weak and lies at shorter wavelengths [679] (Table 5.3).

Estimation of average diameter of nanoparticles from plasma resonance peak width The dependence of the resonance peak width on particle size (smaller particles have larger peak width, a correlation graph may be found in the review by Perenboom et al. [681]) enables the determination of the mean particles size. In the 1–10 nm range, the Mie theory predicts an inverse proportional dependence of the plasmon peak width w on the particle diameter dav (intrinsic size effect): w0 dav ∝ , (5.6) w where w0 is a constant.

212

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

Electric field L 1

Magnetic field L 1

Electric field L 2

Magnetic field L 2

Figure 5.3 Electric and magnetic fields far away from metal clusters in dipole and quadrupole resonance mode, L = 1 and 2, correspondingly [680].

Table 5.3

Plasma resonance frequencies of some important systems [679].

Geometry Bulk Flat surface

Sphere (dipole resonance)

Plasma resonance frequency ne 2 ωp = ε0 me ωp ωres = 1 + εε10 ωp ω1 = 1 + 2 εε10

Formula number (5.3) (5.4)

(5.5)

Notations: ωp – Drude plasma frequency, n – density of electrons, e – electron charge, me – electron mass, ε0 – vacuum permettivity, ε1 – medium permettivity.

With a further increase in the diameter of the nanoparticle (>20 nm), the peak width increases again, because of more inhomogeneous polarization of the larger nanoparticles in the electromagnetic field of the incoming light and due to excitation of a higher number of different multipole modes, the so-called extrinsic size effect [682].

Estimation of the average diameter of nanoparticles from absorbance From Drude theory follows a linear dependence between absorbance and average diameter of nanoparticles [683]: katom = f0 dav ,

(5.7)

where f0 is a constant. The constants w0 and f0 may be determined from direct measurements of particle size with electron or scanning probe microscopes.

213

Generation and modification of particles

5.3 Experimental Techniques of Particles Generation Main experimental setups used for laser ablation fabrication of colloids are presented in Figs 5.4–5.7. Glass beaker Laser beam 1064 nm 3.5 ns 10 Hz

Isopropyl alcohol

Graphite target

Focusing lens

Figure 5.4 Setup with vertical target [684]. For avoiding of crater formation and absorbance increase due to generated suspension, the target my be rotated [685]. © Elsevier.

(a) Preparation of colloids 1064 nm (38 J/cm2)

(b) Modification of colloids 355 nm (4–12 mJ/pulse)

Silver nanoparticles

Water

Silver plate

Figure 5.5 Setup for ablation of an horizontal target in liquid (left) and for irradiation of suspended particles (right). © The Laser Society of Japan, reproduced with permission from Ref. [686].

Laser beam Lens – Quartz cell Distilled water

Target holder

Target Stirring bar

Magnetic stirrer

Figure 5.6

Setup with horizontal target and stirred liquid [687]. © Elsevier.

214

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

Laser beam Lens Splash of suspension

Laser beam

l/2 plate Lens 53° Splash of suspension

Suspension

(a)

Suspension (b)

Figure 5.7 Setup with inclined laser beam (b), compared to conventional setup (a). The conventional system suffers from splashes at laser energies over 30 mJ/pulse. System (b) with laser beam at an angle to the surface avoids the splashes reaching the lens. At Brewster angle, also the reflection losses may be avoided. Pulse energies up to 150 mJ were applicable with this optical arrangement [688]. © Elsevier.

5.4 Metal Particles 5.4.1 Introduction Noble metals colloids (Fig. 5.8) are useful in photography, optoelectronics, catalysis, biosensing, labelling of proteins, etc. Due to plasma resonance in visible region (Fig. 5.2), the Raman scattering and other optical nonlinearities of the nanoparticles are greater here by orders of magnitude compared with those of flat surfaces. In comparison with conventional chemical methods of fabrication of noble metal colloids, in laser process the particles are clean, because no other substances but a metal target and a liquid are needed. A recent application-oriented review about photophysical and photochemical properties of metal nanoparticles was published by Kamat [689] and a review of using surface plasma resonance techniques in biomedical sciences by Englebienne et al. [690]. Magnetic colloids are useful in catalytic chemistry, magnetic recording, magnetorheological fluids, etc. In comparison with the common fabrication methods of magnetic particles, such as decomposition of organometallic precursors and mechanical milling, laser ablation is simpler and helps to avoid contamination of particles. However, when ablation is performed in oxygen-containing liquids, the surface of the particles becomes oxidized.

5.4.2 Mechanisms determining the particles size In many applications, particles of same size are of advantage, for example in SERS-based sensors [692]. In the following, the major phenomena controlling the size of small particles during laser irradiation and subsequent growth are characterized.

Dependence of the melting temperature on particles size Because the vapour pressure depends on the surface curvature (Eq. (7.57)), the melting temperature of solid particles decreases with the decrease of their size (Fig. 5.9).

215

Absorbance

Generation and modification of particles

200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Wavelength (nm) (b)

(a)

Figure 5.8 (a) Electron micrograph and (b) optical absorption spectrum of platinum nanoparticles with an average diameter of 6 nm produced by laser ablation at 1064 nm of a platinum metal plate in pure water [691]. © Elsevier.

Tr /T0

1.0

0.95

0.9

0

20

40 R, nm

Figure 5.9 Variation of melting temperature Tr with radius for gold particles in vacuum,T0 – melting temperature for macroscopic bodies (after Sambles [693], © Royal Society of London, reproduced with permission).

According to Sambles [693] (with reference to Reiss and Wilson [694] and Curzon [695]), the melting temperature of small particles follows the relation: H m ρs γl γsl (T0 − Tr ) = + 2M T0 r −p r

ρs 1− ρl

,

(5.8)

with notations: Hm – latent heat of fusion, T0 – bulk melting point, Tr – melting point at radius r, ρs – density of solid, ρl – density of liquid, γl – surface energy of liquid, γsl – mean solid–liquid interfacial energy, M – molecular mass, p – relevant skin thickness. Sambles [693] gives to the parameter p an estimate p = 2.2 ± 0.5 nm.

216

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

Ostwald ripening Because the solubility of smaller particles is larger than this of larger ones, mass transfer from smaller particles to larger occurs. Ostwald ripening tends to minimize the total surface area of the particle system.

Heat transfer efficiency Small particles cool faster than larger ones. Inasawa et al. [696] have shown that for a given laser fluence, there exists a critical size over which the temperature of the particle does not reach the melting temperature during the laser pulse length. This phenomenon explains the particle size reduction and narrowing of their size distribution at laser irradiation of suspensions. The time to reach the boiling temperature of the particles, t b is − t b = tm

where

A − B (Tb − Tw ) 1 ln , B A − B (Tm − Tw )

N rn2 3FM 1 − 2 ηε , 1− A= 4τρCp r r n=1 B=

3M λ , ρCp r 2

(5.9)

(5.10)

(5.11)

is the time for the particle to melt, tm

4πr 3 ρ

Hm 3M , tm = tm + N

rn2 F 2 1 − 2 ηε − 4πrλ (Tm − Tw ) πr 1− τ r n=1 tm is the time for the particle to reach the melting temperature, given by the equation N rn2 3M λ Fr Tm = Tw + 1 − 2 ηε × 1 − exp − , 1− t m 4τλ r ρCp r 2 n=1

(5.12)

(5.13)

with notations: Tw – ambient temperature, Tm – melting point of the particle, Tb – boiling point of the particle, F – laser fluence per pulse, τ – laser pulse width, M – atomic mass of the particle, ρ – density of the particle, Cp – specific heat of the particle, λ – thermal conductivity of the surroundings, r – radius of the particle, rn – radius of the nth (111) plane: r 2 = r 2 − (r − nd)2 , d – distance between (111) planes, N – number of (111) planes included in a particle, N = 2r/d, η – fraction of the area of the plane occupied by metal atoms (η = 0.91 for a gold (111) plane), ε – absorption coefficient of a metal atom, ε = ε/επr02 NA , ε – mole absorption cross-section of the metal, NA – Avogadro’s number, r0 – bond radius of metal atoms. (111) Planes mean that the particle is modelled as being composed of n layers of equal thickness perpendicular to the laser beam axis. Particle’s size reduction occurs if the particles temperature reaches the boiling temperature, tb ≤ τ, during the laser pulse.

Surfactants Surfactants were found to control efficiently the size of laser ablation formed nanoparticles through a so-called dynamic formation mechanism [697–699]: (1) Immediately after the laser ablation, a dense cloud of metal atoms is built over the laser spot of the metal plate. As the interatomic interaction is much stronger than the interaction between a metal atom and a

217

Generation and modification of particles

surfactant molecule or a solvent molecule, metal atoms are aggregated as much as metal atoms collide mutually. (2) This initial rapid aggregation continues until metal atoms in the close vicinity are consumed almost completely. As a result, an embryonic metal particle forms in a region void of metal atoms (cavity). However, the supply of metal atoms outside the region through diffusion causes the particle to grow slowly even after the rapid growth ceases. (3) This slow growth terminates when the surfaces of the particles are fully covered with surfactant molecules or the free metal atoms are consumed completely in the solution. Full covering of particles by surfactant molecules occurs when the surfactant concentration exceeds the critical micelle concentration. Using this criterion, Mafuné et al. [698] developed a formula for maximum particle radius rs growing in a surfactant solution: rs (t) =

Ns S = 4π

S · 3

k ds vs · kVa da va

1 r0 + kVa da va t 4

3 − 3r0 ,

(5.14)

where Ns is the number of surfactant molecules absorbed on particle, S is surface area occupied by one surfactant molecule on the particle, k is attachment coefficient of metal atoms by the particle (attachment cross-section = kπr 2 ), k is attachment coefficient of surfactant atoms, ds is density of a surfactant molecules in the solution, vs is velocity of surfactant molecules in the solution, da is the number density of metal atoms in the cloud of the metal atoms, va is diffusion velocity of metal atoms in the vapour, Va is volume of the metal atom, and r0 is the radius of the embryonic particle. Ionic surfactants, but also cyclodextrines were used to control the growth of laser-generated particles, reducing this way their size and size dispersion. Cyclodextrines were chosen due to their biocompatibility [700].

Effect of chlorides Bae et al. [701] found that presence of chlorides in the aqueous medium during laser ablation contributed to the reduction of the average particle size, prevented formation of large particles, and increased the formation efficiency of small nanoparticles thereby. However, the long-term stability of Ag nanoparticles formed in NaCl solution was reduced by enhanced spontaneous aggregation compared to those in neat water.

5.4.3 Modification of suspending particles by laser irradiation 5.4.3.1 Reduction in size and fragmentation Often there is a need to convert larger particles into smaller ones, enlarging this way their overall surface area (in sensing and catalysis) or increasing the density of the particles on a surface (in information storage). Particles exposed to light may loose their mass due to photodissolution and vapourization. In case of ultrashort intense pulse irradiation, particles may decay into fragments in a Coulomb explosion process. Fig. 5.10 presents some situations in particles fragmentation under the action of laser light. Lasers provide a unique possibility to reduce the size of noble metal particles due to their intense plasma resonance in visible region [702]. Figure 5.11 presents the dependence of final size of irradiated in suspension 45-nm size Au particles depending on the laser fluence. The mechanisms controlling the final size of particles were described in Section 5.4.2. Particle size reduction may occur also due to disintegration of aggregated particles, a process going on also below the melting temperature of the material [703].

Modification of particles by ps/fs-laser pulses Shorter pulses melt the particles at lower pulse energy, because the energy losses due to heat transfer from particles to liquid is smaller. According to Hodak et al. [704], the characteristic time of heat transfer from nanoparticles to liquid is about 100–200 ps.

218

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

AuCl4

Laser beam Laser beam

Laser beam

Heated to the b.p by laser pulses (T b.p.)

T b.p.

Size reduction of larger particles

Photoreduction and nucleation

Without particle growth

Particle growth and nucleation

Evaporation of gold atoms from the surface and cooling the particle

Aggregation of gold atoms, formation of small particles.

(a)

• Size reduction of larger particles • Particle growth and nucleation

Wide size distribution

(b)

Narrow size and distribution

(c)

Figure 5.10 Schematic of laser-induced size reduction of gold nanoparticles [696]. (a) Heated by laser pulses, gold atoms evaporate from the particle surface when the particle temperature is above the boiling point. Then the particle becomes smaller and evaporated gold atoms aggregate to form small particles. (b) With laser irradiation to gold nanoparticles, fragmented particles cannot grow because of a lack of source material, AuCl4 , which causes a wide size distribution. (c) With laser irradiation into AuCl4 solution, particle growth and laser-induced size reduction occur at the same time. Fragmented particles can grow to the maximum diameter controlled by the irradiated laser fluence, which results in narrow size distribution. © Institute of Pure and Applied Physics, reproduced with permission.

Maximum diameter (nm)

50

40

30

20 m.p.

10

b.p.

0 102

103

104

Absorbed laser energy, Q(J/(g pulse))

Figure 5.11 Dependence of the maximum diameter of Au particles on the absorbed laser energy [702]. Notations: m.p. – melting point of the material reached; b.p. – boiling point of the material reached. Solution: water + citric acid; laser: 532 nm, 7 ns. © American Chemical Society (1999), reprinted with permission from Ref. [702].

Because of smaller mass of electrons, they gain easier energy from laser light, so that the electron temperature may considerably exceed the temperature of ions (Fig. 5.12). If a significant amount of hot electrons leave the particle, the particle may explode due to repulsive forces between the positive ions, a phenomenon called Coulomb explosion (Fig. 5.13).

219

Generation and modification of particles

τ 30 ps

Electrons

4000

380 Temperature (K)

Temperature (K)

6000

2000

Electrons

τ 5 ns

360 ions

340

320

ions 300 0

200 400 Delay time (ps)

600

0

5

10

15

20 103

Delay time (ps)

Figure 5.12 Temporal evolution of electron temperature Te (dotted line) and ion temperature Ti (full line) calculated for 20-nm Au particles excited with (a) 30 ps and (b) 5 ns laser pulses with Eabs = 2.05 mJ/pulse. © American Chemical Society (2000), reprinted with permission from Ref. [704].

e

e h

e e

Ag nanocluster

e

e e

Electron ejection

Ag e e Ag e e Ag Ag e Ag Ag Ag e e e Ag Transient state

Ag e Ag e

Ag e Ag e

Fragmentation

Figure 5.13 Fragmentation of a Ag cluster with laser excitation [705]. A transient aggregate formed via the photoejection of electrons is considered to be a precursor for complete fragmentation of the particle. © American Chemical Society (1998), reprinted with permission from Ref. [705].

5.4.3.2 Melting without fragmentation It is possible to modify the shape or/and structure of the particles by melting. The corresponding changes in optical absorption spectra are expected to be applicable for optical information storage [704].

Melting of nanorods At melting, the rod-shaped particles transform into spheres, minimizing this way their surface energy (Fig. 5.14). The changes start at the middle of the rods, what is explained by poorer cooling and thus higher temperature there (Fig. 5.15). Changes in optical absorption spectra during the transformation are shown in Fig. 5.16. Shape transformation at nanoparticles at an exposure to light may occur also without melting. Jin et al. [708] observed conversion of 8-nm-sized spherical Ag nanoparticles into prisms at exposure to a fluorescent lamp light. In another study the same researchers [709] found that it was possible to control the nanoprisms size in range of 30–120 nm by the ratio of the amplitudes of two wavelengths from an Xe-lamp, the first wavelength corresponding to dipole plasmon resonance and the second to quadrupole plasmon resonance of the nanoprisms (see Table 5.4 for experimental details, Jin 2001, and 2003).

Melting of core-shell particles Laser melting of core-shell particles may also cause significant changes in their absorption spectra (Fig. 5.17) having a potential for use in optical information storage.

220

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

Figure 5.14 TEM image of a gold nanorods solution after exposure to 800-nm nanosecond laser pulses [706]. The laser fluence was 0.64 J/cm2 . Nanoparticles having an odd shape (φ-shape) are highlighted in the TEM image by circles. Particles of this particular shape are absent in the original starting solution, and a high abundance of this particular shape is mainly produced by irradiation with low-power nanosecond laser pulses (the length of rods was 44 nm and width 11 nm before laser irradiation). © American Chemical Society (2000), reprinted with permission from Ref. [706].

(110) ) (001)

(1

11

11

)

(1

(a)

(110) ) (001)

(1

11

11

)

(1

in

(b)

Tw

) 11

(11

) 11 (1

1)

(1

11

)

(001)

(1

(c)

)

11

(1

11

)

in

Tw

(001)

(d)

(1

Figure 5.15 A schematic process for the structural transformation of a gold nanorod to nanodot under laser irradiation [707]. © 2000 American Chemical Society, reprinted with permission from Ref. [707].

5.4.3.3 Enlargement in size and coagulation Growth of particles may occur even at low-level light exposure due to photodissolution and Ostwald ripening. Jin et al. [708] observed a size reduction of 8 nm Ag particles at an exposure to a fluorescent lamp light with subsequent growth into prisms. Mafuné et al. [682] report that growth of gold clusters into nanoparticles continued within 2 h after the pulsed laser for the size reduction was switched off.

221

Generation and modification of particles

0.30

τ 7 ns

Absorbance

0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 500

600

700

800

900

1000

900

1000

Wavelength l/nm

(a)

(b)

0.30

τ 100 fs

Absorbance

0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 500 (c)

600

700

800

Wavelength l/nm (d)

Figure 5.16 Comparison of the optical absorption data and TEM images for two gold nanorod samples irradiated by laser pulses having the same fluence (0.25 J/cm2 ) but different laser pulse width (7 ns (top: a, b) vs. 100 fs (bottom: c, d)) [706]. Only an optical hole burning at the laser wavelength (800 nm) and a partial melting of the gold nanorods are found when nanosecond pulses are used. Especially a high abundance of φ-shaped particles as shown in Fig. 5.14 is clearly visible. However, a complete melting of the gold nanorods into nanodots and a complete depletion of the nanorods are achieved with femtosecond laser pulses of the same energy (fluence). This result leads to the conclusion that nanosecond laser pulses are less effective in melting the gold nanorods. (The length of rods was 44 nm and width 11 nm before laser irradiation). © American Chemical Society (2000), reprinted with permission from Ref. [706].

Light may stimulate aggregation of particles by increasing van der Waals forces between them (Section 2.3.1). The effect is most pronounced at Mie resonances where interparticle energy may be enhanced by many orders of magnitude. Laser-heated particles may melt together, as shown in Fig. 5.18. Having a mixture of particles of different materials, alloy particles may be achieved. Izgalijev et al. [710] report about AgAu alloy particles formation at irradiation of a mixture Ag and Au colloids by laser light. Chandrasekharan et al. [712] observed laser-stimulated melting together of gold particles, previously aggregated through adsorbed Rhodamine 6G molecules. In some cases, the particles aggregation into nanowires and nanonetworks was observed [713–715] (Fig. 5.19).The mechanisms determining the morphology of the aggregates is not clear. Formation of networks may be controlled by surfactants in the solution (Fig. 5.20).

222

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

1.0

Absorbance (1 cm)

a b c d 0.5

0.0 300

600 400 500 Wavelength (nm)

700

Figure 5.17 Absorption spectra of AucoreAgshell particles (molar ratio Au:Ag = 1:0.5) following photoexcitation with 532 nm, 30 ps laser pulses: (a) non-irradiated; (b)–(e) Eabs = 0.13, 1.16, 4.6, and 6.7 mJ/pulse [704]. Further details of the experiment are given inTable 5.4, Hodak 2000. Reprinted with permission from J. H. Hodak,A. Henglein, M. Giersig, G. V.Hartland, Laser-induced inter-diffusion in AuAg core-shell nanoparticles. J. Phys. Chem. B.; (Article); 2000; 104(49): 11708-11718. © American Chemical Society (2000), Ref. [704].

TiO2

nhν

TiO2

Au Au

Figure 5.18 Schematic diagram illustrating the fusion of TiO2 /Au nanoparticles at laser irradiation [711]. © American Chemical Society (2001), reprinted with permission from Ref. [711].

Atomic transmutations observed at laser irradiation of suspended particles It is well known that even in low-temperature deuterium plasma, free neutrons are generated – laboratory neutron sources use only some kilovolt of excitation.Thus, at laser processing of materials in heavy or semiheavy water, the generation of neutrons in laser plasma or at bubble collapse is expected. The released neutrons can cause nuclear reactions in the surrounding materials. Also extraordinary high-electric fields near small metal particles at Mie resonance (Section 5.2) may contribute to nuclear reactions. Shafeev et al. [716] report about transmutation of mercury into gold in course of irradiation of mercury suspension in heavy water by picosecond Nd:YAG and Ti:Sapphire laser pulses of energy density of ∼1010 W/cm2 . The supposed nuclear reaction was: 196

Hg + n →

197

Hg + γ,

(5.15)

223

Generation and modification of particles

(a)

(b)

Figure 5.19 TEM images of laser-generated Au networks in water [715]. (a) Preparation within an ice-bath and (b) preparation under the room temperature. The scale bar length corresponds to 50 nm. © Elsevier.

0.9 Absorbance @ 250 nm

0.8 0.7

Nanonetworks

0.6 0.5

Small nanoparticles

0.4 0.3 0.2

1

100

10

Concentration (mM)

Figure 5.20 Typical optical absorption spectra of Pt particles irradiation products after laser excitation of the interband at 355 nm in different SDS concentrations [691]. The arrow indicates the critical micelle concentration of SDS. SDS – sodium dodecyl sulphate (C12 H25 OSO3 Na). © Elsevier.

where γ stands for γ-photon. 197 Hg decays within 2.7 days into 197Au through electron capture from its own K shell: 197

Hg (Z = 80) + e − →

197

Au (Z = 79).

(5.16)

After 4 h of irradiation of an Hg suspension by 350 ps, 1.06 µm laser pulses, up to 13 per cent of mercury was converted into gold.

Table 5.4 Metal colloids prepared or modified by laser irradiation, and related research (solids targets in liquids); av – average size; st – standard deviation; λmax wavelength (in vacuo) of main absorption peak. Lasers or other light sources

Particles size, achieved or after treatment

2-propanol, chloroform, acetone, ethanol, n-hexyl alcohol

Hg-lamp, 100W, up to 30 h

Ba, Ca

Superfluid liquid He (1.6 K)

Au particles, 10 nm, in suspension

Targets

Liquids

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Au particles, 11 nm, in suspension

Aggregated particles

Stable in dark colloids aggregated in course if irradiation in 16 h; at the beginning of the growth Ostwald ripening was observed; coagulation started with formation of particle chains, later particles networks developed

Hasegawa (1991) [717]

Nd:YAG, 1064 and 532 nm, 1 and 0.2 mJ, respectively. 2ω-Nd:YLF,0.2 mJ

Clusters and atoms of Ba and Ca

Laser ablation of metal targets resulted in metal clusters which at further irradiation decomposed into atoms; excitation and emission spectra of the triplet transitions of Ba and Ca in He are presented; growth of tangle thin wires of diameter ∼1 µm was also observed at laser ablation of targets in superfluid He

Fujisaki (1993) [718]

Aqueous solution used for particles preparation by chemical reduction

Ar+ , 0.5W, beam area 1 mm2 , up to 200 min

Aggregated particles

Laser irradiation caused the colloids to aggregate, obviously due to light-enhanced van der Waals forces

Eckstein (1993) [719]

Au film

2-propanol, water, cyclohexane

Ruby, 694 nm, 2.3–27 J/cm2

2–19 nm (Au) 3–4 nm (Ni)

Dependence of suspension absorption spectra on laser fluence presented; λmax = 520 nm (Au)

Fojtik (1993) [720]

Ni film

water + sodium polyacrylate 0.2 mM Calculation of optical absorption spectra for metal colloids, review of physical and chemical properties of small metal particles in solutions

Henglein (1993) [721]

Stable (at least over some months) metal colloids fabricated by ablation in water; SERS spectra of various absorbed on colloids molecules were of high quality; higher pulse energy yield obviously smaller particles; λmax : 399 nm (Ag, water), 414 nm (Ag, methanol), 521 nm (Au, water), 625 nm (Cu, water)

Neddersen (1993) [692]

Ag,Au, Pt, Cu

Water, acetone, methanol

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 10 Hz, 55 mJ

10–50 nm, 20 nm av (Ag)

Irradiation caused full coagulation of colloid in 20 h (in dark stable for several years); first particle chains, then fractal conglomerates formed; optical absorption spectra changes were explained by Ostwald ripening; the possible mechanisms of coagulation were photon neutralization of Ag particles and/or by surface plasmon oscillation-enhanced van der Waals forces; photocoagulation was observed also in case of Zn colloids

Satoh (1994) [722]

Clusters and µm-sized particles

Larger particles were further dissociated by continuing laser irradiation, the dissociation was more effective at shorter wavelengths; absorption and emission spectra of Ca2 , Cu2 ,Ag2 in UV–VIS region are presented

Persson (1995) [723]

Nd:YAG, 532 and 355 nm, pulsed, 10 and 20 Hz, 10–20 mJ

Neutral atoms, clusters, and particles

Emission and absorption spectra and dynamics of neutral atoms, also residing at microscopic He bubbles were investigated

Hui (1995) [724]

Water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 10 Hz, 55 mJ ≈15 min

20 nm mean

Surface of colloids were modified by I− and Br− ; effect of this modification on plasma resonance frequency was small

Sibbald (1996) [725]

Ag particles, 19 nm mode

Aqueous solution of AgNO3 , NaBH4 , and SDS

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 10 ns, 60 mJ/cm2 2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm (less effective)

9 nm mode (15 min irradiation with 355 nm)

Irradiation reduces the particle mean size to less than ≈10 nm and changed ζ-potential from −35 to −50 mV; achieved particles were stable at least one week (no aggregation or precipitation); λmax : 400 nm (before irradiation), 450 nm (after 15 min irradiation with 355 nm light)

Takami (1996) [703]

Ag

He II (1.6 K)

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, pulsed, 10 and 20 Hz, 10–20 mJ

Ag atoms, clusters and particles; AgHe2 -exciplexes

Produced by Nd:YAG-laser Ag particles were further dissociated by XeCl-laser (308 nm, 10 Hz, 10 mJ); linear He-Ag-He-exciplexes, trapped in microcavities were found; formation of AgHe2 -exciplexes was confirmed by ab initio calculations

Persson (1996) [726]

Au colloids, 8 nm

Acetone, ethanol, 2-propanol, chloroform

High-pressure Hg-lamp, 100W with water filter

Ca, Cu,Ag

He II (1.7 K)

Nd:YAG, 532,355, and 266 nm, pulsed, 10 Hz ∼20 mJ

Ag, Mg,Yb,Al, Ga, In

He II (1.7 K)

Ag

(Continued)

Table 5.4

(Continued) Lasers or other light sources

Targets

Liquids

Au particles <10 nm, in suspension

2-propanol

Ag

Water,water + 0.7 mM Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, NaCl,water + 10−5 M 40 ps, 1 Hz, 40 mJ phtalazine

Ag

Water, water + NaCl 0.2–5 mM and NaNO3 (liquids optionally stirred)

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 20 ns, 10 Hz, 10–30 mJ

Eu

He II

Mg, Be

Ag

Particles size, achieved or after treatment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Laser irradiation promotes the coagulation of high-concentration colloids; acetone was detected in irradiated solution, obviously in photochemical process where Au particles get electrons from 2-propanol

Takeuchi (1997) [727]

Colloids prepared in water and NaCl solution were stable at least for a year; prepared in phtalazine solution precipitated within 1 day; SERS-activities of colloids and deposited onto surface particles studied

Procházka (1997) [728]

12.3–14.8 nm av (in water)

Smaller laser fluence yields smaller particles; initially larger particles fragment upon laser irradiation; NaCl additive (but not NaNO3 ) enhances the particles yield and provides smaller size, but causes their aggregation; metalation of a free base porphyrin on laser fabricated particles was faster and more stable in time (at least 10 months) that on chemically produced particles. λmax = 395 nm

Procházka (1997) [729]

Nd:YAG, 532 or 355 nm, pulsed, 10 and 20 Hz, 10–20 mJ

Eu atoms and particles

Results of spectroscopic investigations (LIF) of neutral Eu atoms residing in He bubbles are presented

Hui (1997) [730], (1999) [731]

He II (∼1.6 K)

Nd:YAG?

Mg and Be atoms and particles

Neutral Mg and Be atoms were produced by laser dissociation of laser-ablated metal particles in superfluid He; the LIF spectra of Mg and Be atoms are explained by formation of solid He around the metal atoms

Hui (1998) [732]

Water Water + 10−5 M phtalazine water + 7 × 10−4 –7 × 10−2 M NaCl

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 40 ps, 1 Hz, 40 mJ

18 nm mean 10 nm mean 13–14 nm mean (7 × 10−4 M)

SERS-active colloid/adsorbate systems prepared directly by laser ablation in an adsorbate (phtalazine) solution; colloid-adsorbate (bpy or tppz) films on glass and Cu/C-grids fabricated; λmax = 406 nm (water), 410 nm (phtalazine added), 398 nm (7 × 10−4 M NaCl)

Srnová (1998) [733]

Ar+ -ion, 514 and 488 nm, up to 1.8W, up to 20 h

Ag

Water, methanol, iso-propanol

Nd:YAG, 1064 or 532 nm, 247 and 397 mJ/cm2

16.3–32.9 nm (water), 12.4–17.4 nm (iso-propanol)

Longer laser wavelength and smaller fluence yielded smaller particles; colloids stability: prepared in water – several months, in methanol – 1 day, in iso-propanol – at least 6 months; λmax ≈ 400 nm

Jeon (1998) [734]

CuO powder

2-propanol under anaerobic conditions

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 10 Hz

Cu particles 10–150 nm achieved

Stable colloids (at least over a week) achieved; acetone formed at laser ablation; λmax = 580 nm

Yeh (1999) [735]

Au particles, 10.5–29.4 nm av

Solution used for particles generation by chemical reduction

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, up to 60 mJ, up to 120 min

≈12 nm av independent of starting size

Formed particles were spherical

Kurita (1998) [736]

Ag particles, 40–60 nm

Solution used for particles generation by chemical reduction, under N2

Xe-lamp, 250W, >300 nm filtered Nd:YAG, 355 and 532 nm, ≈18 ps, 2–3 mJ Nd:YAG, 355 nm, ≈6 ns

5–20 nm (355 nm, 18 ps, 10 Hz, 1.5 mJ, 3 min)

Laser irradiation of particles by ps-pulses causes photoexcitation of electrons and this way plasmon absorption to bleach; photoejection of electrons leads to particles fragmentation (see Fig. 5.13); longer wavelength (532 nm instead of 255 nm) causes preferentially the fragmentation of larger or irregularly shaped particles

Kamat (1998) [705]

TNA-capped Au particles

Water + citric acid + sodium citrate

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 18 ps, 1.5 mJ

About 10 nm particles fused during irradiation (532 nm) for 1 min, and fragmented again during 30 min

Fujiwara (1999) [737]

Au particles 5–50 nm

Water + citric acid, agitated

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 Hz, 7 ns, up to 800 mJ/cm2

Non-spherical particles of size 20–50 nm changed in some minutes into spherical particles of size less than 10 nm, obviously due to melting and vaporization; thermal radiation measurements indicated that the particles temperature exceeded the Au melting temperature.; shift of λmax from 531.5 to 517 nm during irradiation

Takami (1999) [702]

Au rods, e.g. ≈10 nm diam., ≈50 nm length, also silica-covered and micellestabilized

Electrolyte solution used for preparation of nanorods

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 6 ns, up to 10 Hz, up to 67.4 mJ/cm2

At 532-nm laser irradiation (SPtrans excitation) causes mainly a rod-to-sphere conversion; at 1064 nm (SPlong excitation) an incomplete photoannealing process was observed resulting in φ-shaped along their bent and twisted forms nanostructures, probably representing an early stage of the rod-to-sphere shape transition; the restructuring of the Au nanorods starts from the centre portion of the particle

Chang (1999) [738]

(Continued)

Table 5.4

(Continued) Lasers or other light sources

Targets

Liquids

Au rods, 8 nm diameter, 31 nm length; and 11 nm diameter, 44 nm length

Electrolyte solution used for preparation of nanorods

Ti:sapphire,800 nm, 100 fs, 1 kHz, up to 1 mJ, spot 25 µm OPO, 800 nm, 7 ns, 10 Hz, up to 20 mJ, spot 25 µm

Au rods, (e.g. 10.2 nm diameter, 28.6 nm length)

Electrolyte solution used for preparation of nanorods

Ti:sapphire, 400 nm, 100 fs, 500 Hz, 20 µJ, spot 100 µm, 10 min

Au, Ag suspensions, 5–100 nm

Water, also with I+ and CN− additives

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 15 ns, 10 Hz

Ag

Water + 0.003–0.1 M SDS (Cn H2n+1 OSO3 Na, n = 8, 10, 12, 16)

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, <90 J/cm2

Ag

Water + 0.003–0.05 M SDS (C12 H25 SO4 Na)

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 Hz, up to 90 mJ,spot 1– 3 mm

heptane + dodecanethiol Ag

Water

Particles size, achieved or after treatment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

At moderate energies (e.g. 40 µJ), the femtosecond irradiation melts the nanorods to near-spherical particles of comparable volumes while the nanosecond pulses fragment them to smaller near-spherical particles; at high energies (mJ), fragmentation is also observed for the femtosecond irradiation; a mechanism involving the rate of energy deposition as compared to the rate of electron–phonon and phonon–phonon relaxation processes is proposed to determine the final fate of the laser-exposed nanorods, that is, melting or fragmentation

Link (1999) [739]

Pump-probe investigations; rods transformation to spheres is a photothermal process, transformation time is at least 30–35 ps, independent of the power used (5–20 µJ) or the nanorod aspect ratio (1.9–3.7)

Link (1999) [740]

Optical absorbance studies, transient grating experiments; the observations support the particles size reduction mechanism through metal ions formation; size dependent reactivity was explained by longer heating time of large particles and that they maintain their heated state longer

McGrath (1999) [741]

≈10 nm

Nearly spherical particles formed; abundance and stability was greatest at 0.01 M SDS (n = 12); particles size can be controlled in 7–15 nm by SDS concentration; SDS with n ≥ 12 are more favourable for providing stable particles; λmax = 400 nm

Mafuné (2000) [697]

5.3–16.2 nm average (90 mJ, 0.05–0.003 M SDS)

Dependences of colloid parameters on process parameters studied; less particles were produced in heptane solution; obviously particles form within a single laser shot; theory for particle maximum radius presented; in pure water, the particles continue to grow until precipitate within a day

Mafuné (2000) [698]

Dependence of colloid absorbance spectra on laser wavelength, fluence, and focusing studies; particle generation thresholds: 0.5 J/cm2 (355 nm), 0.8 J/cm2 (532 nm)

Tsuji (2000) [742]

15.9 nm av, mostly spherical particles

5–30 nm Nd:YAG, 355, 532, and 1064 nm, 5–9 ns, 10 Hz, up to 1.4 J/cm2

Au particles, 3.2 nm av, DT-passivated

Cyclohexane, stirred

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 6–8 ns, 10 Hz, up to 360 mJ, beam size ≈0.4 cm2 , up to 45 min

20 nm av, some 200 nm

Growth of particles is accelerated at large sizes, due to more effective absorption of 1064 nm light

Niidome (2000) [743]

Rh6G-capped Au nanoparticles ≈2 nm

Aqueous solution used for particles preparation, stirred

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, ≈18 ps, 4 mJ, 10 Hz, 5–30 min

5–20 nm

Fusion of particles was explained by formation of particle clusters; the energy gained from the absorbed photons is dispersed as excess heat into the neighbouring particles, thus the energy loss per particle in clusters is lower of separate particles

Chandrasekharan (2000) [712]

Cd and Cu particles in solution

Aqueous solution containing gelatine

Nd:YAG, 355 and 532 nm, 35 ps, 10 Hz, unfocused, 8 mJ/cm2

Particles were prepared by γ-radiolysis; the particles underwent shape change and fragmentation in course of laser irradiation; transient absorption spectra of Cu particles on ps-scale presented

Kapoor (2000) [744]

Au Ag core-shell particles, both Au and Ag core

Aqueous solution used for particles preparation

532 nm, 5 ns, beam diameter 5 mm 532 nm, 30 ps, 10 Hz, beam diameter 4 mm

Core-shell particles were prepared by radiation chemistry (60 Co source), core size ≈10–15 nm, various shell thickness; alloying and spherical particles formation occurred at 5–6 mJ/pulse and fracturing at >10 mJ/ pulse for 5 ns pulses; in case of 30 ps pulses at 1 and 4 mJ/pulse, correspondingly; dissipation of energy absorbed in 75 nm particles occurs in 100–200 ps; melting of particles was observed to start at much lower temperatures than the expected melting point (is depending on particle size); at used fluences, the complete alloying of particles needs hundreds of laser pulses

Hodak (2000) [704]

Ag nanorods 44/11 nm

Tetraalkylammonium bromide salts solution

T:sapphire, 800 nm, 100 fs, 1 mJ, 0.2 mJ/cm2 – 10.2 J/cm2 OPO, 800 nm, 7 ns, 0.64–16.7 J/cm2

Laser irradiation caused the nanorods to melt into spherical and φ-shaped particles; for fs-pulses, the energy threshold for particle melting was found 100 times lower as for ns-pulses; fs-pulses provide more homogeneous (in sense particles size and shape) colloidal solution; at ns-pulse irradiation much φ-shaped particles formed at low fluences (Figs 5.14 and 5.16)

Link (2000) [706]

(Continued)

Table 5.4

(Continued)

Targets

Liquids

Au nanorods

Aqueous solution used for particles preparation

Au nanorods, 44/11 nm (average length/diameter)

Lasers or other light sources

Particles size, achieved or after treatment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

T:sapphire, 800 nm, 100 fs, 1 mJ/cm2 OPO, 800 nm, 7 ns, 250 mJ/cm2

Laser irradiation below the melting threshold induces point and line defects, mostly (multiple) twins and stacking faults, which are the precursor that drives the nanorods to convert their {110} facets into the more stable {100} and {111} facets and hence minimize their surface energy, followed by surface reconstruction and diffusion, leading through φ-shaped particles to spheres (Fig. 5.15)

Link (2000) [707]

Aqueous solution used for particles preparation

T:sapphire, 410 and 820 nm, 100 fs, 1 mJ/cm2 , up to 30 µJ

As estimated from the changes in SPR longitudinal band optical absorption (at 800 nm), energy for melting a single Au nanorod was in average 60 fJ at both laser wavelengths

Link (2001) [745]

Ni, Cu, Nb

Ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, 2-ethoxy-ethanol

CO2 , 10.64 µm, CW Nd:YAG, 1.064 µm, pulsed

The liquids contained AgNO3 and Ni(NO3 )2 – precursors for Ni and Cu; the power of laser beams was 150–1100W, beam diameter 3 and 6 mm, interaction time 1–3 min; spherical pure Ag particles, but porous dual phase Ni and Ni oxide particles were achieved

Poondi (2000) [746]

Ag Au core-shell particles

Aqueous stirred solution of salts used at particle synthesis

532 nm, 5 ns, 10 Hz, up to 12.8 mJ; 532 nm, 30 ps, 10 Hz, up to 6.7 mJ

Laser heating transformed core-shell particles (up to ≈60 nm in size) after some pulses into homogeneous alloyed particles; the thresholds for alloying and fragmentation are many times lower for 30 ps pulses (1 and 4 mJ) than for 5 ns pulses (5–6 and 12 mJ)

Hodak (2000) [704]

Au and Ag colloids

Aqueous solution used at particle synthesis

532 nm, 0.245 J, up to 25 min

Average size of starting particles was Au: 13.7 nm, Ag: 16.8 nm; at beginning of irradiation (at 5 min) temporarily colloid networks formed

Chen (2001) [747]

Au

Water

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 Hz, 5 min

Cross-linked networked nanowires and twisted nanorods formed, diameter of wires 6 nm, structure fcc-polycrystalline Au; wires prepared at 0◦ C are thinner; laser melting at 1064 nm affected selectively the twisted nanorods with aspect ratio of 6 (burning a hole into distribution histogram)

Chen (2001) [715]

1–5 nm (Ag) and 0.4–1.2 nm (Ni Ni oxide) spherical particles;Ag Ni nanotubes

≈5 nm av dependent on metals ratio

Au

Water + SDS, 0.1–10 mM

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 10 ns, 80 mJ, <90 J/cm2

4.6–14.4 nm av

Particles generation threshold at 532 nm was 7.2 mJ/ pulse; irradiation of produced by 1064 nm particles by 532 nm reduced their size down 5 nm; λmax = 517 nm

Mafuné (2001) [675]

Au colloids, ≈8 nm av, prepared by 1064 nm laser ablation

Water + SDS, 10 mM

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 10 Hz, up to 1.05 J/cm2

4.1–6.2 nm av (840–280 mJ/cm2 )

At laser irradiation, the particle size was found to approach exponentially a stable size, which was laser fluence dependent; a theory relating the optical absorbance to particle average diameter, presented (Eq. (5.7))

Mafuné (2001) [683]

Ag, Cu

Stirred water

Nd:YAG, 355, 532, and 1064 nm, 5–9 ns, 10 Hz, 0.1–1 J/cm2

12 nm av (Ag, 532 nm), 31 nm (Ag, 1064 nm)

Colloid absorbance dependence on laser wavelength, fluence, and target relative position studied; λmax ≈ 400 nm (Ag), ≈220 nm (Cu)

Tsuji (2001) [687]

Pt,Tl particles, 25 av nm (Pt)

Water + gelatine

Nd:YAG, 355 and 532 nm, 35 ps, 10 Hz, unfocused, 6–10 mJ/cm2

15 nm av (Pt)

Particles were prepared by γ-radiolysis; the particles underwent shape transformation and fragmentation in course of laser irradiation

Kapoor (2001) [748]

Ag,Au

Water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 6 ns, 10 Hz, 5–40 mJ

15 nm av (Ag), 18 nm av (Au)

Benzenethiol SERS spectra in Au and Ag colloids recorded; the ablated surface of Ag proved to be an efficient SERS-active substrate; λmax = 395 nm (Ag), 520 nm (Au)

Lee (2001) [749]

Ag,Au

Water, stirred or flowing

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 15 kHz, spot 10 µm, up to 32 J/cm2

Disk-shaped particles

At 10–20 J/cm2 disk-shaped particles achieved, average diameters 20 nm (Au), 60 nm (Ag), thickness some nm; at 32 J/cm2 ‘rosary’ ensembles of Au particles formed

Simakin (2001) [750]

Ag nanoparticles, 8 nm av

Aqueous solution used for particle synthesis

Fluorescent lamp, 45W, 350–700 nm, 70 h

Nanoprisms, thickness 15.6 nm, side 10–60 nm

Spherical nanoparticles of 8 nm size transformed into smaller particles which grew into nanoprisms; optical absorption spectrum calculated by finite element solution of Maxwell equations

Jin (2001) [708]

Au core – Ag shell particles, 23.4 nm

Aqueous solution of salts used for particle synthesis

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 5 ns, 10 Hz, 15–96 J/cm2

Alloying

Low fluences cause alloying of the particles while high fluences cause removal of silver layer due to photo-oxidation; λmax = 510 nm (96 mJ/cm2 ), 455 nm (16 mJ/cm2 )

Abid (2001) [751]

(Continued)

Table 5.4

(Continued)

Targets

Liquids

Au Pd and Ag Pd colloid mixtures

Aqueous solution used at particle synthesis, stirred

Lasers or other light sources

Particles size, achieved or after treatment

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, ≈4 nm (AuPd), ≈6 nm 5 ns, 10 Hz, 0.245 J, (AgPd), metal ratio beam diameter dependent 7.5 mm,up to 55 min

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Average size of starting particles was Au: 13.7 nm, Ag: 16.8 nm, Pd: 4.8 nm; at laser irradiation mostly spherical AuPd respectively AgPd alloy nanoparticles formed

Chen (2002) [752]

Review of metal nanoparticles photophysical and photochemical properties; thereby of laser-induced fragmentation and fusion of Au,Ag, andTiO2 particles

Kamat (2002) [689]

Au,Ag,Ti (scanned targets)

Water (for Au and Ag), ethanol, isobutanol (for Ti)

Cu-vapour, 510.5 nm, 20 ns, 15 kHz, spot 50 µm, 1–4 J/cm2

<80 nm (Au), 60 nm av (Ag), 35 nm av (Ti)

At ablation of Ti in water also TiO1.04 formed and at ablation in dichloroethane also TiC formed; further irradiation of Au particles reduced their size and changed their shape to flat disks;Au colloids coagulated in 30 days; λmax = 524 nm (Au), 405 nm (Ag)

Dolgaev (2002) [753]

Au particles 8 nm av in SDS soln.

Water + SDS (up to 0.05 M)

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 Hz, 0.32–1.2 J/cm2

3.4 nm (9 × 10−4 M SDS); 1.7 nm (0.05 M SDS)

Laser fragmentation of nanoparticles: it was demonstrated, that particle size can be controlled in range 1.7–5.5 nm by laser fluence and SDS concentration; λmax = 520 nm

Mafuné (2002) [754]

Au particles 8 nm av in SDS solution.

Water + SDS (up to 0.05 M)

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 Hz, up to 1 J/cm2

3.4 nm (9 × 10−4 M SDS); 1.7 nm (0.05 M SDS)

Within 2 h after laser fragmentation the particles grow again due to cluster attachment to nanoparticles and mutual aggregation; the growth depends crucially on SDS concentration

Mafuné (2002) [682]

Ag

Water

Nd:YAG, 355 and 532 nm, 10 Hz, up to 130 mJ

3530 nm av as ablated; 63 nm av at continued irradiation, then size rises again)

As-ablated particles were of irregular size and amorphous; further irradiation of suspension first lowers the particles size, but then the size rises again due to particles coagulation; critical lower size (coagulation onset) for Ag clusters in water was ≈50 nm; λmax = 399–393 nm (as ablated); 393–404 nm (during irradiation of suspension)

Brause (2002) [676]

Au,Ag

Water, ethanol, chloroform, n-heptane

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 5 ns, 10 Hz, 0.2–1 J/cm2

12 nm av (Au in ethanol), 20 nm av (Ag)

XPS studies revealed formation of Au Cl compounds at ablation in chloroform; solid films with embedded Au particles fabricated with SOG, PMMA, and PS; λmax = 525 nm (Au, water), 390 nm (Ag, water)

Compagnini (2002) [755]

Ag

Water + NaCl, up to 30 mM

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 5 ns, 10 Hz, spot 1 mm, 6.4 J/cm2 Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 7 ns

26.4 nm av (1064 nm, 5 mM NaCl)

5 mM NaCl provides highest efficiency of particles production; NaCl additive reduces the stability of colloids; postirradiation by 355 nm unfocused light reduced the particle size; λmax = 400 nm

Bae (2002) [701]

Ag

Stirred water

Nd:YAG, 1064, 532, 255 nm, 12 mJ, 36 J/cm2

29 nm → 12 nm (λ = 1064 → 355 nm)

Colloids prepared by shorter wavelength were smaller, obviously due to fragmentation of particles induced by self-absorption; λmax ≈ 400 nm

Tsuji (2002) [756]

Au (20 nm av) and Pt particles (6 nm av)

Stirred water

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 Hz, spot 0.023 mm2 , 2.2 J/cm2

Particles were prepared by 1064 nm laser ablation in pure water (2.4 J/cm2 ); as result of Au Pt colloid mixture laser irradiation nanowebs formation was observed: Pt particles were soldered together by Au joints

Mafuné (2003) [757]

Au particles, 20.7 nm av

Water, water + SDS, SOS, or SDBS, stirred

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 Hz, spot 0.023 mm2 , up to 5 J/cm2

≈2 nm av (5 J/cm2 , 3 × 10−4 SDS)

Particles were prepared by 1064 nm laser ablation in pure water (2.5 J/cm2 ); at irradiation with 532 nm, 4.3 J/cm2 , nanonetworks (length up to 500 nm) form at SDS concentration less than 4 × 10−5 M; at higher SDS concentration the particles were fragmented; nanoparticles are size reduced in a more concentrated SDS solution under irradiation of a less intense laser, whereas nanonetworks are formed in a less concentrated SDS solution under irradiation of a more intense laser

Mafuné (2003) [758]

Pt

Water, water + SDS (0.1 M)

Nd:YAG, 1064, 532 nm, 10 Hz, up to 3 J/cm2

6.2 nm av (water), 3 nm av (water + 0.01 M SDS)

Particle generation threshold 1 J/cm2 ; stable colloids in SDS solution, in pure water the half-life >600 days (particles grow slowly); greatest abundance at 0.01 M SDS and colloid stability is due to charging of the particles

Mafuné (2003) [699]

Ag

Water

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 120 fs, 10 Hz, 4 mJ, 30 min OPO, 800 nm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, 4 mJ, 30 min

41 nm mean (fs-laser), 27 nm mean (ns-laser)

Using fs-laser mostly non-spherical particles, in case of ns-laser spherical; formation efficiency using fs-laser much lower than in case of ns-laser; λmax ≈ 400 nm

Tsuji (2003) [495]

Ag colloids, 10–100 nm

Stirred water

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 5 kHz, 4 mJ, 10 min

Particle fragmentation and nanowire formation was observed; length of wires up to 1 µm; wires had irregular shape; formation of wires was obviously possible due to absence of foreign substances in water

Tsuji (2003) [714]

A short review (1 p.) of the work by Tsuji et al.

Tsuji (2003) [713] (Continued)

Table 5.4

(Continued) Lasers or other light sources

Particles size, achieved or after treatment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Chloroform, chloroform + CTAB (up to 0.5 M)

Nd:YAG, 50 Hz, 5–15 mJ, 10 min

≈30 nm av (in pure chloroform, by dynamic light scattering)

λmax = 565 nm (in pure chloroform); in CTAB solutions (10−4 –0.5 M) no particles were formed but different gold complexes; obviously immediately after ablation gold ions are formed

Mortier (2003) [759]

Au

Linear alkanes having 5–10 carbon atoms

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 5 ns, 10 Hz, up to 200 J/cm2

8 nm av (n-hexane, 1 J/cm2 )

λmax = 640 → 790 (10 → 5 carbon atoms in the alkane chain); at fluences >5 J/cm2 elongated particles were formed with aspect ratios 4.2–6.5 (at 10–5 carbon atoms in alkane chain)

Compagnini (2003) [760], (2004) [761]

Au

Water, water + cyclodextrines (α,β,γ-CD) 0.1–10 mM

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 110 fs, 1 kHz, 0.8 mJ

2.1–2.3 nm av (10 mM β-CD)

Colloids fabricated in pure water continued to grow and started to precipitate in some days; most small and stable (at least 45 days) colloids were achieved at ablation in 10 mM β-CD solution

Kabashin (2003) [762, 763]

Au

Water in a rotating vessel

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 110 fs, 1 kHz, 60–1000 J/cm2

4 nm av (60 J/cm2 ), rises to 125 av (1000 J/cm2 )

Particle formation threshold in water 5 times larger than in vacuum; size distribution function may be decomposed into two Gaussian distributions, pointing to two different mechanisms

Kabashin (2003) [496], (2004) [764]

Ag,Au

Water, ethanol (also with PVP additive), acetone, moving cuvette 1 mm/s

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 15 kHz, up to 35 J/cm2

60 nm maximum abundance (Ag in water)

In water: as fabricated Ag particles were disk shaped and Au particles elongated; at further irradiation (35 J/cm2 ) of the colloid Au particles changed to disk-shaped dav = 20 nm; stability time of Au particles ≈30 days; in acetone and ethanol somewhat smaller and spherical particles were achieved; PVP addition to ethanol reduced the average size down to ≈4 nm; particles generation rate 1012 particle/(cm3 h); theory of optical absorption spectrum evolution presented (only in 2003 publications)

Bozon-Verduraz (2003) [673], Simakin (2003) [765], (2004) [766]

Mixture of Au and Ag colloids

Water, ethanol, ethanol + PVP 0.1 g/l

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 15 kHz, 30–50 µm spot, 9–9.4 J/cm2

Au-Ag-alloy particles formed, ≈10 nm av

Hybrid Au-Ag particles were converted to alloyed particles; PVP 0.1 g/l enhances the alloying rate, but 0.5 g/l inhibits it (the experimental conditions in Simakin (2004) [766] and Izgaliev (2004) [767] were somewhat different)

Simakin (2003) [765], (2004) [766], Izgaliev (2004) [767]

Targets

Liquids

Au

Ag foil, chemical prepared hydrosol

Stirred water under air or Ar, chloroform

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 ns, 6 ns, 10 Hz

30 nm av (air, 1064 nm), 49 nm av (Ar, 1064 nm), 6 nm av in chloroform

After fragmentation first by 1064 nm and thereafter by 532 nm the average diameter was reduced about 2 times; air (dissolved atmospheric gases) contributes to reduction of particle size, both at generation and at fragmentation; irradiation of chemical prepcipitate particles by 532 nm reduced their average size from 45 to 15 nm; photodissolution of Ag may be a reason for particle size reduction

Pfleger (2003) [768]

Co

Water in a rotating vessel

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 7 ns, 10 Hz, up to 60 min

17 nm av

Spherical particles formed; 1064 nm is more efficient than 532 nm for particle generation; coercitivity of particles was 230 Oe, much more that of bulk cobalt, obviously due to antiferromagnetic cobalt oxide core

Chen (2003) [769]

Au particles, photo- and chemically reduced

Solutions where the particles were prepared

XeCl, 308 nm, up to 260 mJ/cm2

The size of photoreduced particles was 8.3–17.7 nm av, fluence dependent), size of chemically prepared ones was 36.1 nm av; laser irradiation of chemically prepared particles reduced their size to 7.5–13.3 nm (260–75 mJ/cm2 ); a semi-quantitative theory of laser size reduction presented (Eqs (5.9)–(5.13))

Inasawa (2003) [696]

Ag particles, 4.8 nm av

Solutions where the particles were prepared

Xe-lamp, 150W, 550 nm pass filtered, beam power <0.2W, 50 h

Triangular nanoprisms, maximum abundances at 70 and 150 nm, thickness 9.8 nm (constant)

At irradiation spherical particles transformed into nanoprisms having bimodal size distribution; by dual-beam irradiation by two different wavelength beams, unimode growth was achieved: the size was controlled in range 30–120 nm by the wavelengths ratio, first wavelength corresponding to dipole plasmon resonance and the second to quadrupole plasmon resonance; obviously exciting quadrupole plasmon mode inhibits the bimodal growth

Jin (2003) [709]

Ag particles

Solutions where the particles were prepared

Fluorescent tube, 20W, 350–700 nm, 1h

Various shapes, size ≈80 nm

Due to irradiation the spherical particles grew into various shape and size particles, dependent of light wavelength (various filters were used): cubes, octaheders, tetraheders, prisms; all prisms had the same thickness 7 nm

Callegari (2003) [770]

Ag,Au, Si

Water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 10 ns, 18 and 36 J/cm2

Time-resolved imaging of laser ablation process; in first µs a vertical jet 10 km/s observed; bubble growth velocity 400 m/s; bubble lifetime 200 µs (18 J/cm2 ), 300 µs (36 J/cm2 )

Tsuji (2004) [672]

(Continued)

Table 5.4

(Continued)

Targets

Liquids

Lasers or other light sources

Particles size, achieved or after treatment

Pt particles, 6 nm av

Water + SDS or SHS, stirred, 278 K

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, spot 0.03 cm2 , ≈3.3 J/cm2

Au,Ag

Water and ethanol, also with PVP additive (0.1 g/l)

Cu, CuZn (60–40%)

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

≈1.5 nm av (0.1 M SDS)

At low surfactant concentrations (
Mafuné (2004) [691]

Ti:sapphire, 810 nm, 120 fs, 1 kHz, 0.5 mJ, spot 0.1 mm

9–16 nm max (Au), 4.6–6.4 nm max (Ag)

Second harmonic (405 nm) generation was observed at ablation of Ag due to light interaction with Ag particles; obviously Ag particles cause the generation of SH, and SH performs the fragmentation of particles due to SPR

Shafeev (2004) [771]

Water, ethanol (95%), acetone, diethylene glycole

Cu-vapour, 511 nm, 20 ns, 7.5 kHz, ≈30 J/cm2 Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 130 ns, 1–5 Hz, 200 J/cm2

5–10 nm (Cu in ethanol), 20–60 nm (CuZn in ethanol)

In water no particles after laser ablation were found; the colloids in acetone and ethanol have Cu plasma resonance peak at 580 nm, in acetone Cu particles surrounded by glassy carbon were achieved; irradiation of CuZn in water yielded particles containing besides CuZn also metal oxides and hydroxides, in ethanol core-shell particles were formed with CuZn core; at further irradiation of CuZn particles Zn was removed

Kazakevich (2004) [772]

Ag

Water, ethanol

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 15 kHz, up to 34 J/cm2

Achieved Ag particles obviously had oxide shells, ensuring the stability of colloid solution; nonlinear optical properties of achieved colloids studied at wavelength 532 nm, ti 25 ns; nonlinear optical absorption of aqueous colloids changes in 48 h to nonlinear optical transmission

Karavanskii (2004) [773]

Ag

Stirred ethylene glycol (EG), water, or ethanol

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 9 ns, 10 Hz, 20 J/cm2 , up to 30 min

As fabricated particles were of various shaped (rods, spheres, elliptical, etc.), after sedimentation for 0.5 months mostly spherical particles remained in solution; third-order susceptibility of colloid solution estimated form Z-scan measurements was |χ(3) | ≈ 5 × 10−8 esu; nonlinear refractive index 3 × 10−13 cm2 /W, nonlinear absorption coefficient −1.5 × 10−9 cm/W (at 397.5 nm, 1.2 ps)

Ganeev (2004) [774], (2005) [775]

4–400 nm (as fabricated in EG), 5–10 nm (after 0.5 month)

Ag, rotating

Water

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 10 Hz, up to 340 mJ/cm2

4.2 nm av (at spot size 0.7 mm)

Laser light spot size influence in range 0.6–1.3 mm studied; small spot sizes provide stable over months colloids

Pyatenko (2004) [685]

Au

Alkanes from pentane to decane, pure and with DDT additive (up to tens of mM)

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 5 ns, 10 Hz, up to 30 J/cm2 , 5 min

Down to 2 av (in decane with DDT, 1 J/cm2 ), 5 nm av in pure decane, 1 J/cm2

Using decane with DDT additive, mostly spherical single crystalline and stable over several weeks colloids achieved; λmax = 540 nm (pure n-decane) → 507 nm (+0.01 M DDT) (1 J/cm2 ); at laser fluence 30 J/cm2 , larger particles were achieved

Compagnini (2004) [776]

Ag

Water + SDS (70 mM)

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 350 mJ

5 nm av

Spherical nanoparticles achieved, λmax of the colloidal solution absorption 405 nm; measured by Kretschmann type SPR sensor dielectric constant of the colloidal solution was 1.8167 and refractive index 1.3478; dielectric constant decreases with increasing Ag nanoparticle concentration (approximate formula given)

Chen (2004) [777]

Co

Water, ethanol, (rotating vessel)

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 7 ns, 10 Hz, up to 30 J/cm2

18.7 nm av (water, 532 nm), 11.8 nm av (ethanol, 532 nm)

Spherical particles achieved; 532 nm is more effective for particles production than 1064 nm; besides Co, also CoO phase found by XRD; coercivity 100 Oe (less than of bulk Co); is ethanol less particles were formed, obviously due to lower threshold of bubbles generation

Chen (2004) [778]

Co, CoO, and Co3 O4 powder suspensions

Water and hexane, stirred

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 10 Hz, 30 mJ, 60 min

In water, Co3 O4 nanoparticles were produced from all materials; in hexane, Co nanoparticles were produced from Co3 O4 and Co, while CoO particles were dominantly produced from CoO

Tsuji (2005) [779]

Ag

Water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 10 ns, 10 Hz, 38 J/cm2 , 10 min

Spherical Ag particles were produced by 1064 nm laser ablation of Ag plate; additional irradiation of colloids (355 nm, 4–12 mJ/pulse, 10 min) reduced particles size and caused formation of Ag wires and sheets; λmax = 410–420 nm (Ag colloids)

Tsuji (2005) [686]

Ag colloid, 20 nm av, prepared by laser ablation

Water

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, non-focused, 50–150 mJ/cm2 , 10 min

At higher fluences >150 mJ/cm2 , laser irradiation of Ag colloid caused the particles fragmentation and formation of Ag wires and sheets, probably due to the fusion of particles; at lower fluences, 50–100 mJ/cm2 , particles fragmentation and formation of crystalline nanoprisms and nanorods were observed, cf. Jin 2003 [709]

Tsuji (2005) [780]

30 nm av (after ablation), down to 14 nm av (after additional irradiation 12 mJ/p)

(Continued)

Table 5.4

(Continued) Lasers or other light sources

Particles size, achieved or after treatment

Water, rotating vessel

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 120 fs, 1 kHz, spot 6 µm, 880 J/cm2 at waist

Zr57V35.8 Fe7.2 , sintered, rotating 12/min

Ethanol

Ag, Cu

Targets

Liquids

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Au

20 nm (main peak), 60 nm (second peak); focal point on surface

Bimodal particle size distribution function; sound level, plasma emission intensity and removed mass were largest at focal point ≈0.4 mm above the target surface, probably due to self-focusing; at high fluences obviously plasma heats/melts the target and subsequent bubble collapse ejects molten material from the surface; λmax = 523–530 nm

Sylvestre (2005) [700]

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, 100–300 mJ, up to 20.3 J/cm2

71–110 nm av, log-normal distribution

Achieved ZrVFe powder contained 10% more Zr than the target; smallest particles (71 nm av) were formed at highest laser fluence (20.3 J/cm2 ); the crystallographic structure of generated particles was the same that of the starting material

Kil (2005) [781]

Water, acetone

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 10 Hz, 50 mJ, up to 5 J/cm2 , 0.5–5 GW/cm2

≈20 nm av (Ag, acetone, single pulse 1064 nm), ≈10 nm av (two shifted pulses)

Single or two shifted in time (1–30 µs) laser pulses, greatest Ag particles production efficiency (2–3 times) and smallest particles size at shift 5–10 µs; postirradiation of Ag colloids by 532 nm, 0.35 J/cm2 caused both fragmentation and growth of particles; Ag colloid in water stable some days, in acetone at least several months; for Cu colloids only optical extinction spectra presented

Burakov (2005) [782]

Ag colloids 10–30 nm

Solution where the particles were fabricated, including gelatine as surfactant

Nd:YAG, 266 and 532 nm, 15 ns, 10 Hz, up to 0.5 J/cm2 Ti:sapphire,400 nm, up to 0.1 J/cm2

Particles fragmentation and formation of right-angled aggregates observed, 1400–1500 nm in size, consisting of small Ag particles

Tarasenko (2005) [783]

Ag

Acetone

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 10 Hz, 50 mJ, 0.5–5 GW/cm2

15–50 nm as prepared by 1064 nm, by 532 nm agglomerates of disc-like particles d > 50 nm formed

Studies of postirradiation of achieved colloids by 266, 532, 400, and 800 nm laser light for 5 min at fluences 0.1, 0.5, 0.1, and 0.6 J/cm2 correspondingly; size reduction of single particles and transformation of nanodisc agglomerates to nanowire agglomerates observed; optical absorption spectra for all achieved colloids presented and discussed

Tarasenko (2005) [784]

Au

Water

Nd:YAG, 266 nm (5–40 J/cm2 ) and 532 nm (10–250 J/cm2 ), 10 ns, 10 Hz

15 nm av (532 nm, 95 J/cm2 ), ≈7 nm av (266 nm, 16 J/cm2 )

At subsequent irradiation with 532 nm light, 0.3 J/cm2 , both particles fragmentation and growth/chains formation was observed

Tarasenko (2006) [785]

Ag

Water, water + NaCl, KCl, and MgCl2 , 0.2 mM

Nd:YAG 1064 nm, 10 Hz, 36 J/cm2 , 10 min

10–100 nm, spherical (as ablated in water)

Irradiation of achieved colloid by 355 and 532 nm, 6 ns, 50 mJ/cm2 laser light or by fluorescent lamp light in 0.2 mM NaCl solution yielded Ag crystals of prismatic, rod a.o. shape; their growth was explained by photo-oxidation of Ag particles with twin planes by Cl− -ions and following photo-reduction of silver ions, although Ag crystals were found also at irradiation of colloids in pure water

Tsuji (2006) [786]

Inconel 600, 316L

Water

Nd:YAG, 12 ns, 4 Hz, 0.8 J, spot 1 mm, 100 J/cm2 , scanned beam

∼60 nm, spherical

Spherical nanoparticles formation with diameter of ∼60 nm was observed during laser shock peening of the material

Bugayev (2006) [419]

Hg suspensions (dispersed ultrasonically)

D2 O (RT or frozen, −10 ◦ C)

Cu-vapour, 510 and 578 nm Ti:sapphire, 810 or 405 nm Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 90 ps Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 350 ps

10 nm, Hg →Au transmutation observed

Laser beam parameters: (i) CVL: 20–30 ns, 10 kHz, 100 µJ, 2 × 108 W/cm2 ; (ii) Ti:sapphire: 120 fs, 1 kHz, 900 µJ (at 810 nm), 2 × 1012 W/cm2 ; (iii) Nd:YAG: 90 ps, 40 mJ, 10 Hz, 1013 W/cm2 ; (iv) Nd:YAG: 350 ps, 350 µJ, 300 Hz, 1010 W/cm2 ; transmutation of Hg into Au, obviously due to the generation of thermal neutrons during laser exposure was observed; using Hg of natural isotopic composition, the conversion of Hg into Au is close to the content of 196 Hg (0.15%). In case of 196 Hg-enriched (52%) Hg, the conversion amounts to 13% (350 ps Nd:YAG-laser pulses, 4 h)

Shafeev (2006) [716]

Abbreviations: SDS – sodium dodecyl sulfate (C12 H25 OSO3 Na) SHS – sodium hexadecyl sulphate (C16 H33 NaSO4 ) SDBS – n-dodecylbenzene sulfonate (C12 H25 C6 H4 SO3 Na) SOS – sodium n-octyl sulfonate (C8 H17 SO3 Na) PVP – polyvinylpyrrolidone DT, DDT – dodecanethiol [CH3 (CH2 )11 SH] CD – cyclodextrines bpy – 2,2 -bipyridine tppz – 2,3,5,6-tetrakis(2’-pyridyl)pyrazine TNA – thionicotinamide SOG – spin on glass PMMA – polymethylmetacrylate PS – polystyrene CTAB – cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide), C19 H42 BrN Rh6G – Rhodamine 6G CMC – critical micelle concentration LIF – laser-induced fluorescence CVL – copper vapour laser

240

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

5.5 Inorganic Compound Particles Inorganic nanoparticles (Fig. 5.21) are efficient in catalysis and sensors due to their large surface/bulk ratio (TiO2 , SnO2 ). They may be useful also as luminophores (Eu2 O3 ), semiconducting quantum dots (ZnSe, CdSe) and hard, high-temperature conductivity materials (BN). Table 5.7 gives an overview of the related experimental research up to the end of 2006. Laser ablation of zinc and some selenide and oxide materials in water has resulted in growth of differently shaped nanostructures in the ablation zone (Figs 5.22–5.25).There is a strong evidence that the process proceeds through formation of a water solution of the starting or intermediate (ZnO) materials. High temperatures generated by laser are known to enhance the dissolution of many solids in water (Table 7.4). The growth is most intense at the bottom of an ablation groove, obviously because both temperature and solute concentration remain high there for a sufficient time. The growth obviously occurs after the laser pulse, else the fragile structures would be broken by laser- induced shock and flow. At ablation of same or similar materials in air, no growth of such structures has been observed. In comparison with hydrothermal growth under static conditions (Table 5.5) the laser-induced growth is faster by many orders of magnitude.

5.5.1 Hydrothermal growth It is probable that the growth of nanorods and nanoplatelets in laser ablation zone in water occurs via an hydrothermal route: the solid starting material dissolves in laser-heated water and the solute crystallizes thereafter

200 nm

Figure 5.21 The TEM morphologies of the prepared by laser ablation c-BN nanocrystals with diameters of 30–80 nm [787]. Target: h-BN, ambient: acetone; laser: 532 nm, 10 ns. © Elsevier.

1 µm

Figure 5.22 ZnO columnar single crystals, 500–600 nm long and 200 nm wide, formed by pulsed laser ablation of Zn in deionized water at 80◦ C [788]. © Elsevier.

241

Generation and modification of particles

Figure 5.23 SEM image of the ablation crater and ZnSe nanowires. Liquid: water; laser: 800 nm, 150 fs, 220 µJ, 2000 pulses (courtesy by Tianqing Jia, The Institute for Solid State Physics, The University of Tokyo, Japan; and State Key Laboratory of Optoelectronic Materials and Technologies, Zhongshan University, China. Read more in the article by Jia et al. [518].

2 µm (a) Zinc hydroxide layers DS molecules layers

.8

38

Å

26.52 Å

34.5° (b)

Figure 5.24 TEM image and SAED pattern (a) of organic/inorganic nanocomposite produced by laser ablation of Zn target in 0.01 M SDS solution at 100 mJ/pulse [789]. The drawing (b) shows the schematic structure of model of the nanocomposite. Laser: 355 nm, 5–7 ns. SAED – selected area electron diffraction; SDS – sodium dodecyl sulphate (C12 H25 OSO3 Na). © The Laser Society of Japan, reproduced with permission from Ref. [789].

Figure 5.25 PZT platelets grown at laser ablation of PZT ceramics (Pz 26, Ferroperm A/S) under water [790]. Laser: Nd:YAG, 1.064 µm, 180 ns, 1000 Hz; spot diameter about 50 µm, fluence 59 J/cm2 (0.6 GW/cm2 ) scanning speed 0.16 mm/s, number of passes – 4.

242

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

Table 5.5

Hydrothermally fabricated single crystalline platelets (conventional hydrothermal processes).

Material synthesized

Reactants

Reaction time and temperature

Size of platelets

Reference

PbTiO3

H2 O,TiO2 , KOH Pb(CH3 COO)2 · 3H2 O

200◦ C; 15 h

≈10 µm

Peterson (1999) [792]

PbTiO3

H2 O,TiO2 , KOH (or NaOH, or RbOH), Pb(NO3 )2

150◦ C; 24 h

≈0.3 µm

Chien (1999) [791]

SnS

H2 O, SnCl2 · H2 O, Na2 S, thioglyeolic acid

200◦ C; 48 h

≈7 µm

Zhu (2005) [796]

Table 5.6

Examples of materials synthesized or grown by hydrothermal techniques [797].

Material class

Examples

Growth rate

Single oxides

SiO2 ,TiO2 , ZrO2 , HfO2 , Cu2 O, BeO, Bi2 O3 ,Al2 O3 , ZnO, Fe2 O3

2.5 mm per day (SiO2 )

Perovskite type mixed oxides

A(Ti, Zr)O3 , where A = Ca, Sr, Ba, Pb, Bi

Carbonates

CaCO3 , MnCO3 , FeCO3 , CdCO3 , NiCO3 ,

0.2 mm per day (CaCO3 )

Phosphates

AlPO4 (berlinite), GaPO4

0.5 mm per day (AlPO4 )

Hydroxyapatites

A10 (BO4 )6 X2 , where A = Ca, Sr, Ba, Fe, Pb, Cd and 3− 3− 3− 2− BO4 = PO3− 4 ,VO4 , SiO4 ,AsO4 , CO3 ; X = OH− , Cl− , F− , CO2− 3

Silicates, zeolites, germanates, fluorides, sulphides, tungstates, molybdates, titanates, tantalates, neobates, selenides, aluminates, antimonites and antimonates, ferrites Piezoelectric materials

Li2 B4 O7 , Pb(Zr,Ti)O3

Laser hosts

YVO4 , GdVO4

Nonlinear optical crystals

KTiOPO4 (KTP), LiB3 O5 , {K+ } [Ti4+ ]O [P5+ ]O4

Superconductors

YBa2 Cu3 O7−δ , Bi2 Sr2 CaCu2 O8+δ ,

Superionic conductors

Li4 B7 O12 Cl, LiH2 B5 O9

1.8 mm per week (KTP)

into regular-shaped structures. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that, for example, platelet growth has often been observed at solution synthesis of similar materials under static conditions: in hydrothermal synthesis of PbTiO3 [791, 792], in chemical coprecipitation synthesis of Bi4Ti3 O12 [793], and also in molten salt synthesis of Bi4Ti3 O12 [794]. Growth of Al2 O3 platelets was observed at calcination of boehmite in an HF aqueous solution [795] However, the aspect ratio of platelets (up to 50) has remained smaller by 1–2 orders of magnitude compared to this in laser-assisted process (aspect ratios up to 500). Laser-assisted growth is also much faster (∼10 µm/s) than chemical coprecipitation growth (∼10 µm/h) [793] or the hydrothermal growth (∼10 nm/h) [791, 792]. Table 5.5 summarizes the main conditions and results of some hydrothermal synthesis processes of nanoplatelets. Note that the ordinary methods need, as a rule, foreign substances in the solution while laser ablation-induced growth may occur in pure water. Table 5.6 presents further examples of materials, whose growth may accur at laser irradiation of corresponding solids in water. Table 5.7 presents a chronological reference of the research about inorganic compound particles preperation by laser ablation of solids in liquids.

Table 5.7

Inorganic compound particles prepared by laser ablation of solids in liquids.

Targets

Liquids

Lasers

Particles achieved

Size

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Graphite, polycrystalline

Ammonia solution, 1–2 mm layer

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 5 Hz, 1010 W/cm2 , up to 45 min

α-C3 N4 , β-C3 N4 , graphite-C3 N4 , cubic-C3 N4

50 nm av (Yang (2000) [799])

Most part of achieved powder was sheet- and sphere-shape graphite

Yang (2000) [799], Wang (1998) [798]

Poly-B4.3 C

Ethanol

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 10–15 ns, 1 Hz, 0.5–1 J

Achieved: encapsulated in boron carbon spherules of size 70–2800 nm, boron grains and carbon fibres

Liu (2001) [800]

Au-capped TiO2 particles, 10–40 nm

Aqueous solution used for particles preparation, flowed

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 18 ps, 10 Hz, 2–3 mJ, 5 min

TiO2 multicore Au-shell composite

up to 100 nm

Due to laser irradiation fusion the particles volume grows 6–8 times

Dawson (2001) [711]

TiO2 particles, 2 nm and 170–1050 nm

Water or aqueous solution used for particles preparation, stirred

XeCl, 308 nm, 15 ns, 5 Hz, unfocused beam

TiO2 , spherical

≈10 nm av

At laser irradiation the particles in range 2–1050 nm transformed into ≈10 nm diameter spherical particles with a narrow size distribution; the size 10 nm approximately corresponds to both the surface energy/cohesion energy and cooling/collisions balance

Sugiyama (2002) [801]

SC Ni-doped ZnSe, CdS

Water, acetone, isobutanol, diethylene glycole, ethanol, DMSO

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 10 kHz, spot 20–80 µm

ZnSe, CdSe

10–20 nm av

Crystalline nanoparticles were achieved in all liquids (was not proved in case of DMSO)

Anikin (2002) [802]

Eu2 O2

Anhydrous ethanol, under N2 atmosphere

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 8 ns, 10 Hz

Non-crystalline europium oxide

<5 nm

Reduction of Eu3+ to Eu2+ observed

Zhang (2002) [803]

Ti

Dichloroethane water, ethanol

Cu-vapour, 510.5 nm, 20 ns, 15 kHz, spot 50 µm, 4 J/cm2

TiC,TiOx particles

25 and 150 nm (maxima) 35 nm av

At ablation of Ti in water also TiO1.04 formed and at ablation in dichloroethane also TiC formed

Dolgaev (2002) [753], Simakin (2003) [765], (2004) [766]

CdS, ZnSe

Acetone

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 15 kHz, spot 50 µm, 4 J/cm2

CdS, ZnSe

40 nm av (CdS)

Well-crystalline particles achieved

Simakin (2003) [765]

(Continued)

Table 5.7

(Continued) Particles achieved

Size

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 25 ns, 12.5 Hz, spot 100 µm

As2 S3

10 nm av

Stable within 1 month, thereafter sedimentation of small crystals was observed; nonlinearity parameters of colloid given for ns- and ps-pulses

Ganeev (2003) [804]

Water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 25 ns, 2 Hz

As2 S3

<10 nm

Nonlinear refractive index of colloid solution −7.5 × 10−18 m2 /W, nonlinear absorption coefficient 1 cm/GW (by Z-scan at 1064 nm, 25 ns, 10 Hz, volume part of nanoparticles 10−3 )

Ganeev (2003) [805]

As2 S3 , CdS

Water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 20 ns, 10 Hz, 15 mJ, focused beam, 15 min

As2 S3 , CdS (volume part of particles 3–5 × 10−5 )

4–12 nm (As2 S3 ), 2.5–6 nm (CdS)

Nonlinear refractive index, nonlinear absorption coefficient and third-order nonlinear susceptibility of colloid solutions determined by Z-scan technique; the nonlinear refractive index of CdS colloid was ≈1000 times greater than that of bulk material

Ganeev (2003) [806]

h-BN, rotating

Acetone

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 5 kHz, 1010 W/cm2

c-BN

30–80 nm

XRD and FTIR spectra presented; discussion of c-BN formation mechanism

Wang (2003) [787]

Sn

Water, water + SDS (1 and 10 mM)

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm

SnO2−x

2–3 nm av

Fabricated in 10 mM SDS colloid was stable more than 1 week; the particles were obviously non-stoichiometric SnO2−x with oxygen vacancies near the surface

Liang (2003) [807]

Ni

AgNO3 saturated aqueous solution, 1–2 mm layer

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 5 Hz, 1010 W

Ag80 Ni20 nanorods

Single crystalline Ag80 Ni20 nanorods formed with diameters typically 30–50 nm and lengths 300–500 nm

Liu (2003) [808]

Targets

Liquids

Lasers

As2 S3 glass

Water

As2 S3

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

TiO2 (rutile, SC)

Water

4ω-Nd:YAG, 266 nm, 10 Hz, spot 40 µm, 100 J/cm2

TiO2

Ni

Saturated AgNO3 aqueous solution

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 3 Hz, 107 W/cm2 , >120 min

Ag nanodendrites and Ag2 O3 nanoplumes

Mg

Water, water + SDS (1–50 mM), stirred

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 7–8 ns, 10 Hz, spot 1 mm, 60 min

Brucite Mg(OH)2

Ti, Sn, Zn, Pt, TiO3

Water + SDS (1–10 mM),

Nd:YAG, 1064 (130 ns) and 355 nm (10 ns), 1–10 Hz, 200 J/cm2

Ti

Water, water + SDS (1–100 mM),

LiCoO2 powder (3 µm av) suspension

Water, methanol, cyclohexane

< 10 nm, spherical

In 4 weeks after fabrication filament deposits were found on the vessel’s bottom, composed of both rutile and anatase TiO2 + 1.3 H2 O, the filament diameter ≈1 µm

Iwabuchi (2004) [492]

Nanodendrites consisting of Ag nanoparticles (50 nm av) and Ag2 O3 plumes were grown at solid–liquid interface

Liu (2004) [809]

Features size down to some nm

In pure water, Mg(OH)2 gel was achieved; Mg(OH)2 in SDS solution; nanostructures exhibiting wormhole-, tube-, rod-, or platelet-like morphologies were formed

Liang (2004) [810]

Anatase TiO3 , cassiterite SnO2 , spherical

TiO3 : 2 nm, SnO2 : 6 nm (in both pure water and SDS solution)

Well-crystalline particles achieved when SDS concentration near the critical micelle concentration (8.6 mM); only at 10 mM SDS fabricated particles were stable over 1 week; at ablation of Zn in pure water ZnOH/SDS multilayer plates (≈30 nm thick) achieved; at ablation of Pt/TiO3 spindle-like particles of well-crystalline anatase TiO3 achieved, diameter 1–5 nm

Sasaki (2004) [811], Liang (2004) [812]

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 10 Hz, spot 1 mm, 150 mJ maximum

Anatase TiO3 (0.01 M SDS)

3 nm av, elongated and spherical

AnataseTiO3 particles formed at 10 mM SDS, stable >1 week, in pure water and 1 mM SDS unstable amorphous particles were formed, but transformed to anatase and grew in size (8 nm av) after 3 h annealing at 500◦ C

Liang (2004) [813]

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 6 ns, 10 Hz, focused, 30 mJ, 60 min

LiCoO2 , Co3 O4

10–200 nm (LiCoO2 ), <10 nm (Co3 O4 )

Spherical LiCoO2 and not spherical Co3 O4 particles were formed (less in organic liquids); formation mechanisms discussed

Tsuji (2004) [814]

(Continued)

Table 5.7

(Continued) Particles achieved

Size

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Targets

Liquids

Lasers

References

GaAs, CdS

Water, ethanol, acetone

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 33 ps, 30 mJ

GaAs, CdS

2 nm av (GaAs), 3 nm av (CdS), both in ethanol

colloid in water unstable (PL degradation in some days), in ethanol more than 1 year; particle sizes calculated from PL spectra

Lalayan (2005) [815]

Zn

Water and water solutions of surfacts. 0.1–10 mmol/dm3 , rotating vessel

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 5–7 ns, 10 Hz, spot 1.5 mm2 , 6.7 J/cm2 , 60 min

ZnO, in SDS solution β-Zn (OH)2 /SDS multilayer plates

12–33 nm av for round particles, ≈2 µm for plates

Surfactants used: CTAB (cationic), SDS (anionic), LDA (amphoteric), OGM (non-ionic); LDA at >1 mmol/dm3 provided highest exciton luminescence and lowest green luminescence, probably due to the occupation of O defects of the surface of ZnO by the O in carboxyl groups of LDA

Usui (2005) [816]

Zn

Water and water solution of SDS, 10 mmol/dm3

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 7 ns, 10 Hz, 6.7 J/cm2 , 60 min

In SDS solnution β-Zn(OH)2 /SDS octagonal multilayer plates

In water spherical ZnO particles formed; in SDS, β-Zn(OH)2 /SDS multilayer plates of hexagonal crystal symmetry formed with thickness of inorganic layer 4.6 Å; diffuse reflectance and PL spectra recorded; both particles exhibited UV emission

Usui (2005) [817]

Ti, Sn, Zn

Water and water solution of SDS, 10 mmol/dm3

Nd:YAG, 355 nm

TiO2 (anatase), SnO2 (cassiterite), β-Zn(OH)2 /SDS multilayers

A review (6 pp., 7 figs., 32 refs.) of oxide nanomaterials fabrication at AIST by laser ablation in gases and in liquids; in gas, Fe2 O3 , Co3 O4 , and BaTiO3 particles were prepared

Sasaki (2005) [789]

Co, CoO,and Co3 O4 powder suspensions

Water and hexane, stirred

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 10 Hz, 30 mJ, 60 min

Co3 O4 (in water from all materials), Co and CoO in hexane

In water up to micrometers, mostly <10 nm,

In hexane, Co nanoparticles were produced from Co3 O4 and Co, while CoO particles were dominantly produced from CoO

Tsuji (2005) [779]

Sintered CeO2

Water

Nd:YAG, 5–40 kJ/cm2 (total dose?)

CeO2 spherical particles

20–80 nm

Melted surface quenching studies

Chen (2005) [818]

Ti

Water and water solution of SDS, 1–100 mM

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 10 Hz, 150 mJ, 60 min

TiO2

3 nm av spheroidal (10 mM SDS)

Well crystalline TiO2 particles (anatase) were achieved only at 10 mM SDS solution, the other were mostly amorphous; optical band gap of well crystalline particles 3.34 eV; solutions changed during ablation from neutral to acidic state

Liang (2005) [819]

GaAs water

Water, ethanol, ethylene glycol, silicon oil, stirred

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 9 ns, 10 Hz, 20 J/cm2 , 15–45 min

GaAs (gallium-rich particles), volume ratio ≈2 × 10−4

5–200 nm (in ethylene glycol), up to 10 nm (in silicon oil)

Optical nonlinearity studies by Z-scan and time-varied absorption; for 10-nm particles self-defocusing start-up time 8 ns; optical limiting onset for particles in ethylene glycol and water 5–8 µJ (0.9 ps pulses); third-order susceptibility of GaAs particles at 795 nm |χ(3) | ≈ 2 × 10−9 esu

Ganeev (2005) [820, 821]

CdS crystalline, As2 S3 glass

Toluene, xylol, ethanol

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 20 ns, 10 Hz, 30 J/cm2 , 15 min

CdS respectively As2 S3 particles, ≈ spherical and slightly nonstoichiometric

CdS: 2 nm av, As2 S3 : 4.5 nm av, volume ratio 4 × 10−5

Narrowest particle size distribution and best stability in case of xylol; nonlinear optical parameters of particles were 2–3 orders of magnitude greater than of bulk materials; nonlinear refractive indexes of solutions: CdS 4 × 10−15 cm2 /W (at 532 nm), As2 S3 −7.5 × 10−14 cm2 /W (at 1064 nm, 25 ns)

Ganeev (2005) [822, 775]

h-BN

Water

A thermodynamic theory of c-BN nucleation at laser irradiation of BN in liquids is presented; calculated dependences of critical radius of nuclei and probability of phase transition h-BN → c-BN on temperature (1000–5000 K) and pressure (4–40 GPa) are presented

Liu (2005) [823]

Cubic BN (c-BN)

(Continued)

Table 5.7

(Continued)

Targets

Liquids

Lasers

Particles achieved

Zn

Water + SDS (0.1–100 mM)

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 10 ns, 10 Hz, 70 mJ, spot 2 mm, 30 min

ZnO and Zn core– ZnO shell spherical particles

18–45 nm av

Below CMC of SDS (8 mM), ZnO particles formed; over CMC, core–shell particles were achieved; SDS depresses the oxidation of initially formed Zn particles; the characterization results of colloids by HRTEM, PL, FT-IR, and optical absorption spectroscopy are presented

Zeng (2005) [824]

Zn

Water, water + LDA or CTAB; up to 40–80◦ C

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 7 ns, 10 Hz, 3.2 J, spot 1 mm, 40 min

ZnO, at 40◦ C spherical, at 60 and 80◦ C SC hexagonal rods (Fig. 5.22)

Rods fabricated in water had diameter 200 nm, length 600–800 nm

Surfactants inhibited the growth of the crystals, LGA more strongly (LGA: 3.6–180 mM, CTAB: 1.4–140 mM); hydrothermal growth hypothesis proposed

Ichikawa (2006) [788]

Ti rod, rotating

Water, 2-propanol, ethanol, n-hexane

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 Hz, 20–100 mJ, spot 1 mm, 30–60 min

Ti, O, C, and H containing particles, dependent of the solvent;TiC,TiO, and TiH phases found

≈5–≈20 nm av, dependent on solvent and laser fluence

The elements present in solvents were incorporated into particles, into smaller particles to a greater extent; Ti: impurities ratios were for example Ti:O = 3:1 (water <50 nm) and Ti:C = 2:1 (nhexane >40 nm); in n-hexane, in addition, amorphous carbon deposit formed

Golightly (2006) [825]

CaMoO4 (ceramics)

Water

4ω-Nd:YAG, 266 nm, 8 ns, 10 Hz, 0.1 J, spot ≈1 mm, 120 min

CaMoO4 , spherical, polycrystals

24 nm av

Photoluminescence peak of suspension was blue-shifted by about 40–50 nm; optical bandgap of particles was estimated to be 4.7 eV

Ryu (2007) [826]

Size

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

At irradiation with 150 mJ pulses 90% of microparticles were converted to nanoparticles; rate capacity of battery electrodes composed of achieved particles studied

Tsuji (2007) [827]

Fused together AuFe3 O4 particles

Fusing of particles occurred only at 532 nm laser wavelength at irradiation at least 10 min; in contrast with the source particles, the fused together particles exhibited a faint ferromagnetic component up to at least 300 K

Kawaguchi (2007) [828]

ZnSe-nanorods

Growth of wurzite ZnSe-nanorods of 50–150 µm of diameter and 0.5–3 µm length was observed at the sides of the ablation crater; the growth rate of the nanorods was 1–3 µm/s

Jia (2007) [518]

LiMn2 O4 suspension, particles size 5 µm

Water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 6 ns, 10 Hz, 30 and 150 mJ, 60 min

Nearly LiMn2 O4

Au and Fe3 O4 colloids (tens of nm)

Water solution

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 10 Hz, 20 mJ, up to 40 min

ZnSe (SC)

Water (1.2 mm layer)

Ti:sapphire, 800 nm, 130 fs, 1 kHz, 0.7 mJ

10–100 nm

Notations: SDS – sodium dodecyl sulfate (C12 H25 OSO3 Na) DC – dodecyl sulfate DMSO – dimethylsulfoxide (CH3 )2 SO CTAB – cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, (C19 H42 BrN) LDA – lauryl dimethylaminoacetic acid betaine (CH3 (CH2 )11 N+ (CH3 )2 CH2 COO− ) OGM – octaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (CH3 (CH2 )11 (OCH2 CH2 )8 OH) HRTEM – high-resolution transmission electron microscope PL – photoluminescence FT-IR – Fourier transform infrared (spectroscopy) AIST – National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Japan ∗ Critical micelle concentrations: CTAB: 9.2 × 10−4 mol/dm3 ; SDS: 8.1 × 10−3 mol/dm3 ; LDA: 1.8 × 10−3 mol/dm3 ; OGM: 1.1 × 10−4 mol/dm3 at 25◦ C. [816].

250

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

5.6 Silicon and Amorphous Carbon Particles Silicon nanoparticles have applications as ultraviolet photodetectors and visible light sources/lasers. Carbon particles (Fig. 5.26) have gained interest for their nonlinear optical properties. For example, carbon suspensions are efficient optical limiters for nanosecond pulses, for protection of human eyes and of optical sensors against high-power laser irradiation. The limiting occurs via production of bubbles and its onset is around 1 J/cm2 for carbon particles in water [829]. At laser ablation of solid carbon in liquids, formation of polyynes has been observed as well. Polyynes are believed to serve as novel 1D-conducting materials,‘molecular wires’ [830]. Table 5.8 presents a chronological reference of the research about silicon and amarphous carbon particles preparation. Formation of diamond particles and films (including diamond-like carbon (DLC)) in liquidsassisted laser processes is overviewed in Section 5.7.

(a)

(b)

Figure 5.26 High-resolution SEM images of the carbon particles formed at laser ablation of graphite in isopropyl alcohol: (a) a nanostructured particle and (b) a micron-sized particle [684]. Laser: 1064 nm, 3.5 ns, 1 J/cm2 . © Elsevier.

5.7 Diamond and DLC Particles and Films Laser-energized liquid-assisted diamond synthesis may occur in several ways: • • • •

By laser irradiation of organic liquids or organic liquid–solid interface. By laser ablation deposition having an organic liquid target (Fig. 5.27). By laser irradiation of solid carbon or carbon suspensions in a liquid. By laser irradiation of a liquid containing a dissolved organic gas (e.g. methane in water).

Laser synthesis of diamond is an alternative to other low-pressure diamond synthesis methods like CVD and flame, featuring locality, good controllability, and little consumption of starting materials [841]. Besides diamond, formation of DLC in the same processes is likely (see Table 5.9). Graphite may be converted into diamond by driving the material into the pressure/temperature region where diamond is the only stable form of carbon (Fig. 5.28). The calculated probabilities of phase transformations in dependence of temperature and pressure are presented in Figs 5.29 and 5.30. Laser synthesis of diamond occurs in the region 3500–4500 K, ∼10 GPa above the graphite–diamond boundary. Mechanisms determining the crystallographic form of laser-synthesized diamond are discussed in the article by Yang et al. [845] Graphite tends to transform into such form of diamond whose structure is close to the structure of graphite (minimal displacement of atoms needed for transformation): thus the hexagonal graphite lattice is changed into a hexagonal diamond lattice, and the rhombohedral graphite lattice is changed into a cubic diamond lattice. Although hexagonal diamond is metastable, it could be kept when it is prepared in dynamic methods such as the shock-wave method or explosive method, or by laser method; where the quenching rate is high [846, 798]. There is also evidence that hexagonal graphite may transform into cubic diamond via a rhombohedral graphite intermediate [846]. Similarly, conversion of organic compounds into diamond in a laser-driven process is easier if the carbon atoms in the molecules of the starting compound are arranged similar way as the atoms in diamond, like in

Table 5.8

Carbon and silicon particles fabricated by laser irradiation of solids in liquids (diamond and DLC particles and films: see Table 5.9). Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Targets

Liquids

Lasers

Particles type

Particles size

Graphite (pyrolytic)

Benzene (3–4 mm layer)

Ruby, 694 nm, 30 ns, 20 J/cm2 , single pulse

Diamond

5–20 nm

Diamond particles on graphite surface achieved; ablation crater was deeper than in air

Ogale (1992) [831]

C (film and suspension)

Water, 2-propanol, c-hexane, toluene

1–3 nm

c-hexane

Ablation of suspended carbon particles (several µm in diameter) in toluene yielded C60 , C70 and other unidentified clusters

Fojtik (1993) [720]

Si film

Ruby, 694 nm, 2.3–27 J/cm2 (film targets), 500 J/cm2 (carbon suspension)

Graphite

Benzene (under Ar), benzene vapour

Nd:YAG, 266, 532, and 1064 nm, 6 ns, 10 Hz, 1010 W/cm2

Cn

Benzene was used as a reactive molecule for trapping the laser-induced Cn ; Cn reactions with laser irradiation produced phenyl radicals were identified: the main product is phenylacetylene; in liquid the yield of Cn , n >2 is smaller than in vapour

Gaumet (1996) [832]

Carbon black, 25 nm in suspension

Water

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 16 ns, 10 Hz, 0.7 J, up to 6000 shots

Carbon

Up to 400 nm

Spherical structures with dense shells and lower density cores formed; tiny bubbles and audible sound generation observed; produced gases detected

Chen (1997) [833]

Graphite

Water

Nd:YAG, pulsed

Carbon

35 nm av

Partly crystallized spherical carbon particles were achieved of size 20–50 nm

Chen (2002) [834]

Si

Water (also with surfactant additives) ethanol, dichloroethane

Cu-vapour, 510.5 nm, 20 ns, 15 kHz, spot 50 µm, 1–2 J/cm2

60–84 nm av

Crystal size was almost independent on laser fluence; in case of PVP additive in water the particle size was about 10% smaller

Dolgaev (2002) [753]

Graphite particles, 75 µm, suspended in liquid

Benzene, toluene, hexane, stirred

Nd:YAG, 355, 532 and 1064 nm, 5–9 ns, 10 Hz, 0.2 J/cm2 Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 1 ms, both focused or non-focused

Polyynes Cn H2 , n = 10, 12, 14, 16 formed in benzene and toluene; n = 8, 10, 12, 14 in hexane; shorter laser wavelength and starting particle concentration of 4 mg/ml provided greatest effective for polyyenes formation; polyynes formation paths discussed

Tsuji (2002) [835]

Cn H2

References

(Continued)

Table 5.8

(Continued)

Particles size

Novel Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Targets

Liquids

Lasers

Particles type

References

C60 suspension

Hexane, methanol (stirred)

Nd:YAG, 266, 355, 532, and 1064 nm, 5–9 ns, 0.2 J/cm2 , non-focused, 60 min

Cn H2

Graphite particles and hydrogen-capped polyynes Cn H2 , n = 8, 10, 12 were formed, C8 being dominant in all cases; C2 radicals produced from C60 are obviously polymerized and hydrogenated to form Cn H2 ; dependence of polyynes yield on various experimental parameters studied

Tsuji (2003) [836]

Diamond particles, 5 nm in diameter

Ethanol

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, ≈7 ns, 20 Hz, 1.3 J/cm2

Cn H2

Polyynes Cn H2 , n = 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 formed; ablation of graphite particles yielded less and shorter polyynes

Tabata (2004) [837]

Graphite

Water, cyclohexane under Ar, free surface liquids

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 10 Hz, spot 0.5 mm, up to 66 J/cm2

Most of particles were of graphite; some of diamond (in both liquids); atomic H in plasma, detected by optical spectroscopic, may be responsible for diamond growth

Pearce (2004) [674]

Glassy (vitreous) carbon

Water, rotating vessel

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 7 ns, 10 Hz, 0.8 J/cm2 , 5 min

15 nm av

Photostable colloids achieved; average graphitic domain size estimated from Raman spectra was 1.56 nm; optical limiting setup ≈0.3 J/cm2 at 532 nm

Chen (2004) [829]

Glassy carbon

Tetrahydrofuran (THF)

Nd:YAG, 532 and 1064 nm, 7 ns, 10 Hz, 1 J/cm2 , 30 min

6.5 nm av

Photostable (at least up to 12 J/cm2 ) and stable in time (over 3 months) colloid achieved; probablyTHF polymerizes onto particles surface;

Chen (2004) [838]

Graphite

Isopropyl alcohol

≈2 µm, ≈20 µm

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 3.5 ns, 30 Hz, 1 J/cm2 , 108 W/cm2 , 30 min

Graphite

Carbon black particles suspension, 14 nm – 5 µm av

Water, stirred

Nd:YAG, 355, 532 and 1064 nm, 7 ns, 10 Hz, up to 250 mJ/cm2 , up to 20 min

Graphite, coal or C60 powder in suspension

Benzene, toluene, hexane, cyclohexane, methanol, hexafluorobenzene, perfluorooctane, perfluorodecaline (stirred)

Nd:YAG, 266, 355, 532, and 1064 nm, 5–9 ns, 10 Hz, 40 mJ, 0.2 J/cm2 , non-focused, 60 min

Notation PVP – polyvinylpyrrolidone

C2n H2

Rose-shaped particles of ≈2 µm size and cracknel-shaped particles of ≈20 µm size were formed; FTIR, PL, PLE, and Raman studies

Kitazawa (2005) [684]

Theory of diamond nucleation and growth at laser ablation of graphite in liquids presented; at temperatures up to 5000 K and pressures up to 30 GPa the particles sizes are predicted to be in range 25–250 nm

Wang (2005) [839]

Almost no morphological changes were observed for small particles; 5 µm particles were covered after laser irradiation by nets of short wires composed of small particles; no crystallinity was developed

Miyazaki (2006) [840]

Hydrogen-capped polyynes C2n H2 , n = 4–8 were formed, the measured absorbance, abundance, and Raman spectra are presented for different experimental conditions (starting materials, solvents, and laser wavelengths); the yield of polyynes increased with decreasing laser wavelength; largest distributions of long-chain polyynes were achieved at ablation of graphite in aromatic hydrocarbons; formation mechanisms of polyynes are discussed

Tsuji (2006) [830]

Table 5.9

Diamond and diamond-like carbon (DLC) formation by laser irradiation of liquids and solid–liquid interfaces

Targets

Liquids

Lasers

Particles size

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

W

Cyclohexane, decalin, n-hexane

KrF, 248 nm, 20 ns, 5 Hz, ≈4 J/cm2 , 20 pulses at each point

20–50 nm

In cyclohexane and decalin a mixture of hexagonal polytypes along a small fraction of cubic phase formed; no diamond in hexane, obviously because the structure of molecule does not mach the diamond lattice

Sharma (1993) [848]

Cu, SC (100) and polycrstalline

Benzene (3 mm layer)

XeCl, 308 nm, 30 ns, 1–4 J/cm2

Some nm

Four laser pulses: cubic diamond, 10 pulses: cubic, 2H- and 6H-hexagonal

Singh (1993) [849]

Si (100) ∼600◦ C

Santovac 5 vacuum oil (a polyphenyl ether)

ArF, 193 nm, 10 Hz, 220 mJ, spot 2 × 5 mm

DLC film with a large amount of sp3 bondings was obtained, deposition rate was 0.1 Å/pulse; in comparison with a PMMA target, no particulates were found in the deposited films

Xiao (1995) [842]

Stainless steel (above the liquid surface)

Santovac 5 vacuum oil (a polyphenyl ether)

ArF, 193 nm, 10 Hz, 220 mJ, focused beam

Ablation/deposition performed in O2 /H2 O2 vapour mixture (200 mbar); film deposition rate 0.1 Å/pulse; 120 nm thick film obtained after 12 000 laser pulses; hydroxyl ions OH − promote the diamond growth

Xiao (1995) [841]

Si (100)

Cyclohexane (2–3 mm layer)

KrF, 248 nm, 23 ns, 1 Hz, 1–10 J/cm2 , 2 pulses

Mostly graphitic particulates formed, but also diamond; formation mechanism probably includes preferential breaking of C−H bonds in cyclohexane and atomic hydrogen formation

Lu (1998) [847]

Si, SC

Toluene (≈ 2 mm layer)

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 8 kHz, up to 1 J/cm2 , focused steady or scanned beam

Simultaneous with carbon deposition etching of the substrate and generation of suspended particles observed; the carbon dots and lines had good adhesion to substrate and ohmic contacts; adding organometallic substances (ClAuPPh3 ) to toluene did not result in doped carbon films

Shafeev (1999) [850]

500 nm cubic

Glassy carbon dots and lines

Probability of graphite to diamond transformation Wang (1999) probability as function of temperature and pressure [844] calculated for range 1000–5000 K, 0–20 GPa (see Figs 5.29 and 5.30); formation of nanometre-sized diamond at laser irradiation in liquids is explained by high nucleation rate

Glass, fused silica, Al2 O3 , CaF2

Benzene, toluene, also with glassy carbon or diamond particles (4–5 nm) added

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 8 kHz, 0.2–1.5 J/cm2 ; liquid–solid interface was irradiated through the substrate

DLC film 80– 100 µm

Well adherent and stable in DLC films were achieved; film thickness saturated at 100 nm, despite the ablated depth of the surface increased; calculated peak temperature of the sapphire-film-liquid structure during laser pulse was 600 K

Simakin (1999) [622]

Glass, fused silica, sapphire

Toluene, benzene, cumene, containing carbon particles (3–4 nm)

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 8 kHz, spot 50 µm, up to 1.5 J/cm2 , up to 25 min, scanned beam up to 1.2 mm/s

DLC film ∼100 µm

The sp3 fraction in deposited films amounted to 60–70% depending on the precursor; the films showed excellent adherence, were transparent in the visible and have microhardness of 50-70 GPa

Lyalin (1999) [623]

Soda-lime glass, Pyrex, sapphire

Toluene, benzene, cumene, also with addition of glassy carbon particles, 3–5 nm

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 8 kHz, up to >1.5 J/cm2 , scanned focused beam 0.3–3 mm/s

DLC film 100 µm thick formed on surface, 70% sp3 bonds

Backside of the substrates in contact with liquid irradiated; film deposition took place along the etching of the substrate; no optical breakdown or plasma was observed; film microhardness 50–70 GPa; film thickness saturates at ≈ 100 nm, probably due to heating it by laser beam following graphitization and periodic detachment of the film due to thermal stresses

Simakin (2000) [628, 629]

Glass

Water + dissolved methane (at 350 kPa)

ArF, 193 nm, 23 ns, 30 Hz, 150 mJ, 20 min

Hydrogen DLC film; particles size in film 30 nm

Focused laser beam irradiation of methane solution in water resulted in formation of granular DLC film, containing 7.2 wt% hydrogen; dependence of the transmittance of a focused laser beam by water on the defocus distance was studied as well, five-fold variation of the transmittance was observed

Hidai (2000) [851]

Graphite (polycrystalline)

Water, 1–2 mm layer

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 5 Hz, 250– 350 mJ

Diamond particles, 300 nm (for example)

Intergrowth diamond crystals achieved with both cubic and hexagonal structure, graphite conversion to diamond occurs via metastable intermediate rhombohedral graphite phase

Yang (2001) [846], Wang (1998) [798]

Graphite (polycrystalline)

Acetone, 1–2 mm layer

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 5 Hz, 1010 W/cm2 , 45 min

Diamond particles, 30 nm av

Obtained particles consisted of 5% diamonds and 95% graphite; a new Raman line of the irradiated surface, 926/cm, was found, obviously originating from nano-diamonds

Wang (2002) [852]

(Continued)

Table 5.9

(Continued)

Targets

Liquids

Lasers

Particles size

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Glass

Benzene, toluene (also with Pd(acac)2 additive)

Cu-vapour, 510.6 nm, 20 ns, 8 kHz, 0.5 J/cm2 , scanned focused beam 0.5 mm/s

DLC film ∼100 µm thick on surface

Glass–liquid interface was irradiated through the glass; addition of Pd(acac)2 to the liquid resulted in Pd-doped films which served as seed layer for subsequent CVD copper deposition; efficiency of DLC film as diffusion barrier for Cu was demonstrated

Simakin (2002) [853]

No

Water + dissolved methane (up to 72 mg/l)

ArF, 193 nm, 23 ns, 30 Hz, 40–150 mJ, 20 min

DLC particles, 200–700 nm

The achieved particles consisted of DLC, covered by multiwall carbon nanotubes; in case of laser irradiation of the gas near the liquid surface, DLC particles of diameters 50–200 nm were achieved

Hidai (2002) [854]

W

Benzene

Ar-ion, 514.5 nm, CW, spot 150 µm2 ; 0.72–1.09 MW/cm2

DLC film The tip of a W needle (10 nm in radius) covered (graphitic), cluster by benzene was irradiated by laser light; near-field effect size 34 nm provided enhanced DLC deposition at needle tip; the deposited in liquid films were rougher and thicker than those deposited in benzene vapour by KrF-laser (248 nm, 23 ns, spot 0.1 cm2 , ∼3 J/cm2 )

Graphite

Water

Notations ClAuPPh3 – triphenylphosphine complex of Au Pd(acac)2 – palladium acetylacetonate CVD – chemical vapour deposition

Diamond

Shi (2005) [855]

Wang (2005) Thermodynamic calculations of nanodiamond [856] formation at laser ablation of graphite in water; calculated radia of critical nuclei and graphite–diamond phase transition probabilities are presented at temperatures up to 5000 K and pressures 7–21 GPa; formation of diamond particles of size 3–5 nm was predicted to be most favourable around 12 GPa and 4500 K

257

Generation and modification of particles

Heating wires thermocouples

rotating motor

excimer laser beam liquid target

focusing lens

viewing window reactive gas cooling water

substrate

vacuum pump

gravity

Figure 5.27 Laser ablation deposition of diamond films using a liquid target [842]. An high viscosity, low-vapour pressure liquid-like vacuum oil is needed for this process (see also Section 6.3.2). © American Institute of Physics (1995), reprinted with permission from Ref. [842]. 50 G

J

Pressure (GPa)

40

Diamond

30

F I

E

20 H

CW D

10

Liquid

B

PLIIR

A

P

C

HTH

Graphite 0

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Temperature (K)

Figure 5.28 P, T phase and transition diagram for carbon as understood from experimental observations. Solid lines represent equilibrium phase boundaries [843]. A: commercial synthesis of diamond from graphite by catalysis; B: P/T threshold of very fast (less than 1 ms) solid–solid transformation of graphite to diamond; C: P/T threshold of very fast transformation of diamond to graphite; D: single crystal hexagonal graphite transforms to retrievable hexagonal-type diamond (shock-wave synthesis); E: upper ends of shock compression/quench cycles that convert hex-type graphite particles to hex-type diamond; F: upper ends of shock compression/quench cycles that convert hex-type graphite to cubic-type diamond; B, F, G: threshold of fast P/T cycles, however generated, that convert either type of graphite or hexagonal diamond into cubic-type diamond; H, I, J: path along which a single crystal hex-type graphite compressed in the c-direction at room temperature loses some graphite characteristics and acquires properties consistent with a diamond-like polytype, but reverses to graphite upon release of pressure. Notations: SW – shock waves; HTHP – high temperature high pressure; PLIIR – pulsed laser-induced liquid–solid interfacial interaction. © Elsevier.

cyclic and aromatic compounds. Cyclohexane, decaline, and benzene are favourable compounds for diamond synthesis, because only breaking of relatively weak C–H bonds is needed to get free carbon rings. Abstracted atomic hydrogen and formed in solvents OH-radicals have known to contribute to the nucleation of diamond as well [847].

258

Handbook of Liquids–Assisted Laser Processing

2.01010

10 2

5

10

3

3

10 4 10 5

4

10

1.01010 5

10

ine

0 1000

2000

2

10

5 10 3

10 4 5 10 4

10 3

0.51010

3

Sl B–

10

Pressure (Pa)

1.51010

3000

4000

5000

Temperature (K)

Figure 5.29 Schematic illustration of the probability of phase transformation in the pressure–temperature diagram [844]. The B–S line is the Berman–Simon line. The curves above and below the B–S line are fd and fg , respectively. fd – probability of the transformation from graphite to diamond; fg – probability of the transformation from diamond to graphite. © Institute of Physics, reproduced with permission. 103 104 105 106

c b a

fd

107 108 109 1010 1011 1012 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 Temperature (K)

Figure 5.30 fd –T curves of diamond formation probability: (a) P = 6 GPa. (b) P = 8 GPa and (c) P = 10 GPa [844]. © Institute of Physics, reproduced with permission.

5.8 Organic Particles Laser ablation of organic materials in liquids has been used for fabrication of phthalocyanine and its metal derivatives particles. These materials possess useful photoconductive and semiconductive properties and are applied for sensors, bioprobes, and organic microdevices. The common methods of fabrication of particles of these materials are evaporation and reprecipitation. Laser ablation of bulk materials in liquids presents a simple way to control the size and molecular aggregation structure of the particles [857]. Nanoparticles of some materials cannot be fabricated another way, for example of quinacridone particles of size below 50 nm [858] (Table 5.10).

Table 5.10

Organic colloids prepared by laser ablation in liquids.

Target materials

Liquids

Lasers

Size

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

VOPc, CuPc, FePc, Water anthracene, perylene, pyrene, abd coronene powders in suspension

XeF, 351 nm, 30 ns, 5 Hz, up to 340 mJ/cm2 , up to 180 min

≈100 nm (VOPc, 340 mJ/cm2 , 180 min)

Transparent colloid solutions stable for at least several months were achieved; phase transitions of Pc due to laser irradiations are likely

Tamaki (2000) [859]

VOPc crystalline powder (few tens of µm) floated in water

Water, stirred

XeF, 351 nm, 30 ns, 5 Hz, up to 68 mJ/cm2

Triangular 60/19 nm hexagonal 49/17 nm (mean width/height)

StableVOPc nanoparticle colloids achieved; threshold fluence Tamaki ≈20 mJ/cm2 ; as fabricated particles were structurally (2002) [857] metastable, a phase transformation occurred in some days

VOPc powder floated in liquid by stirring

Water, methanol, ethanol, 1-propanol, ethyl acetate

XeF, 351 nm, 30 ns, 5 Hz, 30 mJ/cm2 for 10 min

50 nm av

Thermal diffusivity of the liquid determines the size and crystalline phase of the particles

Tamaki (2003) [860]

VOPc, CuPc, FePc powders in suspension

Water, water + (SDS or Igepal CA-630)

3ω-Nd:YAG, 4 ns, 20 Hz, spot 2 × 2 mm, up to 80 mJ/cm2 , up to 80 min

60–100 nm av (VOPc, 0.4–0.01 mM surfactants)

In pure water VOPc nanoparticles associated in some days, but were stable at least 2 months if surfactants were added; lowering the temperature down to 5◦ C increased the efficiency of particles generation; surfactants lowered the threshold fluence of particle generation

Li (2003) [861]

FePc powder in suspension

Water solutions of SDS (1–16.4 mM) and Igepal CA-630 (0.184–0.41 mM)

3ω-Nd:YAG, 20 Hz, spot 2×2 mm, 80 mJ/cm2

60 nm av

At higher concentrations of surfactants the Q-band in optical abstraction spectra is shifted towards longer wavelengths

Li (2004) [862]

50 nm av (355 nm, 98 mJ/cm2 , 20 min); 20 nm av (580 nm, 90 mJ/cm2 , 30 min)

Laser spot size typically 23 mm2 , fluence up to 120 mJ/cm2 , irradiation up to 30 min; thresholds for particle modification: 30 mJ/cm2 at 355 nm and 15 mJ/cm2 at 580 nm; achieved colloid stable at least for 1 month; prepared by 355 nm nanoparticles were of β-form and by 580 nm, >50 mJ/cm2 of γ-form

Sugiyama (2006) [858]

β – quinacridone par- Water, stirred ticles, 0.2 µm and 1– 10 µm in suspension

4 ns,

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, ns-pulses OPO, 580 nm, 7 ns, 10 Hz

Notations VOPc – vanadyl phthalocyanine, oxo(phthalocyaninato) vanadium FePc – iron phthalocyanine CuPc – copper phthalocyanine SDS – sodium dodecyl suphate (C12 H25 SO3 Na) Igepal CA-630 – octylphenoxy polyethoxy ethanol ((CH3 )3 CCH2 (CH3 )2 CC6 H4 O(CH2 CH2 O)9 H)

C H A P T E R

S I X

Surface Modiﬁcation, Deposition of Thin Films, Welding, and Cladding

Contents 6.1 Surface Modification 6.2 Deposition and Transfer of Thin Films 6.3 Welding and Cladding Under Water

261 262 277

6.1 Surface Modiﬁcation 6.1.1 Modification of surfaces of inorganic materials Laser irradiation may modify the surface of a solid by melting and vaporizing it, or/and by inducing chemical reactions between the solid and the ambient. In a liquid, there are two main differences in comparison with gases or vacuum: (a) Cooling rate of the laser melted zone is faster which may result in metastable phases; (b) The density of chemical species (e.g. oxygen and nitrogen) is greater in liquid than in gas, thus the reaction efficiency is greater. Using lasers, the modification of surfaces can easily be performed locally without a need for masks.

Laser-induced quenching in water Much research has been done in quenching of laser melted silicon in water. In comparison with air ambient, in water the quench rate was ∼30 per cent higher (for 270 nm deep melts, 4 ns laser pulses). After irradiation of single crystalline silicon under water, perfect epitaxy was obtained with no surface oxidation or changes in surface morphology. Si regrowth velocities over 7 m/s were observed, but the critical for formation of amorphous silicon quench rate 15 m/s was not achieved [863–865] (see also Table 6.1, Polman 1988 and 1999). In conventional nanosecond laser melting of solids in gas or vacuum, the solidification velocity v can be estimated by: λ ∂T v= · , (6.1) H ∂z where ∂T /∂z is the temperature gradient in the solid just behind the interface, H is the enthalpy of melting, and λ is the thermal conductivity of the solid [863]. Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing ISBN-13: 978-0-08-044498-7

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

261

262

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

A review of laser reactive quenching at liquid–solid interface has been published by Kanetkar and Ogale [866].

Oxidation and nitriding At laser-induced high temperatures, inert under normal conditions liquids like water and liquid nitrogen, dissociate, liberating chemically reactive species. In Table 6.1, some examples of corresponding research are presented (see also the review by Kanetkar and Ogale [866]). In the articles by Imai et al. [867], and Watanabe and Sameshima [868] some examples of aftertreatment of laser irradiated materials by water are presented (see Table 6.1).

6.1.2 Modification of surfaces of organic materials Fluorocarbon polymers like PTFE possess excellent chemical and thermal stability, low wettability, low electrical conductance, small dielectric losses up to very high frequencies, etc., which makes them useful in many applications. On the other hand, high chemical stability hinders, for example, their joining with other materials, needed for example in fabrication of electronic printed boards. Adhesion and biocompatibility of fluorocarbon polymers can be improved by treatment in plasma, but also by irradiation by UV light in water or aqueous solutions (see Table 6.2). Using of UV light, thereby from lasers, avoids the need for a vacuum system and enables selective treatment without masks. Besides lasers and liquids, excimer lamps and nitrogen or ammonia gases have given similar results [874, 55]. The principle of PTFE hydrophilization is shown in Fig. 6.1. Surface irradiation by UV (excimer) laser light at presence of water leads to replacement of surface fluorine atoms by OH-groups, and liberation of hydrofluoric acid (which in turn may be used for etching of silica as described by Murahara [596]) (see Table 4.9, Murahara 2001). H2 O + [CF2 ]n + hν(193 nm) → [CFOH]n + HF.

6.2 Deposition and Transfer of Thin Films 6.2.1 Laser ablation deposition in water vapour Laser ablation deposition in water vapour has found to be beneficial in fabrication of bio-compatible hydroxylapatite coatings on implants, and of TiO2 passivating films on silicon solar cell structures [881] (Table 6.3). A schematic representation of PLD is shown in Fig. 6.2. Focused pulsed laser light (usually from an excimer laser because of short pulse and high absorption) irradiates the target and causes explosive vaporization of the material. The ejected material condenses on a substrate placed some centimetres away. In case of laser pulse length in nanoseconds, the chemical composition of the coating closely resembles the composition of the target [882]. Apatites, in particular hydroxylapatite Ca10 (PO4 )6 (OH)2 (also named hydroxylapatite or HA), have chemical composition and structure similar to the calcium phosphate phase of the bone and the tooth mineral [883]. Hydroxoapatite is the material of choice for biologically compatible coatings on metal substrates, implants and prostheses for orthopaedics, neurosurgery, and dentistry [884]. It is the most stable calcium phosphate in contact with the body fluids [885]. HA coatings may be fabricated by sputtering, plasma and flame spraying, electrophoretic deposition, electrolysis, RF sputtering, ion beam deposition, powder sintering, etc. [886]. The commonly used method is plasma spraying, but it suffers from pores in the coatings [887]. Laser ablation deposition has attracted as a method for achieving pore-free well-crystalline HA coatings. For PLD of HA, the targets were made of compressed HA powder, the laser fluences at the target were 1.5–3.5 J/cm2 , and the substrate was heated up to some hundreds of degrees of Celsius. For the deposition of coatings of some micrometres thick, 10 000–20 000 laser pulses at 193 and 248 nm wavelength were

Table 6.1

Modification of inorganic materials surfaces by laser irradiation under liquids and related research (examples).

Materials processed

Environment

Fe (foil)

Air, water

Fe,W, Fe+Al layer (40 nm), Fe+B layer

Laser or other light source Other features of and beam parameters the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Ruby, 694 nm, 30 ns, 10 and 15 J/cm2

Metastable Fe oxide was formed; results of oxide characterization by CEMS, XRD, RBS, and XPS are presented and discussed

Patil (1987) [869]

Water, NH3 , benzene, LN2

Ruby, 694 nm, 30 ns, up to 15 J/cm2

Processed surface studied by CEMS, XRD, RBS, XPS and TEM; transient reflections measurement in cource of process; in Fe:H2 O and Fe:NH3 cases FeO and γ-Fe-N austenite, respectively found, in the W:C6 H6 case a multiphase composite comprised of W3 C, β-W2 C, and WC1−x was observed; laser irradiation of Fe+Al layered structures in LN2 led to dimeric metastable solid solution

Ogale (1987) [870]

Si (100)

Air, water

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 4 ns

Light conducted through Physical phenomena at solid–liquid interface quartz guide diffusor were studied by transient electrical conductivity without focussing; and optical reflectivity measurements; quench irradiated area rate may be enhanced by 30% for deep ∼6 mm in diameter (down to 270 nm) melts if irradiated in water; Si regrowth velocities over 7 m/s were observed

Polman (1988) [863, 864]

Si (100) and SOS

Air, water

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 4 ns, up to 28 mJ

See Polman (1988) [863] or Polman (1988) [864]

In addition to the results presented in Polman (1988) [863, 864], calculated reflectivities, TEM-micrographs, and a thorough discussion of physical phenomena at liquid–solid interface are presented; a short review of related previous research with 94 references is also presented

Polman (1989) [865]

Silica, titania and silica-titania sol–gel coatings

The coatings were saturated with water vapour (60–180◦ C, 1–72 h)

Synchrotron, 6–20 eV 4ω-Nd:YAG, 4.7 eV Low pressure Hg-lamp, 4.9 eV, 1.4 mW/cm2

Experiments were performed in vacuum

Irradiation caused densification and crystallization of sol–gel films; subsequent exposure to water vapour was found to accelerate the rearrangement of sol–gel films, leading densification of silica and crystallization of titania and phase separation of silica–titania gel films

Imai (1999) [867]

38HMJ steel

Ar, liquid nitrogen (77 K)

CO2 , 10.6 µm, 1 kW,∼130 kW/cm2

Sample was immersed into LN2 bath and scanned 0.17–2 cm/s

At laser irradiation in LN2 the sample’s surface layer ∼30 µm became enriched by nitrogen; an increase of hardness down to the depth of 270–330 µm was observed (in Ar gas 400–500 µm)

Jendrzejewski (2000) [871]

(Continued)

Table 6.1

(Continued)

Materials processed

Environment

Laser or other light source and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Poly-Si (25 nm films)

Water vapour

XeCl, 308 nm, 30 ns, 280 mJ/cm2 , 50 shots in vacuum

Aftertreatment in vapour was performed at 260◦ C and 1.3 MPa for 3 h

Amorphous Si layers were crystallized by laser irradiation and then exposed to water vapour; as result of aftertreatment by vapour, the density of defect states in the crystallized silicon films was reduced from 1 × 1014 cm−2 (as crystallized) to 3.2 × 1012 cm−2

Watanabe (2002) [867]

Al (films 10–150 nm) on glass

Water (15 µm)

Ar-ion, 488 nm, up to 30 mW, spot ∼250 nm

Water was covered by glass, scanning rate up to 33 µm/s

Electrically insulating Al oxide lines of width down to 266 nm were obtained, increased oxidation rate was obviously due to increased diffusivity and convection transport mobility of oxygen in water and due to the increased of Al3+ ions in the oxide; grooves formation was also observed

Haefliger (2002) [509]

Al (coating 120 nm) on Si3 N4

Water

Ar-ion, 488 nm, up to 30 mW, spot 10 µm, 10 and 15 s

SNOM tip was immersed into a tips drop of water, illuminated from below by laser

Protrusions of up to 30 nm height and 38 nm in diameter were formed at aluminized Si3 N4 SNOM as result of laser heating destruction of passivating oxide layer followed by local corrosion of the metal

Haefliger (2002) [872]

Al (∼60 nm films on PDMS, SU-8 and glass)

Water

Ar-ion, 488 nm, CW, up to 17 mW, spot 2.5 µm

Water-immersion micro-objective was used for laser beam focusing

Al electrode film was patterned by laserassisted corrosion in water

Haefliger (2003) [873]

Sintered CeO2

Water

Nd:YAG, 5–40 kJ/cm2 (total dose?)

Target immersed into water

At 6–15 kJ/cm2 amorphous layer formed; at 20–25 kJ/cm2 10 µm thick nanocrystalline films formed, crystallite size 50–150 nm

Chen (2005) [818]

Notations CEMS – conversion-electron Mössbauer spectroscopy XRD – X-ray diffraction RBS – Rutherford-backscattering spectrometry XPS – X-ray-photoelectron spectroscopy TEM – transmission electron microscopy SOS – silicon on sapphire SNOM – scanning near-field optical microscope PDMS – poly(dimethylsiloxane) CW – continuous wave SU-8 – a kind of high-viscosity photoresist

Table 6.2

Modification of organic materials surfaces by laser irradiation under liquids and related research (examples).

Materials processed

Environment

Laser or other light source and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

PTFE (film)

Water solution of B(OH)3 (1.8%, 50 µm layer)

ArF, 193 nm, up to 25 mJ/cm2 , up to 3000 pulses

Liquid was covered by fused silica plate

As result of laser irradiation, the surface of PTFE became hydrophilic and oleophilic, due to replacement of surface F atoms by CH3 and OH functional groups; the tensile shear strength of modified surface PTFE bonded by epoxy resin to stainless steel was 12 MPa

Murahara (1995) [875, 876]

PTFE, FEP (10–1000 µm)

Vacuum, gaseous NH3 and N2 H4

Excimer lamps Kr2 * (146 nm) and Xe2 * (172 nm); pulse tens of nanoseconds, 10–20 mW/cm2

Irradiation time up to 90 min

Treatment resulted in hydrophilic surface, where abstraction of fluorine atoms and introduction of nitrogen, oxygen, and hydrogen atoms occurred; the modified surface layer showed higher absorption in the UV–VIS spectral region

Heitz (1996) [874]

Fluorocarbon resin

Water and water solution of B(OH)3 (1.2%)

ArF, 193 nm, 20–30 mJ/cm2 , up to 4000 pulses

Liquid was covered by fused silica plate

Adhesive strength of fluorocarbon resin to epoxy resin was improved 275 times/up to 98 kgf/cm2 (treatment in water), respectively, 490 times/up to 55 kgf/cm2 (treatment in B(OH)3 solution)

Hatao (1997) [877]

PTFE

Water and water solutions of H3 BO3 ,NaOH, CuSO4 , NaAlO2

XeCl, 308 nm, 10 Hz, 10–535 mJ/cm2 , up to 2500 shots

Liquid layer was covered by silica window

Laser irradiation converted the PTFE surface from hydrophobic to hydrophilic (minimum contact angle with water was 28◦ if treated in 1% H3 BO3 ); the bond strength to epoxy resin 509 was increased from 2 to 26.2 kg/cm2 (1% NaAlO2 )

Lou (1998) [878], Huang (1999) [879]

FEP

Water

ArF, 193 nm, 10 ns, 100 Hz, up to 50 mJ/cm2 , up to 4000 pulses

Sample was grind using FEP turntable with a water layer between; laser light irradiated the turntable through the sample

Laser treatment in water (25 mJ/cm2 , 3000 pulses) resulted in hydrophilic surface of FEP; adhesion strength of FEP to epoxy resin was increased due to laser treatment from 0.2 to 110 kg/cm2

Murahara (2001)

PTFE (50 µm)

Air, amino-ethanol, 1,2-diamino-ethane, triethylene-tetramine

ArF, 193 nm, 20 ns, up to ∼8 mJ/cm2 , 1500 pulses

PTFE–liquid interface was laser irradiated through PTFE (transmission 51%)

Laser irradiation in liquids (but not in air) converted the PTFE surface from hydrophobic to hydrophilic (minimum contact angle with water became down to 30◦ if treated in aminoethanol and triethylene-tetramine; the bond strength to epoxy resin Uverapid 20 was increased 100–200 times, up to 9 MPa (when treated in triethylene-tetramine)

Hopp (2003) [880]

Notations FEP – poly(tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene) PTFE – poly(tetrafluoroethylene)

266

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

H2O H ArF laser

F F

OH

F

C

C

C

C

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

C

C

C

F

F

F

PTFE

Fluorocarbon

Figure 6.1 Principle of the photochemical reaction providing the replacement of F atoms by OH functional groups. © SPIE (2001), reproduced with permission from Ref. [596].

Window

Plasma plume

Rotating target

t° Heater Substrate To vacuum pump

Water vapour

Figure 6.2 Schematics of pulsed laser deposition (abbreviated as PLD or LAD). Because a focused laser beam acts only on a small area of the target, the latter is rotated for even consumption of the material and for avoidance of formation of craters. The substrate may be heated in order to improve the adhesion and crystallinity of the deposited film. The irradiation densities of the target are some joules per centimetre square.

needed [888]. A 0.5 mbar water vapour pressure in the chamber was found to yield the best coatings (highly crystalline) [888]. Regarding other materials, only TiO2 coatings fabrication by PLD in water vapour ambient has been reported [881]. 0.55 mbar vapour pressure was found to yield best passivating films for silicon solar cells.

6.2.2 Laser ablation deposition using a liquid target Pulsed laser ablation deposition has established as a method for fabrication of high purity thin films of compound materials without little declination from the composition of the target. It is also easy to fabricate multilayer films by in situ target changing. However, PLD suffers from target deterioration (craters and cones formation) and from particulates in the deposited film. The particulates originate from droplets ejected from the molten target. Both of these problems can be avoided by using a liquid target. In this way, the focused laser beam ablates always a smooth surface and, hence, target deterioration is completely prevented without target rotation. Further, splashing can be avoided by using a viscous liquid [842]. For example, a liquid GaAl target was used by Willmott et al. [896], Fig. 6.3, for fabrication of AlGa films, from considerations that ablation of solid Al produces easily droplets and because liquid GaAl target has less impurities than a sintered target. (see also Table 6.4)

Table 6.3

Laser ablation deposition in water vapour (examples). Laser or other light source Other features of and beam parameters the experiment

Targets

Substrates

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

HA (sintered pellets)

Ti-6Al-4V, Si (RT–800◦ C)

KrF, 248 nm, 20 Hz, ∼200 mJ, ∼2 J/cm2 , incident angle 45◦

O2 , He,Ar, or Kr was bubbled through a water bath at rate 10 sccm

In water vapour-enriched inert gas environments, deposition of hydroxylapatite was observed at temperatures between 400◦ C and 700◦ C and tetracalcium phosphate at temperatures above 700◦ C

Cotell (1993) [885]

HA and natural apatite

Ti-6Al-4V, Ti (RT)

KrF, 248 nm, 20 ns, 10 Hz, 300 mJ, spot 0.4 × 2.2 mm, 0.5–10 J/cm2

Scanned laser beam, residual gas pressure 2–100 Pa (no gases added)

Coatings of thickness 0.2–1.2 µm were deposited; dependence of the density of macroparticles and chemical composition of films on laser fluence, distance between target and substrate, and residual gas pressure are presented

Bagratashvili (1995) [884]

HA

Ti-6Al-4V, fused silica (200–780◦ C)

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 10 Hz, 3–7 J/cm2

The deposition was performed in Ar/water vapour environment (Ar flow 9–18 sccm, water vapour flow 0.7–10 sccm)

0.4–1 µm HA films were deposited; deposition rate was around 0.1 nm/pulse; the best crystallinity films were achieved at 600–700◦ C and high water ratio; surface micrographs and XRD spectra of the films at various deposition conditions are presented; the adhesion of the films was generally good except if deposited at high temperatures (780◦ C) and low water content ambient

Jelínek (1996) [887]

HA (powder pellet)

No

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, 10 Hz, 2.6 J/cm2 , incident angle 45◦

The deposition was performed in vacuum chamber, water vapour pressure 0.1 mbar

Optical emission intensity and spectrum, and temporal Serra (1998) evolution of HA laser ablation plume was investigated; [889] three distinct components were identified: a fast shock wave generating component including Ca and P ions, a intermediate faint component and a slow micrometre-size particulates component

HA (powder pellet)

Ti-6Al-4V (575◦ C)

ArF, 193 nm, 10 Hz, 3.5 J/cm2 KrF, 248 nm, 10 Hz, 3.5 J/cm2

Water vapour pressure in vacuum chamber was 0.15–1.5 mbar; number of laser shots 15 000

HA coatings of thickness of 2–3 µm were deposited; pure HA phase was obtained using ArF laser; in case of KrF laser, best films (highest degree of hydroxylation and best crystalline properties) were achieved at water vapour pressure of 0.5 mbar

FernándezPradas (1998) [888]

(Continued)

Table 6.3

(Continued) Laser or other light source Other features of and beam parameters the experiment

Targets

Substrates

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

HA (sintered)

ArF, 193 nm, 20 ns, Ti-6Al-4V, Si (100); (485◦ C) 10 Hz, 0.8 J/cm2

Pressures of water vapour: 0.15–0.8 mbar

HA coatings of thickness of 0.85 µm were deposited; Arias (1998) the dependence of the coatings composition on water [883] vapour pressure was investigated by FT–IR spectroscopy

TiO2 (SC, rotating target)

p-Si (100), Pyrex glass; (300◦ C)

KrF, 248 nm, up to 6 J/cm2

O2 ,Ar, or water vapour environment

Deposition in 0.55 mbar water vapour was found to Doeswijk provide lowest density of states at TiO2 /Si interface (1999) [881] and the largest lifetime of charge carriers (27.8 µs); the optimal laser fluence at target was 2 J/cm2

HA (powder pellet)

No

KrF, 248 nm, 30 ns, spot 0.8 × 3.1 mm, 2.6 J/cm2 , incident angle 45◦

Ne or water vapour environment (0.1 mbar)

The dynamics of found in Serra (1998) [889] laser plume components was investigated by high-speed photography at different wavelengths: (i) Ca: 520 nm, (ii) atomic oxygen (O): 777 nm, velocity 20 km/s, (iii) Cax Oy : 600 nm, velocity 2.3 km/s

Serra (1999) [890]

HA (powder pellet)

No

Nd;YAG, 355 nm, 10 ns, 1.5 J/cm2

Vacuum, Ne (0.1 mbar) or water vapour (0.1 and 0.2 mbar) environment

Images of laser plume obtained in water vapour revealed that species are confined by the background gas leading to the formation of a planar shock wave at 0.1 mbar and a spherical shock wave at 0.2 mbar; in both cases the presence of chemical reactions with the background atmosphere leads to the formation of calcium oxide radicals that become the dominant emissive species in the plume

Serra (1999) [891]

HA (powder pellet)

Ti-6Al-4V (20–600◦ C)

Nd;YAG, 355 nm, 10 ns, 10 Hz, 73 mJ, 3.1 J/cm2 , incident angle 45◦ , 18 000 shots

Water vapour environment (10–45 Pa)

HA coatings of thickness of 1–4 µm and of surface roughness of 0.4 µm were fabricated; coatings deposited at substrate temperatures under 400◦ C were amorphous; at over 500◦ C and 10 Pa H2 O, the coatings contained crystalline phases rich in calcium, as CaO and Tetra CP; coatings deposited at 45 Pa H2 O were composed of HA and a-TCP; scratch test results are presented as well

FernándezPradas (2000) [892]

HA (sintered)

Si (111)

ArF, 193 nm, 20 ns, 20 Hz, spot 1.4 × 3.2 mm, 1.6 J/cm2

Water vapour environment (45 Pa)

Thickness distributions of deposited coatings was determined at target-substrate distances 9–48 mm; the coatings were more homogeneous at greater distances, while at shorter distances the coatings also contained undesired phases and surface damage

Arias (2002) [893]

HA (sintered)

No

ArF, 193 nm, 20 ns, 20 Hz, spot 1.4 × 3.2 mm, 0.9 J/cm2

Ar, O2 , or water vapour environment (15–80 Pa)

HA ablation rate was measured in dependence of the kind of ambient gas and its pressure; for water vapour the ablation rate sinks linearly from 122 nm/pulse (15 Pa) to 108 nm/pulse (80 Pa); in O2 ambient, the ablation rate was ∼125 nm/pulse and in Ar close to that in H2 O

Arias (2003) [894]

HA (sintered)

Ti (300–460◦ C)

ArF, 193 nm, 20 ns, 20 Hz, 1.2 J/cm2

Water vapour environment (45 Pa, 25 Pa · l/s); DC discharge 0–60 mA

Using electric discharge, crystalline HA coatings could be obtained at lower temperatures (as low as 300◦ C), due to both the higher incorporation of OH− in the coatings (higher H2 O dissociation by the ionization current) and the higher mobility and ionization of the particles on the substrate (provided by the electron bombardment of the coating during its growth)

Jiménez (2004) [895]

Notations HA – hydroxylapatite, hydroxyapatite, Ca10 (PO4 )6 (OH)2 XRD – X-ray diffraction DC – direct current RT – room temperature (∼20–25◦ C) SC – single crystalline FT-IR – Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy CP – Calcium phosphate TCP – tricalcium phosphate, Ca3 (Po4 )2

Table 6.4

Laser ablation deposition using liquid targets and related research (examples). Laser or other light source and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Si, CdTe, GaAs, NaCl (25–300◦ C)

CO2 , 100–120 J/cm2

Santovac 5 vacuum oil (a polyphenyl ether)

Si (100), ∼600◦ C

Santovac 5 vacuum oil

Targets

Substrates

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Molten Ge

Deposition was performed in vacuum

Ge films deposited from molten Ge on 300◦ C substrates were smooth, single crystalline and epitaxial; at RT dense, low stress, bulk refractive index, and very low optical absorption films were achieved; use of liquid Ge target completely elilminated the generation and ejection of particulates

Sankur (1989) [897]

ArF, 193 nm, 10 Hz, 220 mJ, spot 2 × 5 mm

Experiment was performed in vacuum chamber, O2 flow 3 sccm

DLC film with a large amount of sp3 bondings was obtained, deposition rate was 0.1 Å/pulse; incomparison with a PMMA target, no particulates were found in the deposited films

Xiao (1995) [842]

Stainless steel (above the liquid surface)

ArF, 193 nm, 10 Hz, 220 mJ, focused beam

Ablation/deposition performed in O2 /H2 O2 vapour mixture (200 mbar)

120 nm thick film containing cubic diamond particles was obtained after 12 000 laser pulses; film deposition rate was 0.1 Å/pulse; hydroxyl ions (OH− ) obviously promote the diamond growth

Xiao (1995) [841]

In (solid 300 K, and liquid 600 K)

No

KrF, 248 nm, 15 ns (up to 180 mJ/cm2 ) and 0.5 ps (up to 19 mJ/cm2 ), 10 Hz, spot 0.3 mm

Experiment was performed in vacuum

The threshold fluence of liquid In ablation by 15 ns pulses was 30 mJ/cm2 (100 mJ/cm2 for solid In); with 0.5 ps laser pulses the ablation threshold was the same for both solid and liquid metal, 2.5 mJ/cm2 , but above the threshold, the ablation was more efficient for liquid In

Götz (1997) [898]

Si, Ge (molten and solid), Cu (solid)

No

KrF, 248 nm, 25 ns;ArF, 193 nm, 17 ns; 1–8 J/cm2

Experiment was performed in vacuum

Kinetic energy distribution of the ions ejected from the targets was studies by TOF technique; the most probable kinetic energy has values of several tens of electronvolts for singly charged ions, and was larger by a factor exceeding 2 for doubly charged ions

Franghiadakis (1999) [899]

Molten Sn, Bi

No

ArF, 193 nm, 18 ns, spot 0.5 × 1.6 mm, up to 5.5 J/cm2

Experiment was performed in vacuum

High-speed photographs of material ejection from targets are presented; the velocity of the front of the ablated plume was approximately 6 km/s for both Sn and Bi at 5.5 J/cm2 ; laser irradiation excites surface waves (radial velocity ∼1 m/s), in case of Bi also droplets emission; relaxation times of wave processes were ∼0.3 and ∼1.2 s for Sn and Bi, respectively

Tóth (1999) [900]

Molten Ga,Al-Ga

Si (111), 640–740◦ C

KrF, 248 nm, 17 ns, 8 and 12 Hz, spot size 0.1 and 0.15 mm, 3.5–6.4 J/cm2

Pulsed N2 or NH3 ambient, ∼400 µs, 2.5 × 1017 molecules per pulse; non-wetting glass-ceramic crucibles were used for molten targets

GaN (0001) and Al x Ga1−x N (0001) films of thickness up to 3.37 µm (75 000 laser pulses) were achieved, without the need for a GaN or AlN buffer layer; the growth rate ranged <0.001–0.16 AL/s; the crystallographic and optical properties of the films were found to be superior using N2 as the nitriding source compared to NH3 , though control of the film thickness and, in the case of Alx Ga1−x N also control of the stoichiometry, was poorer due to high reevaporation rates of unreacted, physisorbed Ga atoms between laser pulses

Willmott (2000) [896]

Molten Ga

SiO2

ArF, 193 nm, 20 ns, 10 Hz, up to 5.5 J/cm2

Experiment was performed in vacuum

Kiso (2002) Deposited film thickness was up to 140 nm; optical [901] emission spectra of Ga plume and emission intensity dependence on laser fluence are presented; experimental results were compared with 1D-simulation of heat flow, taking into account the heat of vaporization and recoil pressure; it was found that most of the ablated particles are transferred to the substrate not in the form of an excited ion but an excited neutral atom, except at and near the target

Notations RT – room temperature (∼20–25◦ C) DLC – diamond-like carbon TOF – time of flight AL – atomic layer

272

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

KrF 248 nm

LT

i

⫹V

⫹V

PV

LT

i Si (111) KrF 248 nm

PV

LT

LF

LT

CR

CC

E

E

RS Si AI2O3 i (a)

TF

(b)

⫹V

Figure 6.3 Schematics of liquid-target pulsed laser deposition systems used for the production of GaN and Alx Ga1−x N thin films: (a) Plan view of the horizontal geometry, (b) side view of the vertical geometry. The labelling is as follows: PV: pulsed valve; CC: ceramic crucible; LT: liquid target; LF: laser focus spot on target; RS: radiation shield;TF: tungsten filament; CR: ceramic ring; E: Pt-coated Ti electrode. Due to space problems heating was provided by passing current through the Si wafer. Non-wetting glass-ceramic crucibles were used for molten targets. © American Institute of Physics (2000), reprinted with permission from Ref. [896].

Diamond and diamond-like carbon (DLC) films fabrication by laser ablation of carbon-containing liquids is described in Section 5.7.

6.2.3 Laser ablation deposition using frozen target Frozen gas targets If nitrogen-containing compound films are desired in laser ablation deposition, the ablation is commonly performed in nitrogen gas ambient. However, due to low density of nitrogen atoms in the gas, the films may remain nitrogen deficient. The use of frozen nitrogen target enables to compensate the nitrogen deficit, and generate chemically activated species (excited N2 and H), which promote the bonding in the films [902] (Fig. 6.4). For deposition of carbon and carbide films, frozen acetylene and methane targets have been used as carbon source (see Table 6.5).

Frozen solution targets (MAPLE) MAPLE means Matrix-Assisted Pulsed-Laser Evaporation. The technique was developed for deposition of thin films of biomaterials, materials which are too fragile for direct laser ablation deposition. In addition, the technique was proved to be useful for deposition of nonlinear optical organic materials, conductive polymers, luminescent organic substances, etc. MAPLE involves dissolving or suspending the functional material in a volatile solvent, freezing the mixture to create a solid target, and using a low fluence pulsed laser to evaporate the target for deposition of the solute inside a vacuum system (Fig. 6.5).

273

Surface modification, deposition of thin films, welding, and cladding

Gas inlet Refrigerator Mass flow controller

Capillary Turbo molecular pump

Substrate holder

Condensed gas Substrate

Window Lens Excimer laser

Figure 6.4 Schematic view of the synthesis chamber with a frozen nitrogen target [902]. Gaseous nitrogen is constantly supplied onto cold target and is frozen there. © Elsevier.

MAPLE suits for fabrication of biomaterial thin films ranging from biocompatible polymers like polyethylene glycol (PEG) to complex living micro-organisms such as eukaryotic cells [911]. The target is a frozen matrix consisting of a volatile solvent (e.g. water, methanol, chloroform, etc.) and a low concentration, <1 wt. per cent, of the film material. The solvent and solution concentration are selected so that the polymer/organic material of interest can dissolve to form a dilute, particulate free solution and also so that the majority of the laser energy is initially absorbed by the solvent molecules and not by the solute. At laser irradiation the solvent vaporizes and the expanding vapour plume carries the solute onto substrate placed some centimetres away from the target [910] (Tables 6.6 and 6.7). Patterning can be achieved with a contact shadow mask, feature sizes down to 20 µm are possible. MAPLE technique has been proven to provide better thickness control of polymer and biomaterials films as traditional aerosol, dip coating, or spin coating processes. In comparison with vacuum evaporation, conventional PLD, and in situ polymerization techniques, MAPLE is less substance specific [910].

6.2.4 Forward transfer from solution (LIFT, MDW) LIFT technique – laser induced forward transfer – is an alternative to MAPLE for fabrication of biomaterial thin patterned films. In LIFT, the target is a thin solution film on a transparent substrate at room temperature and is irradiated by laser from backside (Fig. 6.6). The process is also called MAPLE Direct Write (MWD) (Table 6.8). The functional solute material (e.g. proteins, DNA, cells, tissue) is imbedded in a matrix and spread on a transparent ribbon blank. A laser pulse strikes this material through the ribbon, thermally exciting part of the matrix material. The thermal expansion propels the materials to the substrate. The matrix function is to

Table 6.5

Laser ablation deposition from frozen targets (examples).

Target’s substrates

Targets

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Cu

Solid acetylene (1–2 mm)

ArF, 193 nm, 14 ns, 10 Hz KrF, 248 nm

Deposition was performed in vacuum

DLC films formed on a quartz substrate placed Hanabusa 40 mm apart from the target; deposition rate was (1995) [903] 17 nm/min at RT and 13 nm/min at 300◦ C (ArF laser, power density 900 MW/vm2 ); a KrF laser produced DLC films at substrate temperature above 200◦ C

Nb and h-BN

Solid N2 (∼10 K)

KrF, 248 nm, 14 ns, 5 Hz ArF, 193 nm

Deposition was performed in vacuum or in N2 (0.1 Torr)

∼2 µm thick NbN x and/or BN films were deposited onto MgO (100), Si (100) and Corning 7059 glass substrates (300◦ C and 400◦ C) at laser fluence up to 3.8 J/cm2 and total number of shots 18 000; frozen targets provided higher nitrogen concentration in the films

Graphitic carbon

Solid CH4 and/or CO2 (12 K)

KrF, 248 nm, 14 ns, 5 Hz, 3.9 J/cm2 , incident angle 45◦ , 18 000 shots

Deposition was performed in vacuum at substrate temp. RT, 573 K, 873 K and 1173 K

DLC films containing nanometre-sized diamond embryos Ishiguro were deposited onto Si (100) substrate located at (1998) [906] 30 mm distance from the target

Si (100)

Solid CH4 (1–2 mm)

2ω-Nd:YAG, 1 and 5 Hz, spot 1 mm, 3–7 J/cm2 , up to 8000 pulses

Ishiguro (1999) [902]

Cu

Solid N2 + CH4 mixture (16 K)

The films were ablation Ablation of CH4 film on Si yielded polycrystalline hexagonal deposited onto glass, Si SiC films without the need of any post-thermal and rock salt substrates, annealing, but Si splashes were found in the film: ablation of N2 + CH4 mixture yielded amorphous 15 mm apart from targets in vacuum C–N films without splashing particles

Cu

Solid N2 (3 mm, 10 K)

4ω-Nd:YLF, 263 nm, 8 ps, 10 Hz, 5 J/cm2

Experiment was performed in vacuum

Results of studies of solid N2 film ablation are presented; atomic nitrogen was produced in a multi-photon ionization process

Niino (2000) [907], Niino (2001) [908]

Cu

Solid N2 (10 K)

4ω-Nd:YLF, 263 nm, 8 ps, 10 Hz, 1.5–10 J/cm2

Deposition was performed in vacuum

C3 N4 and Si 3 N4 were formed on HOPG and Si plates 2 cm Niino (2002) apart from laser ablation target [909]

Notations HOPG – highly oriented pyrolytic graphite DLC – diamond-like carbon RT – room temperature (∼20–25◦ C)

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Hiroshima (1997) [904, 905]

275

Surface modification, deposition of thin films, welding, and cladding

Desorbing solvent and macromolecules

Cooled, rotating MAPLE target

Incident UV laser pulse

Volatile solvent pumped away

Substrate

Gate valve Turbo pump

Figure 6.5 Schematic diagram of the MAPLE deposition system [910]. The process is carried out in vacuum or in low-pressure inert gas/water vapour. © Elsevier.

Table 6.6 Processing conditions for deposition of thin films of chemoselective polymers and carbohydrates by MAPLE [910]. Laser wavelength (nm)

248 or 193 for polymers, 193 for carbohydrates

Laser power (W)

∼0.02

Laser spot size on the target (cm2 )

∼0.4 × 0.1

Laser fluence on the target (J/cm2 )

0.05–0.25

Laser repetition rate (Hz)

2–5

Target size (diameter in cm)

∼2.5

Target to substrate distance (cm)

5

Substrate type

NaCl, Si,Au/Si and quartz (SAW)

Substrate temperature (◦ C)

Room temperature (25◦ C)

System base pressure prior to deposition (Torr)

10−5

Background gas during deposition

Ar or Ar/H2

Background pressure during deposition (Torr)

5 × 10−2 (50 mTorr)

Deposition rate (Å/laser pulse)

0.03–0.05

Typical film thickness (nm)

20–50

Typical deposition time (min)

20–50

Table 6.7

Frozen matrix-assisted pulsed-laser evaporation deposition (MAPLE) (examples). Substrates for films

Laser type and beam parameters

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

Si (111) and NaCl

KrF, 248 nm, 30, or ArF, 20 ns; 1–5 Hz, spot 0.05 cm2 , 10–500 mJ/cm2 , angle of incidence 45◦

Deposition ambient:Ar or Ar saturated with water vapour, 50 mTorr; 50–100-nm thick films were deposited; it was possible to deposit polymers without chemical changes and with submonolayer thickness control; a short overview of previous research with a table of process parameters is presented

Piqué (1999) [910]

Water (220–240 K)

Si

1–15 Hz, 0.1–0.4 J/cm2

250-µm dots of immobilized HRP, in the form of a polymer composite (500 nm) with a protective coating (polyurethane, 20 µm) were fabricated

Wu (2001) [911]

NPP, ppy,Alq3, BSA

Chloroform (for NPP); water (for ppy), glycerole/ phosphate buffer (for BSA); (−40◦ C to −160◦ C)

Glass, fused silica

ArF, 193 nm, 20 ns, 1–20 Hz, 10–500 mJ/cm2 , angle of incidence 45◦

Deposition ambient: vacuum; only Alq3 underwent some degradation during deposition, the other compounds did not suffer any chemical changes; a short overview of previous research with a table of deposited materials and deposition conditions is presented

Piqué (2002) [912]

PEG

Water (−50◦ C)

Quartz, Si

3ω-Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 6 ns, spot size 0.8–1.9 mm2 , 2.5–10 J/cm2 , 0.4–2 GW/cm2

Deposition rate was 0.3–1.1 ng/cm2 (for PEG concentration in water 0.5–4 wt%); the film had particle structures of a particle size up to 5–10 µm; chemical structure of the deposits was close to that of the un-irradiated PEG

Toftmann (2005) [913]

PLGA

Chloroform (∼120 K)

Si (100), NaCl

KrF, 248 nm, 25 ns, 5 Hz, 0.1–1 J/cm2

Depositions were conducted in Ar at 100 mTorr; gel permeation chromatography (GPC) with refractive index (RI) detection revealed a significant change (up to 95%) in molecular weight of PLGA during deposition process; severe non-uniformity of achieved films support the spallation mechanism of MAPLE

Mercado (2005) [914]

Compounds

Matrix

SXFA polymers

Tert-butyl alcohol (100–200 K)

Glucose, sucrose, dextran

Water (−20◦ C)

PEG, HRP/PEG

Notations MAPLE – matrix-assisted pulsed-laser evaporation SXFA – fluoroalcoholpolysiloxane NPP – N -(4-nitrophenyl)-(L)-prolinol Alq3 – tris-(8-hydroxyquinoline) aluminium BSA – biotinylated bovine serum albumin ppy – polypyrrole PEG – polyethylene glycol PLGA – poly (lactide-co-glycolide) HRP – horseradish peroxidase

277

Surface modification, deposition of thin films, welding, and cladding

Laser pulse Transparent ‘ribbon’ Material to be deposited

Laser transferred material Objective

Micromachined channel

Substrate

Figure 6.6 Schematic diagram of the LIFT (MDW) process [911]. Material to be deposited is pre-coated on a quartz plate and is transferred using a single laser pulse onto a receiving substrate placed parallel and in close proximity to the target film (distance ∼100 µm) under air or vacuum conditions. © Elsevier.

minimize the irradiation damage to the film material and to softly desorb the solute material. The matrix can also be an adhesion promoter, or an immobilization medium. The spatial resolution of the deposited patterns of 10 µm can be routinely achieved. By translating the substrate with respect to the laser any features can be directly written. Laser transfer is a ‘clean’, one step process, not limited to oligomer structures [911, 915–917]. A preferential application of LIFT has been the fabrication of protein patterns for biosensors. Protein-based biosensors consist usually of a dot array of proteins immobilized onto a solid substrate and capable of binding specifically to a target biomolecule. Detection of the bound analyte can subsequently be performed using various methodologies such as fluorescent, immunoenzymatic, and chemiluminescent labelling techniques. Such sensors are used for rapid detection and identification of proteins as required for many biomedical applications such as clinical diagnostics, drug discovery, and proteomic analysis. Commonly, protein microarrays are fabricated by pin microspotting, ink-jet printing, or photolithography. Laser transfer technique serves as an alternative to these techniques being simple and rapid [916].

6.3 Welding and Cladding Under Water Welding and cladding in contact with liquids is not known to bring along any benefits, but there may be a need to do these operations under water at repair of underwater constructions (e.g. offshore platforms, floating structures and nuclear reactors) [918–922]. Compared with the other underwater welding methods, underwater laser welding is characterized by its low-heat input, which is a key to reduce the sensitivity of stainless steel to stress corrosion cracking [923]. Laser underwater welding is commonly performed using a local dry zone, but can be in principle carried out also without it (Fig. 6.7). However, at welding the temperature rises up to 10 000◦ C what causes thermal dissociation of water. The gas bubble at underwater welding is estimated to contain up to 80 per cent of hydrogen that dissolves easily in melt and causes brittleness of the weld joint [502]. Szelagowski and Sepold [924] report about welding of 6-mm thick St 52-3 (A440) steel in contact with water by 4-kW CO2 -laser at pressures 0.5–2.5 bar. The incorporated hydrogen amounted 15–20 ml/100 g weld. In order to avoid the entering of water into the welding zone, special welding heads have been developed (Fig. 6.8). However, the local dry zone may not guarantee an hydrogen-free weld. At a 32-kW Nd:YAG welding of HTS material at feed rate of 22 mm/s having water depth of 460 mm and He shield gas,Whitney and Rhoads [929] measured diffusible hydrogen concentration in wet welds to be about 150 times higher than in dry welds (3.3–6.4 ml of hydrogen per 100 g of wet welded metal; contra only 0.02 ml in dry weld). An increase in tensile strength and hardness throughout the weld was observed as well in the wet case [929].

Table 6.8

Liquids-assisted laser induced forward transfer deposition (MDW, LIFT) (examples).

Compounds or cells

Liquid/matrix

Substrate for starting film

Laser type and beam parameters

Eukaryotic cells, banana tissue + graphite powder

Hydrogel (for cells), mineral oil (for banana tissue)

Fused silica

Lambda phage DNA

Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA

Treponema pallidum 17 kDa protein antigen Salmon sperm DNA

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

References

ArF, 193 nm. 20 ns, 0.1–0.4 mJ/cm2

Patches of 150 µm in diameter containing 40 cells were transferred; banana tissue (containing PPO enzyme) paste was transferred onto microelectrodes resulting a stable biosensor for dopamine

Wu (2001) [911]

Quartz

KrF, 248 nm, 0.5 ps, 10 mJ, 110 mJ/cm2

Starting film thickness was 250 nm; DNA microarrays with spot size of 100 µm × 100 µm were deposited onto glass

Karaiskou (2003) [915]

PBS mixed with glycerol

Glass +Ti film (60 nm)

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 10 ns, 10 µJ, spot 40 µm

Starting film thickness was 10 µm; protein microarrays with dot size ∼50 µm were fabricated on nylon coated glass surface

Serra (2004) [916]

Water + glycerol + SDS

Glass +Ti film (60 nm)

Nd:YAG, 355 nm, 10 ns, 10 µJ, spot 40 µm, 0.8 J/cm2

Microarrays of DNA droplets (55–65 µm in size) were fabricated on a poly-L-lysine coated glass slides

Fernández-Pradas (2004) [917]

Notations LIFT – laser induced forward transfer PBS – phosphate buffered saline solution SDS – sodium dodecyl sulphate DNA – desoxyribonucleic acid PPO – polyphenoloxidase enzyme Tris-HCl – 2-Amino-2-(hydroxymethyl)-1,3-propanediol, hydrochloride, C4 H11 NO3 ClH EDTA – ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, C10 H16 N2 O8

279

Surface modification, deposition of thin films, welding, and cladding

Laser beam v Capillary in water

Water

Weld bead

Workpiece

Molten material

Capillary in workpiece

Figure 6.7 Laser wet welding under water layer [924]. The focused laser beam of intensity of ∼106 W/cm2 impinges onto a metallic surface and delivers its energy to the metal. The material will be heated locally to temperatures above the boiling point resulting in a vapour or plasma filled capillary. Through this capillary the laser beam enters the metal and delivers its energy to deeper areas. The process can be carried out even using a CO2 -laser; although water is opaque at 10.6 µm wavelength, high-intensity laser beam can ‘bore’ a hole into the water. Reproduced by permission TWI Ltd.

Laser beam Shielding Gas Fiber cable Filler Laser torch Shieldig water tube Shielding gas tube Feeding wire

(a) Auxiliary gas

Shielding gas

Working Sensor gas

Water curtain

Working gas Funnelshaped lamella rings Substrate Workpiece

(c)

(b)

Figure 6.8 Devices for underwater laser welding and cladding, developed at (a) Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries, Ltd. (IHI) [925, 926]; (b) Bremer Institut für angewandte Strahltechnik (BIAS) [927] and (c) Hitachi Ltd. [928, 927]. Republished with permission of Atomic Energy Society of Japan.

C H A P T E R

S E V E N

Physics and Chemistry of Laser–Liquid–Solid Interactions

Contents 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6

Laser Beams and Their Propagation Phase Change Phenomena Optical Breakdown of Liquids and Plasma Shock Waves in Liquids and Solids Laser-Induced Reactions of Carbon with Organic Solvents and Water Behaviour of Oxides in High Temperature Water and Water Vapour

281 288 295 302 306 308

7.1 Laser Beams and Their Propagation Nomenclature x, y, z – Cartesian coordinates r, θ √ – cylindrical coordinates, r 2 = x2 + y2 , θ = sin y/x i = −1 – imaginary unit ε – dielectric permittivity, ε = εr ε0 ε0 – dielectric permittivity of vacuum, ε0 = 8.8541878176 × 10−12 F/m εr – relative dielectric constant (permittivity) µ – magnetic permeability, µ = µr µ0 µ0 – magnetic permeability of vacuum, µ0 = 4π × 10−7 N/A2 (by definition) µr – relative magnetic permeability λ – wavelength k = 2π/λ – wave number√ c – speed of light, c = 1/ εµ √ c0 – speed of light in vacuum, c0 = 1/ ε0 µ0 = 299 792 458 m/s (convention) ν – frequency of light ω – angular frequency of light, ω = 2πν E – electrical field vector E(r, z) – electrical field amplitude E0 = E(0, 0) – electrical field amplitude at z = 0, r = 0 H – magnetic field vector H (r, z) – magnetic field amplitude H0 = H (0, 0) – magnetic field amplitude at z = 0, r = 0 P0 – total power transmitted by the beam; for pulses: the maximum total power I0 = I (0, 0) – irradiance power density (intensity of the light) at z = 0, r = 0 Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing ISBN-13: 978-0-08-044498-7

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

281

282

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

F0 = F(0, 0) – fluence at z = 0, r = 0 Ep – energy of the laser pulse τ – pulse duration, full-width half maximum (FWHM), I (τ/2) =√I0 /2 ln 2 τe – half of the pulse duration, at level 1/e, I (τe ) = I0 /e, τe = τ/2 √ τe2 – half of the pulse duration at 1/e 2 level, I (τe2 ) = I0 e 2 , τe2 = τ/ 2 ln 2 w – beam radius (locus of E(z, r) = E(z, 0)/e or H (z, r) = H (z, 0)/e, or I (z, r) = I (z, 0)/e 2 ; contains 86.5% of the beam energy w0 – waist radius (focal spot diameter), w0 = w(z = 0); I (0,√w0 ) = I (0, 0)/e 2 we – waist radius defined by I (0, w√ e ) = I (0, 0)/e, we = w0 / 2 zR – Rayleigh length, w(±zR ) = 2 · w0 b – confocal parameter (depth of focus), b = 2 zR R – wavefront curvature ζ(z) – Gouy phase shift θdiv – divergence – total angular spread of the beam (full-width diffraction angle), = 2θdiv q(z) – complex beam parameter M 2 – beam quality parameter, beam propagation factor, M 2 -factor.

7.1.1 Properties of Gaussian beams TEM00 beam relations (isotropic, linear medium; SI units) Gaussian TEM00 beam (diffraction limited beam) is the most frequently used approximation of low-power laser beams. However, the beams from high-power lasers may significantly differ from the Gaussian one. Complex amplitude of electrical field (V/m): w0 −r 2 r2 E (r, z) = E0 exp 2 + iζ(z) exp −ikz − ik w (z) w (z) 2R (z)

(7.1)

Complex amplitude of magnetic field (A/m): H (r, z) = H0

w0 −r 2 r2 exp 2 exp −ikz − ik + iζ(z) w (z) w (z) 2R (z)

(7.2)

Energy density ( J/m3 ): W =

1 ε0 εr E 2 + µ0 µr H 2 2

(7.3)

in vacuum: W = ε0 E 2 = µ0 H 2

(7.4)

(W/m2 )

(Figs 7.1 and 7.2): Intensity (power density perpendicular to the wavefront) I = 12 Re E × H∗ , I (r, z) = I0 Beam radius:

w0 w (z)

2

w (z) = w0 1 +

exp

−2r 2 w 2 (z)

2

z zR

(7.5)

(7.6)

(7.7)

283

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

1.0

b

I (r , 0) I0

w (z) 2w0

w0

1/e

z0

div

1/e 2 r

zR

Figure 7.1

0

we w0

Intensity distribution in a TEM00 Gaussian beam in the waist region.

z

Figure 7.2 Beam radius dependence on z-coordinate of three TEM00 Gaussian beams having the same wavelength, but different divergences.

Rayleigh length: zR =

π · w02 λ

(7.8)

Confocal parameter (depth of focus): Wavefront curvature:

b = 2zR

(7.9)

z 2 R R (z) = z 1 + z

(7.10)

Divergence (rad):

θdiv = arctan

w0 zR

= arctan

λ πw0

(7.11)

Total angular spread of the beam: = 2θdiv Gouy phase shift (rad):

ζ (z) = arctan

(7.12) z zR

(7.13)

Complex beam parameter (m−1 ): 1 1 λ 1 = = −i 2 q (z) z + izR R (z) πw (z)

(7.14)

Total power of the beam (W): P0 = πwe2 I0 = πw02

I0 I (0, z) = πw 2 (z) 2 2

(7.15)

284

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Power transmitted through a circle of radius r = w(z): P (z) = 1 − e 2 P0 ≈ 0.865P0

(7.16)

Real laser beam For laser beams containing besides TEM00 also higher modes: θreal = M 2 θdiv .

(7.17)

Gaussian laser pulse For a laser pulse of both Gaussian spatial and Gaussian temporal shape, (spatial length of the pulse is much greater than zR ) [W m−2 ]: 2 w0 2 −2r 2 −t , (7.18) exp exp I (r, z, t) = I0 w (z) w 2 (z) τe2 Intensity on the beam’s axis, [W m−2 ]:

2 2P0 t 2 t 2P0 = . exp −2 exp −4 ln 2 · I (0, z, t) = πw 2 (z) τe 2 πw 2 (z) τ

(7.19)(7.20)

Integral relations for single Gaussian pulses Peak intensity [W m−2 ] from peak fluence [ J m−2 ] or pulse energy [ J]: √ √ 2Ep 4 ln 2Ep Ep F0 2 ln 2F0 I0 = √ = √ = 3/2 2 = 3/2 2 = 3/2 2 π w e τe πτe πτ π w0 τe π w0 τ

(7.21)

Pulse energy [ J] from peak fluence [ J m−2 ] or peak intensity [W m−2 ]: Ep = πwe2 F0 =

1 2 1 π3/2 I0 wo2 τ πw0 F0 = π3/2 I0 we2 τe = π3/2 I0 wo2 τe = √ 2 2 4 ln 2

Peak fluence [ J m−2 ] from peak intensity [W m−2 ] or pulse energy [ J]: √ √ Ep 2Ep πI0 τ = F0 = πI0 τe = √ = 2 πw πw02 2 ln 2 e

(7.22)

(7.23)

Region where the power density exceeds a predetermined value P th [930] (Fig. 7.3) 1 2Ep π1/2 w02 zth = − π2 w04 , λ Pth τe 2Ep w 2 (z) ln , rth (z) = 2 Pth π3/2 τe P 2 (r, z, t) Volume where P > Pth :

Vth = 2 0

zth

2 πrth dz

= 0

zth

(7.24)

(7.25)

2Ep πw (z) ln dz. Pth π3/2 τe w 2 (z) 2

(7.26)

285

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

Vth

r th

z th

z th

z

Figure 7.3

Surface of constant power density near the waist of a Gaussian beam.

Time (measured from the laser pulse peak) when laser power in a point (r, z) reaches P > Pth : 2Ep 2r 2 tth = τe ln − 2 . 3 2 2 / Pth π τe w (z) w (z)

(7.27)

7.1.2 Reflection of light (normal incidence) Reflectivity of a vacuum–medium interface (n − 1)2 + k2 , (n + 1)2 + k2 where n is the refractive index indicating the phase velocity and k is the extinction coefficient: 1 2 2 2 ε1 + ε 2 + ε 1 , n = · 2 1 2 2 2 ε1 + ε 2 − ε 1 . k = · 2 ε1 and ε1 are the components of the complex dielectric permittivity, R=

ε = ε1 + iε2 .

(7.28)

(7.29)

(7.30)

(7.31)

k is related to the (linear) absorption coefficient a by a=

2ωk . c

(7.32)

Reflectivity and transmittance of an interface between two media When light is propagating from a medium with refractive index n0 to another medium with refractive index n1 , the reflectivity R and transmittance T is given as n0 − n1 2 Ir = (7.33) R= I0 n0 + n 1 It = 1 − R, (7.34) I0 where I0 is the incident, Ir is the reflected, and It is the transmitted light intensity. Reflectivity of still water surface to visible light at normal conditions and normal incidence is about 2 per cent. T =

286

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Reflectivity of two parallel interfaces (e.g. air–water–solid) For light with coherence length smaller than that the distance between the interfaces, T =

T1 T2 τ , 1 − R 1 R2 τ 2

(7.35)

where T1 is the transmittance of the interface 1, R1 is the reflectance of the interface 1,T2 is the transmittance of the interface 2, R2 is the reflectance of the interface 2, and τ is the transmittance of the medium between the interfaces. According to calculations by Kim and Lee [467], a water layer on aluminium increases the overall surface absorptivity from 0.08 to 0.108.

Reflectivity of liquid–plasma interface The reflectivity at the liquid–plasma interface, Rlp , can be calculated in frames of Drude model as [931, 259] 2 2 npl − nl + kpl − kl (7.36) Rlp = 2 2 , npl + nl + kpl + kl where npl = kpl =

ε +

√

ε2 + ε2 , 2

ε , 2npl

ε = 1 − ε = γ

(7.38) ωp2

ω2 + γ 2

(7.37)

ωp2

ω ω2 + γ 2 ne e 2 ωp = , m e ε0 8kB Te γ = np σc πme

,

(7.39)

,

(7.40)

(7.41)

(7.42)

where ε and ε are the real and imaginary parts of the dielectric function of plasma, ω is the laser frequency, ε0 is the dielectric constant of vacuum, e is the electron charge, ωp is the plasma frequency, npl and kpl are the real and imaginary parts of the refractive index of plasma, nl and kl are those for liquid, respectively, ne and np are electron and particle density, respectively, γ is the electron-particle collision frequency, and σc is electron-particle collision cross-section.

Light pressure Light (or acoustic) pressure on an interface perpendicular to the propagation direction of the light (sound) is given by I (7.43) p = W (1 + R) = (1 + R) , c where W is the energy density, I is the intensity of light (sound), and R is the reflection coefficient.

287

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

p = ε0 E 2 (1 + R) = µ0 H 2 (1 + R) .

In vacuum:

(7.44)

7.1.3 Propagation of Gaussian beams Transformations of a Gaussian beam in a paraxial linear optical system may conveniently be described by the ABCD-method. Below, an example of finding geometrical relations for a laser beam focused onto a workpiece in liquid is given. If the window is absent, the parameter g should be taken equal to zero (Fig. 7.4). The ABCD-matrix for the interval between the beam waists w0 and wwp (interval a-b-g-h) is given as product of the ABCD-matrices of homogeneous intervals and interfaces [932]:

A C

B D

=

1 h · 0 1

1 0

0 ng nl

⎡ 1 1 g · ·⎣0 0 1

⎤ 0 1 ⎦· 1 0 ng

1 b 1 · 1 − F

⎤ g g hF h ab ag ahF b a + b + − − + − − + 1 − ⎢ F ng F nl ng nl F ng F nl ⎥ ⎥. =⎢ ⎦ ⎣ F 1 aF − − nl nl nl Using complex beam parameter q defined for a medium with refractive index n as

1 · 0 1 h

a 1

⎡

1 1 λ0 = −i , q R (z) nπw 2 (z)

(7.45)

(7.46)

the parameters q0 and qwp at the locations 0 and wp are related as: qwp

Aq0 + B = Cq0 + D

or

1 qwp

C + D 1 q0 . = A + B 1 q0

(7.47)

Taking into account that in our model at the boundaries of the interval a-b-g-h, R(z) = ∞ (Eq. (7.10)), from (7.46) follows: λ0 1 = −i 2 , q0 πw0

(7.48)

λ0 1 = −i , 2 qwp nl πwwp

(7.49)

and

n1

Focusing lens

ng

wwp

h

w0

Beam expander (optional)

Laser

F

g

b

a

Figure 7.4 Propagation of a Gaussian beam in a model system of liquids-assisted laser processing. In comparison with focusing in air, in liquid the focus spot lies more away from the laser.

288

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Using (7.47), −i

0D C − i λπw 2 πw02 C − iλ0 D λ0 0 = = . λ B 2 nl πwwp πw02 A − iλ0 B A − i πw0 2

(7.50)

0

The equations for real and imaginary parts of (7.50) are: Re: π2 w04 AC + λ20 BD = 0,

(7.51)

2 (AD − BC) = 0. Im: π2 w04 A2 − λ20 B 2 − π2 nl w02 wwp

(7.52)

Equations (7.45), (7.51), and (7.52) relate the geometrical and material parameters of the model a, b, g, h, w0 , wwp , λ, F, nl , ng .

7.2 Phase Change Phenomena 7.2.1 Overall phenomenology On nanosecond–microsecond time scale, a typical laser-generated transient at a liquid–solid interface looks like in Fig. 7.5. Immediately after laser energy absorption the leading front of excitation may be regarded 1D; later spherical. Decay phase of the bubble is presented in more detail in Fig. 7.6. Nomenclature r1 , r2 – liquid–vapour interface curvatures in two perpendicular planes containing the normal to the interface T – thermodynamic temperature T0 – ambient temperature Tv – temperature of the vapour Tvl – temperature difference across liquid–vapour interface p0 – ambient pressure pg – gaseous phase (vapour) pressure pl – ambient liquid pressure ρ, ρ1 – density of the liquid (a) Silica glass

Laser beam

Toluene loquid Shock wave

(b)

(c) Shock wave

Shock wave Bubble

200 m

(d)

200 m

200 m (f)

(e)

Bubble 200 m

200 m

200 m

Figure 7.5 Time-resolved optical micrographs of laser ablation of toluene liquid through a glass plate at the delay times of (a) 100 ns, (b) 500 ns, (c) 1.2 µs, (d) 10 µs, (e) 50 µs, and (f) 100 µs [607]. Laser: 248 nm, 30 ns, 1.6 J/cm2 pulse−1 . © Elsevier.

289

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

40 s delay

400 s delay

800 s delay

Figure 7.6

Bubble decay at laser ablation of alumina under water [469]. © Elsevier.

ν1 – special volume of liquid σ – surface tension σˆ – accommodation coefficient, ranges 0.02–0.04 for water and lower alcohols [933] α – vaporization coefficient m – particle (atom or molecule) mass Hv – latent heat (enthalpy) of vaporization per unit mass qi – heat flux across liquid–vapour interface Vlv – change of molecular volume at vaporization, Vlv = Vv − Vl J – nucleation rate (number of nuclei per unit volume and time) αl – thermal diffusivity of the liquid kB – Boltzmann’s constant, kB = 1.3806505(24) × 10−23 J/K Rg – universal gas constant, Rg = 8.3144 kJ/(kg mol K).

7.2.2 Vaporization from free liquid surfaces Equilibrium vapour pressure (saturated vapour pressure) Clausius–Clapeyron equation (defines the slope of the vapour pressure curve): Hv dp . = dT T Vg − Vl Saturated vapour pressure:

Hv m ps (T ) = p0 exp Rg T0

T0 1− T

(7.53)

(7.54)

Dependence of vapour pressure on surface curvature Pressure difference across a curved liquid–vapour interface is given by the Laplace equation (Young–Laplace equation): 1 1 P g − Pl = σ . (7.55) − r1 r2

290

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Vaporization/condensation rate Hertz–Knudsen equation: j = σˆ

m [ps (TR ) − pv ], 2πRg TR

(7.56)

where j is the intensity of vaporization or condensation (particles per unit area), M is the liquid molar mass, TR is the temperature at the vapour–liquid interface, and ps is the saturation vapour pressure corresponding to the temperature TR .

Velocity of surface recession at vaporization [934]

∂x ∂t

≈ αpb exp x=0

Hv m kB

1 1 − Tb T

×

ρl

√

m . 2πmkB T

(7.57)

Heat flux to the liquid–vapour interface [554]

qi

=

2σˆ 2 − σˆ

Hv2 Tv Vlv

Heat transfer coefficient of a liquid–vapour interface: hi =

m 2πRg Tv

qi . Tvl

1−

Pv Vlv 2Hv

Tvl .

(7.58)

(7.59)

7.2.3 Nucleation of vapour bubbles Definitions Homogeneous nucleation – nucleation in the interior of a uniform substance. Heterogeneous nucleation – nucleation at interfaces or inclusions. Critical nucleus size – nuclei of size smaller than critical shrink spontaneously, and of greater size grow spontaneously. Critical nucleation rate Jcr – rate of nucleation of critical nuclei. Binodal (vapour pressure curve) – the line on the phase diagram where the liquid and vapour are the thermodynamically stable phases. Spinodal – locus of states of infinite compressibility (∂p/∂V )T = 0; spinodal is the boundary of unstable and metastable regions on state diagram. Fluctuations in density, however small they are, will grow spontaneously. Kinetic spinodal (cloud line) – locus in the phase diagram, where the lifetime of metastable states becomes shorter than a relaxation time to local equilibrium. If the surface tension is known, the physical boundary of metastable states in this approach is completely determined by the equation of state only, (i.e. by the equilibrium properties of the system). Fisher limit – homogeneous nucleation limit derived by Fisher [935]; depends on the size of the volume under consideration and the duration of the applied stress. Phase explosion (Explosive boiling) – sharp increase of homogeneous nucleation in a superheated liquid.

Homogeneous nucleation Homogeneous nucleation of vapour bubbles occurs if the state of the liquid crosses a certain curve in the pressure–temperature diagram (Fig. 7.7). Different theories predict different nucleation limits; in case of heating by nanosecond and shorter laser pulses, the kinetic spinodal is closest to the observed nucleation onset. Homogeneous nucleation rate (nuclei per time and volume unit) is given by [554]:

16πσ 3 3σ exp − (7.60) J = N0 2 , πm 3kB Tl ηpsat − pl

291

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

25

50 C.P.

H2O

20

Pressure (MPa)

0

C.P.

Binodal Spinodal Kinetic spinodal Nucleation limit (Skripov) Nucleation limit (Zheng)

15 50 10 Binodal Kinetic spinodal Spinodal Nucleation limit (Skripov) Nucleation limit (Zheng) Fisher’s theory

100

150 200

300

400

500

5 H2O

0

600

700

5

560

Temperature (K)

580 600 620 Temperature (K)

640

Figure 7.7 Calculated pressure of liquid water along the binodal, spinodal, and kinetic spinodal as a function of temperature [936]. The dotted curve corresponds to the nucleation limit in Fisher’s theory, the circles indicate experimental data of Skripov and Chukanov, and the triangles indicate the experimental data of Zheng recalculated in P −T coordinates with the analytic equation of Soul and Wagner. © Elsevier.

where

η∼ = exp

νl pl − psat (Tl ) . RTl

(7.61)

Feder et al. [937] and Dömer and Bostanjoglo [938] presented an improved formula for nucleation rate for phase explosion situations, taking into account the presence of a Knudsen layer at the liquid–gas interface. The liquid, superheated to a temperature T , was assumed to be exposed to the recoil pressure 0.54 ps (T ) of atoms evaporating into a Knudsen layer, with ps (T ) being the saturated vapour pressure at temperature T . The equilibrium temperature TE is then determined by ps (TE ) = 0.54 ps (T ). The vapour was approximated by an ideal gas. Then the stationary homogeneous nucleation rate of critical bubbles becomes Hv 16πkB T σ 3 ρ (T ) 2σ (7.62) exp − exp − N˙ = 2 , 0.54 m πm kB T 3 0.54ps (T ) g where Hv (T ) is the atomic evaporation enthalpy, g =

T

Hv T dT .

(7.63)

Tg

However, in laser processing situations, for example in cleaning, the exact value of nucleation rate is of minor influence on the experimentally observable nucleation threshold, because the exponential rise of the nucleation rate with superheating leads to an extremely sharp increase over many orders of magnitude within a narrow temperature interval [80]. In water and lower alcohols under typical circumstances, for example, a temperature increase of 1o C causes the nucleation rate to increase three orders of magnitude [554].

Heterogeneous nucleation Heterogeneous nucleation rate is given by [554]: N 2/3 (1 + cos θ) J= 0 2F

3Fσ πm

1/ 2

16πFσ 3 exp − 2 , 3kB Tl ηpsat − pl

(7.64)

292

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Distance from the Au surface (nm)

20

15

10

5

0 90 ps

115 ps

140 ps

165 ps

Figure 7.8 Snapshots from the molecular dynamic (MD) simulation of 24 water layers on a Au(111) surface suddenly heated to 1000 K. The time between successive frames is 25 ps. © American Chemical Society (2001), Reprinted with permission from Ref. [939].

where F = F (θ) =

1 2 + 3 cos θ − cos3 θ , 4

(7.65)

2/3

where θ is the contact angle of the liquid at the interface and N0 is the number of molecules per unit area at the interface. In laser cleaning, a nucleation rate Jcr = 1022 m−3 s−1 was measured at Si–water interface [80]. Likely to homogeneous nucleation, also here an exponential increase over many orders of magnitude in a very narrow temperature interval is observed, giving rise to a relatively sharp nucleation threshold [80]. At intense short pulse irradiation of a solid–liquid interface, no vapour bubbles, but a continuous vapour layer formation is observed and predicted by MD-simulations (Figs 2.37, 2.38, and 7.8).

7.2.4 Bubble dynamics Bubble in an infinite space Bubbles created in bulk liquid by laser pulses or by cavitation, expand and shrink periodically as shown in Fig. 7.9. In many liquids, thereby in water and in alcohols, the bubble emits a short light pulse (sonoluminescence) and shock wave every time it collapses. Dynamics of a spherical bubble much smaller than the sound wavelength is given by Rayleigh–Plesset equation [941]: 3 dR 2 1 4η dR 2σ d2 R pg − P0 − P (t) − = − , (7.66) R 2 + dt 2 dt ρl R dt R with notations: ρl is the density of the liquid, pg is the pressure in the gas, assumed to be spatially uniform, P0 is the background static pressure (usually 1 bar), P(t) is the pressure in the neighbourhood of the bubble, η is the shear viscosity, and σ is the surface tension of the gas–liquid interface. The bubble growth velocity becomes [554] dR = dt

2 [T0 − Ts (P0 )] Hv ρv . · 3 Ts (P0 ) ρl

(7.67)

293

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

Bubble

Shock wave

R

t

Figure 7.9 Bubble pulsation in a bulk liquid. Every time the bubble collapses, a short light pulse (∼150 ps) and a shock wave are generated in many liquids, thereby in water. After Isselin et al. [477] and Brujan [940].

Equation (7.66) does not consider the energy dissipation through heat conduction, viscosity, etc. Leiderer et al. [80] achieved better match with experiment by d2 R 3 R 2 + dt 2

dR dt

2

3γ R0 1 t pmax = exp − − p0 , ρl R τ

(7.68)

where γ is the polytropic exponent. The energy loss was accounted by the relaxation time τ; τ = ∞ corresponding to the adiabatic model.

Bubble at a heated surface Carey [554] gives a formula for bubble growth on a heated surface (constant temperature): √ R(t) = 0.470 Ja Pr l−1/6 αl t, where Ja is the Jakob number, Ja =

(7.69)

[T0 − Ts (P0 )]Cpl ρl , ρv H v

(7.70)

ν , α

(7.71)

and Pr is the Prandtl number, Pr =

where ν is the kinematic viscosity and α is the thermal diffusivity. Heat transfer controlled growth of a hemispherical bubble on a heated surface has been analysed numerically by Robinson and Judd [942]. Veiko et al. [156] present a differential equation for the equilibrium shape of a bubble on an heated surface, taking into account the wetting angle.

Bubble decay at interfaces When a bubble collapses at a solid boundary, a liquid jet, directed to the boundary develops (Fig. 7.10). At millimetre-size bubbles the jet velocity ranges up to 200 m/s (depends on bubble radius and on the distance to the wall) and can cause damage even of hard materials (cavitation erosion) [471, 943].

294

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

t

Figure 7.10 Collapse of a gas/vapour bubble near a rigid boundary. Schematically after Blake et al. [946]. The jet diameter is about one-tenth of the bubble initial diameter. As the investigations by Tomita and Shima [947] indicate also hemispherical bubbles generate a liquid jet at solid boundary.

Liquid jet is formed also at bubble (gravitational) detachment from a heated surface [944] and at bubble collapse near a free liquid surface [945]. The impact pressure of the liquid jet is given by the formula [609, 477]: P=

ρl Cl · ρs Cs · vjet , ρl C l + ρ s C s

(7.72)

where (ρl Cl ), (ρs Cs ) are, respectively, the acoustical impedances of water and solid material. For a perfectly rigid wall an assumption (ρl Cl ) (ρs Cs ) can be made. Thus Eq. (7.72) becomes: P = ρl · Cl · vjet .

(7.73)

Chen et al. [948] measured the microjet impact pressure 320–490 MPa for laser pulse energy in range of 5–22 mJ (iron in water; laser: 1064 nm, 30 ns). Bubbles collapse induced flow near a solid boundary was investigated by Ohl et al. [19]. The tangential to boundary flow velocities were highest during the time interval of jet impact and ranged up to ≈10 m/s at maximum bubble size of 2 mm.

Relict microbubbles After a bubble decays near a solid boundary, many microbubbles with initial radii between 5 and 150 µm remain for hundreds of microseconds [10, 949]. The next laser-induced pressure transient forces these bubbles to collapse, causing a plurality of small cavitation erosion pits over an extended area around the initial bubble epicentre [477]. The lowering of acoustical cavitation threshold by relict microbubbles is called memory effect in cavitation. Antonov et al. [950] observed that also after optical breakdown in bulk water the breakdown threshold for successive pulses remained ∼3 times lower than the initial threshold (Nd:YAG-laser, 15 ns). The initial threshold recovered in a day. According to Bunkin and Bunkin [951], if a liquid with dissolved gas contains small amounts of electrolytes (in concentrations of ∼0.01 ppm), whose ions have surface-active properties, under equilibrium conditions it should contain stable microbubbles of a free gas (called ‘bubbstons’). Thus, after optical breakdown the water decomposition products may form long-live bubbstons that lower the breakdown threshold for successive pulses.

Chemical reactions induced by bubble collapse Temperature in collapsing bubbles is estimated to rise up to 6000–20 000 K [952], which causes the dissociation of the liquid. According to Mason and Peters [953], the following reactions occur at bubble collapse in pure water: H2 O H. + O2 2 HO. 2 HO.2

→ → → →

HO. + H. HO.2 H 2 O2 H2 O2 + O2

295

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

7.3 Optical Breakdown of Liquids and Plasma Nomenclature ne – electron density ρv – electron density in valence band (of the liquid) ρc – electron density in conduction band (of the liquid) ni – ion density na – density of neutral atoms gi – partition function for single ionized atoms ga – partition function for neutral atoms m, me – electron mass, 9.1093826(16) × 10−31 kg kB – Boltzmann’s constant, kB = 1.3806505(24) × 10−23 J/K h – Planck’s constant, h = 6.6260693(11) × 10−34 Js – Dirac’s constant, = h/2π = 1.054 571 628(53) × 10−34 J s T – thermodynamic temperature Tp – plasma temperature; it is assumed here Tp = Te = Ti ν – frequency ω – angular frequency ε0 – dielectric permittivity of vacuum, ε0 = 8.8541878176 × 10−12 F/m c – speed of light In dielectric liquids, which are of main interest in laser processing, the ionization (plasma formation) is possible by (1) direct ionization of the liquid by multiphonon or tunnel ionization, and/or by (2) cascade ionization (avalanche ionization) via inverse Bremsstrahlung absorption. The latter mechanism needs one or more ‘seed’ electrons generated by thermal ionization of impurities or by multiphonon ionization, depending on the purity of liquid (after Sollier et al. [260]).

7.3.1 Photoionization of a dielectric liquid For photon energies below the ionization potential (for water, E = 6.5 eV), free electrons have to be generated by multiphoton or tunnel ionization. The time-averaged ionization rate for a field with angular frequency ω and intensity I acting on an electron density ρv − ρc in the ground state is given by Keldysh equations [954] 3/2 ˜ dρc 2ω 1 + γ 2 mω = × Q γ, dt photo 9π γ ω ⎧ ⎪ ⎪ ⎨

˜ × (ρv − ρc ) exp −π +1 × ⎪ ω ⎪ ⎩ where " # Q (γ, x) = # # $

2K

π √1 2 1+γ

×

" # # ×# $

∞ %

K

⎧ ⎪ ⎪ ⎨

√γ

1+γ 2

−E

√1 2 1+γ

E K

√γ

1+γ 2

E

π (2 x + 1 − 2x + n) 2K √ 1 2 E √ 1 2 1+γ

(7.74)

−E

exp −πn ⎪ ⎪ n=0 ⎩

1+γ

⎫ ⎪ √γ 2 ⎪ ⎬ 1+γ , ⎪ ⎪ ⎭

√1

1+γ 2

⎫ ⎪ √γ 2 ⎪ ⎬ 1+γ ⎪ ⎪ ⎭

(7.75)

296

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Here x represents the integer part of the number x, K and E denote elliptic integrals of the first and second kinds, and denotes the Dawson probability integral, z (z) =

exp y2 − x2 dy.

(7.76)

0

At room temperature the initial steady-state free electron density in the conduction band resulting from the Boltzmann distribution is negligible. Thus, the steady-state electron density in the ground state corresponds to the total electron density ρv = 6.68 × 1023 cm−3 [955]. ˜ for creating an electron–hole pair in The Keldysh parameter γ and the effective ionization potential condensed matter exhibiting a band structure (e.g. water) are given by ω cε0 m (7.77) γ= e 4I and ˜ =

1 + γ2 1 2 . E π γ 1 + γ2

(7.78)

where I is irradiance and is bandgap energy.

7.3.2 Cascade ionization (avalanche ionization) As soon as free electrons exist in the interaction volume, they gain kinetic energy through inverse Bremsstrahlung absorption of photons and can generate further free electrons through impact ionization once their energy exceeds the critical energy. The ionization rate per electron participating in the cascade is then given by (case electron-ion inverse Bremsstrahlung) [955]:

1 mc ω 2 τ e2 τ ei , (7.79) ηIB = 2 2 I− ˜ ω τ + 1 cn0 ε0 mc 3 2 M where τ is the time between collisions, c is the vacuum speed of light, I is irradiance, and n0 is the refractive index of the medium at frequency ω. The masses of the electron and the liquid molecules are m and M , respectively. For large irradiances, the cascade ionization rate is proportional to I (after Vogel et al. [956]). Net absorption coefficient for electron-ion inverse Bremsstrahlung is given by [957, 959] me ω ne2 e 6 g ei aIB = 3 1 − exp − , (7.80) kB Tp 6ε0 cω3 me2 6πkB Tp where g is average Gaunt factor √ 3 ω ω K0 , g (ω, Te ) = exp π 2kB Te 2kB Te

(7.81)

where K0 (x) is the modified Bessel function. ei may be expressed as [958] Alternatively, aIB ei aIB

3Z

2n

≈C·λ

i ne

Tp

ω 1 − exp − kB Tp

√ 2 2e 6 ≈ 1.37 × 10−35 when λ is in micrometers. where C ≈ √ 3/ 2 √ 4 3 3πc me kB

,

(7.82)

297

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

The electron-atom inverse Bremsstrahlung absorption coefficient is given by Wu and Shin [259] e 2 ne ni σc 8kB Te ea , aIB = πmcv2 πm where c is the speed of light in vacuum and ni is the total number of ions.

(7.83)

7.3.3 Photoionization absorption coefficients of atoms Photoionization absorption coefficients of atoms produced by thermal dissociation of the liquid, may be calculated as [259, 957] ∞ % θi,a 3 −θa,i 2 −22 1 , api = na exp 7.9 × 10 (7.84) Z 2 nhν ga kB T p 1 − 1 n 2 n=n 1

where

n = integer θi,a hν .

(7.85)

and θa,i is ionisation potential of particle i. Equation (7.85) states that the lower limit in summations is determined from the condition that the photon energy is greater than the binding energy of the electron in the atom. The total absorption coefficient at is the sum of the electron-ion and electron-atom inverse Bremsstrahlung absorption coefficients and of photoionization absorption coefficient, ei ea + aIB + api . at = aIB

(7.86)

7.3.4 Thermal ionization Near laser heated surface, the generation of plasma by thermal ionization is the usual case. Equilibrium electron and ion concentrations in plasma are expressed by Saha’s equation [959]: 3 n e ni 2gi 2πme kB Tp 2 θi = , (7.87) exp − na ga h2 kB Tp where θi is ionisation energy of atom i, gi is the electronic partition function of ion, gi = 1, and ga is the electronic partition functions of atom, given by n∗ % 1 θi ga = 1− 2 , (7.88) 2n2 exp − kB Tp n n=1 where n∗ ∼ =

√ Z 3 np a0

,

(7.89)

and a0 is the Bohr radius.

7.3.5 Diffusion loss of electrons from the plasma The diffusion loss of electrons depends on the shape of the plasma region. In bulk liquid, the plasma region may be considered elliptical (Fig. 7.3). In the model of Kennedy [955], the ellipsoid was approximated with a cylindrical volume with radius w0 (beam waist radius) and length zR = πw02 /λ (Rayleigh length of the laser beam). This led to the following expression for the diffusion rate per electron

2 2.4 2 2τεav 1 ηdiff = . (7.90) + 3me ω0 zR The same equation may be applied also in case of irradiation of a solid surface in liquid, using instead zR the actual thickness of the plasma.

298

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

7.3.6 Recombination loss At calculation of optical breakdown in water,Vogel et al. [956] used for the recombination rate an empirical value determined by Docchio through inspection of the decay of the plasma luminescence [960], dρC = −2 × 10−9 cm3/s × ρc2 . (7.91) dt rec In reality, recombination of free electrons in water is not a one-step process but consists in hydration of the electron within about 300 fs and subsequent decay of the hydrated state that has an average lifetime of ≈300 ns [961].

7.3.7 Thermal conductivity of the plasma The plasma electron conductivity λe can be calculated by the Spitzer–Härm expression [962], 3/ 2 (kB Te )5/2 kB 2 , λe = δT 20 √ 4 π me Z (ln )

(7.92)

where ln is the Coulomb logarithm, =

3

, 2e 3 kB3 Te3 πne

(7.93)

Z is the average charge of ion and δT = 0.225 when Z = 1. When < 1, the Spitzer–Härm expression is not valid, and thermal conductivity can be calculatedas [963] 5 λe = 2

2 kB (kB Te )5/2 √ π me Ze 4 R

where R =

√ −1 52 16 2 + , 15 15 Z

1 η − 1 − ln η · , 2 (1 − η)2 λ=

λD =

η=

1 , λ2

λD , bc

kB T , 4πe 2 ni Z + Z 2

bc =

Ze 2 . 3kB T

(7.94)

(7.95) (7.96) (7.97)

(7.98)

7.3.8 Rate equation for free electrons The time evolution of the electron density ρc in the conduction band of a liquid under the influence of the laser light is in generic form given by [964, 956] dρc dρc dρc dρc dρc dρc = + + + + dt dt photo dt therm dt casc dt diff dt rec =

dρc dt

+ photo

dρc dt

+ ηcasc ne − ηdiff ne − ηrec ne2 . therm

(7.99)

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

299

Definitions of the terms: 1st term: production of free electrons mediated by the strong electric field in the laser focus (photoionization via multiphoton and tunnelling ionization). 2nd term: production of free electrons by thermal ionization. 3rd term: production of free electrons by cascade ionization. 4th term: diffusion loss of free electrons. 5th term: recombination loss of free electrons. The cascade ionization rate ηcasc and the diffusion loss rate ηdiff are proportional to the number of already produced free electrons, while the recombination rate ηrec is proportional to ρc2 , as it involves an interaction between two charged particles (an electron–hole pair) (citation from Vogel et al. [956]). One speaks of optical breakdown when a critical free electron density of 1018 − 1020 cm−3 is exceeded during the laser pulse [260].

7.3.9 Internal energy density of electrons and particles in plasma [965, 259] Ee =

% 3 n e kB Te + ni θi 2

(7.100)

Ep =

3 np kB Tp + np,0 El,diss 2

(7.101)

where summation in (7.100) is over all particles in the plasma, θi is the ionisation energy of atom i in plasma, and El,diss is the total dissociation energy for the molecule of the liquid.

7.3.10 Energy balance equation for electrons Electrons gain energy by absorption of the laser light and loose energy by collision with atoms and ions, via conduction, radiation, and plasma expansion. For a water-confined plasma of thickness L at a solid surface, the energy balance equation for electrons was given by Wu et al. as follows [259]: d (LUe ) = I 1 − Rwp [1 − exp (−at L)] + I 1 − Rwp exp (−at L) Rc dt 3 − kB Te − Tp vtr ne L − qcdc − qcdw − (1 − Rc ) σTe4 − 1 − Rwp σTe4 2 − Pe uw,pre + uwev + uc,pre + ucev , vtr =

2me ,

mp,ave np σc 8kB Te πme

(7.102) (7.103)

with notations: L is the thickness of plasma layer, Ue is the energy density for electrons, I is the laser power are the liquid–plasma interface reflectivity to laser and plasma radiation, respectively, density, Rlp and Rlp Rc and Rc are the solid surface reflectivity to laser and plasma radiation, respectively, σ is the Stefan–Boltzmann constant, Pe is the partial pressure of electrons, at is the total absorption coefficient, and qcdc and qcdw are the heat flux conducted from plasma to the solid surface and liquid surface, respectively, vtr is the electron-particle energy transfer frequency, mp,ave is the average particle mass, σc is the electron-particle collision cross section, uw,pre and uwev are the pressure- and evaporation-caused receding velocities of the liquid surface and uc,pre and ucev are the pressure- and evaporation-caused velocities of the solid surface.

300

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

7.3.11 Heat flux conducted from plasma to adjacent matter [966, 967, 259] Wu and Shin [259] used in simlation of laser peening in water confinement the relation Te − T m kB Te , , fne kB Te qc = min λe 0.5L me

(7.104)

where Tm is the temperature of the adjacent medium, and f is a dimensionless number ∼0.03–0.1 [966]. The total pressure of plasma P is the sum of the electron partial pressure and the particle partial pressure P = Pe + Pp = kB Te ne + kB Tp np ,

(7.105)

where the subindex p denotes particles. Plasma models used for simulation of laser peening were described in Section 3.3.6.1.

7.3.12 Dependence of optical breakdown threshold on laser pulse length Calculated and measured optical breakdown thresholds for bulk water are presented in Fig. 7.11. Optical breakdown is a stochastic process and it depends on hard to avoid particulate impurities in the liquid; at low laser fluences it may not occur at every laser pulse. The fluence, at which breakdown occurs at every pulse, may be 10 times higher than the minimum fluence at which breakdown becomes possible [968]. Table 7.1 presents a comparison of optical breakdown thresholds of some common solvents.

7.3.13 Factors affecting the breakdown threshold in liquids Optical breakdown thresholds in liquids are lowered by suspending particles [969, 930] and by dissolved gases [970, 971]. Bunkin and Lobeev [968] studied the probability of Nd:YAG-laser breakdown in water in dependence on temperature and on dissolved electrolyte concentration. According to Kennedy et al. [972] the impurities

Breakdown threshold (J/cm2)

104 1013

103 102

1012 101 100

1011

101 102

1014

1013

1012

1011

1010

109

Breakdown threshold (W/cm2)

1014

105

1010 108

Pulse duration (s)

Figure 7.11 Optical breakdown thresholds for bulk water. The circles are experimental data in W/cm2 . Solid lines are calculated dependencies for 800 nm wavelength using critical electron density ρcr = 1021 cm13 . After Vogel et al. [956].

301

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

Table 7.1 Relative to water optical breakdown thresholds in various liquids for Nd:YAG-laser pulses (calculated from the data by Bunkin and Lobeev [968]). Liquid

Ith /Ith, water

Water

1.00

Heptane

0.4

Ethanol

0.47

Benzene

0.36

Carbon tetrachloride

0.28

in water affect the breakdown thresholds for pulse lengths greater than 10–100 ps, but not for shorter pulses (1064 nm wavelength). For pure water, the calculations by Vogel et al. [956] showed that laser wavelength starts to influence the breakdown threshold only beginning from 1 to 10 ps pulse length.

7.3.14 Temperatures and pressures at laser breakdown and ablation in water Figures 7.12 and 7.13 and Table 7.6 present some examples of temperatures of laser beakdown and processing plasmas. Data on plasma pressures can be found in Figs 3.16–3.18 and in Table 7.6. Figure 7.14 shows the spatial distribution of luminescence of a laser-induced plasma at a solid–liquid interface. Compared with laser plasmas in air or in vacuum, the confined plasmas by liquids or solids have higher temperature, density, and pressure. The results of some experimental work on laser-generated plasmas at solid–liquid interfaces and in suspensions are summarized in Table 7.6. The observations of Sakka et al. [974, 470] have shown that the typical plasmas occurring at laser processing in liquids are neither thin nor dense – there is a broadened line spectrum with self-absorption reversed dips on a continuous background.

Plasma temperature (K)

20 000

10 000

5000 0.1

1

10

100

1000

Laser pulse energy (mJ)

Figure 7.12 Measured maximum plasma temperature as a function of laser pulse energy at optical breakdown in bulk water. Schematically after Kennedy et al. [972].

302

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Temperature, T(r,z,t) (K)

15 000 Ramp-up, z 0 Ramp-up, z 100 nm Pamp-down, z 0 Ramp-down, z 100 nm Rectangular, z 0 Rectangular, z 100 nm

10 000

t 30 ns

5000

0

0

0.2

0.4 0.6 Radius, r (mm)

0.8

1

Figure 7.13 Calculated by an analytical model radial temperature distributions at a distance z = 0 and z = 100 nm over a laser irradiated iron target in water. Laser: τ = 30 ns, Pave = 50W, spot size r0 = 1 mm; pulse shapes: ramp-up, ramp-down, and rectangular [384]. © Elsevier. 21 ns

40 ns

60 ns

80 ns

100 ns 0.5 mm

Figure 7.14 A series of images of the light-emitting region generated by the irradiation of a pulsed Nd:YAG-laser to a graphite target in water. Exposition time for each frame was 13 ns. A white broken line indicates a rough estimation of the position of the target surface [973]. © Elsevier.

7.4 Shock Waves in Liquids and Solids Nomenclature ρ0 – density ahead the shock front ρ – density behind the shock front m˙ – mass flux of the material passing through the shock wave p0 – pressure ahead the shock front p – pressure behind the shock front e0 – specific internal energy ahead the shock front e– specific internal energy behind the shock front Us – shock velocity up – particle velocity behind the shock front

303

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

u0 – relative to shock front particle velocity ahead the shock front, u0 = −Us u – relative to shock front particle velocity behind the shock front, u = up − Us h – enthalpy ht – total enthalpy v0 – specific volume ahead the shock front v – specific volume behind the shock front εxx – xx-component of the strain tensor σxx – xx-component of the stress tensor µ, λ – Lamé constants. – Grüneisen coefficient (Mie-Grüneisen coefficient) Shock waves in liquid-assisted laser processing are commonly considered as a discontinuity of material properties, density, pressure, particle velocity, and internal energy in the space. This is justified by circumstance that the shock front width in liquids and solids is of order of only few angstroms. The properties of matter at both sides of the shock front are related by following conservation relations [975]: Conservation relations Conservation of mass: (7.106) ρ0 Us = ρ Us − up = m˙ Conservation of linear momentum: p − p0 = ρ0 Us up Conservation of energy:

pup = ρ0 Us

(7.107)

1 2 u + e − e0 2 p

(7.108)

For solids, the last two equations may be written also (for shock propagating in x-direction) [976] σxx = p0 + ρ0 Us up

(7.109)

1 2 ρ0 Us e − e0 + up = σxx up 2

(7.110)

Rankine–Hugoniot relations (Conservation relations in moving with shock front coordinates) ρu = ρ0 u0

(7.111)

p + ρu = p0 1 p 1 + e0 + u02 + e + u2 = ρ 2 ρ0 2

(7.112)

2

p0 + ρ0 u02

(7.113)

Bernoulli’s equation 1 1 h + u2 = h0 + u02 = ht 2 2

(7.114)

Hugoniot equation e − e0 =

1 p − p0 (v0 − v) 2

(7.115)

Rayleigh equations ρ02 Us2 = ρ02 u02 = ρ2 u2 = −

p − p0 v − v0

(7.116)

304

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Snay & Rosenbaum (1952) Rice & Walsh (1957) Nagayama et al (2002 Bloom & Keeler (1974) Sound speed at 1pm & 20C Ref. [977] (Flyer impact method) Linear fit of all data

3

12 Shock Velocity (km/s)

Shock velocity (km/s)

4

Water 2

11 10

Linear fit of all data D 1471 1.956u

1

0

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Particle velocity (km/s)

9 Iron

8 7 6

1

5 1

(a)

2 3 4 Particle velocity (km/s)

5

(b)

Figure 7.15 (a) Shock velocities as a function of particle velocity for water. © American Institute of Physics (2004), reprinted with permission from Ref. [977]. (b) Shock velocities as a function of particle velocity for iron [978]. Open circles are the reprocessed Los Alamos standards data. Filled circles are the two stage light–gas gun data. Experimental uncertainties lie within the symbol size. Dashed line is linear fit and solid line is quadratic fit. © American Institute of Physics (2000), reprinted with permission from Ref. [978].

Gain in the kinetic energy per unit mass of the material by the passage of the shock wave in the laboratory frame coordinates: 1 2 1 Up = (u − u0 )2 = p − p0 (v + v0 ) (7.117) 2 2 Loss in the kinetic energy per unit mass of the material by the passage of the shock wave in shock front-fixed coordinates: 1 1 2 (7.118) u0 − u2 = p − p0 (v + v0 ) 2 2 Shock impedance Z = ρ0 Us

(7.119)

In liquids and solids, the relation between shock and particles velocity can often be approximated by a linear function (cf. Fig. 7.15 and Table 7.2). Us = C0 + Sup ,

(7.120)

where C0 is speed of the sound ahead the shock wave. Using Eq. (7.120) and jump conditions at the shock front, the Hugoniot pressure and internal energy may be expressed as [273, 976] ρ0 C02 η , (1 − Sη)2 ηp e = , 2ρ0

p =

(7.121) (7.122)

where η=1−

V ρ0 =1− . V0 ρ

(7.123)

305

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

Table 7.2 Relation between shock and particles velocities for some liquids [979, 980]. Liquid

Shock velocity (m/s)

Acetone

Us = 1940 + 1.38 up

Ethanol

Us = 1730 + 1.75 up

Ether

Us = 1700 + 1.46 up

Ethylene glycol

Us = 2150 + 1.55 up

Mercury

Us = 1750 + 1.72 up

Liquid oxygen

Us = 1880 + 1.34 up

Water

Us = 1483 + 1.79 up

(Mie)–Grüneisen equation of state Equation of state for shock-compressed bodies with linear Us (up ) relationship (Eq. 7.120) can be derived from Mie–Grüneisen equation ' (V ) & p (V ) = p0 (V ) + e (V ) − e0 (V ) , (7.124) V using modified Rankine–Hugoniot relation (achieved through elimination of up and Us from Eqs (7.106) and (7.108)), 1 e − e0 = (V0 − V ) p + p0 , (7.125) 2 where V ≡ 1/ρ. Combining Eqs (7.121), (7.124), and (7.125) yields η ρ0 C02 η p = p0 (1 − η) + · 1− (7.126) + ρ0 (e − e0 ) . 2 (1 − Sη)2 In this expression, it is assumed that the shocked matter is in hydrostatic compression; for solids it means that the shock pressure is much larger than the yield strength of the material. Elastic–plastic shock waves in a solid (propagating in x-direction) σxx = (λ + 2µ) εxx

Elastic shock wave:

σyy = σzz = λεxx If yielding occurs behind the elastic precursor wave, the shock yield stress Y is

(7.127) (7.128)

Y = 2µεxx

(7.129)

1 2 p= σxx + σyy + σzz = λ + µ εxx . 3 3

(7.130)

and hydrostatic pressure at the wavefront

Leonov et al. [571] calculated the shock pressure at laser irradiation of glass–water interface using the formula by Zaharov [981] Ea r0 1 p (r) = ln 2 , (7.131) Vf r ln r r0 valid if r > df , where r0 = df /2, df is the diameter of the focus spot, Ea is the absorbed laser energy, Vf is the focal volume, and ≈ 1.5 is Grüneisen coefficient. The shock speed in adiabatic compression approximation

306

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

is given by U 2 (r) p (r) = 2 C0 ρ0 C02

1−

ρ0 C02 n

1

(

p (r) +

) ρ0 C02 −1/n n

,

(7.132)

where the factor n ≈ 7 is valid for water. Models of shock propagation at laser peening were described in the section 3.3.6.2.

7.5 Laser-Induced Reactions of Carbon with Organic Solvents and Water 7.5.1 Reactions of carbon with organic solvents Amongst other possible chemical reactions occurring at liquids-assisted laser processing of solids, the reactions of carbon with organic solvents and water have been studied more extensively. Wakisaka et al. [982] proposed the following reaction schemes between graphite and benzene vapours (A) or liquid benzene (B) at laser irradiation. Reproduced by permission of The Royal Society of Chemistry. The conditions of the experiment are given in Table 7.6:Wakisaka (1993). Condition A H

C1

C1

C2

C2

C CH Intermediate 1

Condition B CH3 H

C1

C1

CH3 Intermediate 2

CH3

CH3

C2H5

CH3

C1

CH3

CH3

Gaumet et al. [983] have identified the following reactions between carbon clusters of different sizes with benzene. The main reaction product was phenylacetylene. Reproduced by permission of The Royal Society of Chemistry. H C1

C2

C2

C Intermediate 1

CH (1)

Phenylactetylene

(A) Cn addition to benzene (linear and cyclic)

C1*

+

*

CH3

C

toluene

CH phenylacetylene

C2*

+

* CH

CH2 styrene

307

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

C

C

CH3 1-phenylprop-l-yne

C3*

*

+

Indene

C

C

C

C

H

1-phenylbuta-1,3-diyne

*

+

C4*

naphthalene

(B) Reaction between Cn

C12H2

C8H2 H

(C

C

C

C)2

H

H

(C

C

C

C)4

H

(C) Reaction between aromatic rings

biphenylene

biphenyl

McGrath et al. [984] detected a number of gaseous and liquid reaction products generated by laser irradiation of graphite suspensions in toluene and benzene (Table 7.3):

Table 7.3 Reaction products of laser irradiation of graphite in toluene and benzene [984]. A carbon suspension made from 25 nm diameter particles was used: 133 mg/l for benzene and 200 mg/l for toluene. The amount of gaseous products are expressed as a percentage of the total gas amount of moles. Laser: 1064 nm, 10 ns, 650 mJ, 6000 pulses. Graphite + benzene

Graphite + toluene

Gaseous products (%)

Liquid products

Gaseous products (%)

Liquid products

H2 (94.6)

1-Methylene

H2 (92.6)

1,2-Dimethylbenzene

CH4 (2.2)

H-indene

CH4 (4.9)

1-methylene-2propenybenzene

C2 H2 (2.9)

naphthalene

C2 H2 (2.2)

1-propynylbenzene

C2 H4 (0.3)

biphenyl biphenylene acenaphthylene 1-methytriphenylene

C2 H4 (0.2) C2 H6 (0.1)

1-methylnaphthalene naphthalene 2-ethenylnaphthalene biphenyl 1,1 -methylenebisbenzene 4-methyl-1,1 -biphenyl biphenylene bibenzyl 2,2 -dimethylbiphenyl 9H-fluorene

308

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

7.5.2 Reactions of carbon with water The studies by Chen et al. [833] revealed the main reactions at 1.06-µm laser irradiation of carbon suspension in water: C + H2 O → H2 + CO, CO + H2 O → H2 + CO2 . McGrath et al. [984] identified both gaseous and liquid products generated in a suspension of 25-nm diameter carbon particles in water by a laser beam of 1064 nm, 10 ns, 650 mJ, and 6000 pulses (percentage is of the total molar amount of gas produced). Gaseous products: CO (68%), H2 (25%), C1 (2.0%), C2 (4.4%), C3 (0.2%), and C4 (0.4%). GC-MS was used to detect individual hydrocarbons which were determined to be methane (CH4 ), ethane (C2 H6 ), ethene (C2 H4 ), ethyne (C2 H2 ), propene (C3 H6 ), 1,2-propadiene (C3 H4 ), 1-propyne (C3 H4 ), 1-buten3-yne (C4 H4 ), and 1,3-butadilyne (C4 H2 ). The main product in each hydrocarbon group is highlighted in italics (citation from McGrath et al. [984]). Liquid products: Carboxyl (R-COOH) and ester (R-COO-R) functional groups, arene carbon, alkenes, and alkynes were detected by 13 C NMR technique.

7.6 Behaviour of Oxides in High Temperature Water and Water Vapour It was pointed out by Dolgajev et al. [479] and Hidai and Tokura [478] that at laser ablation in water the hydrothermal dissolution of solids may play an important role. When the temperature and pressure of water rise from normal to supercritical values, the solubility of many oxides, commonly machined by laser, rises several hundred-fold [985, 797] (Table 7.4). Table 7.4 Solubility of some oxides in pure water at 500◦ C and 1000 atm (100 MPa). (After Matson and Smith [986]). Oxide

Solubility (ppm)

UO2

0.2

Al2 O3

1.8

SnO2

3.0

NiO

20

Nb2 O5

28

Ta2 O5

30

Fe2 O3

90

SeO

120

SiO2

2600

GeO2

8700

309

Physics and chemistry of laser–liquid–solid interactions

Table 7.5

Generation and thermodynamic data on some metal and silicon hydroxides [988]. r H◦298 (kJ/mol)

r S◦298 ( J/mol K)

D◦298 (M—OH) (kJ/mol)

Geometry of M—OH bond

653

213

334

Linear

669

229

318

Bent

½Fe2 O3 (s) + H2 O(g) = Fe(OH)2 (g) + ¼O2 (g)

324

102

411

Bent

CuO(s) + ½H2 O(g) = Cu(OH)(g) + ¼O2 (g)

400

145

260

Linear

429

161

230

Bent Bent

Group

Reaction

VIII

½Fe2 O3 (s) + ½H2 O(g) = Fe(OH)(g) + ½O2 (g)

IB

IIB

ZnO(s) + H2 O(g) = Zn(OH)2 (g)

201

55

300

IIIA

½Al2 O3 (s) + ½H2 O(g) = Al(OH)(g) + ½O2 (g)

779

199

549

½Al2 O3 (s) + ½H2 O(g) = AlO(OH)(g)

498

134

566

½Al2 O3 (s) + H2 O(g) = Al(OH)2 (g) + ¼O2 (g)

572

121

458

½Al2 O3 (s) + 3/2H2 O(g) = Al(OH)3 (g)

188

−7.3

487

½Ga2 O3 (s) + ½H2 O(g) = Ga(OH)(g) + ½O2 (g)

550

211

428

Linear

570

224

408

Bent

675

190

297

Linear

718

188

254

Bent

260

62

436

Linear

317

64

408

Bent

45

−76

487

Bent

IVA

SiO2 (s) + ½H2 O(g) = SiO(OH)(g) + ¼O2 (g) SiO2 (s) + H2 O(g) = SiO(OH)2 (g) SiO2 (s) + 2H2 O(g) = Si(OH)4 (g)

Many oxides form volatile hydroxides by reaction with water vapour. Even the moisture in laboratory air could create high volatility hydroxides and oxy-hydroxides during high-temperature exposure [987] (Tables 7.5 and Fig. 7.16). Tables 7.6 and 7.7 present essentials of some selected experimental and theoretical work on laser-liquid-solid interactions, having importance to several kinds of materials processing.

310

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing

Temperature (K) 4

1800

1600

1400

Si(OH)4 A

6

Log (P, atm)

1200

Si(OH)4 K

8 SiO(OH)2 A

SiO(OH)2 K

10 SiO(OH) K 12

14

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

10 000/T (K)

Figure 7.16 Calculated vapour pressure of Si–OH species over SiO2 with x(H2 O) = 0.37 and P(total) = 1 bar [988]. The lines labelled K were calculated from thermodynamic functions taken from Krikorian’s estimates based on the pseudo halide behaviour of the hydroxyl group. The lines labelled A were calculated from the thermodynamic functions taken from Allendorf ’s et al. ab initio calculations. The vapour pressure of SiO(OH) (g) from Allendorf ’s calculations was too low to appear on this graph. © Elsevier.

Table 7.6 Some experimental research of physical–chemical processes at laser irradiation of solids in liquids.

Materials irradiated

Liquids/gases in contact with specimen

Graphite

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Benzene

2ω-Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 10 ns, 10 Hz, 22 mJ

Sample immersed horizontally into free surface liquid, focused laser beam

Reaction products identified by mass chromatography: phenylacetylene, xylene, ethylbenzene, styrene, C6 H6 -C4 , biphenyl, diphenylacetylene

Wakisaka (1993) [982]

Graphite

Benzene (under Ar), benzene vapour

Nd:YAG, 266, 532, and 1064 nm, 6 ns, 10 Hz, 1010 W/cm2

Benzene was used as a reactive molecule for trapping the laser-induced Cn clusters; Cn reactions with phenyl radical are listed: the main reaction product was phenylacetylene; in liquid the yield of Cn , n > 2 was smaller than in vapour (see also Section 7.5)

Gaumet (1996) [832]

Carbon black, 25 nm in suspension

Water

Nd:YAG, 1.06 µm, 16 ns, 10 Hz, 0.7 J,up to 6000 shots

Reaction products identified by gas chromatography: CO, H2 , C2 H2 , CH4 , C2 H4 (concentrations given), O2 , N2 , CO2 , C2 H6 (traces)

Chen (1997) [833]

Graphite, Poly-BN

Water, benzene, n-hexane, carbon tetrachloride

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 20 ns, fluence ≈8–9 J/cm2

Workpiece immersed into circulating liquid, covered by window

Optical emission spectra at 29–1000 ns from the laser pulse presented; mass spectrography study of reaction products in liquid; the early stage plasma density is estimated ≈ 1020 cm−3 ; lifetime of line emissions ≈100 ns

Sakka (2000) [470]

Si, Hg

Air, water

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, ∼ 13 ns, spot 5 mm, 0.05–1.4 J/cm2

Target immersed horizontally into water, covered by window, 20◦ C

Fluid dynamics observed by high-speed camera up to 20 Mfps and by reflectance of a probe beam; peak pressures up to 10 MPa were measured by PVDF-sensor; transient reflectance data are compared with theoretical predictions of temperature rise and bubble nucleation

Ueno (2001) [989]

Graphite

Air, water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 20 ns

Target immersed into water, focused laser beam, 10 J/cm2 , up to 0.52 GW/cm2

Plasma emission images at 21–1080 ns from the laser pulse in air and at 21–100 ns in water presented; estimated density of carbon atoms in plasma at 10–20 ns 6.7 × 1021 cm−3 , plasma temperature ≈7500 K, pressure 700–1100 MPa

Saito (2002) [973]

References

(Continued)

Table 7.6

(Continued)

Materials irradiated

Liquids/gases in contact with specimen

Al

Laser type and beam parameters

Other features of the experiment

Novel features, observed phenomena, comments

Water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 20 ns

Target immersed into circulating water, focused laser beam, ≈1 mm spot, 7.2–10.4 J/cm2

Optical emission spectra at 20–80 ns from the laser pulse recorded; 396 nm Al line (2 P–2 S) changes at 40–50 ns from absorption line to emission line; analytical model of plasma transients presented; calculated plasma temperature varies from ≈7000 K (t = 0) to ≈4000 K (t = 100 ns)

Sakka (2002) [990]

Graphite

Water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 20 ns

Target immersed into water, focused laser beam, ≈10 J/cm2

Optical emission spectra in 535–575 nm (C2 Swan band region) recorded at 50–500 ns from laser pulse; vibrational temperature of C2 ≈ 5000 K during the whole time interval; thermal cooling of the gas cavity is slower than the collapse of the cavity

Sakka (2002) [991]

Carbon suspension, 13–75 nm

Water, toluene, benzene

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 10 ns, 10 Hz, 650 mJ, beam diameter ≈1 mm

Evolution of tiny gas bubbles observed; in water, H2 and CO were the main reaction products along numerous hydrocarbons ranging from C1 to C4 ; in toluene and benzene H2 was the main gas product with small amounts of C1 to C3 hydrocarbons; the main liquid product in toluene was bibenzyl and in benzene biphenyl, along with numerous polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in smaller concentrations (Table 7.3); possible reaction paths discussed

McGrath (2002) [984]

Optical emission spectra in 512–518 nm (C2 Swan band tail region) recorded at 150–1200 ns from laser pulse; rotational temperature of C2 ≈6000 K up to ≈1000 ns; rotational temperature is more reliable for laser ablation plume in liquids than vibrational

Saito (2003) [992]

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 100 ps, focused and unfocused Ti:sapphire, 780 nm, 40 fs, unfocused Graphite

Air, water

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 20 ns, ≈70 mJ

Target immersed horizontally into free surface water, water layer 15-mm, focused laser beam, spot ≈87 µm, ≈1.2 kJ/cm2

References

Ag,Au, Si

Water

Graphite

Air, water

Si wafer

IPA

Nd:YAG, 1064 nm, 10 ns, 18 and 36 J/cm2

Nd:YAG, 532 nm, 7 ns, 138 mJ/cm2 , spot several mm

Condensed from vapour film (97–227 nm) on surface

Time-resolved imaging of laser ablation process; in first µs a vertical jet 10 km/s observed; bubble growth velocity 400 m/s; bubble lifetime 200 µs (18 J/cm2 ), 300 µs (36 J/cm2 )

Tsuji (2004) [672]

Further analysis of results by Saito 2003 [992]; self-absorption parameter introduced; self-absorption of plasma emission is considerable in water

Sakka (2005) [993]

Dynamics of liquid film at laser-heated surface was recorded by optical reflectivity with 2 nm, 0.2 ns resolution; estimated with aid of temperature calculations initial vapour pressure (at liquid film lift-off) was ∼5 MPa; ejection velocity of liquid film varied from ∼50 m/s (97 nm film) to ∼40 m/s (227 nm film);

Lang (2006) [107]

Table 7.7 Some theoretical research of physical–chemical processes at laser irradiation of solids in liquids.

Targets Tungsten film on glass

Liquids/gases in contact with target Water

Other features of the system under study Water layer over specimen; scanned laser beam

Results, comments

References

3D-numerical calculations of temperature distribution at laser irradiated interface below liquid vaporization threshold presented

Geretovszky (1996) [994]

The transmission of breakdown plasma in water during LSP experiments was investigated theoretically for laser wavelengths from 355 to 1064 nm and pulse length of 25 ns; at 1064 nm the breakdown process was found to be dominated by avalanche ionization, but at 355 and 532 nm by multiphoton ionization

Sollier (2001) [260]

Au (111)

Water (6, 12 or 24 molecular layers)

Molecular dynamics simulation of water on suddenly heated from 0 to 1000 K surface on time internal 0–400 ps; the simulation describes water superheating and film lift-off (Fig. 7.8)

Dou (2001) [939]

Fe, SS304

Water

Analytical models in cylindrical coordinates for LSP plasma temperature, pressure, and thermal stresses for ramp-up, ramp-down, and rectangular laser pulses, including confined ablation with coating (see Fig. 7.13 for calculated temperatures)

Thorslund (2003) [384]

Water

Wu (2005) [259] A mathematical model of pressure generation at water confined LSP is described; the model considers the processes to be 1D, the plasma homogeneous and two-temperatures laser beam absorption due to electron-ion and electron-atom IB and photoionization only, and Hertz–Knudsen surface evaporation; the model was in good agreement with experimental data at 532 and 1064 nm, 0.6–25 ns and 1–10 GW/cm2 ; the calculations give insight into plasma parameters as the density of species, light transmission, thermal to internal energy ratio α, water–plasma interface reflectivity and energy balance

C H A P T E R

E I G H T

Liquids and Their Properties

Contents 8.1 Introduction 8.2 Properties of 100 Selected Liquids 8.3 Properties of Water

315 332 379

8.1 Introduction About 70 different neutral liquids have been used in laser materials processing, Tables 8.1 and 8.2, the most frequently used liquid being water, following with alcohols. Water is also often a constituent of materials. Many materials like oxides have adsorbed water on their surfaces under normal conditions. The codes and synonyms of 100 selected liquids from the first three classes in Table 8.1 are presented in Table 8.6, their molecular structures in Table 8.7, and properties in Table 8.8. The main physical properties of some important to laser processing metals, semiconductors, oxides and other inorganic compounds are also given in this chapter,Tables 8.3 and 8.4. The composition of sea water is given in Table 8.5.

Table 8.1

Classes of liquids used in laser materials processing.

Inorganic liquids H2 O D2 O H4 N2

Organic liquids Hydrocarbons Halocarbons Alcohols Ethers Esters Ketones Amines Carbon disulphide DMSO Silicon oil Vacuum oil

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing ISBN-13: 978-0-08-044498-7

Liquefied or frozen gases

Molten or liquid metals and semi-conductors

Ar He CH4 CO2 NH3 N2 O2 Freones

Bi Ga,Al-Ga Ge Hg In Si Sn

Molten salts KNO3 NaNO3 NaCl NH4 Cl

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

315

316 Table 8.2

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

Liquids used in laser processing classified by the processes.

Process

Liquids

Additives

Cleaning

Water, ethanol, methanol, IPA, acetone

NaCl, methanol, ethanol, IPA

Shock processing

Water

No

Front-side machining

Water, heptane, perfluorocarbons, benzene, o-xylol, p-xylol, ethanol, glycerine, ether, DMSO, DMFA, N2 H4 , liquid nitrogen, molten NaCl, NH4 Cl, NaNO3 and KNO3

H2 O2 , NaCl, CaCl2 , NaNO3 , KNO3 , Na2 SO4 , K2 SO4 , CuSO4 , KOH, methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, soapy additives, saccharose

Back-side machining

Cyclohexane, tetrachloromethylene, tetrachloroethylene, benzene, toluene, cumene, t-butylbenzene, 1,2,4trimethylbenzene, chlorobenzene, dichlorobenzene, fluorobenzene, isopropanol (IPA), tetrahydrofuran, methylmethacrylate, methyl benzoate, acetone, mercury, gallium

NiSO4 , CrO3 , KMnO4 , CrO3 , FeCl3 , KMnO4 , KNO3 , K2 CrO4 , carbon particles, pyrene, pyranine, benzil, naphthalene, phenanthrene, anthracene, 9-methyl-anthracene, 9,10-dimethylanthracene, 9-phenyl anthracene, fluoranthrene, Rose Bengal dye, Np(SO3 Na)3

Generation of metal particles

water, D2 O, pentane, hexane, cyclohexane, heptane, octane, nonane, decane, chloroform, methanol, ethanol, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, 1-propanol, 2-propanol (IPA),isobutanol, n-hexanol, 2-ethoxyethanol, acetone, liquid He II

NaCl, KCl, MgCl2 ,AgNO3 , NaBH4 , I+ , CN− , phtalazine, citric acid, sodium citrate, dodecanethiol, gelatine, cyclodextrines, PVP, SDS, SHS, SOS, SDBS, CTAB, sodium polyacrylate, tetraalkyl-ammonium bromide salts

Generation of inorganic compound particles

Water, hexane, dichloroethane, toluene, xylene, ethanol, 2-propanol (IPA), ethylene glycol, diethylene glycole, isobutanol, acetone, DMSO, silicon oil

Ammonia,AgNO3 , SDS, LDA, CTAB

Generation of carbon and silicon particles (not diamond or DLC)

Hexane, cyclohexane, perfluoro-octane, perfluorodecalin, benzene, hexafluorobenzene, toluene, methanol, 2-propanol (IPA), tetrahydrofuran (THF)

Generation of diamond and DLC particles and films

Hexane, cyclohexane, decalin, benzene, toluene, cumene, acetone, vacuum oil (a polyphenyl ether)

Carbon or diamond particles, dissolved methane (in water), Pd(acac)2

Generation of organic particles

Water, methanol, ethanol, 1-propanol, ethyl acetate

SDS, Igepal CA-630

Surface modification

Water, benzene, aminoethanol, 1,2-diaminoethane, triethylenetetramine, NH3 , liquid nitrogen

H3 BO3 , B(OH)3 , NaOH, NaAlO2 , CuSO4

Ablation deposition from liquid targets

Ga,Al-Ga, Ge, In, Sn, Bi, Si, vacuum oil (a polyphenyl ether) (Continued)

317

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.2

(Continued)

Process

Liquids

Additives

Ablation deposition from frozen targets (inorganic compounds)

Acetylene, N2 , CH4 , CO2

Ablation deposition from frozen targets (MAPLE)

Water, chloroform, tert-butanol, glycerole, phosphate buffer

Forward transfer deposition (LIFT)

Water, glycerine, mineral oil

Tris–HCl, EDTA, PBS, SDS

Notations DLC – dry laser cleaning LIFT – laser induced forward transfer Np(SO3 Na)3 – naphthalene-1,3,6-trisulphonic acid trisodium salt PVP – polyvinylpyrrolidone SDS – Cn H2n+1 OSO3 Na SHS – sodium hexadecyl sulphate, C16 H33 NaSO4 SOS – sodium n-octyl sulphonate, C8 H17 SO3 Na SDBS – n-dodecylbenzene sulphonate, C12 H25 C6 H4 SO3 Na CTAB – cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide), C19 H42 BrN LDA – lauryl dimethylaminoacetic acid betaine, CH3 (CH2 )11 N+ (CH3 )2 CH2 COO− Pd(acac)2 – palladium acetylacetonate Igepal CA-630 – octylphenoxy polyethoxy ethanol (CH3 )3 CCH2 (CH3 )2 CC6 H4 O(CH2 CH2 O)9 H Tris-HCl – 2-Amino-2-(hydroxymethyl)-1,3-propanediol, hydrochloride, C4 H11 NO3 ClH EDTA – ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, C10 H16 N2 O8 PBS – phosphate buffered saline solution

Table 8.3

Properties of some metals and elemental semiconductors [995–998]

ρ kg/m3

α × 106 K−1

Cp J/kg K

λ W/m K

Tm ◦ C

Tb ◦ C

Hm kJ/kg

Hvap kJ/mol

n (400 nm)

k (400 nm)

R (400 nm)

2519

397

291

0.49

47.86

0.9243

1287

2471

877

292

2.90

3.13

0.537

1907

2671

404

342

1.50

3.62

0.691

1.28

2.14

0.489

1.66

1.94

0.371

1.83

3.04

0.58

Al

2700

23.1

897

237

Be

1850

11.3

1825

200

Cr

7150

4.9

449

Co

8860

13.0

421

100

1495

2927

275

Cu

8960

16.5

385

401

1084.62

2562

208.7

307

Ga

5910

29.76

2204

80.2

270

Au

19 300

14.2

129

1064.18

2856

63.7

343

In

7310

32.1

233

81.6

156.60

2072

28.6

232

Fe

7870

11.8

449

80.2

2861

247.3

340

371

93.7

40.6 317

660.32

1538

(Continued)

318

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

Table 8.3

(Continued)

ρ kg/m3 Mg

1740

Hg

13 533.6

Mo 10 200 Ni

8900

α × 106 Cp λ Tm −1 ◦ K J/kg K W/m K C

Tb ◦ C

Hm Hvap n k R kJ/kg kJ/mol (400 nm) (400 nm) (400 nm)

24.8

1090

349

1023 140

4.8

251

13.4

444

156

650

8.34 −38.83 138

356.73

128

11.4 59.1

2623

4639

390.7 590

3.03

3.22

0.550

90.7

1455

2913

298

1.62

2.39

0.479

375

Nb

8570

7.3

265

53.7

2477

4744

323

Pd

12 000

11.8

246

71.8

1554.9

2963

157.3 361

Pt

21 500

8.8

133

71.6

1768.4

3825

113.6 469

1.73

2.85

0.556

Ag

10 500

18.9

235

961.78 2162

104.8 258

0.17

1.95

0.848

Ta

16 400

6.3

140

57.5

3017

5458

Sn

7260

22.0

228

66.6

231.93

26.2

Ti

4510

8.6

523

21.9

1668

3287

295

W

19 300

4.5

132

3422

5555

284.5 824

3.39

2.41

0.464

V

6000

8.4

489

1910

3407

422

Zn

7140

30.2

388

116

419.53

907

112

Si

2329

2.6

700

130

1412

Ge

5323.4

5.9

310

58

937

C

3515

0.8

520

600

3547

429

174 30.7

202.1 59.2 296 426

114

Table 8.4 Properties of some inorganic compounds [999–1001]. SC – single crystalline, subl – sublimes, decp – decomposes, expl – explods. α × 106 K−1

Cp J/kg K

Tm ◦ C

Tb ◦ C

Hm kJ/mol

1465

28.158

decp 520

165.7

1689

23.849

Compound

ρ kg/m3

NaCl

2165

NH4 Cl

1530

Na2 SO4

2680

884

LiNO3

2380

254

NaNO3

2260

310

expl 537

16

KNO3

2109

337

decp 400

12

Al2 O3

3980

SiO2 (SC)

λ W/m K

801 sublimes

6.5 ◦

2651 (0 C)

0.55

∼25 ◦

1.6 (500 C)

25.5

2047

2980

1423

2950 (Continued)

319

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.4

(Continued) α × 106 K−1

Cp J/kg K

Tm ◦ C

Fe2 O3

5240

1565

CuO

6480

1326

11.80

ZnO

5610

4.0

25.2

1975 subl

52.3

TiO2 (rutile)

4250

9.0

9

1867

2500–3000

SnO2 (cassiterite)

6950

1630

subl 1800–1900

Co3 O4

6110

decp 900

ZrO2

5760

8.0

λ W/m K

Tb ◦ C

Compound

ρ kg/m3

1.5 ◦

∼5000

∼2852

∼3600

MgO

3581

CeO2

7650

Si3 N4

3190

2.5

c-BN

3487

1.2

SiC

3220

5.3

AlN (SC)

3255

5.27

ZnSe (SC)

5420

1517

CdS (SC, hexagonal)

4820

1750

Table 8.5 [1002]

60.0 (27 C)

2710

2400 ∼600

600

17

subl 1900

740

2973

84

2760

285

3000

3500

sublimes

decomposes

subl 980

Major composition of sea water (salinity 35‰)

Constituent

Concentration g/kg

Na+ Mg2+ Ca2+ K+ Sr2+ Cl− SO2− 4 HCO− 3 − Br F− B

10.77 1.29 0.4121 0.399 0.0079 19.354 2.712 0.1424 0.0673 0.0013 0.0045

Hm kJ/mol

78

Nomenclature of 100 selected organic solvents, waters and cryoliquids. Molecular structure is presented in Table 8.7 and properties in Table 8.8.

Number

Halocarbons (not aromatic)

Hydrocarbons

Class

Table 8.6

IUPAC Name

Composition

Linear molecular formula

CAS Reg. No.

Beilstein Reg. No.

EG/EC number

Common synonyms

1

Pentane

C5 H12

CH3 (CH2 )3 CH3

109-66-0

969132

203-692-4

n-Pentane, 1,3-dimethyl propane, diethyl methane

2

2-Methylbutane

C5 H12

CH3 CH2 CH (CH3 )2

78-78-4

1730723

201-142-8

Iso-pentane, isopentane

3

Hexane

C6 H14

CH3 (CH2 )4 CH3

110-54-33

1730733

203-777-6

n-Hexane

4

Heptane

C7 H16

CH3 (CH2 )5 CH3

142-82-5

1730763

205-563-8

n-Heptane, n-dipropylmethane, n-heptylhydride

5

2,2,4-Trimethylpentane

C8 H18

CH3 C(CH3 )2 CH2 540-84-1 CH(CH3 )CH3

1696876

208-759-1

Isobutyltrimethylmethane, isooctane

6

Cyclopentane

C5 H10

C5 H10

287-92-3

1900195

206-016-6

Pentamethylene, cyclopentyl

7

Cyclohexane

C6 H12

C6 H12

110-82-7

1900225

203-806-2

hexahydrobenzene, hexamethylene, naphthene

8

Methylcyclohexane

C7 H14

C6 H11 CH3

108-87-2

203-624-3

Cyclohexylmethane

9

Decalin

C10 H18

C10 H18

mix. 91-17-8 cis 493-01-6 trans 493-02-7

202-046-9

Decahydronaphthalene

10

Petroleum ether*

mixture of hydrocarbons (mostly alkanes)

101316-46-5; 64742-49-0

265-151-9 232-453-7

Petroleum benzin, petroleum spirit, mineral spirits, ligroine, naphtha petroleum

11

Bromoform

CHBr3

CHBr3

75-25-2

1731048

200-854-6

Tribromomethane

12

Dichloromethane

CH2 Cl2

CH2 Cl2

75-09-2

1730800

200-838-9

Methylene chloride, chloromethylene

13

Chloroform

CHCl3

CHCl3

67-66-3

1731042

200-663-8

Methylidyne trichloride, trichloromethane

14

Tetrachloromethane

CCl4

CCl4

56-23-5

1098295

200-262-8

Carbon tetrachloride, carbon tet, Freon 14, CFC-14

15

Fluoroform

CHF3

CHF3

75-46-7

200-872-4

Trifluoromethane, fluoryl, Freon 23, HFC-23

16

1,2-Dichloroethane

C2 H4 Cl2

ClCH2 CH2 Cl

107-06-2

605264

203-458-1

Ethylene chloride, ethylene dichloride, EDC, Freon 150

17

1,1,2-Trichloroethene

C2 HCl3

ClCH CCl2

79-01-6

1736782

201-167-4

Trichloroethylene, ethylene trichloride, trichloroethene,TCE

878165

Halocarbons (not aromatic) Aromatic hydrocarbons, their derivatives

18

1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethene

C2 Cl4

CCl2 CCl2

127-18-4

1361721

204-825-9

Tetrachloroethylene, ethylene tetrachloride, perchloroethylene, tetrachloroethene, PERC, PCE

19

1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6, 6-Tetradecafluorohexane

C6 F14

C6 F14

355-42-0

1802113

206-585-0

Tetradecafluorohexane, perfluorohexane, perfluoro-n-hexane, perflexane, PP1, FC72

20

1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4a,5,5,6, 6,7,7,8,8,8aOctadecafluorodecalin

C10 F18

C10 F18

306-94-5 cis 60433-11-6 trans 6043312-7

2067113

206-192-4

Perfluorodecalin, octadecafluorodecahydronaphthalene, perfluorodecahydronaphthalene

21

Benzene

C6 H6

C6 H6

71-43-2

969212

200-753-7

Cyclohexatriene, benzol

22

Chlorobenzene

C6 H5 Cl

C6 H5 Cl

108-90-7

605632

203-628-5

Phenyl chloride

23

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

C6 H4 Cl2

C6 H4 Cl2

95-50-1

606078

202-425-9

o-Chlorobenzene

24

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

C6 H3 Cl3

C6 H3 Cl3

120-82-1

956819

204-428-0

1,2,4-TCB

25

Fluorobenzene

C6 H5 F

C6 H5 F

462-06-6

1236623

207-321-7

Phenyl fluoride, monofluorobenzene

26

1,2,3,4,5,6Hexafluorobenzene

C6 F6

C6 F6

392-56-3

1683438

206-876-2

Hexafluorobenzene, perfluorobenzene

27

Benzonitrile

C7 H5 N

C6 H5 CN

100-47-0

506893

202-855-7

Phenyl cyanide

28

Toluene

C7 H8

C6 H5 CH3

108-88-3

635760

203-625-9

Methylbenzene, toluol

29

Styrene

C8 H8

C6 H5 CH CH2

100-42-5

1071236

202-851-5

Phenylethylene, vinylbenzene, styrol

30

o-Xylene

C8 H10

C6 H4 (CH3 )2

95-47-6

1815558

202-422-2

1,2-Dimethylbenzene, ortho-xylol

31

m-Xylene

C8 H10

C6 H4 (CH3 )2

108-38-3

605441

203-576-3

1,3-Dimethylbenzene, meta-xylol

32

p-Xylene

C8 H10

C6 H4 (CH3 )2

106-42-3

1901563

203-396-5

1,4-Dimethylbenzene, para-xylol

33

Cumene

C9 H12

C6 H5 CH(CH3 )2

98-82-8

1236613

202-704-5

2-Phenylpropane, isopropylbenzene, isopropylbenzol, cumol

34

1-Chloronaphthalene

C10 H7 Cl

C10 H7 Cl

90-13-1

970836

2019673

α- Chloronaphthalene

35

1-Methylnaphthalene

C11 H10

C10 H7 CH3

90-12-0

506793

201-966-8

α- Methylnaphthalene (Continued)

(Continued)

Number

Alcohols

Class

Table 8.6

IUPAC Name

Composition

Linear molecular formula

CAS Reg. No.

Beilstein Reg. No.

EG/EC number

36

Methanol

CH4 O

CH3 OH

67-56-1

1098229

200-659-6

Hydroxymethane, methyl alcohol, wood alcohol, carbinol, MeOH

37

Ethanol

C2 H6 O

C2 H5 OH

64-17-5

1718733

200-746-9

Ethyl alcohol, grain alcohol, hydroxyethane, EtOH

38

Ethane-1,2-diol

C2 H6 O2

HOCH2 CH2 OH

107-21-1

505945

203-473-3

Ethylene glycol, monoethylene glycol, glycol, MEG

39

2,2,2-Trifluoroethanol

C2 H3 F3 O

CF3 CH2 OH

75-89-8

1733203

200-913-6

Trifluoroethyl alcohol, β,β,β-trifluoroethyl alcohol

40

2-Aminoethanol

C2 H7 NO

NH2 CH2 CH2 OH 141-43-5

505944

205-483-3

Ethanolamine, 2-aminoethyl alcohol, monoethanolamine, MEA

41

Propan-1-ol

C3 H8 O

CH3 CH2 CH2 OH 71-23-8

1098242

200-746-9

1-Propanol, propanol, n-propanol, propyl alcohol, n-propyl alcohol

42

Propan-2-ol

C3 H8 O

(CH3 )2 CHOH

67-63-0

635639

200-661-7

2-Propanol, iso-propanol, isopropanol, isopropyl alcohol, dimethyl carbinol, IPA

43

Propane-1,2,3-triol

C3 H8 O3

HOCH2 CH(OH) CH2 OH

56-81-5

635685

200-289-5

Glycerol, glycerine, glycerin, 1,2,3-propanetriol

44

Butan-1-ol

C4 H10 O

CH3 (CH2 )3 OH

71-36-3

969148

200-751-6

1-Butanol, n-butanol, butyl alcohol, n-butyl alcohol

45

Butan-2-ol

C4 H10 O

CH3 CH2 CH(OH) 78-92-2 CH3

773649

201-158-5

2-Butanol, sec-butyl alcohol

46

2-methylpropan-1-ol

C4 H10 O

(CH3 )2 CHCH2 OH

78-83-1

1730878

201-148-0

Isobutyl alcohol, 2-methyl-1-propanol, isobutanol, iso-butanol

47

2-Methylpropan-2-ol

C4 H10 O

(CH3 )3 COH

75-65-0

906698

200-889-7

tert-butanol, 2-methyl-2-propanol, tert-butyl alcohol, trimethyl carbinol

48

2-[Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)amino]ethanol

C6 H15 NO3

(HOCH2 CH2 )3 N

102-71-6

1699263

203-049-8

Triethanolamine, 2,2 ,2 -nitrilotriethanol, tris (2-hydroxyethyl)amine,TEA

49

Phenylmethanol

C7 H8 O

C6 H5 CH2 OH

100-51-6

878307

202-859-9

Phenyl methanol, benzyl alcohol, benzene methanol, phenyl carbinole

50

Octan-1-ol

C8 H18 O

CH3 (CH2 )7 OH

111-87-5

1697461

203-917-6

1-Octanol, n-octanol, alcohol C-8, capryl alcohol, octyl alcohol

Common synonyms

Ether alcohols Ethers Esters

51

2-Methoxyethanol

C3 H8 O2

CH3 OCH2 CH2 OH

109-86-4

1731074

203-713-7

Ethylene glycol monomethyl ether, methyl glycol, methyl cellosolve, 2ME, EGMM

52

2-Ethoxyethanol

C4 H10 O2

C2 H5 OCH2 CH2 OH

110-80-5

1098271

203-804-1

Ethyl glycol, 2EE monoethyl ether, ethyl cellosolve, cellosolve®

53

2-(2Hydroxyethoxy)ethanol

C4 H10 O3

(HOCH2 CH2 )2 O

111-46-6

969209

203-872-2

Diethylene glycol, 2,2 -dihydroxydiethyl ether, 2,2 -oxydiethanol, diglycol, bis(2-hydroxyethyl) ether, DEG,TL4N

54

2-Butoxyethanol

C6 H14 O2

CH3 (CH2 )3 OCH2 111-76-2 CH2 OH

1732511

203-905-0

Butyl glycol, ethylene glycol monobutyl ether, ethylene glycol butyl ether, butyl cellosolve

55

Oxolane

C4 H8 O

C4 H8 O

109-99-9

102391

203-726-8

Tetrahydrofuran, tetramethylene oxide, 1,4-epoxybutane, oxacyclopentane,THF

56

1,4-Dioxane

C4 H8 O2

C4 H8 O2

123-91-1

102551

204-661-8

Diethylene oxide, ethylene dioxide, dioxane, p-dioxane, dioxacylohexane, glycolethylether, 1,4-diethylene dioxide, 1,4-dioxacyclohexane

57

Ethoxyethane

C4 H10 O

(CH3 CH2 )2 O

60-29-7

1696894

200-467-2

Diethyl ether, ether, ethyl ether, 1,1 -oxybisethane

58

1,2-Dimethoxyethane

C4 H10 O2

CH3 OCH2 CH2 OCH3

110-71-4

1209237

203-794-9

Dimethyl glycol, dimethylglycol, ethylene glycol, dimethyl ether, monoglyme, DME

59

2-Methoxy-2-methylpropane

C5 H12 O

(CH3 )3 COCH3

1634-04-4

1730942

216-653-1

tert-Butyl methyl ether, methyl tert-butyl ether, MTBE, DRIVERON®

60

1-Methoxy-2-(2methoxyethoxy)ethane

C6 H14 O3

(CH3 OCH2 CH2 )2 O

111-96-6

1736101

203-924-4

Diethylene glycol dimethyl ether, 2-methoxyethyl ether, dimethyl diglycol, dimethyldiglycol, bis(2-methoxyethyl) ether, Diglyme

61

Anisole

C7 H8 O

CH3 OC6 H5

100-66-3

506892

202-876-1

Methoxybenzene, methyl phenyl ether

62

1-Butoxybutane

C8 H18 O

[CH3 (CH2 )3 ]2 O

142-96-1

1732752

205-575-3

Dibutyl ether, butyl ether, di-n-butyl ether

63

Methyl formate

C2 H4 O2

HCO2 CH3

107-31-3

1734623

203-481-7

Methyl methanoate, methyl ester, formic acid, formic acid methyl ester

64

Ethyl acetate

C4 H8 O2

CH3 COOC2 H5

141-78-6

506104

205-500-4

Acetic acid ethyl ester

65

Methyl 2-methylprop-2enoate

C5 H8 O2

CH2 =C(CH3 ) COOCH3

80-62-6

605459

201-297-1

Methyl methacrylate, methyl 2-methylpropenoate, methacrylic acid methyl ester, MMA

66

Butyl acetate

C6 H12 O2

CH3 COO(CH2 )3 CH3

123-86-4

1741921

204-658-1

n-Butyl acetate, acetic acid n-butyl ester

67

Methyl benzoate

C8 H8 O2

C6 H5 COOCH3

93-58-3

1072099

202-259-7

Benzoic acid methyl ester, Clorius, Niobe oil (Continued)

(Continued)

Number

Nitrogen compounds

Ketones

Class

Table 8.6

IUPAC Name

Composition

Linear molecular formula

CAS Reg. No.

Beilstein Reg. No.

EG/EC number

Common synonyms

68

Acetone

C3 H6 O

CH3 COCH3

67-64-1

635680

200-662-2

Propanone, 2-propanone, dimethyl ketone

69

Butan-2-one

C4 H8 O

C2 H5 COCH3

78-93-3

741880

201-159-0

2-Butanone, methyl ethyl ketone, ethyl methyl ketone, MEK

70

Pentan-2-one

C5 H10 O

CH3 COCH2 CH2 CH3

107-87-9

506058

203-528-1

2-Pentanone, methyl propyl ketone

71

Cyclohexanone

C6 H10 O

C6 H10 (=O)

108-94-1

385735

203-631-1

Pimelic ketone

72

4-Methylpentan-2-one

C6 H12 O

(CH3 )2 CHCH2 COCH3

108-10-1

605399

203-550-1

4-Methyl-2-pentanone, methyl isobutyl ketone, isobutyl methyl ketone, isopropylacetone, MIBK

73

5-Methylhexan-2-one

C7 H14 O

(CH3 )2 CHCH2 CH2 COCH3

110-12-3

506163

203-737-8

5-Methyl-2-hexanone, isobutylacetone, isopentyl methyl ketone, methyl isoamyl ketone, isoamyl methyl ketone, MIAK

74

Formamide

CH3 NO

HCONH2

75-12-7

505995

200-842-0

Formic amide, formic acid amide, methane amide, Amide C1,

75

Nitromethane

CH3 NO2

CH3 NO2

75-52-5

1698205

200-876-6

Mononitromethane, nitrocarbol

76

Acetonitrile

C2 H3 N

CH3 CN

75-05-8

741857

200-835-2

Methyl cyanide,ACN

77

Ethane-1,2-diamine

C2 H8 N2

NH2 CH2 CH2 NH2 107-15-3

605263

203-468-6

1,2-Diaminoethane, 1,2-ethanediamine, ethylenediamine

78

N ,N Dimethylmethanamide

C3 H7 NO

HCON(CH3 )2

68-12-2

605365

200-679-5

N ,N -Dimethylformamide, formic acid dimethylamide, DMF, DMFA

79

N ,N Dimethylethanamide

C4 H9 NO

CH3 CON(CH3 )2

127-19-5

1737614

204-826-4

N ,N -Dimethylacetamide, acetic acid dimethylamide, DMAC

80

Pyridine

C5 H5 N

C5 H5 N

110-86-1

103233

203-809-9

Azabenzene, azine

81

1-Methylpyrrolidin-2one

C5 H9 NO

C5 H9 NO

872-50-4

106420

212-828-1

1-Methyl-2-pyrrolidinone, N -methyl-2pyrrolidinone, m-pyrrole, 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidone, N -methyl-2-pyrrolidone, M-PYROL®, NMP

82

Hydrazine

H4 N2

NH2 NH2

302-01-2

Diazane, diamide, levoxine

Misc. Water Liquefied gases

83

Methanedithione

CS2

CS2

75-15-0

1098293

200-843-6

Carbon disulphide, carbon bisulphide, Carbon sulphide

84

Methylsulphinylmethane

C2 H6 OS

(CH3 )2 SO

67-68-5

506008

200-664-3

Dimethyl sulphoxide, methylsulphoxide, DMSO

85

Silicone oil*, 5 cSt

[-Si(CH3 )2 O-]n

63148-62-9

EINECS

Polydimethylsiloxane, polysilicone oil

86

Oxidane (water*)

H2 O

7732-18-5

231-791-2

Water, ordinary water, light water, hydrogen oxide

87

Heavy water*

D2 O

7789-20-0

232-148-9

Deuterium oxide, water-d2

88

Sea water*

89

Hydrogen

H2

1333-74-0

215-605-7

90

Deuterium

D2

7782-39-0

91

Helium

He

7440-59-7

231-168-5

92

Nitrogen

N2

7727-37-9

231-783-9

93

Oxygen

O2

7782-44-7

231-956-9

94

Neon

Ne

7440-01-9

231-110-9

95

Argon

Ar

7440-37-1

231-147-0

96

Krypton

Kr

7439-90-9

231-098-5

97

Xenon

Xe

7440-63-3

231-172-7

98

Carbon dioxide

CO2

124-38-9

1900390

204-696-9

99

Methane

CH4

74-82-8

1718732

200-812-7

100 Air* *

Other common name.

N2 , O2

CH4

2050024

Methyl hydride, biogas, marsh gas

326

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

Table 8.7

Molecular structure of 90 liquids, listed in Table 8.6. Pentane

2-Methylbutane

Hexane

C5H12 109-66-0

C5H12 78-78-4

C6H14 110-54-3

CH3

CH3

H3C

H3C 1

H3C

CH3

2

CH3

3

Heptane

2,2,4-Trimethylpentane

Cyclopentane

C7H16 142-82-5

C8H18 540-84-1

C5H10 287-92-3

CH3 H3C

CH3

CH3 CH3

H3C CH3

4

6

5 Cyclohexane

Methylcyclohexane

cis-Decalin

C6H12 110-82-7

C7H14 108-87-2

C10H18 493-01-6 H

CH3 H

7

8

9a

trans-Decalin

Bromoform

Dichlromethane

C10H18 493-02-7

CHBr3 75-25-2

CH2Cl2 75-09-2

H

Br Br

Cl Cl

Br

H 9b

11

12

Chloroform

Tetrachloromethane

Fluoroform

CHCl3 67-66-3

CCl4 56-23-5

CHF3 75-46-7

Cl 13

F

Cl

Cl Cl

Cl 14

Cl

F

Cl

F

15 (Continued)

327

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.7

(Continued) 1,1,2-Trichloroethene C2HCl3 79-01-6

1,2-Dichlroethane C2H2Cl2 107-06-2

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethene C2Cl4 127-18-4

Cl

Cl

Cl

Cl

Cl

Cl Cl

Cl

Cl

16

17

FF

FF

F

F F

FF

FF

FF

19

trans-1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4a, 5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,8aOctadecafluorodecalin C10F18 60433-12-7

cis-1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4a, 5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,8aOctadecafluorodecalin C10F18 60433-11-6

1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6Tetradecafluorohexane C6F14 355-42-0

FF

18

20a

F F F

F F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F F

F

F F

F

F

20b

Chlorobenzene C6H5Cl 108-90-7

Benzene C6H6 71-43-2

F F F F F F

F

F F

F

F

F F

1,2-Dichlorobenzene C6H4Cl2 95-50-1 Cl Cl

21

22 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene C6H3Cl3 120-82-1

Cl

23 1,2,3,4,5,6Hexafluorobenzene C6F6 392-56-3

Fluorobenzene C6H5F 462-06-6

F

Cl

Cl

F

Cl

24

25

F

26 Toluene C7H8 108-88-3

Benzonitrile C7H5N 100-47-0

F

F

F

F

Styrene C8H8 100-42-5

CH2 CH3

N

27

28

29 (Continued)

328

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

Table 8.7

(Continued) o-Xylene C8H10 95-47-6

m-Xylene C8H10 108-38-3

p-Xylene C8H10 106-42-3

H3C

CH3 CH3 30

H3C

CH3 31

Cumene C9H12 98-82-8

CH3

32 1-Methylnaphthalene C11H10 90-12-0

1-Chloronaphthalene C10H7Cl 90-13-1

CH3

Cl CH3 CH3 33

34

35

Methanol CH4O 67-56-1

Ethanol C2H6O 64-17-5

Ethanol-1,2-diol C2H6O2 107-21-1

H3C

H3C

HO

HO

36

OH

37

38 2-Aminoethanol C2H7NO 141-43-5

2,2,2-Trifluoroethanol C2H3F3O 75-89-8

OH

Propan-1-ol C3H8O 71-23-8

F H2N

OH

F

39

40 Propan-2-ol C3H8O 67-63-0

Propane-1,2,3-triol C3H8O3 56-81-5

Butan-1-ol C4H10O 71-36-3

OH HO

42

OH

41

OH H3C

H 3C

OH

H3C

OH

OH

CH3 43

44 (Continued)

329

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.7

(Continued) 2-Methylpropan-1-ol C4H10O 78-83-1

Butan-2-ol C4H10O 78-92-2

OH

OH

CH3 CH3

H3C

2-Methylpropan-2-ol C4H10O 75-65-0

OH

H3C

45

46

47 Phenylmethanol C7H8O 100-51-6

2-[Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)amino]ethanol C6H15NO3 102-71-6

Octan-1-ol C8H18O 111-87-5

OH

OH

OH

CH3 CH3

H3C

H3C

N

OH

OH 48

49

50 2-Eethoxyethanol C4H10O2 110-80-5

2-Methoxyethanol C3H8O2 109-86-4

H3C

OH

OH

O

2-(2-Hydroxyethoxy)ethanol C4H10O3 111-46-6

H3C

51

O

HO

52 2-Butoxyethanol C6H14O2 111-76-2

HO

OH

O

53 Oxolane C4H8O 109-99-9

1,4-Dioxane C4H8O2 123-91-1

O

O

CH3

O

O 54

55 Ethoxyethane C4H10O 60-29-7

56 1,2-Dimethoxyethane C4H10O2 110-71-4

2-Methoxy-2-methylpropane C5H12O 1634-04-4 CH3

H3C

O

CH3

O H3C

O

CH3

O

H3C 57

58

59

CH3 CH3 (Continued)

330

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

Table 8.7

(Continued)

1-Methoxy-2(2-methoxyethoxy)ethane C6H14O3 111-96-6

Anisole C7H8O 100-66-3

1-Butoxybutane C8H18O 142-96-1

CH3 H3C

O

O

CH3

O

60

H3C

O

61 Methyl formate C2H4O2 107-31-3

CH3

O

62 Methyl-2-methylprop2-enoate C5H8O2 80-62-6

Ethyl acetate C4H8O2 141-78-6

O O H

O

O

H3C

O

O OCH3

CH3

67

CH3

68 Cyclohexanone C6H10O 108-94-1

O

O

CH3

O

CH3 H3C

69

70 4-Methylpentan-2-one C6H12O 108-10-1

H3C

H3C

Pentan-2-one C5H10O 107-87-9

Butan-2-one C4H8O 78-93-3

H3C

CH3

O

66

H3C

O

Acetone C3H6O 67-64-1

Methyl benzoate C8H8O2 93-58-3

O H3C

H3C 65

64 Butyl acetate C6H12O2 123-86-4

O

CH3

CH3 63

H2C

71 5-Methylhexan-2-one C7H14O 110-12-3

Formamide CH3NO 75-12-7

CH3

O

O CH3

H4C

CH3

H

NH2

O 72

73

74 (Continued)

331

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.7

(Continued) Acetonitrile C2H3N 75-05-8

Nitromethane CH3NO2 75-52-5

Ethane-1,2-diamine C2H8N2 107-15-3

O H3C

H2N

N

H3C

N

NH2

O 76

75

77 N,N-Dimethylethanamide C4H9NO 127-19-5

N,N-Dimethylmethanamide C3H7NO 68-12-2

O H

Pyridine C5H5N 110-86-1

O CH3

CH3

H3C

N

N N CH3

CH3 79

78 1-Methylpyrrolidin-2-one C5H9NO 872-50-4

80 Methanedithione CS5 75-15-0

Hydrazine H4N2 302-01-2

CH3 N

H2N

S

NH2

C

S

O 83

82

81

Silicone oil

Methylsulfinylmethane C2H6OS 67-68-5

CH3

O

CH3

O

O

Si

S H3C

Oxidane (water) H2O 7732-18-5

CH3

n

85

84 Heavy water D2O 7789-20-0

H

H

86 Carbon dioxide CO2 124-38-9

Methane CH4 74-82-8

H O 2H

87

O

2H

C

O H

98

99

H H

332

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

8.2 Properties of 100 Selected Liquids Most important physical and chemical properties, and references to optical spectra of 100 liquids, used or of potential importance in laser materials processing, are given in Table 8.8. All properties correspond to liquids of maximum possible purity. In case of many different values for the same property in the same source, one of the middle values was chosen. The properties of sea water are for 35–40 ‰ of salinity. All parameters are given at normal conditions, 298.15 K (25◦ C) and 1.01325 bar (1 atmosphere), unless noted with *. * and ** and *** denote that measurement conditions or composition of the substance are specified at the references below.

Definitions of the properties (More detailed definitions and further explanations for all properties are given in the Glossary.) E

Hazard codes: B Biohazard

Highly Flammable Extremely F+ Flammable

O Oxidizing

C Corrosive

Xn Harmful Xi Irritant

R Radioactive

E Explosive

N

F

Dangerous for the environment

F G H I J K L M N O P Q R

Molar mass Molar volume Density ρ dρ/dT Melting point (K) Melting point (◦ C) Hm Heat capacity Diffusion coefficient Heat conductivity Surface tension Dynamic viscosity, η d(ln η)/dT

S T U V W X Y

Relaxation time Thermal expansion Isothermal Compressibility Adiabatic compressibility Sound velocity Acoustic impedance US absorption

Z AA AB

Acoustic non-linearity Shock velocity Boiling point (K)

T Toxic T+ Very Toxic

Molar mass M (g/mol) Liquid molar volumeVliq (cm3 /mol) Density ρ (kg/m3 ) Temperature coefficient of density dρ/dT (kg/m3 K) Atmospheric (1.01325 bar) freezing/melting point Tm (K) Atmospheric (1.01325 bar) freezing/melting point Tm (◦ C) Enthalpy change of atmospheric melting (kJ/mol) Heat capacity at constant pressure Cp liq (J/mol K) Diffusion coefficient D (10−5 cm2 /s) Heat conductivity λ (J/s m K) Surface tension γ (N/m) Dynamic viscosity η (kg/m s) Temperature coefficient of dynamic viscosity d(ln η)/dT (10−2 K−1 ) Orientational relaxation time τ (ps) Volumetric thermal expansion coefficient β (K−1 ) Isothermal compressibility κT (kPa−1 ) Adiabatic compressibility κS (kPa−1 ) Longitudinal sound velocity vL (m/s) Acoustic impedance Z (Pa s/m); (1 Mrayls = 1 MPa s/m) ultrasound absorption coefficient (10−15 s2 /m), near 25◦ C at 104–107 MHz Acoustic non-linearity parameter B/A Shock velocity Us (m/s) at shock pressures close to 10 GPa Atmospheric (1.01325 bar) boiling point Tb (K)

333

Liquids and their properties

AC AD AE AF AG AH AI AJ AK AL AM AN AO AP AQ AR AS AT AU

Boiling point (◦ C) Superheat temperature Nucleation rate Hb Evaporation rate Vapour density Vapour pressure Antoine equation parameter A Antoine equation parameter B Antoine equation parameter C Saturation concentration Flash point Ignition temperature Explosion range Critical temperature (K) Critical temperature (◦ C) Critical pressure Critical volume Critical compressibility factor

AV AW AX

Pitzer acentric factor Electrical conductivity Dipole moment

AY AZ BA

Polarity parameter Dielectric constant 1000 × d ln ε/dT

BB BC BD

Magnetic susceptibility Index of refraction 1000 × dnD /dT

BE

Kerr coefficient

BF BG BH BI BJ

Scattering coefficient Depolarization factor IR spectrum IR/Raman Spectrum UV–VIS Spectrum

BK BL BM BN BO

UV cut-off point UV 5% absorption Ionization energy Hf (0) Gf (0)

BP BQ BR BS BT BU BV BW

Hildebrandt parameter Oxygen solubility Nitrogen solubility CO2 solubility Solubility in water Riddick reference Marcus reference Poling reference

Atmospheric (1.01325 bar) boiling pointTb (◦ C) Attainable atmospheric superheat temperature Tsh (◦ C) Homogeneous bubble nucleation rate J (cm−3 s−1 ) Enthalpy of vaporization at Tb (kJ/mol) Evaporation rate, ER, BuOAc Vapour density (vs. air) Vapour pressure (kPa) Antoine equation parameter A (SI system of units) Antoine equation parameter B (SI system of units) Antoine equation parameter C (SI system of units) Saturation concentration in air (g/m) Flash point (◦ C) Ignition temperature (◦ C) Vapour explosion range (vol% in air) Vapour/liquid critical temperature Tc (K) Vapour/liquid critical temperature Tc (◦ C) Vapour/liquid critical pressure Pc (bar) Vapour/liquid critical molar volume Vc (cm3 /mol) vapour/liquid critical compressibility factor Zc = Pc · Vc /(R · Tc ) Pitzer acentric factor ω = −log10 (Pvp /Pc )T /Tc = 0.7 Electrical conductivity σ ( −1 cm−1 ) Molecular dipole moment D (Debyes), 1 Debye = 3.162 × 10−25 ( J m3 )1/2 Solvent polarity parameter ETN Dielectric constant relative to vacuum ε Temperature coefficient of dielectric constant, 1000 × d ln ε/dT (K−1 ) Molar magnetic susceptibility χm (10−6 cm3 /mol) Index of refraction nD at 589 nm Temperature coefficient of the index of refraction 1000 × dnD /dT (K−1 ) Kerr coefficient B (10−9 cm−1 esE−2 ); 1 esE = 300 V/cm; Bs = Kerr coefficient of CS2 Light scattering coefficient R90 , relative to benzene Light depolarization factor u × 102 Spectrum number in the Sadtler handbook [1003] Spectrum number in the Raman/IR Atlas [1004] Spectrum number in the Perkampus UV–VIS Atlas [1005] UV cut-off point (nm) UV 5% absorption point (nm) Gas phase ionization energy (eV) Standard state enthalpy of formation Hf (0) (kJ/mol) standard state Gibbs energy of formation for gas Gf (0) (kJ/mol) Hildebrandt solubility parameter δ (MPa1/2 ) Oxygen solubility xg (mole fractions) Nitrogen solubility xg (mole fractions) Carbon dioxide solubility xg (mole fractions) Solubility in water (g/l) Substance number in Riddick handbook [1006] Substance number in Marcus handbook [1007] Substance number in Poling handbook [1008]

334

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

Table 8.8

Properties of 100 selected liquids listed in Table 8.6

Substance

Property code (PC) →

E

F

G

H

Molar mass M

Molar volume Vliq 3

Density ρ

No.

Formula or name

CAS Reg. No.

Hazard codes

(g/mol)

(cm /mol)

(kg/m3 )

1

C5 H12

109-66-0

F+ Xn N

72.150

115.22

621.39

2

C5 H12

78-78-4

F+ Xn N

72.150

116.46

614.2

3

C6 H14

110-54-3

F Xn N

86.177

131.59

654.84

4

C7 H16

142-82-5

F Xn N

100.204

147.47

679.46

5

C8 H18

540-84-1

F Xn N

114.231

166.07

687.81

6

C5 H10

287-92-3

F

70.134

94.73

740.45

7

C6 H12

110-82-7

F XnN

84.161

108.75

773.89

8

C7 H14

108-87-2

F Xn N

98.188

128.35

765.06

9

C10 H18 , mix

91-17-8

CN

138.253

9a

C10 H18 , cis

493-01-6

CN

138.253

154.83

892.88

9b

C10 H18 , trans

493-02-7

CN

138.253

159.66

865.96

10

Petroleum ether

64742-49-0 101316-46-5

F+ Xn N

11

CHBr3

75-25-2

TN

252.73

12

CH2 Cl2

75-09-2

Xn

84.932

64.53

1316.78

13

CHCl3

67-66-3

Xn

119.377

80.68

1479.70

14

CCl4

56-23-5

TN

153.822

97.07

1584.36

15

CHF3

75-46-7

70.014

51.66*

16

C2 H4 Cl2

107-06-2

TF

98.96

79.45

17

C2 HCl3

79-01-6

T

131.39

1451.4*

18

C2 Cl4

127-18-4

Xn N

165.83

1614.32

19

C6 F14

355-42-0

338.044

20

C10 F18 , mix

306-94-5

462.08

20a

C10 F18 , cis

60433-11-6

462.08

20b

C10 F18 , trans

60433-12-7

462.08

21

C6 H6

71-43-2

FT

78.114

89.41

873.60

22

C6 H5 Cl

108-90-7

Xn N

112.558

102.22

1100.9

23

C6 H4 Cl2

95-50-1

Xn N

147.00

24

C6 H3 Cl3

120-82-1

Xn N

181.45

25

C6 H5 F

462-06-6

F Xi

96.10

1013.14*

26

C6 F6

392-56-3

F

186.05

1607.32

0.645–0.665 2877.9

1246.37

198.91* 1.917*

1300.33

(Continued)

335

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

Substance

Property code (PC) →

E

Hazard codes

F

G

Molar mass M

Molar volume Vliq

(g/mol)

H

3

(cm /mol)

Density ρ (kg/m3 )

No.

Formula or name

CAS Reg. No.

27

C7 H5 N

100-47-0

28

C7 H8

108-88-3

F Xn

92.141

29

C8 H8

100-42-5

Xn

104.15

30

C8 H10

95-47-6

Xn

106.167

121.25

875.94

31

C8 H10

108-38-3

Xn

106.167

123.47

860.09

32

C8 H10

106-42-3

Xn

106.167

123.93

856.61

33

C9 H12

98-82-8

Xn N

120.194

140.17

857.43

34

C10 H7 Cl

90-13-1

35

C11 H10

90-12-0

Xn N

142.200

139.37*

1016.76

36

CH4 O

67-56-1

FT

32.042

40.73

786.37

37

C2 H6 O

64-17-5

F

46.069

58.68

784.93

38

C2 H6 O2

107-21-1

Xn

62.07

1110.0

39

C2 H3 F3 O

75-89-8

Xn

100.04

1373.6*

40

C2 H7 NO

141-43-5

C

61.08

1012.7

41

C3 H8 O

71-23-8

F Xi

60.096

75.14

799.60

42

C3 H8 O

67-63-0

F Xi

60.096

76.92

781.26

43

C3 H8 O3

56-81-5

44

C4 H10 O

71-36-3

Xn

74.123

91.96

805.75

45

C4 H10 O

78-92-2

Xi

74.123

92.35

802.41

46

C4 H10 O

78-83-1

Xi

74.123

92.91

797.8

47

C4 H10 O

75-65-0

F Xn

74.123

94.88

775.45*

48

C6 H15 NO3

102-71-6

49

C7 H8 O

100-51-6

50

C8 H18 O

51

103.12

1000.6 106.87

862.19 901.22

162.62

1193.82*

92.09

1255.9

149.19

1119.6

Xn

108.140

1041.27

111-87-5

Xi

130.230

C3 H8 O2

109-86-4

T

76.09

960.24

52

C4 H10 O2

110-80-5

T

90.12

925.20

53

C4 H10 O3

111-46-6

Xn

106.12

1116.4*

54

C6 H14 O2

111-76-2

Xn

118.17

896.25

55

C4 H8 O

109-99-9

F Xi

72.107

81.71

889.2*

56

C4 H8 O2

123-91-1

F Xn

88.106

85.29*

1027.97

57

C4 H10 O

60-29-7

F+ Xn

74.123

104.75

707.82

158.37

821.57

(Continued)

336

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

Table 8.8

(Continued)

Substance

Property code (PC) →

E

F

G

H

Molar mass M

Molar volume Vliq

Density ρ

No.

Formula or name

CAS Reg. No.

Hazard codes

(g/mol)

(cm /mol)

(kg/m3 )

58

C4 H10 O2

110-71-4

FT

90.126

104.56

863.70

59

C5 H12 O

1634-04-4

F Xi

88.15

60

C6 H14 O3

111-96-6

T

134.17

938.4

61

C7 H8 O

100-66-3

108.14

989.32

62

C8 H18 O

142-96-1

Xi

130.23

764.1

63

C2 H4 O2

107-31-3

F+ Xn

60.053

62.14

966.4

64

C4 H8 O2

141-78-6

F Xi

88.106

98.55

894.55

65

C5 H8 O2

80-62-6

F Xi

100.12

66

C6 H12 O2

123-86-4

67

C8 H8 O2

93-58-3

Xn

136.15

68

C3 H6 O

67-64-1

F Xi

58.080

73.94

784.40

69

C4 H8 O

78-93-3

F Xi

72.107

90.13

799.7

70

C5 H10 O

107-87-9

F

86.134

107.33

801.5

71

C6 H10 O

108-94-1

Xn

98.144

72

C6 H12 O

108-10-1

F Xn

100.161

73

C7 H14 O

110-12-3

Xn

114.19

74

CH3 NO

75-12-7

T

45.04

75

CH3 NO2

75-52-5

Xn

61.040

76

C2 H3 N

75-05-8

F Xn

41.05

776.49

77

C2 H8 N2

107-15-3

C

60.10

893.1

78

C3 H7 NO

68-12-2

T

73.09

943.87

79

C4 H9 NO

127-19-5

T

87.12

936.337

80

C5 H5 N

110-86-1

F Xn

79.101

81

C5 H9 NO

872-50-4

Xi

99.13

82

H4 N2

302-01-2

83

CS2

75-15-0

84

C2 H6 OS

67-68-5

85

[-Si(CH3 )2 O-]n

63148-62-9

86

H2 O

7732-18-5

18.015

18.07

997.0474

87

D2 O

7789-20-0

20.028

18.13

1104.36

116.160

32.045 FT

3

943.31* 132.51

876.36 1079.01*

945.2* 125.81

796.3

1129.15 53.96

80.88

1131.28

978.24 1025.9

31.79*

76.14

1255.5

78.13

1095.37

(Continued)

337

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued) Property code (PC) →

Substance

E

F

G

H

Molar mass M

Molar volume Vliq

Density ρ

(g/mol)

(cm /mol)

(kg/m3 )

1333-74-0

2.016

28.39*

70.721*

D2

7782-39-0

4.0282

24.41*

163.94*

91

He

7440-59-7

4.0026

32.54*

125.01*

92

N2

7727-37-9

28.014

34.84*

807.14*

93

O2

7782-44-7

31.999

27.85*

1141.8*

94

Ne

7440-01-9

20.180

16.76*

1207.7*

95

Ar

7440-37-1

39.948

29.10*

1397.1*

96

Kr

7439-90-9

83.800

34.63*

2416.3*

97

Xe

7440-63-3

131.290

42.91*

2947.2*

98

CO2

124-38-9

44.010

99

CH4

74-82-8

35.54*

422.7*

100

Air

No.

Formula or name

88

Sea water

89

H2

90

CAS Reg. No.

Hazard codes

F+

16.0428

3

28.958

875.99*

(PC) →

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

No.

dρ/d T (kg/m3 K)

Melting point Tm (K)

Melting point Tm (◦ C)

Hm (kJ/mol)

Heat capacity Cp liq ( J/mol K)

Diffision coefficient D (10−5 cm2 /s)

Heat conductivity λ ( J/s m K)

1

−0.975

143.43

−129.72

8.40

167.19

5.62

2

−1.02

113.26

−159.89

5.16

164.80

4.85

3

−0.891

177.84

−95.31

13.07

195.43

4.21

4

−0.840

182.59

−90.56

14.03

224.98

3.11

5

−0.824

165.80

−107.35

9.04

238.55

2.42

6

−0.986

179.28

−93.87

0.61

126.80

7

279.69

6.54

2.63

156.20

8

146.56

−126.59

6.75

184.50

0.123*

0.0967*

1.41

9 9a

−0.760

230.14

−43.01

232.00

9b

−0.749

242.75

−30.40

228.50

<193

10 11

−2.61

282.35

0.46

<−80 9.2

1.58 (Continued)

338 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

No.

dρ/d T (kg/m3 K)

Melting point Tm (K)

Melting point Tm (◦ C)

Hm (kJ/mol)

Heat capacity Cp liq ( J/mol K)

Diffision coefficient D (10−5 cm2 /s)

Heat conductivity λ ( J/s m K)

12

−1.80

176.00

−97.15

4.60

100.00

3.78

13

−1.857

209.74

−63.41

8.80

113.80

2.31

14

−1.931

250.33

−22.82

3.28

131.60

1.32

117.96

−155.19 8.84

126.30

1.72

15 16

−1.44

237.65

−35.5

17

−1.649

187.15

−86

18

−1.646

251.15

−22

19

186.05

−87.1

20

273.15

0

0.00028*

20a 20b 21

−1.051

278.68

5.53

9.95

135.95

2.16

22

−1.081

227.90

−45.25

9.61

150.80

2.35

23

−1.112

256.15

−17

256.15

−17

231.15

−42

11.31

146.36

11.585

221.610

1.61

6.95

157.29

2.59

24 25

1.18

26

2.278

≈277

3.7−4.1

27

−0.88

260.15

−13

28

−0.929

178.16

−94.99

29

−0.8739

242.15

−31

30

−0.840

247.97

−25.18

13.60

188.07

1.61

31

−0.855

225.28

−47.87

11.57

188.44

2.56

32

−0.873

286.41

13.26

16.81

181.66

2.75

33

−0.853

177.12

−96.03

7.79

213.30

1.68

34

−0.77

270.7

−2.45

35

−0.727

242.69

−30.46

6.94

224.40

36

−0.9321

175.49

−97.66

3.18

81.08

2.32

0.21*

37

−0.856

159.05

−114.1

5.01

112.25

1.01

0.170*

38

−0.70

260.15

−13

229.65

−43.5

39

0.1296

0.261*

(Continued)

339

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

No.

dρ/d T (kg/m3 K)

Melting point Tm (K)

Melting point Tm (◦ C)

Hm (kJ/mol)

Heat capacity Cp liq ( J/mol K)

Diffision coefficient D (10−5 cm2 /s)

Heat conductivity λ ( J/s m K)

40

−0.78

283.65

10.5

41

−0.79

147.00

−126.15

5.20

143.73

0.65

0.158*

42

−0.82

183.65

−89.5

5.38

154.40

0.65

0.141*

43

−0.615

291.15

18

44

−0.76

183.35

−89.8

45

−0.80

158.50

−114.65

199.00

46

−0.76

165.15

−108

183.00

47

−1.032

298.55

25.4

48

−0.55

294.15

21

49

−0.74

257.80

−15.35

50

−0.81

257.65

−15.5

51

−0.780

188.15

−85

52

−0.70

173.15

−100

53

−0.72

263.15

−10

54

−0.66

203.15

−70

55

−1.01

164.61

−108.54

56

−1.128

284.15

57

−1.154

156.86

−116.29

58

204.15

−69

59

164.55

−108.6

11

60

−1.06

209.15

−64

61

−0.932

236.15

−37

62

−0.86

178.15

−95

63

−1.56

174.15

−99

64

−1.20

189.55

−83.6

65

−1.16

225.15

−48

66

−1.02

199.65

−73.5

67

−0.955

261.15

−12

68

−1.12

178.50

69

−0.84

186.51

0.05

0.310* 9.28

6.79

177.06

0.51

0.153*

0.139*

220.10

0.51

0.115*

302.40

0.14

0.160*

8.97

8.54

124.10

0.141*

12.85

154.50

1.01

7.27

172.60

6.1

1.35

119.70 10.48

170.60

14.59

228.40

−94.65

5.69

126.60

−86.64

8.44

158.90

2.77

0.143*

0.137*

4.77

0.1791* 0.150* (Continued)

340 Table 8.8 (PC) →

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued) I

J

K

L

M

N

O

No.

dρ/d T (kg/m3 K)

Melting point Tm (K)

Melting point Tm (◦ C)

Hm (kJ/mol)

Heat capacity Cp liq ( J/mol K) [kJ/kg k]

Diffision coefficient D (10−5 cm2 /s)

Heat conductivity λ ( J/s m K) [mW/mK]

70

−0.98

196.34

−76.81

10.63

184.5

71

−0.89

242.15

−31

72

−0.78

189.15

−84

73

199.15

−74

74

275.15

2

75

−1.377

244.60

−28.55

76

−1.078

227.45

−45.7

77

−0.88

284.15

11

78

−0.72

212.15

−61

253.15

−20

79 80

−0.99

231.43

−41.72

81

−0.92

249.15

−24

0.89

106.80

2.11

0.203*

4.85

1.61 0.174* 8.28

132.70

1.49 0.78

82

274.68

1.53

83

161.55

−111.6

4.11

291.65

18.5

0.76

86

273.15

0

6.01

75.29

2.272

0.610

87

276.96

3.81

6.38

84.35

2.109

0.595

89

13.83

−259.32

0.12

[9.711]*

90

18.63

−254.52

0.20

[7.503]*

91

2.15

−271

92

63.15

−210

93

54.36

−218.79

94

24.56

95

84

−0.99887

12.66

0.190*

96.8

85

88 [71.6]*

[5.242]*

[18.7]*

0.72

[2.042]*

[133.2]*

0.44

[1.699]*

[152.0]*

−248.59

[1.861]*

[125.7]*

83.80

−189.35

[1.078]*

[128.5]*

96

115.77

−157.38

[0.5218]*

[89.0]*

97

161.25

−111.9

[0.3484]*

98

216.58

−56.57

9.02

99

[3.49]*

[188.7]*

100

[1.937]*

[139.9]* (Continued)

341

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8 (PC) →

(Continued) P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

No.

Surface tension γ (N/m)

Dynamic viscosity η g/m s) [kinematic, mm2 /s]

d(ln η)/d T (10−2 K−1 )

Relaxation time τ (ps)

Thermal expansion β (10−3 K−1 )

Isothermal compressibility κT (GPa−1 )

Adiabatic compressibility κS (GPa−1 )

1

0.01548

0.225

0.84

1.610

2.180

1.5955

2

0.01446

0.215

0.93

3

0.01794

0.2942

0.86

4

0.126*

0.3967

1.05

5

0.01832

0.504*

1.20

6

0.02188

0.416

7

0.02465

0.898

8

0.02329

0.685

9a

0.03218

3.381

9b

0.03015

2.128

11

0.04510*

1.741*

1.29

12

0.02789*

0.4043*

0.93

8

1.391*

1.026

13

0.02653

0.5357

1.00

7.4

1.26*

0.9980*

0.7571*

14

0.02613

0.9004

1.42

4.5

1.229

1.0799

0.747

16

0.03223

0.730*

1.27

6.9

1.141*

0.846*

17

0.0288

0.532

0.91

1.17

18

0.03130

0.798*

1.04

1.02

1.75

2.450 7.4

10

1.391

1.706

1.3180

1.440

1.2043*

1.347

1.358

1.220

1.140

0.8220

9 2.23

0.867 0.865

10

15

0.555*

19 20

[2.66]*

20a 20b 21

0.02820

0.6028

1.27

16

1.213

0.9660

0.67826

22

0.03296*

0.799*

1.15

10.3

0.990

0.731*

0.771

23

0.02684*

1.324

1.44

24

0.85*

1.83 (Continued)

342 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

No.

Surface tension γ (N/m)

Dynamic viscosity η (g/m s)

d(ln η)/d T (10−2 K−1 )

Relaxation time τ (ps)

Thermal expansion β (10−3 K−1 )

Isothermal compressibility κT (GPa−1 )

Adiabatic compressibility κS (GPa−1 )

25

0.02647*

0.517*

1.25

5.6

1.92

26

0.02164

0.860

2.05

42

1.412

27

0.03843*

1.237

1.51

37.9

28

0.02792

0.5525

1.15

7.4

1.067

0.9115

0.696

29

0.0323*

0.696

1.42

30

0.02949

0.756

1.36

9.6

0.952

0.8105

0.636

31

0.02810

0.581

1.19

0.981

0.8621

0.667

32

0.02776

0.605

1.21

0.956

0.8588

0.673

33

0.02768

0.739

1.35

34

0.04104*

2.940

35

0.03980*

3.10*

36

0.02230

0.5513

1.32

53

1.196

1.248

1.028

37

0.02232*

1.0826

1.91

143

1.096

1.153

0.9460

38

0.04849*

13.759*

205

0.626*

39

0.531*

0.893 0.699

1.543*

2.57

40

0.04889*

19.346

4.14

41

0.02345*

1.9430

2.37

430

1.004

1.026

0.849

42

0.02096*

2.0436

2.92

290

1.064

1.332*

1.066*

43

0.0633*

945

0.520*

0.219*

44

0.02467*

2.5710

2.55

480

0.948

0.942

45

0.02337*

2.998

3.96

500

1.024

46

0.02298*

3.3330

3.24

800

0.95

47

0.02002*

4.438

2.80

1.325*

613.6

7.78

0.53* 0.75*

48

0.79*

49

0.03996*

4.650*

3.30

50

0.02692*

7.363

3.59

51

0.02928*

1.60

2.53

0.95*

52

0.0282

1.85

2.70

0.97*

1360

0.827

0.866

0.950*

0.764

(Continued)

343

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

No.

Surface tension γ (N/m)

Dynamic viscosity η (g/m s)

d(ln η)/d T (10−2 K−1 )

Relaxation time τ (ps)

Thermal expansion β (10−3 K−1 )

Isothermal compressibility κT (GPa−1 )

Adiabatic compressibility κS (GPa−1 )

53

0.0485*

30

4.69

470

0.635*

54

0.0274

3.15

55

0.0264

0.460

1.04

56

0.03280

1.087*

1.77

0.738

0.539

57

0.01650

0.242*

1.01

2.18

1.654

58

0.02461*

0.455

1.06

3.6

1.19*

60

0.0296

0.989

1.57

61

0.03500*

0.789*

1.51

9.6

0.951*

62

0.02199*

0.602*

63

0.02462*

0.328

0.94

64

0.02375*

0.426

1.10

4.35

1.39*

0.8987*

65

0.0285*

0.6322*

66

0.02509*

0.7375*

1.34

1.17*

0.8390*

67

0.03814*

1.673*

2.09

0.876*

68

0.02268

0.3029

0.95

3.34

1.43*

1.324

69

0.02397*

0.378

1.09

10

1.19*

1.188

70

0.02509*

0.489*

1.13

71

0.03505*

1.810*

2.01

72

0.02329*

0.5463

1.34

74

0.05815

3.302

2.62

75

0.03719*

0.614

1.17

76

0.02825

0.341

0.96

77

0.04077*

1.54

2.55

78

0.03642

0.802

1.22

10.4

79

0.03243*

0.927

1.19

16

80

0.03633

0.884

1.53

7.27

0.92* 2.87

1.138* 1.115*

59

1.025*

1.092 10.4

0.955*

0.5391*

0.116*

73 37.4

3.21

0.775*

0.399*

1.24*

0.59*

1.368*

1.07*

1.024

0.508

0.416*

1.00*

1.070* (Continued)

344 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

No.

Surface tension γ (N/m) [dyne/cm]

Dynamic viscosity η (g/m s)

d(ln η)/d T (10−2 K−1 )

Relaxation time τ (ps)

Thermal expansion β (10−3 K−1 )

Isothermal compressibility κT (GPa−1 )

Adiabatic compressibility κS (GPa−1 )

81

0.0407

1.666

1.88

82

1.64

83

0.03225*

0.363*

0.72

4.5

1.218*

0.950

84

0.04298

1.991

1.93

4.7

0.928*

0.52

86

0.07198

0.8909

2.21

9.45

0.25705

0.4524

0.4477

87

0.07187

1.095

0.1722

0.4736

0.4625

85

88 89

0.9654 0.00194*

0.0134*

90 91

0.0032*

92

0.1507*

93

0.01320*

94 95

0.1954* 0.1247*

[10.53]*

96

0.2612* 0.4011*

97 98 99

0.1178*

100

0.1640*

(PC) →

W

X

Y

Z

AA

AB

AC

No.

Sound velocity vL (m/s)

Acoustic impedence Z (Mrayls = MPa s/m)

Ultrasound absorption (10−15 s2 /m)

Acoustic non-linearity B/A

Shock velocity Us (m/s)

Boiling point Tb (K)

Boiling point Tb (◦ C)

1

1020

0.634

2 3

1112

0.728

4

1131

0.768

60

9.9* 10.0*

5540*

309.22

36.07

300.99

27.84

341.84

68.69

371.57

98.42 (Continued)

345

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

W

X

Y

Z

AA

AB

AC

No.

Sound velocity vL (m/s)

Acoustic impedence Z (Mrayls = MPa s/m)

Ultrasound absorption (10−15 s2 /m)

Acoustic non-linearity B/A

Shock velocity Us (m/s)

Boiling point Tb (K)

Boiling point Tb (◦ C)

5

372.39

99.24

6

322.38

49.23

353.93

80.78

374.09

100.94

468.92

195.77

460.42

187.27

7

1248

0.966

192

10.1*

8 9 9a

124

9b 10

30−80

11

918

2.642

262

422.65

149.5

12

1070

1.409

779

312.79

39.64

13

979

1.449

363

334.33

61.18

14

926

1.467

546

349.79

76.64

191.11

−82.04

3510*

15 16

1193

17

1028

18

1036

19

508

1.487

1.672

20

356.7

83.55

360

87

394

121

329.75

56.6

415

142

353.24

80.09

404.91

131.76

20a 20b 21

1306

1.141

850

9.2*

22

1273

1.401

147

9.3*

4100*

23

132

453

180

24

110

486.65

213.5

357.884

84.734

26

353.405

80.255

27

464

191

383.79

110.64

418

145

417.59

144.44

25

28

1273

1328*

86

29 30

1331.5

1.166

63

4120*

(Continued)

346 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

W

X

Y

Z

AA

AB

AC

No.

Sound velocity vL (m/s)

Acoustic impedence Z (Mrayls = MPa s/m)

Ultrasound absorption (10−15 s2 /m)

Acoustic non-linearity B/A

Shock velocity Us (m/s)

Boiling point Tb (K)

Boiling point Tb (◦ C)

31

1343*

412.34

139.19

32

1334*

411.53

138.38

425.52

152.37

34

532.15

259

35

517.84

244.69

33

65

36

1076

0.846

30

9.6*

5510*

337.69

64.54

37

1207

0.947

52

10.5*

5630*

351.80

78.65

38

1658

1.840

470.75

197.6

346.75

73.6

444.15

171

370.93

97.78

355.39

82.24

563.15

290

390.88

117.73

372.66

99.51

381.04

107.89

47

355.49

82.34

48

633.15

360

478.46

205.31

50

468.33

195.18

51

398.15

125

52

408.15

135

9.7*

39 40

1724

41

1222*

42

1170*

43

1904

1.746

10.7*

2.391

44

4580* 81

45

1240

0.995

46

1212

0.967

49

53

166

10.7*

153

79

10.2*

1586

54 55

≈518

242−247

≈442

168−170

339.12

65.97

374.50

242−247

307.59

168−170

58

358.15

85

59

328.45

55.3

56

1376

1.414

117

57

985

0.697

45

60

5400*

≈433

155−165 (Continued)

347

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

W

X

Y

Z

AA

AB

AC

No.

Sound velocity vL (m/s)

Acoustic impedence Z (Mrayls = MPa s/m)

Ultrasound absorption (10−15 s2 /m)

Acoustic non-linearity B/A

Shock velocity Us (m/s)

Boiling point Tb (K)

Boiling point Tb (◦ C)

61

44

429.15 ≈415

62 63

140−143

304.90

242−247

350.21

168−170

65

374.15

101

66

399.12

125.97

67

472.15

199

329.22

56.07

69

352.71

79.56

70

375.39

102.24

428.59

155.44

72

389.15

116

73

417.15

144

483.15

210

64

68

49

156

1085

1174

0.971

0.921

71

26

9.2*

5370*

73

74

1622

1.831

39

75

1300

1.471

374.35

101.2

76

1290

1.002

354.75

81.6

77

389.15

116

78

426.15

153

≈438

79 80

388.37

115.22

81

475.15

202

82

386.65

113.5

319.65

46.5

462.15

189

83

1415

1149

1.384

165−166

1.443

2068

84

>410

85 21

5.0*

3910*

>140

86

1498

1.494

373.15

100

87

1400

1.546

374.55

101.4

88

1531

89

1098*

11800*

20.345

−252.805

90

876*

10970*

23.264

−249.886

5.25*

(Continued)

348 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

W

X

Y

Z

AA

AB

AC

No.

Sound velocity vL (m/s)

Acoustic impedence Z (Mrayls = MPa s/m)

Ultrasound absorption (10−15 s2 /m)

Acoustic non-linearity B/A

Shock velocity Us (m/s)

Boiling point Tb (K)

Boiling point Tb (◦ C)

91

177*

92

851*

93

905*

94

595*

95

831*

96

691*

119.62

−153.53

97

639*

164.78

−108.37

98

839*

99

1340*

111.51

−161.64

100

865*

78.9

−194.25

(PC) →

AD

AE

AF

AG

AH

AI

AJ

No.

Superheat temperature Tsh (◦ C)

Nucleation rate J (cm−3 s−1 )

Hb (kJ mol−1 )

Evaporation rate BuOAc

Vapour density vs. air

Vapour pressure (kPa)

Antoine equation parameter A

1

145

104 −1018

25.79

2.48

68.33

5.97786

24.69

2.6

91.7

5.92023

∼3

20.17

6.00091

2 3

138

6.6*

10−10

7

−183.088

27.061

−246.089

87.169

−185.981

3.5

6.09

6.02167

5

215.3

237.2

90.062

31.77

10 −10

8

4644*

28.85

213.5

218.5

−195.913

18

4

7

77.237

20

100−10

180

5090*

6052*

182

6

−268.928

4.2221

6

8.9

30.79

3.9

6.5

5.92885

10

6

27.30

∼2

42.4

6.04584

10

6

29.97

2.9

13.04

5.96407

31.27

3.4

6.1

5.94790

9

4.76

9a

41.00

0.10

6.00019

9b

40.20

0.164

5.98171

10

2.5

11

8.7

0.79

6.15631

12

179.9

13

173

14

25*

28.06

14.5

2.9

58.10

6.07622

100

29.24

10.45

4.1

25.97

5.96288

1000

29.82

6.0

5.32

15.36

6.10445 (Continued)

349

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

AD

AE

AF

AG

AH

AI

AJ

No.

Superheat temperature Tsh (◦ C)

Nucleation rate J (cm−3 s−1 )

Hb (kJ mol−1 )

Evaporation rate BuOAc

Vapour density vs. air

Vapour pressure (kPa) [mmHg]

Antoine equation parameter A

15

2.43

16

31.98

4.46

3.4*

11.11*

6.28356

4.46

4.5

6.307

6.15298

2.10

5.83

2.462

6.10170

17.5

[6.6]*

2.77

12.7

6.02232

3.86

1.567

6.30963

5.1

0.171

6.19518

31.20

10.48

6.07698

31.670

10.733*

6.14231

0.1*

5.87121

3.2

3.8036

6.08540

3.6

0.841

6.34792

36.24

3.7

0.88

6.13072

35.66

3.7

1.1

6.13785

32

35.67

3.7

1.2

6.11140

33

37.50

4.1

0.61

6.06588

17 18 19

136.6

10

6

20

78.7

20a 20b 21

225.3

100−1018

30.72

22

250

100

35.19

23

5.1

0.15

>6

24 25 26

191.7

10−10

6

27 28

253.5

100

33.18

1.90

29 30 31

235

34

0.052*

35 36 37

46.00 186 190.9

0.00895

6.16082

1.11

16.937

7.20519

1.60

1.59

7.870

7.16879

<0.01

2.1

0.0117

6.83995

3.5

10.09

5.9656

2.1

0.048*

6.86290

10–10

18

35.21

2.10

10–10

4

38.56

38 39 40 41 42

222.5 200

10–10 10

6

18

41.44

0.86

2.1

2.798

6.87613

39.85

2.30

2.1

5.775

6.86618 (Continued)

350 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

AD

AE

AF

AG

AH

AI

AJ

No.

Superheat temperature Tsh (◦ C)

Nucleation rate J (cm−3 s−1 )

Hb (kJ mol−1 )

Evaporation rate BuOAc

Vapour density vs. air

Vapour pressure (kPa)

Antoine equation parameter A

3.1

0.00033*

43 44

245.0

18

100–10

43.29

0.43

2.55

0.910

6.54743

40.75

0.81

2.6

2.317

6.35457

41.82

0.62

2.55

1.527

6.50091

39.07

1.30

2.5

5.637

6.35648

48

5.14

<0.0013*

7.67989

49

3.7

0.015

<0.01

4.5

0.010

5.88511

51

0.52

2.62

1.3

6.8334

52

0.38

3.1

0.71

6.9440

53

<0.001

2.14

0.00060

6.67111

54

0.07

4.1

0.114

29.81

4.72

2.5

21.60

34.16

2.42

3

4.95

26.52

33

2.6

71.622

6.05115

36.69

4.99

3.1*

6.40*

5.7736

45 46

437.2

10

47

50

313

104

46.90

55 56 57

147

19

100–10

58 59

6.79696

3.1

60

4.6

0.45

61

3.7

0.472

6.17595

62

4.48

0.898

5.930185

2.1

78.06

6.29529

3*

12.600

6.18799

3.5

5.1

4

1.664

6.151445

4.86

0.05258

6.60743

63

0.36

150

10

64

27.92 31.94

3.90

65 66

36.28

0.98

67 68

181.7

10–1018

29.10

5.59

2

30.806

6.25478

69

31.30

3.8

2.49

12.079

6.18444

70

33.44

2.50

3

4.720

6.13925

0.29

3.4

0.64

6.103304

71

(Continued)

351

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

AD

AE

AF

AG

AH

AI

AJ

No.

Superheat temperature Tsh (◦ C) [k]

Nucleation rate J (cm−3 s−1 )

Hb (kJ mol−1 ) [kJ kg−1 ]

Evaporation rate BuOAc [kg m−2 s−1 106 ]

Vapour density vs. air

Vapour pressure (kPa) [mbar]

Antoine equation parameter A

34.49

1.62

3.5

2.51

6.0976

72 73

3.94

74

1.55

3.96

2.1

4.888

6.399073

1.41

11.84

6.24747

2.07

1.75*

2.5

0.49

6.2334

3

0.17

6.88718

2.72

2.7*

6.18595

3.4

0.0445

75 76

33.99 224

10

1.3

6

77 78

0.20

79 80

35.09

81

<0.1

82 83

25.20

1*

168

84

48.21

6.06684

2.7

0.0800

6.72167

3.165

8.07131**

>1

85 86

2.67

270

10 −10 6

87

15

40.66

[100**]

0.62

41.46

88 89

[31.12] [27.9]*

100

0.89

0.07*

91

[4.55]*

10

7

1.23

0.07

0.08

0.14

92

[110]

1

5.58

0.97

93

[134.1]

1

6.82

1.105*

1.71

0.7*

100

6.43

1.38*

5

9.08

2.899*

12.57

4.560*

90

94 95

[130.8]

96

[182.5]*

10

97

[254.1]*

105

98 99 100

1.52 [167.6]*

105

0.55 [205.1]

1.00 (Continued)

352 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

AK

AL

AM

AN

AO

AP

AQ

No.

Antoine equation parameter B

Antoine equation parameter C

Saturation concentration (g/m3 )

Flash point (◦ C)

Ignition temperature (◦ C)

Explosion range (vol% in air)

Critical temperature (K )

1

1064.84

232.012

1689*

−48 c.c.

285

1.4–8

469.70

2

1022.88

233.460

−57 c.c.

420

1.3–7.6

460.39

3

1171.17

224.408

563*

−22 c.c.

240

1.0–8.1

507.60

4

1264.90

216.544

196*

−4 c.c.

215

1–7

540.20

5

1253.36

220.241

239*

−12 c.c.

410

1–6

543.90

6

1142.30

233.463

1470*

−42

380

1.5–8.7

511.60

7

1200.31

222.504

357*

−18

260

1.2–8.3

553.50

8

1270.763

221.416

192*

−4 c.c.

260

1.1–6.7

572.19

58

255

0.7–4.9

9 9a

1594.460

203.392

703.60

9b

1564.683

206.259

678.00 <−21c.c.

10 11

1511.50

214.959

12

1070.07

223.24

1549*

13

1106.94

218.552

1027*

14

1265.632

232.148

754*

250

0.8–7.4

605

13–22

510.00 536.50

>982

556.30

15

298.97

16

1341.37

230.05

350*

17

1315.04

230.0

145*

18

1386.90

217.52

126*

13 c.c.

412.6–440

6–11.4

410

7.9-100

19

448.7

20 20a 20b 21

1206.53

220.91

22

1556.6

230

23

1649.55

213.314

24 25

1248.083

221.827

26

1219.410

214.525

−11

555

1.4–8

562.05

27 c.c.

590

1.3–11

632.40

8*

66 c.c.

640

2.2–12

2*

99 c.c.

571

2.5–6.6

−15 c.c.

630

1.3- 8.9

319*

560.09 516.78 (Continued)

353

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

AK

AL

AM

AN

AO

AP

AQ

No.

Antoine equation parameter B

Antoine equation parameter C

Saturation concentration (g/m3 )

Flash point (◦ C)

Ignition temperature (◦ C)

Explosion range (vol% in air)

Critical temperature (K )

27

1436.72

181.0

70

550

1.4–7.2

28

1348.77

219.976

110*

4 c.c.

535

1.2–8

29

1629.2

230

25.6*

31 c.c.

480

1.1–8.9

30

1479.82

214.315

29*

30

465

1.0–7.6

630.30

31

1465.39

215.512

35*

25

∼525

1.1–7

617.00

32

1451.39

215.148

38*

25 c.c.

525

1.1–7

616.20

33

1464.17

208.207

22*

31 c.c.

420

0.8–6.0

631.00

35

1826.948

195.002

122

529

36

1581.993

239.711

11 c.c.

455

5.5–36.5

512.64

37

1552.601

222.419

105*

12 c.c.

425

3.5–15

513.92

38

1818.591

178.651

0.15*

111 c.c.

410

1.8–12.8

39

952.466

166.587

33

40

1732.11

186.215

92.5

410

3.4–27

41

1441.705

198.859

46*

15 c.c.

360

2.1–13.5

536.78

42

1360.131

197.592

105*

12 c.c.

425

2–12.7

508.30

∼180 o.c.

400

0.9

591.75

34

43

772.00

8.4–28.8

44

1338.769

177.042

20*

30

340

1.4–11.3

563.05

45

1171.891

169.955

52*

24

390

1.4–9.8

536.05

46

1295.197

175.787

36*

28 c.c.

430

1.6–12

547.78

47

1107.060

172.102

122*

14 c.c.

490

2.3–8.0

506.21

48

2962.73

186.750

190

325

3.6–7.2

101

435

1.3–13

715.00

∼90

270

0.8

652.50

49

0.56*

50

1264.322

130.73

51

1711.2

230

33*

37

325

2.5–20

52

1801.9

230

18*

∼40 c.c.

235

1.8–15.7

53

1897.637

161.067

0.12*

140 c.c.

345

0.7–22

5*

63–64

230

1.1–10.6

557*

−21.5 c.c.

215

1.5–12.4

540.20

149*

11 c.c.

300

1.7–25.2

587.00

54 55 56

1557.06

260.05

(Continued)

354 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

AK

AL

AM

AN

AO

AP

AQ

No.

Antoine equation parameter B

Antoine equation parameter C

Saturation concentration (g/m3 )

Flash point (◦ C)

Ignition temperature (◦ C)

Explosion range (vol% in air)

Critical temperature (K )

57

1062.409

228.183

1776*

−41

180

1.7–36

466.70

58

1217.03

230

200*

−6 c.c.

200

1.6–10.4

537.00

59

−28 c.c.

460

1.65–8.4

60

51

190

1.4–17.4

43 c.c.

475

0.34–6.3

25

185

0.9–8.5

61

1489.502

203.573

6*

62

1302.768

191.669

63

1125.2

230.56

1569*

−28

440

5–23

487.20

64

1224.673

215.712

336*

−4 c.c.

460

2.1–11.5

523.20

10

430

2.1–12.5

25 c.c.

370

1.4–7.5

82 c.c.

510

8.6–20

65 66

1368.051

203.9298

62*

67

1974.6

230

68

1216.689

230.275

533*

<−20 c.c.

465

2.6-12.8

508.10

69

1259.223

221.758

310*

−4

514

1.8-11.5

536.80

70

1309.592

214.561

52*

7

449

1.5–8.2

561.10

71

1495.511

209.5517

19*

43

430

1.3–9.4

653.00

72

1190.69

195.45

82*

14

460

1.2–8.0

574.60

43 o.c.

455

1.4–8.8

0.24*

175 o.c.

500

2.7-19.0

73 74 75

1441.610

226.939

90*

35.6 c.c.

418

7.3-63.0

76

1315.2

230

163*

2 c.c.

524

3.0–17

29*

∼36 c.c.

400

2.5-16.3

77 78

1537.78

210.39

12*

58 c.c.

410

2.2–16

79

1889.10

221.0

12*

70

400

1.7-11.5

80

1386.683

216.469

65*

17 c.c.

550

1.7-12.4

91 c.c.

245

1.3–9.5

81 82

579.00

588.00

620.00

653.01

83

1168.623

241.534

1244*

−30

95

1–60

84

1962.05

225.892

8.0*

95 o.c.

301

1.8-63.0

1730.63**

233.426**

22.9

85 86

647.14 (Continued)

355

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

AK

AL

AM

AN

AO

AP

AQ

No.

Antoine equation parameter B

Antoine equation parameter C

Saturation concentration (g/m3 )

Flash point (◦ C)

Ignition temperature (◦ C)

Explosion range (vol% in air)

Critical temperature (K )

87

643.89

88 89

33.19

90

38.34

91

5.1953

92

126.193

93

154.581

94

44.4918

95

150.6633

96

209.433

97

289.734

98

304.12 ◦

99

998 F

15

190.55

100

132.5168

(PC) → AR

AS

AT

AU

AV

AW

AX

No.

Critical Critical Critical Critical Pitzer Electrical Dipole temperature pressure volume compressibility factor acentric conductivity, σ moment D Tc (◦ C) Pc (bar) Vc (cm3 /mol) Zc = Pc · Vc /(R · Tc ) factor ( −1 cm−1 ) (Debyes)

1

196.55

33.70

311.00

0.268

0.252

2

187.24

33.81

308.30

0.272

0.229

3

234.45

30.25

368.00

0.264

0.300

4

267.05

27.40

428.00

0.261

0.350

5

270.75

25.70

469.70

0.266

0.304

6

238.45

45.08

260.00

0.276

7 8

280.35 299.04

40.73

308.00

0.273

2 × 10−8 *

0.0 0.1

−14

<10

0.085

−14

<10

0.0 0 0.0

0.211

−16

∼7 × 10 −14

<10

0.3

34.71

368.00

0.268

0.235

9a

32.00

480.00

0.265

0.276

0.0

9b

32.00

480.00

0.272

0.303

0.0

0.0

9

10 (Continued)

356 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) → AR

No.

AS

AT

AU

AV

13

AX

Critical Critical Critical Critical Pitzer Electrical Dipole temperature pressure volume compressibility factor acentric conductivity, σ moment D Tc (◦ C) Pc (bar) Vc (cm3 /mol) Zc = Pc · Vc /(R · Tc ) factor ( −1 cm−1 ) (Debyes) <2 × 10−6

11 12

AW

236.85 263.35

−9

4.3 × 10

61.00 55.00

240.00

−8

<1 × 10

0.296

14

283.15

45.57

276.00

0.271

15

25.82

48.36

133.00

0.259

−16

4 × 10 0.267

4 × 10

17

8 × 10

18

0.0555* 18.70

573.20

0.274

0.513

288.90

48.95

256.00

0.268

0.210

1.1 0.0

1.8

−10

175.55

1.8

1.6 −9

16

19

*

0.99**

*

0.8*** 0*** 0.0

20 20a 20b 21 22

359.25

45.20

308.00

0.265

0.251

4.43 × 10−15 −9

7 × 10

0.0 1.6

−9

3 × 10

23 24 25

286.94

45.505

354.1

26

243.63

32.73

335.1

1.48 0.255

0.396 5 × 10−6

27 28

0

318.60

41.08

316.00

0.264

0.264

8 × 10−14

0.4

357.15

37.32

370.00

0.263

0.312

6.7 × 10−14

0.5

29 30 31

343.85

35.41

375.00

0.259

0.327

−14

8.6 × 10

−14

7.6 × 10

0.3

32

343.05

35.11

378.00

0.259

0.322

33

357.85

32.09

434.70

0.261

0.326

0.8

35

498.85

36.00

462.00

0.259

0.348

0.5

36

239.49

80.97

118.00

0.224

0.565

0.1

34

37 38

240.77

61.48

167.00

0.240

0.649

1.5 × 10−7 −7

1.35 × 10

1.7 1.7

0.000116

39 (Continued)

357

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) → AR

No.

AS

AT

AU

AV

42

45

Dipole moment D (Debyes)

0.00110 263.63 235.15

51.75 47.62

219.00 220.00

0.254 0.248

0.629 0.665

9.17 × 10−7 * −6

5.8 × 10

1.7 1.7

−6

∼6 × 10

43 44

AX

Critical Critical Critical Critical Pitzer Electrical temperature pressure volume compressibility factor acentric conductivity, σ Tc (◦ C) Pc (bar) Vc (cm3 /mol) Zc = Pc · Vc /(R · Tc ) factor ( −1 cm−1 )

40 41

AW

289.90 262.90

44.23 41.79

275.00 269.00

0.260 0.252

0.590 0.574

9.12 × 10−7 * −5

<1 × 10 * −8

1.8 1.7

46

274.63

43.00

273.00

0.258

0.590

1.6 × 10

1.7

47

233.06

39.73

275.00

0.260

0.613

2.66 × 10−6 *

1.7

441.85

43.00

48 49 50

379.35

28.60

0.390 490.00

0.258

0.594

1.7 −5

1.39 × 10 *

2.0

−4

51

1.09 × 10 *

52

9.3 × 10−6 *

53

5.86 × 10−5 *

54

4.32 × 10−5 *

55

267.05

51.90

224.00

0.259

0.0045-9.3 × 10−6 * 1.7

56

313.85

51.70

238.00

0.255

5 × 10−13

0.0

57

193.55

36.40

280.00

0.263

<3 × 10−14 *

1.3

58

263.85

0.281

270.64

59 60 1 × 10−11

61 62 63 64

214.05

60.00

172.00

0.255

0.000192* −7

1.8

250.05

38.30

286.00

0.252

0.361

<1 × 10 *

1.9

305.85

30.90

412.80

0.253

0.407

1.6 × 10−6 **

1.8

65 66 67 68

0.00137* 234.95

47.00

209.00

0.233

0.307

69

263.65

42.10

267.00

0.252

0.322

70

287.95

36.90

301.00

0.238

0.346

4.9 × 10−7 −7

3.6 × 10 *

2.9 3.3 2.5 (Continued)

358 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) → AR

No.

AS

AT

AU

AV

Critical Critical Critical volume Critical Pitzer temperature pressure Vc (cm3 /mol) compressibility factor acentric Tc (◦ C) Pc (bar) [kg/m3 ] Zc = Pc · Vc /(R · Tc ) factor

71

379.85

40.00

72

301.45

32.70

0.299 340.60

0.256

0.351

AW

AX

Electrical Dipole conductivity, σ moment D ( −1 cm−1 ) (Debyes) 5 × 10−16 <5.2 × 10−6 *

2.8

73 <2 × 10−5 *

74 75

314.85

58.70

173.00

5 × 10−7

0.208

3.1

−8

76

6 × 10

77

9 × 10−6

78

6 × 10−6

79 80

346.85

56.70

254.00

0.267

0.242

2.3

−6

1–2 × 10

81 82

4.0 × 10−6

379.86

147.00

101.10

0.282

3.0

83

0.37

84

2 × 10−7

85 86

373.99

220.64

55.95

0.229

87

370.74

216.71

56.26

0.228

0.344

1.2 × 10−6 *

1.854 1.9

42.9 × 10−3 *

88 89

−239.96

13.152

66.95

0.303

−0.214

0.0

90

−234.81

16.653

57.71

0.312

−0.175

0.0

91

−267.95

58.22

0.301

−0.382

0.0

92

−146.96

33.978

89.47

0.289

0.037

0.0

93

−118.57

50.43

73.37

0.288

0.022

0.0

94

−228.66

26.786

41.87

0.312

−0.039

0.0

95

−122.49

48.6

75.24

0.291

−0.004

0.0

96

−63.72

55.1

92.30

0.288

−0.00313

0.0

97

16.58

58.4

119.47

0.286

0.00336

0.0

98

30.97

73.74

94.07

0.274

0.225

0.0

99

−82.60

45.992

[162.65]

0.286

0.011

100

−140.63

37.860

84.53

2.2746

(Continued)

359

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) → AY

AZ

BA

BB

BC

BD

BE

No.

Polarity Dielectric 1000 ×d Magnetic Index of Kerr coefficient parameter constant, ln ε/dT susceptibility refraction 1000 × dnD /dT B (10−9 /cm esE2 ) ENT ε (K−1 ) χm (10−6 cm3 /mol)* nD (K−1 ) {ratio B/Bs}

1

0.009

2

1.841*

−2.00

−63.0

1.3547

−0.552

1.8275

−0.70

−64.4

1.3509

−0.570

5.5*

3

0.009

1.8799

−1.90

−74.1

1.3723

−0.520

6.6*

4

0.012

1.9246*

−1.68

−85.4

1.3851

−0.506

7.6*

5

1.940*

−1.67

−98.3

1.3890

−0.494

6.2*

6

1.96875* 2.02431* −1.82

−68.2

1.4235

−0.538

5.9*

−106.7

1.4788

−0.440

22*

7

0.006

8

2.020*

9 9a

0.015

9b

2.197

−1.15

2.172

10 11

4.39*

−2.42

−82.6

1.595

−0.550

{−0.86}*

12

0.309

8.93

−8.50

−46.6

1.421

−0.600

{−0.36}*

13

0.259

4.806*

−3.68

−59.3

1.442

−0.590

−308*

14

0.052

2.2288

−2.06

−66.8

1.457

−0.558

8.4*

16

0.327

10.37

−5.08

−59.6

1.442

−0.540

17

0.160

3.42*

−65.8

1.475

−0.568

−81.6

1.503

−0.530

15

18

2.280

−2.02

19

1.251

20

1.313

20a 20b 21

0.111

2.27401

−2.03

−54.8

1.4979

−0.640

41.0

22

0.188

5.621

−3.00

−69.6

1.521

−0.592

1050*

23

0.225

9.93

−4.47

−84.4

1.549

−0.458

−106.5

1.571

−58.3

1.462

0.500

1.374

0.558

24 25 26

0.194

5.42

(Continued)

360 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) → AY

No.

BA

BB

BC

BD

BE

Polarity Dielectric 1000 ×d Magnetic Index of Kerr coefficient parameter constant, ln ε/dT susceptibility refraction 1000 × dnD /dT B (10−9 /cm esE2 ) ENT ε (K−1 ) χm (10−6 cm3 /mol)* nD (K−1 ) {ratio B/Bs}

27 28

AZ

0.099

25.20

−3.62

−65.2

1.525

−0.506

2.3807

−2.35

−66.1

1.4941

−0.560

−68.0

1.5440

−0.519

−77.8

1.5030

−0.500

134*

71.4*

29

2.4257*

30

2.568*

31

2.3742*

−1.89

−76.6

1.4946

−0.516

75*

2.2699*

−1.62

−76.8

1.4933

−0.514

75*

−89.3

1.4889

−0.510

32

0.074

33

2.3833*

34

5.04

35

2.915*

−2.38

36

0.762

32.66

−6.08

−21.4

1.3265

−0.383

{0.3}*

37

0.654

24.55

−6.22

−33.5

1.3594

−0.400

{0.24}*

37.7

−5.16

−38.9

1.4306

−0.240

38

−7.24

39 40

0.651

37.72

41

0.617

20.45

42

0.546

19.92

43

1.2907 −42.1

1.452

−0.340

−6.50

−45.2

1.3837

−0.372

{−0.78}*

−7.14

−45.7

1.3752

−0.410

{∼0.73}*

{−1.13}*

42.5

44

0.586

17.51

−7.71

−56.1

1.3974

−0.390

45

0.506

16.56

−9.90

−57.3

1.3953

−0.364

46

0.552

17.93

−8.60

−57.2

1.3939

−0.390

{−1.37}*

47

0.389

12.47

−14.60

−57.4

1.3852

−0.740

{1.54}*

1.483

−0.200

48

29.36

49

13.1*

−4.89

−71.8

1.5384

−0.396

{−4.77}*

50

10.34*

−9.44

−102.2

1.4276

−0.400

{−2.36}*

16.93

−11.58

−60.3

1.4002

−0.380

1.4057

−0.400

−13.67

1.4461

−0.280

1.4050

−0.440

1.4203

−0.460

51

0.657

52 53

29.6* 0.713

54

31.69* 9.30

55

0.207

7.58

−3.94

56

0.164

2.209

−1.80

−51.1

{0.02}* (Continued)

361

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) → AY

AZ

BA

BB

BC

BD

BE

No.

Polarity Dielectric 1000 ×d Magnetic Index of Kerr coefficient parameter constant, ln ε/dT susceptibility refraction 1000 × dnD /dT B (10−9 /cm esE2 ) ENT ε (K−1 ) χm (10−6 cm3 /mol)* nD (K−1 ) {ratio B/Bs}

57

0.117

58 59

0.124

60

0.244

61 62

−5.00

−55.1

1.3495

−0.560

7.20

−5.69

−55.2

1.3781

−0.304

−85.8

1.4058

−0.408

−72.2

1.5143

−0.500

4.33 0.071

63 64

4.335*

0.228

−5.90

−62*

112.3* −50.1*

3.083* 8.5*

−13.50

6.02

−5.70

−54.1

1.3415

−0.440

1.3698

−0.490

65

2.9*

66

5.01*

−6.50

−77.4

1.3918

−0.470

67

6.59*

−3.20

−81.6

1.514

−0.460

68

0.355

20.56

−4.72

−34.0

1.3560

−0.544

{5.05}*

69

0.327

18.51*

−4.77

−45.6

1.3769

−0.480

1382*

15.38*

−4.49

−57.4

1.3885

−0.469

70 71

0.281

16.10*

−3.73

−62.0

1.4500

−0.212

1400*

72

0.269

13.11*

−5.07

−70.0

1.3936

−0.430

711*

111.0*

−15.10

−23.1

1.446

−0.144

73 74 75

0.481

35.87*

−4.35

−20.9

1.379

−0.450

76

0.460

35.94

−4.16

−27.6

1.341

−0.496

77

0.349

12.9

−17.90

−45.5

1.454

−0.547

78

0.386

36.71

−5.12

−38.8

1.428

−0.460

79

0.377

37.78

−6.09

−56.1

1.435

−0.560

80

0.302

12.91

−4.88

−48.5

1.507

−0.550

81

0.355

32.2

−61.7

1.467

−0.500

−4.95

82 83

0.065

2.643*

84

0.444

46.45

1.000

78.304

−2.34

{6.32}*

1.469 −42.2

1.624

−0.674

−43.9

1.477

−0.358

−12.9

1.33286

−0.644

355*

85 86

−4.53

{1.23} (Continued)

362 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) → AY

No.

AZ

BA

BB

BC

BD

Polarity Dielectric 1000 ×d Magnetic Index of parameter constant, ln ε/dT susceptibility refraction ENT ε (K−1 ) χm (10−6 cm3 /mol)* nD

87

78.06

1.32828*

1.226*

1.1093* **

BE

1000 × dnD /dT Kerr coefficient (K−1 ) B (10−9 /cm esE2 )

88 89

3.45*

90 91

1.0492*

92

1.434*

93

1.4837*

94

1.188*

95

1.52*

8.00* 1.219* **

20*

96 97 98

14*

99

1.6758*

100

1.445*

(PC) →

BF

BG

BH

BI

BJ

BK

BL

No.

Scattering coefficient R90

Depolarization factor u × 102

IR spectrum (Sadtler)

IR/Raman spectrum (Schrader)

UV-VIS spectrum (Perkampus)

UV cut-off point

UV 5% absorption

1

7.3

2

A1-05

200*

230*

2

5.6*

3

A1-13

8.0

7

A1-02

M/4

200*

225*

4

8.7

13

A1-03

M/3

195*

230*

5

5.6

21

A1-04

M/6

205*

230*

6

11.1

1

195*

220*

5.6

6

8

11.1*

12

205*

9

17.6

24

200*

3

7

0.298

0.217

E1-01

9a

25

E12-02

9b

26

E12-01

10

34

M/5

195*

250*

226* (Continued)

363

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

BF

BG

BH

BI

BJ

BK

BL

No.

Scattering coefficient R90

Depolarization factor u × 102

IR spectrum (Sadtler)

IR/Raman spectrum (Schrader)

UV-VIS spectrum (Perkampus)

UV cut-off point

UV 5% absorption

279

A2-03

31.0

248

A2-40

M/12

230*

245* 260*

11 12

330*

13

0.357

20

249

A2-04

M/11

245*

14

0.323

6

250

A2-02

M/10

260*

15

A2-48

16

252

A2-18

17

268

18

269

C1-10

230*

250* >400

290*

320*

280*

295*

19 20 20a 20b 21

1.00

43

35

F1-01

22

1.46

57.5

244

F1-03

285*

310*

261

F3-01

295*

350*

23 24

F7-01

25

225

26

229

27 28

M/13

1.12

29

350*

FI-02

68

301

F1-06

300*

48

36

F1-08

285*

315*

56

60

F1-50 325*

30

1.29

49.7

37

F3-07

290*

31

1.30

50.6

38

F4-05

290*

32

1.61

56.4

39

F5-02

290*

41

F1-33

33 34

78

247

35 36

0.146

4.9

64

A3-03

M/1

205*

240*

37

0.178

5.6

65

A3-11

M/2

205*

240*

103

A3-01

38

(Continued)

364 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

BF

BG

BH

BI

BJ

BK

BL

No.

Scattering coefficient R90

Depolarization factor u × 102

IR spectrum (Sadtler)

IR/Raman spectrum (Schrader)

UV-VIS spectrum (Perkampus)

UV cut-off point

UV 5% absorption

39

190*

40

362

41

0.180

5.8

66

42

0.168

3.9

67

43 44

0.191

9.3

45 46

0.182

47

A3-08 M/19

210*

250*

210*

240*

107

A3-39

205*

68

A3-06

205*

245*

69

A3-05

260*

285*

200*

250*

200*

270*

210*

280*

5.5

70

4.1*

71

58.6

96

48 49

1.02

50

0.307

F1-41

93

51

9

52

A4-06

53

6

A4-11

70

J3-08

M/9

220*

280*

13.4*

80

J7-01

M/14

220*

290*

7

86

A4-01

M/18

215*

255*

54 55 56 57

0.280

58

A4-02

59

85

60

64

61

60.0

62 63

220*

F1-15 91

A4-04

210*

0.351

260*

64

66

255*

280*

255*

275*

330*

340*

330*

345*

65 66 67 68 69

0.257

23.1*

38

B2-01

16.6

43

B2-11

M/16

(Continued)

365

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

BF

BG

BH

BI

BJ

BK

BL

No.

Scattering coefficient R90

Depolarization factor u × 102

IR spectrum (Sadtler)

IR/Raman spectrum (Schrader)

UV-VIS spectrum (Perkampus)

UV cut-off point

UV 5% absorption

71

54

E1-02

72

55

B2-02

335*

375*

330*

350*

380*

>400*

195*

200*

300*

70

19.6

73 74 75

24

B11-01

76

27

B9-01

77

40

A7-09

78

34

B6-01

270*

79

35

B6-03

268*

53

I7-01

37

I1-07

260*

92

O-01

380*

28

B13-01

1

O-02

80

46

81

M/17

M/15

305*

345*

82 83

4.15

62

84

M/8

265*

330*

185*

190*

85 86 87

0.0546

8.8

O-03

88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 (Continued)

366 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) → BM

BN

BO

BP

BQ

BR

BS

No.

Ionization energy (eV)

Hf (0) (kJ/mol)

Gf (0) (kJ/mol)

Hildebrandt parameter δ (MPa1/2 )

Oxygen Nitrogen CO2 solubility solubility xg solubility xg xg (mole (mole fractions) (mole fractions) fractions)

1

10.28

−146.76

−8.65

2

10.32

−153.70

−13.86

3

10.13

−166.92

0.15

4

9.93

−187.80

5

9.98

6

0.00205

0.00145

0.01258

0.00198

0.00138

0.01207

8.20

0.00217

0.00135

0.0119

−224.01

14.21

0.002529

0.001533

0.01387

10.33

−77.10

38.92

7

9.88

−123.10

32.26

0.00123

0.000761

0.00759

8

9.64

−118.10

64.30

0.001599

0.000946

0.00934

9a

9.32

−169.20

85.60

9b

9.32

−182.10

74.20

0.000425

0.0128

0.000641

0.0107

14.9

16.8

9

10 11

10.50

12

11.33

−95.40

−68.84

13

11.37

−102.93

−70.09

19.0

14

11.47

−95.81

−53.53

17.6

15

13.86

−693.30

−658.80

16

11.07

−126.78

−70.20

17

9.46

18

9.326

0.001200

20.0

−2973.99 −2722.34

19 20

0.00390

20a 20b 21

9.24378

82.88

129.75

18.8

0.000810

0.000445

0.00912

22

9.07

51.09

98.36

19.4

0.0007884

0.000427

0.00982

23

9.06

24

9.04

25

9.20

−145.39

0.001508

26

9.90

−991.69

0.002418

0.0232* (Continued)

367

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

BM

BN

BO

BP

BQ

BR

BS

No.

Ionization energy (eV)

Hf (0) (kJ/mol)

Gf (0) (kJ/mol)

Hildebrandt parameter δ (MPa1/2 )

Oxygen solubility xg (mole fractions)

Nitrogen solubility xg (mole fractions)

CO2 solubility xg (mole fractions)

50.17

122.29

0.000923

0.000539

0.0105

27

9.73

28

8.828

29

8.464

30

8.56

19.08

122.05

31

8.55

17.32

118.89

32

8.44

18.03

121.48

33

8.73

4.00

139.05

34

8.13

35

7.96

115.20

216.40

36

10.84

−200.94

−162.24

29.6

0.0004122

0.000273

0.00635

37

10.48

−234.95

−167.73

26.0

0.000583

0.000357

0.00689

38

10.552

39

11.49

40

8.96

41

10.22

−255.20

−159.81

0.000406

0.00762

42

10.17

−272.70

−173.32

29.9

0.0007745

0.000466

43

0.00009

44

9.99

−274.60

−150.17

45

9.88

−292.75

−167.71

46

10.02

−282.90

−167.40

47

9.90

−325.81

−191.20

48

7.9

49

8.26

−72.38

18.20

−356.90

−116.59

50 51

10.13

52

9.97

23.3

0.0007894

0.000461

0.00883

21.7

0.000854

0.000482

0.00697

0.001132

0.000657

0.01277 0.0100

53 54 55

9.40

−184.18

−79.57

18.6

0.000816

0.000521

56

9.19

−314.70

−180.20

20.5

0.000616

0.000237

0.027

(Continued)

368 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

BM

BN

BO

BP

BQ

BR

BS

No.

Ionization energy (eV)

Hf (0) (kJ/mol)

Gf (0) (kJ/mol)

Hildebrandt parameter δ (MPa1/2 )

Oxygen solubility xg (mole fractions)

Nitrogen solubility xg (mole fractions)

CO2 solubility xg (mole fractions)

−120.70

18.6

0.000871*

20.2

0.0008399

57

9.51

−250.80

58

9.3

−342.80

59

9.24

60

9.8

61

8.20

62

9.44

63

10.835

−352.40

−294.90

64

10.01

−444.50

−328.00

65

10.06

66

9.92

−485.30

−312.10

67

9.32

68

9.703

−217.10

−152.60

69

9.52

−238.60

−146.50

0.001011

70

9.38

−259.20

−138.20

0.001112

71

9.16

−230.12

−90.87

72

9.30

−286.40

−135.10

73

9.284

20.3

74

10.16

75

11.08

76

12.20

77

8.6

78

9.13

79

9.20

80

9.26

81

9.17

82

8.1

83

10.073

20.4

84

9.10

24.5

0.0230

0.000542

0.0187

0.000855

39.3 −74.70

−6.90

0.000201* 24.3

24.8

140.37

190.55

95.40

159.38

21.9

0.0164

0.000458

0.000250

0.0119

0.0000072 0.000439

0.000222

0.00328

0.0000229

0.0000118

0.000615

85 86

12.621

−241.81

−228.42

47.9

(Continued)

369

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

BM

BN

BO

BP

BQ

BR

BS

No.

Ionization energy (eV)

Hf (0) (kJ/mol)

Gf (0) (kJ/mol)

Hildebrandt parameter δ (MPa1/2 )

Oxygen solubility xg (mole fractions)

Nitrogen solubility xg (mole fractions)

CO2 solubility xg (mole fractions)

87

12.6395

−249.20

−234.53

−393.51

−394.38

−74.52

−50.45

0.0000118

88 89

15.42593

90

15.46658

91

24.58741

92

15.581

93

12.0697

94

21.56454

95

15.759

96

13.99961

97

12.12987

98

13.777

99

12.61

100 (PC) →

BT

BU

BV

BW

No.

Solubility in water (g/l)

Riddick reference

Marcus reference

Poling reference

1

0.36*

5

20

166

2

0.048*

6

30

167

3

0.0095*

10

40

216

4

0.05*

16

60

259

5

0.00056

27

80

310

6

0.156

4

7

0.055*

9

8

0.014*

15

9

0.006*

9a

32

9b

33

10

0.01* ***

11

3.2*

351

148 50

197 247

220

356 357

1730 (Continued)

370 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

BT

BU

BV

BW

No.

Solubility in water (g/l)

Riddick reference

Marcus reference

Poling reference

12

20*

315

1540

20

13

8*

316

1600

18

14

0.8*

317

1650

13

15

19

16

8.7*

319

1560

17

1*

336

1630

18

0.16*

337

1660

19

1460

20

1490

58

180

20a 20b 21

1.770*

38

120

187

22

0.4*

307

1530

186

326

1580

23 24

0.049*

25

1.54*

288

1500

26

Insoluble*

293

1510

27

10*

395

2130

28

0.52*

39

130

29

0.24*

75

200

30

0.18*

40

140

274

41

150

275

31

1640

178

234

32

0.2

42

160

276

33

Insoluble*

44

180

326

34

312

35

0.0258

47

36

In all proportions

78

240

27

37

In all proportions

79

250

66

38

1000*

134

490

475

450

39

367

(Continued)

371

Liquids and their properties

Table 8.8

(Continued)

(PC) →

BT

BU

BV

BW

No.

Solubility in water (g/l)

Riddick reference

Marcus reference

Poling reference

478

1920

80

260

96

42

81

270

97

43

147

40 41

In all proportions*

44

77*

82

280

130

45

125*

83

300

133

46

85*

84

290

131

85

310

132

47 48

In all proportions*

481

1940

49

40*

115

400

235

50

0.3*

112

370

314

464

470

51 52

In all proportions*

465

480

53

In all proportions*

469

560

54

466

55

170

740

118

56

172

770

122

151

660

134

159

710

135

162

720 800

57

69*

58 59

26*

60 61

1.5–1.7*

175

62

10*

156

63

300*

224

1240

61

64

85.3*

232

1270

124

65

15*

255

66

7*

238

1290

211

67

0.158*

258

1380

189

920

89

68 69

292*

190

930

117

70

43*

192

940

154 (Continued)

372 Table 8.8

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

(Continued)

(PC) →

BT

BU

BV

BW

No.

Solubility in water (g/l) [mole fractions] {vol/vol}

Riddick reference

Marcus reference

Poling reference

71

90*

194

1000

195

72

18–20*

196

980

204

73

5.4* 440

2190

380

2140

76

385

2070

77

415

1790

78

442

2210

445

2250

431

1950

449

2280

74 75

79

105*

In all proportions*

80 81

1000

82

2570

83

2.1*

451

2330

84

1000*

462

2400

0

230

25

143

449

85 86 87

440 418

88 89

[0.00001411]

438

90

[0.00001460]

416

91

[0.000006997]

450

92

[0.00001183]

455

93

[0.00002293]

460

94

[0.000008152]

458

95

[0.00002519]

1

96

[0.00004512]

453

97

[0.00007890]

468

98

[0.000615]

31

99

[0.00002552]

26

100

{0.0292}

Liquids and their properties

373

Simple analytical expressions, with up to 5 constants, of temperature dependencies of the properties of many organic solvents are given in Riddick handbook [1006]: viscosity, surface tension, heat of vaporization, and heat capacity; and in Poling handbook [1008]: vapour pressure and vapour heat capacity.

Data sources for numerical values The numbers of the liquids are in italic NA – not available b.p. – (atmospheric) boiling point E (safety codes) – [Merck [1009]]: 1–14, 16–18, 21–26, 28–33, 35–42, 44–47, 49–60, 62–65, 67–81, 83, 99 F (molar mass) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–15, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 49, 50, 55, 56, 57, 58, 63, 64, 66, 68–72, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87, 89–98; [NIST [1010]]: 11, 16, 18, 20, 23, 24–27, 29, 34, 38–40, 43, 48, 51, 52, 53, 54, 59–62, 65, 67, 73, 74, 76–79, 81, 83, 84; [Jacobsen et al. (1997) [1011]]: 90, 91, 95, 99, 100 G (liquid molar volume) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–16, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 50, 55–58, 63, 64, 66, 68–70, 72, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87, 89–99 * at temperature: 15 [−60◦ C]; 19, 35, 56, 82 [20◦ C]; 89 [20 K]; 90 [22.7 K]; 91 [4.3 K]; 92 [78 K]; 93 [90 K]; 94 [27 K]; 95 [90 K]; 96 [120 K]; 97 [165 K]; 99 [90.68 K] H (density) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1–9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–23, 25–58, 60–72, 74–81, 83, 84, 86; [Mackanos et al. (2003) [1012]]: 20; [Nakamura et al. (1995) [1013]]: 87; [Jacobsen et al. (1997) [1011]]: 89–97, 100; [Cryogenic Fluids Databook (2002) [1014]]: 99 * at temperature: 17 [30◦ C]; 20 [NA]; 25 [30◦ C]; 34 [20◦ C]; 39 [22◦ C]; 47 [30◦ C]; 53, 55, 65 [20◦ C]; 67 [30◦ C]; 71 [20◦ C]; 89 [20.345 K]; 90 [23.264 K]; 91 [4.2163 K]; 92 [77.237 K]; 93 [90.062 K]; 94 [27.061 K]; 95 [87.169 K]; 96 [119.62 K]; 97 [164.78 K]; 99 [111.5 K]; 100 [78.569 K] I (temperature coefficient of density) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1–6, 9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–23, 25–38, 40–57, 60–72, 75–78, 80, 81, 84 J (melting point in K) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–15, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–45, 47, 49, 50, 55, 56, 57, 63, 64, 66, 68–70, 72, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87, 89–98; [NIST [1010]]: 35; rest calculated J = K + 273.15 K (melting point in ◦ C) – [Merck [1009]]: 10, 11, 16, 17, 18, 23, 24, 29, 8–40, 43, 46, 48, 51, 52, 53, 54, 58–62, 65, 71, 73, 74, 76–79, 81, 83, 84; [ChemExper [1015]]: 20; [Sigma-Aldrich [1016]] – 25–27; [Liquid Synthetic Air [1017]]: 100; rest calculated K = J − 273.15 L (enthalpy change of atmospheric melting) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–8, 12–14, 16, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44, 47, 49, 55–57, 64, 66, 68–70, 80, 82, 86, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 98; [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 25, 26 M (heat capacity at constant pressure) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–14, 16, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 50, 55–57, 63, 64, 66, 68–70, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87; [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 25, 26; [Jacobsen et al. (1997) [1011]]: 89–97, 100; [Cryogenic Fluids Databook (2002) [1014]]: 99 * at temperature: 89 [20.345 K]; 90 [23.264 K]; 91 [4.2163 K]; 92 [77.237 K]; 93 [90.062 K]; 94 [27.061 K]; 95 [87.169 K]; 96 [119.62 K]; 97 [164.78 K]; 99 [111.5 K]; 100 [78.569 K] N (diffusion coefficient) – [Marcus (1998) [1007]]: 1–5, 7, 9, 11–14, 16, 21, 22, 26, 28, 30–33, 36, 37, 40–42, 44, 47, 50, 56, 57, 61, 64, 68, 71, 75, 76, 78, 80, 81, 83, 84 [Eisenberg and Kauzmann (1969) [1018]]: 86, 87 [Horita and Cole (2004) [1019]]: 88

374

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

O (heat conductivity) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 3, 5, 14, 28, 36–38, 41–44, 46, 47, 50, 55, 64, 66, 68, 69, 75, 79, 81; [IAPWS (1998) [1020]]: 86, 87; [Cryogenic Fluids Databook (2002) [1014]]: 89, 91–96, 99, 100 * at temperature: 3, 5 [37.8◦ C]; 14 [23◦ C]; 36 [20◦ C]; 37, 38, 41–44, 46, 47, 50 [37.8◦ C]; 55 [20◦ C]; 64, 66 [37.8◦ C]; 68, 69 [20◦ C]; 75 [37.8◦ C]; 79 [22.2◦ C]; 81 [38◦ C]; 89 [20.23 K]; 91 [4.208 K]; 92 [77.2 K]; 93 [90.07 K]; 94 [27.05 K]; 95 [87.16 K]; 96 [119.6 K]; 99 [111.5 K]; 100 [78.9 K] P (surface tension) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1–9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–23, 25–38, 40–47, 49–58, 60–72, 74–81, 83, 84; [IAPWS (1994) [1021]]: 86, 87; [Flynn (2005) [1022]]: 89, 95 * at temperature: 4 [37.8◦ C]; 9 [20◦ C]; 11 [24.8◦ C]; 12, 16, 22, 23 [20◦ C]; 25 [30◦ C]; 27 [27◦ C]; 29, 34, 35, 37, 38 [20◦ C]; 40, 41 [20◦ C]; 42 [30◦ C]; 43–46 [20◦ C]; 47 [26◦ C]; 49 [20◦ C]; 50 [24.73◦ C]; 51 [41.0◦ C]; 53, 58 [20◦ C]; 61 [20◦ C]; 62 [30◦ C]; 63–67 [20◦ C]; 69 [24.8◦ C]; 70, 71 [20◦ C]; 72 [23.7◦ C]; 75, 77 [20◦ C]; 79 [30◦ C]; 83 [20◦ C]; 89 [b.p.]; 95 [90 K] Q (dynamic viscosity) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1–9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–23, 25–58, 60–72, 74–81, 83, 84; [Mackanos et al. (2003) [1012]]: 20; [IAPWS (2003) [1023]]: 86; [IAPS (1982) [1024]]: 87; [Siedler (1986) [1025]]: 88 (salinity 40‰); [Cryogenic Fluids Databook (2002) [1014]]: 89, 91–96, 99, 100 * at temperature: 5 [20◦ C]; 9 [20◦ C]; 11 [30◦ C]; 12 [27.61◦ C]; 16, 18 [30◦ C]; 20 [NA]; 22 [20◦ C]; 25 [30◦ C]; 35 [20◦ C]; 38, 39, 49, 56 [30◦ C]; 57 [20◦ C]; 61, 62 [30◦ C]; 65, 66 [20◦ C]; 67 [30◦ C]; 70 [20◦ C]; 71 [30◦ C]; 83 [20◦ C]; 89 [20.23 K]; 91 [4.208 K]; 92 [77.2 K]; 93 [90.07 K]; 94 [27.05 K]; 95 [87.16 K]; 96 [119.6 K]; 99 [111.5 K]; 100 [78.9 K] R (temperature coefficient of dynamic viscosity) – [Marcus (1998) [1007]]: 1–5, 7, 9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–33, 36, 37, 39, 40–42, 44–53, 55–58, 60, 61, 63, 64, 66–72, 74–84, 86 S (orientational relaxation time) – [Marcus (1998) [1007]]: 3, 7, 12–14, 16, 21, 22, 25–28, 31, 36–38, 41, 42, 44–46, 50, 53, 55, 57, 58, 61, 64, 68, 69, 71, 74, 76, 78–80, 83, 84, 86 T (thermal expansion coefficient) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1, 3, 6, 7, 9, 12–14, 16–18, 21–23, 25, 26, 28, 30–32, 34, 36–38, 40–58, 61, 64, 66–69, 71, 72, 74–78, 80, 83, 84, 86; [Nakamura et al. (1995) [1013]]: 87 * at temperature: 9 [NA]; 12, 13 [NA]; 16 [20◦ C]; 23 [NA]; 38 [20◦ C]; 40 [55◦ C]; 43 [20◦ C]; 47 [30◦ C]; 48 [55◦ C]; 49 [NA]; 51, 52–54 [20◦ C]; 55, 56 [NA]; 58 [NA]; 61 [NA]; 64 [20◦ C]; 66 [20◦ C]; 67 [NA]; 68 [20◦ C]; 69 [NA]; 71, 72 [NA]; 74, 75 [NA]; 76 [20◦ C]; 78 [NA]; 80 [NA]; 83 [20◦ C]; 84 [NA] U (isothermal compressibility) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1–4, 6, 7, 12–14, 16, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 36, 37, 41–44, 50, 56, 68–70, 74–77, 83, 84, 86; [Rodnikova et al. (2003) [1026]]: 87 * at temperature: 13 [20◦ C]; 16 [30◦ C]; 22 [20◦ C]; 42 [40◦ C]; 43 [20◦ C]; 74 [NA]; 75 [20◦ C]; 76 [NA] V (adiabatic compressibility) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1, 3, 4, 7, 13, 14, 18, 21, 22, 27, 28, 30–32, 36, 37, 41, 42, 44, 46, 56, 64, 66, 68, 71, 77; [Nakamura et al. (1995) [1013]]: 86, 87 * at temperature: 4 [30◦ C]; 13 [35◦ C]; 18 [20◦ C]; 27 [35◦ C]; 42 [35◦ C]; 46 [35◦ C]; 64 [30◦ C]; 66 [30◦ C]; 68 [35◦ C]; 71 [35◦ C]; 77 [30◦ C] W (sound velocity) – [RSHydro [1027]]: 1, 3, 4, 7, 11–14, 16–18, 21, 22, 25, 28, 30–32, 36–38, 40–43, 45, 46, 53, 56, 57, 64, 68, 74–76, 80, 83, 86, 87, 89, 99 [Jacobsen et al. (1997) [1011]]: 89–97, 99, 100 * at temperature: 28 [20◦ C]; 31, 32 [20◦ C]; 41, 42 [20◦ C]; 89 [20.345 K]; 90 [23.264 K]; 91 [4.2163 K]; 92 [77.237 K]; 93 [90.062 K]; 94 [27.061 K]; 95 [87.169 K]; 96 [119.62 K]; 97 [164.78 K]; 98 [−37◦ C]; 99 [111.51 K]; 100 [78.569 K] X (acoustic impedance) – calculated as Z = ρ · vL

Liquids and their properties

375

Y (ultrasound absorption coefficient) – [Marcus (1998); [1007] near 25◦ C, 104–107 MHz]: 3, 7, 9, 11–14, 21–24, 28, 30, 33, 36, 37, 40, 44, 46, 49, 56, 57, 61, 63, 68, 71, 74, 83, 86 Z (acoustic non-linearity parameter) – [Beyer (1974) [1028]]: 3, 4, 7, 21, 22, 36–38, 41, 44, 49, 68, 86, 88 (salinity 35‰), 92 * at temperature: 3, 4 [30◦ C]; 7 [30◦ C]; 36, 37 [20◦ C]; 38 [30◦ C]; 41 [20◦ C]; 44 [20◦ C]; 49 [30◦ C]; 68 [20◦ C]; 24 [30◦ C]; 86 [20◦ C]; 88 [20◦ C]; 92 [b.p.] AA (shock velocity) – [Marsh (1980) [979]]: 89, 90, 92, 93, 95; [Rice and Walsh (1957) [1029]]: 86; [Schaaffs (1967) [1030]]: 3, 14, 21, 28, 36, 37, 43, 57, 68 * at temperature: 3 [32◦ C]; 14 [22◦ C]; 21 [16◦ C]; 28 [15◦ C]; 36 [24◦ C]; 37 [26◦ C]; 43 [18◦ C]; 57 [32◦ C]; 68 [26◦ C]; 86 [20◦ C]; 89, 90 [20 K]; 92 [75 K]; 93 [NA, density 1202 kg/m3 ]; 95 [NA, density 1400 kg/m3 ] at shock pressure: 3 [9.57 GPa]; 14 [7.39 GPa]; 21 [52.4 kbar]; 28 [52.1 kbar]; 36 [10.95 GPa]; 37 [11.04 GPa]; 43 [7.66 GPa]; 57 [9.61 GPa]; 68 [10.58 GPa]; 89 [6.480 GPa]; 90 [12.964 GPa]; 92 [10.601 GPa]; 93 [11.499 GPa]; 95 [26.054 GPa] AB (atmospheric boiling point in K; at 1013 hPa) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–15, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 49, 50, 55, 56, 57, 58, 63, 64, 66, 68–72, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87; [NIST [1010]]: 16; [Jacobsen et al. (1997) [1011]]: 89, 90, 92–99; [Cryogenic Fluids Databook [1014]]: 91; [Flynn (2005) [1022]]: 100; rest calculated:AB =AC + 273.15 AC (boiling point in ◦ C; at 1013 hPa) – [Merck [1009]]: 10, 11, 17, 18, 23, 24, 29, 38–40, 43, 48, 51, 52, 53, 54, 59–62, 65, 68, 73, 74, 76–79, 81, 83, 84; [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 25, 26; [Sigma-Aldrich [1016]]: 27, 85 (0.002 mm Hg(lit.)); [ChemExper [1015]] −20, 35; [Horita and Cole (2004) [1019]]: 88; [Liquid Synthetic Air [1017]]: 100; rest calculated:AC =AB − 273.15 AD (attainable superheat temperature) – [Skripov et al. (1988) [1031]]: 1–8, 12, 13, 19, 21, 22, 28, 31, 36, 37, 41, 44, 57, 68, 83, 86, 95; [Avedisian (1985) [1032]]: 14, 26, 42, 46, 50, 63, 76, 89, 91–93, 96, 97, 99 * at pressure: 14 [−27.6 MPa]; 89 [149 kPa]; 91 [100 kPa]; 96 [400 kPa]; 97 [500 kPa]; 99 [400 kPa] AE (bubble nucleation rate) – [Avedisian (1985) [1032]]: 1–4, 6, 7, 13, 14, 19, 21, 22, 26, 28, 36, 37, 41, 42, 44, 46, 50, 57, 63, 68, 76, 86, 89, 91–93, 95–97, 99 AF (enthalpy change of atmospheric boiling) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–14, 16, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 50, 55–58, 63, 64, 66, 68–70, 72, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87, 89–97; [Mackanos et al. (2003) [1012]]: 20; [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 25, 26; [Flynn (2005) [1022]]: 100 AG (evaporation rate) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 3, 12–14, 16–18, 21, 23, 28, 36–38, 41, 42, 44–47, 50–58, 60, 64, 66, 68–72, 75, 78, 81; [Sartori (2000) [1033]]: 86 ** 86 at RH 45%, kg/m2 s 106 AH (vapour density vs. air) – [Sigma-Aldrich [1016]]: 1–18, 20–24, 28–33, 36–85, 89–92, 94, 95, 98, 99; [Padfield (1996) [1034]]: 86; [Flynn (2005) [1022]]: 93, 96, 97 * at temperature: 16 [20◦ C]; 58, 64 [20◦ C]; 82 [37◦ C]; 89 [21◦ C]; 93 [21.1◦ C]; 94, 95, 96, 97 [21◦ C] AI (vapour pressure) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1–9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–23, 25–58, 60–72, 74–81, 83, 84; [Mackanos et al. (2003) [1012]]: 20 [Greenwood and Earnshaw (1997) [1035]]: 86; [Kennish (1989) [1036]]: 88 (salinity 35‰) * at temperature: 16 [20◦ C]; 20 [NA]; 26 [24◦ C]; 28 [28,2◦ C]; 34 [60◦ C]; 40 [20◦ C]; 43 [50◦ C]; 48 [20◦ C]; 58 [20◦ C]; 77 [26.51◦ C]; 80 [24.8◦ C]

376

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

AJ, AK, AL (Antoine equation parameters A, B, C); temperature in ◦ C, pressure in Pa – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1–9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–23, 25–33, 35–42, 44–48, 50–53, 55, 57, 58, 61–64, 66–72, 75, 76, 78–80, 83, 84; [Antoine-Gleichung [1037]]: 86 ** Pressure in mmHg AM (saturation concentration) – [Merck [1009]]: 1, 3–8, 12–14, 16–18, 21, 23, 24, 28–33, 37–38, 41, 42, 44–47, 49, 51–58, 61, 63, 64, 66, 68–72, 74–80, 83, 84; [Padfield (1996) [1034]]: 86 (calculated using the formula therein) * at temperature: 1, 3–8 [20◦ C]; 12–14 [20◦ C]; 16–18 [20◦ C]; 21 [20◦ C]; 23, 24 [20◦ C]; 28–32 [20◦ C]; 37–38 [20◦ C]; 41–42 [20◦ C]; 44–47 [20◦ C]; 49 [20◦ C]; 51–58 [20◦ C]; 61 [20◦ C]; 63–64 [20◦ C]; 66 [20◦ C]; 68–70 [20◦ C]; 71 [NA]; 72 [20◦ C]; 74–80 [20◦ C]; 83, 84 [20◦ C] AN (flash point) – [Merck [1009]]: 1–9, 10 (boiling range 40–60 ◦ C), 16, 21–25, 27–33, 35–81, 83, 84 o.c. – open cup method, c.c. – closed cup method. AO (autoignition temperature) – [Merck [1009]]: 1–10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21–25, 27–33, 35–38, 40–81, 83, 84, 99 AP (explosion limit) – [Merck [1009]]: 1–10, 12, 17, 18, 21–25, 27–33, 36–81, 83, 84, 99 AQ (critical temperature, K) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–15, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 48, 50, 55, 56, 57, 58, 63, 64, 66, 68–72, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87, 98 [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 25, 26; [ Jacobsen et al. (1997) [1011]]: 89–97, 100; [Cryogenic Fluids Databook (2002) [1014]]: 99; rest calculated:AQ =AR + 273.15 AR (critical temperature, ◦ C) – calculated:AR =AQ – 273.15 AS (critical pressure) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–15, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 49, 50, 55, 56, 57, 63, 64, 66, 68–72, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87, 98; [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 25, 26; [ Jacobsen et al. (1997) [1011]]: 89–97, 100; [Cryogenic Fluids Databook (2002) [1014]]: 99 AT (critical volume) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 13–15, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 50, 55, 56, 57, 58, 63, 64, 66, 68–70, 72, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87, 98; [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 25, 26; [ Jacobsen et al. (1997) [1011]]: 89–97, 100; [Cryogenic Fluids Databook (2002) [1014]]: 99 AU (critical compressibility factor) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 13–15, 19, 21, 22, 26, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 50, 55, 56, 57, 63, 64, 66, 68–70, 72, 75, 80, 82, 86, 87, 89–99 AV (Pitzer acentric factor ω) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–5, 7–9, 15, 19, 21, 22, 26, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 49, 50, 57, 64, 66, 67–70, 72, 80, 86, 98, 99; [Jacobsen et al. (1997) [1011]]: 89–97 AW (electrical conductivity) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 11–14, 16–18, 21–23, 27, 28, 30–32, 36–38, 40–47, 50–57, 61, 63, 64, 66–69, 71, 72, 74–78, 80, 81, 83, 84; [Pashley et al. (2004) [1038]]: 86; [Siedler (1986) [1025]]: 88 (salinity 35‰) * at temperature: 1 [19.5◦ C]; 14 [18◦ C]; 17 [NA]; 18 [20◦ C]; 41 [18◦ C]; 44, 45 [NA]; 47 [27◦ C]; 50 [23.1◦ C]; 51 [20◦ C]; 52 [NA]; 53, 54 [20◦ C]; 55 [NA]; 57 [NA]; 63 [17◦ C]; 64 [NA]; 67 [22◦ C]; 69 [NA]; 72 [35◦ C]; 74 [NA]; 86 [22◦ C]; 88 [15◦ C, salinity 35‰] ** 85% AX (molecular dipole moment) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1, 2, 4, 6–9, 12–16, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 49, 50, 55–57, 63, 64, 66, 68–70, 72, 75, 80, 82, 87, 89–98; [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 3, 5, 11, 17, 18, 25, 26; [Suresh and Naik (2000) [1039]]: 87 * at temperature: 17 [NA]; ** in benzene; *** in tetrachloromethane

Liquids and their properties

377

AY (solvent polarity parameter) – [Reichardt (2003) [1040]]: 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 12–14, 16, 17, 21–23, 25, 28, 32, 36, 37, 40–42, 44–47, 51, 53, 55–57, 59, 60, 62, 64, 68, 69, 71, 72, 75–81, 83, 84, 86 AZ (dielectric constant) – [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 1–9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–23, 25, 27–38, 40–58, 61–72, 74–81, 83, 84, 86; [Greenwood and Earnshaw (1997) [1035]]: 87; [Flynn (2005) [1022]]: 89, 91–95, 99, 100 * at temperature: 1, 4–9 [20◦ C]; 11 [20◦ C]; 13 [20◦ C]; 17 [∼16◦ C]; 29–33 [20◦ C]; 35 [20◦ C]; 49, 50 [20◦ C]; 52 [24◦ C]; 53 [20◦ C]; 57 [20◦ C]; 62, 63 [20◦ C]; 65 [NA]; 66, 67 [20◦ C]; 69–71 [20◦ C]; 72 [20◦ C]; 74 [20◦ C]; 75 [30◦ C]; 83 [20◦ C]; 89, 91–95, 99, 100 [NA] BA (temperature coefficient of dielectric constant) – [Marcus (1998) [1007]]: 1–5, 7, 9, 11–14, 16, 18, 21–23, 27, 28, 30–32, 36–39, 41, 42, 44–47, 49–51, 53, 55–58, 61, 63, 64, 66–72, 74–80, 82, 83, 86 BB (magnetic susceptibility) – [Marcus (1998) [1007]]: 1–5, 7, 9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–25, 27–33, 36–38, 40–42, 44–47, 49–51, 56–58, 60, 61, 64, 66–72, 74–81, 83, 84, 86 * temperatures not given BC (index of refraction) – [Marcus (1998) [1007]]: 1–5, 7, 9, 11–14, 16–19, 20–33, 36–42, 44–53, 55–58, 60, 61, 63, 64, 66–72, 74–84; [Harvey et al. (1998) [1041]]: 86; [Smithsonian Physical Tables (2003) [1042]]: 87; [Flynn (2005) [1022]]: 89, 93 * at temperature: 87 [20◦ C]; 89 [b.p.]; 93 [b.p.]; ** ‘long wavelengths’ BD (temperature coefficient of the index of refraction −d ln n/dT ) – [Marcus (1998) [1007]]: 1–5, 7, 9, 11–14, 16–18, 21–23, 25–33, 36–38, 40–42, 44–53, 55–58, 60, 61, 63, 64, 66–72, 74–81, 83, 84, 86 BE (Kerr coefficient) – [Landolt Börnstein (1963) [1043]]: 1, 3–5, 7, 9, 11–14, 21, 22, 28, 30–32, 36, 37, 41, 42, 44, 46, 47, 49, 50, 56, 57, 61, 62, 68, 69, 71, 72, 80, 83, 86, 89, 92, 93, 98 * at temperature/wavelength: 1, 3–5 [20◦ C/546 nm]; 7 [19◦ C/546 nm]; 9 [20◦ C/546 nm]; 11 [17.7◦ C/red]; 12 [18◦ C/white]; 13, 14 [20◦ C/546 nm]; 21 [589.3 nm]; 22 [20◦ C/546 nm]; 28 [20◦ C/546 nm]; 30–32 [20◦ C/589 nm]; 36 [NA/580 nm]; 37 [17.0◦ C/white]; 37 [17.5◦ C/red]; 42 [19◦ C/580 nm]; 44 [18.5◦ C/red]; 46 [19◦ C/red]; 47 [18.3◦ C/red]; 49 [20◦ C/red]; 50 [20.1◦ C/red]; 56 [20.2◦ C/white]; 57 [20◦ C/586 nm]; 61 [20◦ C/586 nm]; 62 [22◦ C/586 nm]; 68 [18.7◦ C/white]; 69 [22◦ C/546 nm]; 71 [19◦ C/546 nm]; 72 [22◦ C/546 nm]; 80 [NA/red]; 83 [20◦ C/546 nm]; 86 [20◦ C/yellow]; 89 [19.91 K/546 nm]; 92 [77.4 K/ 546 nm]; 93 [−183◦ C/520 nm]; 98 [20.9◦ C/546 nm/78.9 bar/0.314 g/cm3 ]; Bs = Kerr coefficient of carbon disulphide (CS2 ) BF (light scattering coefficient, relative to benzene) – [Fabelinski (1968) [1044]]: 3, 7, 13, 14, 21, 22, 28, 30–32, 36, 37, 41, 42, 44, 46, 49, 50, 57, 63, 68, 83, 86 Absolute scattering coefficients: benzene – R90 · 106 = 48.2 (435.8 nm), R90 · 106 = 16.3 (546.1 nm); water: R90 · 106 = 3.08 (435.8 nm), R90 · 106 = 1.05 (546.1 nm) [Fabelinski (1968) [1044]]. BG (depolarization factor) – [Fabelinski (1968) [1044]]: 1, 3–7, 9, 12–14, 21, 22, 27–32, 34, 36, 37, 41, 42, 44, 46, 49, 57, 61, 69–70, 80, 83, 86; [Landolt Börnstein (1963) [1043]]: 2, 8, 56, 47, 68 *at temperature: 2 [NA]; 8 [NA]; 56 [20◦ C]; 47 [NA]; 68 [NA] BH (IR spectrum) – Spectrum code in Sadtler handbook [1003] BI (IR/Raman spectrum) – Spectrum code in Schrader handbook [1004] BJ (UV–VIS spectrum) – Spectrum code in Perkampus handbook [1005]. Many references to UV-spectra are given in book by Hirayama [1045]

378

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

BK (ultraviolet cut-off point) – [Reichardt (2003) [1040]]: 1, 3–5, 7–9, 11–14, 16, 18, 21, 27, 28, 30, 36, 37, 39, 42–44, 55–57, 62–64, 66, 68, 75, 76, 78, 80, 81, 83, 84; [Phillips [1046]]: 6, 22, 23, 30, 41, 45, 46, 51, 52, 69, 72, 73, 86; [CRC Handbook 1995/1996 [995]]: 10, 32, 58, 79 * Temperature not given BL (ultraviolet 5% abs. point) – [Phillips [1046]]: 1, 3–6, 9, 12, 13, 16–18, 21–24, 28, 30, 36, 37, 41, 42, 44–46, 51, 52, 55–57, 64, 66, 68, 69, 72, 73, 75, 76, 78, 80, 84, 86 * temperature not given BM (ionization energy) – [NIST [1010]]: 1–9, 11–18, 21–25, 27–42, 44–49, 51, 52, 55–84, 86–88, 89–99 BN (standard state enthalpy of formation) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–16, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 49, 50, 55–58, 63, 64, 66, 68–72, 75, 80, 82, 86–87, 94, 99; [Riddick et al. (1986) [1006]]: 25, 26 BO (standard state Gibbs energy of formation) – [Poling et al. (2001) [1008]]: 1–9, 12–16, 19, 21, 22, 28, 30–33, 35–37, 41, 42, 44–47, 49, 50, 55–57, 63, 64, 66, 68–72, 75, 80, 82, 86–87, 94 BP (Hildebrandt solubility parameter) – [Reichardt (2003) [1040]]: 3, 7, 13, 14, 16, 21, 22, 36–38, 44, 46, 55, 56, 64, 68, 71, 74, 76, 78, 80, 83, 84, 86 BQ (oxygen solubility) – [Fogg and Gerrard (1991) [1047]]: 1, 3–5, 7, 8, 14, 19–22, 28, 36, 37, 42, 44, 46, 50, 55, 56, 64, 68–71, 80, 83; [Dias et al. [1048]]; 19; [CRC handbook 1995/1996 [995]]: 86 * at temperature 64 [20◦ C] BR (nitrogen solubility) – [Fogg and Gerrard (1991) [1047]]: 1, 3–5, 7, 8, 13, 14, 21, 22, 28, 36, 37, 41, 42, 44, 46, 50, 55, 56, 68, 75, 80, 82, 83; [Battino et al. (1984) [1049]]: 86, 87 * at temperature: 75 [298 K] BS (carbon dioxide solubility) – [Fogg and Gerrard (1991) [1047]]: 1, 3–5, 7, 8, 13, 14, 21, 22, 26, 28, 36, 37, 41, 43, 44, 46, 50, 51, 55, 64, 68, 78, 80, 83; [CRC handbook 1995/1996 [995]]: 86 * at temperature: 26 [297.98 K] BT (solubility in water) – [Merck [1009]]: 1–14, 16–18, 21, 22, 24–29, 30, 32–33, 35, 38, 41, 44–46, 48–50, 52, 53, 57, 59–67, 69–73, 75, 81, 83, 84; [CRC handbook 1995/1996 [995]]: 89–99; [Liquid Synthetic Air [1017]]: 100 * at temperature: 1 [16◦ C]; 2 [20◦ C]; 3, 4 [20◦ C]; 7, 8 [20◦ C]; 9 [NA]; 10 [20◦ C]; 11 [30◦ C]; 12–14 [20◦ C]; 16–18 [20◦ C]; 21, 22 [20◦ C]; 24 [20◦ C]; 25 [30◦ C]; 26–29 [20◦ C]; 30 [20◦ C]; 33 [20◦ C]; 38 [20◦ C]; 41 [20◦ C]; 44–46 [20◦ C]; 48–50 [20◦ C]; 52, 53 [20◦ C]; 57 [20◦ C]; 59 [10◦ C]; 60–66 [20◦ C]; 67 [30◦ C]; 69–73 [20◦ C]; 75 [20◦ C]; 79 [20◦ C]; 83, 84 [20◦ C] ** litre per litre; *** boiling range 40–60◦ C BU Substance no. in Riddick handbook [1006] BV Substance no. in Marcus handbook [1007] BW Substance no. in Poling handbook [1008]

379

Liquids and their properties

8.3 Properties of Water If not specified else, the data below are for pure light water at normal conditions and in SI units.

Transmission of light by water (Fig. 8.1) 10 m Pure water, 298 K

Absorption length ∆

1m 100 mm 10 mm 1 mm 100 µm 10 µm 1 µm 10 nm 1 nm (a)

1 µm

100 nm

Light wavelength in vacuum

10 µm

Pulse energy

100 J 10 1 0.1 0.01 157 193

(b)

248 308 351 266 355

511 694 1054 1540 755 2010 532 800 1064

2900 2940

10 600 Lasers wavelength (nm)

Figure 8.1 Transmission spectrum of pure liquid water (a) and the common lasers wavelengths (b). The spectrum was calculated from the data in [1050, 1051]. Laser data are from Laser Specification Tables [1052]. Table 8.9

Linear absorption of light in an homogeneous medium.

Distance travelled by light in medium

Amount of absorbed light

Amount of transmitted light

0.0101 ≈ 1%

0.01 = 1%

0.99 = 99%

0.0202 ≈ 2%

0.02 = 2%

0.98 = 98%

0.0513 ≈ 5%

0.05 = 5%

0.95 = 95%

0.0105 ≈ 10%

0.1 = 10%

0.9 = 90%

0.0223 ≈ 20%

0.2 = 20%

0.8 = 80%

0.0693 ≈ 70%

0.5 = 50%

0.5 = 50%

1.000 ≈ 100%

0.632 = 1 − 1/e = 63.2%

0.368 = 1/e = 36.8%

380

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

Raman spectrum of water (Fig. 8.2)

H2O

Intensity

21°C 50°C 100°C 150°C 200°C 250°C 300°C

2600

2800

3000

3200

3400

3600

3800

4000

Raman shift (cm−1)

Figure 8.2 Raman spectrum of liquid H2 O in the O—H stretching region [1053]. The peak to the right is v1 symmetric stretching mode, while the peak to the left is due to the 2v2 overtone and the O—H stretching mode of two (or more) hydrogen-bonded H2 O molecules [1054]. © American Chemical Society (1982), reprinted with permission from Ref. [1053].

Phase diagram of water (Fig. 8.3) 1012

Ice XI Ice X Ice VII Ice VIII

Pressure (Pa)

109

Supercritical fluid

Ice VI Ice V Ice II Liquid

Critical point

106 Ice Ih Vapour

103 200

300

400

500 Temperature (K)

600

700

800

Figure 8.3 Phase diagram of water © Martin Chaplin, redrawn with permission from M. Chaplin, Water Structure and Behaviour [1055].

381

Liquids and their properties

Equations of state of water and steam Tait’s equation of state At large pressures (shock compression), the simple Tait’s equation is often used: [980] n p + Aw ρ = . p0 + A w ρ0

(8.1)

For water below 2.5 GPa: Aw = 296.3 MPa and n = 7.415.

IAPWS formulations International Association for the Properties of Water and Steam (IAPWS) has issued two formulations for the properties of water and steam: (a) IAPWS-95 for general and scientific use [1056] and (b) IAPWS-IF97 for industrial use. [1057–1059] The IAPWS-95 formulation for scientific use is a fundamental equation with 69 empirical constants for specific Helmholtz free energy f . The thermodynamic properties of water and steam are expressed through derivatives of Helmholtz free energy with respect to the density, pressure, and temperature. IAPWS-95 is valid in range 100 Pa to 1000 MPa and 0–1000◦ C. The IAPWS-IF97 formulation for industrial use is a set of fundamental equations having 10–52 empirical constants for specific Gibbs or Helmholtz free energy (dependent of the temperature–pressure region). IAPWSIF97 is valid in ranges 0–800◦ C, 0–100 MPa and 800–2000◦ C, 0–10 MPa. Free computer codes for calculation of thermodynamic properties are available. IAPWS has also formulations for dynamic viscosity, thermal conductivity, surface tension, static dielectric constant, and refractive index of water over a large interval of temperatures and pressures.

Dependence of some thermophysical properties of water on temperature Dependence of some thermophysical properties of water on temperature is shown in Figure 8.4.

Some simple analytical formulations Density of water [1061] (253–383 K) [g/ml]. ρ = a + bT + c/(0.0362 − 0.0004099T )2 ,

(8.2)

where a = 1.367, b = −0.000984, c = −0.0005669. Surface tension of water [1058] (valid from triple to critical point) σ = 235.8(1 − θ)1.256 [1 − 0.625(1 − θ)], σ∗

(8.3)

where θ = T /T * with σ* = 1 mN/m and T * = Tc . Viscosity of water [1062] (0–100◦ C) [◦ C, millipoises] η−1 + 120 = 2.1482[(t − 8.435) +

8078.4 + (t − 8.435)2 ]

(8.4)

Heat capacity of water [994] (RT to ∼100◦ C) [(J/kg K): c = −2.42139 × 10−8 T 3 + 2.68536 × 10−5 T 2 − 9.68137 × 10−3 T + 2.13974

(8.5)

Heat conductivity of water [994] (RT to ∼100◦ C) [(W/m K): λ = −0.58180 + 6.357044 × 10−3 T − 7.9662523 × 10−6 T 2

(8.6)

382

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

1.005

1.6

1.000

1.4

Density (g/ml)

1.995

Relative viscosity

1.2

1.990

1.0

1.985

0.8

1.980

0.6

1.975

0.4

1.334

76 74

Surface tension (dyne/cm)

1.332 72 70

1.330

68

Refractive index

1.328

66

1.326

64

1.500

50 49

Sound velocity (m/s)

1.480

Isothermal compressibility (⫻10⫺6, 1/bar)

48

1.460

47

1.440

46 45

1.420

44

1.400

43

600

6.6

500 6.4 400 6.2 300 6.0

Thermal expansivity (⫻10⫺6, 1/K)

200 100

Thermal conductivity (mW/cm/K)

5.8 5.6

0

0

10

20 30 40 50 Temperature (°C)

60

70

0

10

20 30 40 50 Temperature (°C)

60

70

Figure 8.4 Dependence of some thermophysical properties of water on temperature in the range 0–70◦ C. © Society for Applied Spectroscopy, republished with permission from Ref [1060].

Saturated vapour pressure (0–70◦ C) [hPa]: Magnus formula :

17.5043 · T Ew (T ) = E0 · exp 241.2 + T

T is temperature in ◦ C, E0 = E(T0 ) = 611 hPa.

,

(8.7)

383

Liquids and their properties

4.21

90 85

Dielectric constant

80

Thermal capacity (J/g/°C)

4.20 4.19

75 70

4.18

65 60

4.17

200

15.0 Vapor pressure (mmHg)

150

Ionization constant (pKw)

14.5 14.0

100 13.5 50

13.0

0

12.5 Temperature (°C)

300

4.4

250

4.2

Enthalpy (J/g)

200

4.0

150

3.8

100

3.6

50 0

Entropy (J/g/K)

3.4 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0

10

20 30 40 50 Temperature (°C)

60

70

⫺250 ⫺300

Free energy (J/g)

⫺350 ⫺400 ⫺450 ⫺500 ⫺550 ⫺600

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Temperature (°C)

Figure 8.4

(Continued)

Index of refraction of water [1063, 1064] (200–1100 nm, 25◦ C, λ in nanometres): n(λ) = 1.31279 + 15.762λ−1 − 4382λ−2 + 1.1455 × 106 λ−3

(8.8)

Thermal dissociation (autoionization) of liquid water Liquid water dissociates into hydrogen ion (proton) and hydroxyl ion: H2 O ↔ H+ + OH− . The degree of dissociation is commonly characterized by the ionization product Kw , defined by Kw = [H+ ][OH− ], where [H+ ]

384

Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser processing

1000 pKw ⫽ 8

Pressure, MPa

800

600 9 400

10 11

200

0

0

200

400

600

12

14

800

16 1000

Temperature, ⬚C

Figure 8.5 Ionization product of water at high temperatures and pressures. Values at curves are pKw = −log10 (Kw ). © Martin Chaplin, Redrawn with permission from M. Chaplin, Water Structure and Behaviour [1055].

100 H2O

H O

H2

10⫺1 Molar fractions

O2

OH

10⫺2

100 kPa

10⫺3

10⫺4

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

T, K

4000

Figure 8.6 Molar fraction of species of the dissociation of water at thermodynamic equilibrium as a function of temperature starting from pure steam at a pressure of 105 Pa. At higher pressures the maxima will be shifted towards higher temperatures. From the article by Häussinger [1066]. © Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co KGaA, republished with permission.

and [OH− ] are the concentrations of the corresponding ions. Because the proton H+ hydrates immediately, a more real description of the ionization process would be: H2 O + H2 O ↔ H3 O+ + OH− , and Kw = [H3 O+ ] [OH− ]. H3 O+ is named hydronium ion. Instead of Kw , its decadic logarithm log10 Kw = −pKw is often used (Fig. 8.5). At a standard temperature and pressure Kw has a value of 1 × 10−14 .

Thermal dissociation of water vapour Above 2000 K, water vapour starts to dissociate remarkably (Fig. 8.6). The composition of dissociated water vapour as a function of temperature and pressure can be calculated by the formulae in the article by Friel and Goetz [1065].

Liquids and their properties

385

The degree of water dissociation as a function of temperature is [1066]: 2000 K 2300 K 2700 K 3000 K 3500 K

0.69 mol% 2.64 mol% 10.35 mol% 22.4 mol% 57.43 mol%

The concentrations of free electrons and ions in thermally ionized water and other liquids can be calculated by Saha formula (Eq. (7.87)). At atmospheric pressure, significant ionisation sets in at about 12 000 K; excited atomic hydrogen and oxygen exist in region 3000–16 000 K.

R EFERENCES

1. Mittal KL, ed. Particles on surfaces 1. Detection, adhesion, and removal. New York: Plenum; 1988. 2. Hattori T. Contamination control: problems and prospects. Solid State Technol 1990; 33(7):S1–S8. 3. Tam AC, Leung WP, Zapka W, et al. Laser-cleaning techniques for removal of surface particulates. J Appl Phys 1992; 71(7):3515–3523. 4. Allen SD, Miller AS, Lee SJ. Laser assisted particle removal ‘dry’ cleaning of critical surfaces. Mater Sci Eng 1997; B49:85–88. 5. LuYF, ZhangY, Song WD, et al. A theoretical model for laser cleaning of microparticles in a thin liquid layer. Jpn J Appl Phys 1998; 37:L1330–L1332. 6. Mann K, Wolff-Rottke B, Müller F. Cleaning of optical surfaces by excimer laser radiation. Appl Surf Sci l996; 96–98:463–468. 7. Konov VI, Kononenko VV, Lomonosov AM, et al. Laser induced surface cleaning from diamond particles. In: Proc SPIE 4426 (Miyamoto I, LuYF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Second international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2002:347–350. 8. Yava¸s O, Oltra R, Kerrec O. Enhancement of pulsed laser removal of metal oxides by electrochemical control. Appl Phys A 1996; 63:321–326. 9. Cortona A, Kautek W. Microcorrosion and shock-affected zone investigation at anodic films on aluminium alloys by pulse laser depassivation. Phys Chem Chem Phys 2001; 3:5283–5289. 10. Yavas O,Leiderer P,Park HK,et al. Enhanced acoustic cavitation following laser-induced bubble formation: long-term memory effect. Phys Rev Lett 1994; 72(13):2021–2024. 11. Mosbacher M, Münzer HJ, Zimmermann J, et al. Optical field enhancement effects in laser-assisted particle removal. Appl Phys A 2001; 72:41–44. 12. Oltra R, Boquillon JP. Aspects physico-chimiques du nettoyage de surface par laser: critères de choix de la longueur d’onde. J de Physique IV, Colloq 1999; 9:161–165. 13. Veiko VP, Shakhno EA. Physical mechanisms of laser cleaning. In: Luk’yanchuk B, ed. Laser cleaning, New Jersey: World Scientific; 2002:311–340. 14. ZharovVP. Photoacoustic tweezers. In: Proc SPIE 4622 (Farkas DL, Leif RC, eds. Optical diagnostics of living cells V ); 2002:143–153. 15. Assendel’ft EYu, BeklemyshevVI, Makhonin II, et al. Optoacoustic effect on the desorption of microscopic particles from a solid surface into a liquid. Sov Techn Phys Lett 1988; 14(6):444–445. Original: Pis’ma Zh Tekhn Fiz 1988; 14(11–12):1006–1009. 16. Assendel’ft EYu, BeklemyshevVI, Makhonin II, et al. Opticoacoustic effect on the desorption of microparticles from the surface of a solid in a liquid. Russ Ultrason 1988; 18:298–302. 17. Jang D, Oh B, Kim D. Liquid-assisted laser shock cleaning for nanoscale particle removal. In: Kane DM, ed. Laser cleaning II. New Jersey:World Scientific; 2006:133–146. 18. Song WD, Hong MH, Lukyanchuk B, et al. Laser-induced cavitation bubbles for cleaning of solid surfaces. J Appl Phys 2004; 95(6):2952–2956. 19. Ohl CD, Arora M, Dijkink R, et al. Surface cleaning from laser-induced cavitation bubbles. Appl Phys Lett 2006; 89(7):074102. 20. Ulrich RK, Alkire RC. Initiation of single corrosion pits by focused laser illumination. J Electrochem Soc 1981; 128(5):1169–1170. 21. Sakairi M, Ohira Y, Takahashi H. Reformation of anodic oxide films on aluminum after destruction by pulsed Nd-YAG laser irradiation. In: Natishan PM, Isaacs HS, Janik-Czachor M, et al., eds. Proceedings of the symposium on passivity and its breakdown, Paris, France. 1–5 September 1997. Pennington: Electrochem Society, vol. 97–26; 1998:643–653. 22. Oltra R,Yava¸s O, Cruz F, et al. Modelling and diagnostic of pulsed laser cleaning of oxidized metallic surfaces. Appl Surf Sci 1996; 96–98:484–490. 23. Meja P, Autric M, Alloncle P, et al. Laser cleaning of oxidized iron samples: The influence of wavelength and environment,Appl Phys A 1999; 69(Suppl.):S687–S690. 24. Pasquet P, del Coso R, Boneberg J, et al. Laser cleaning of oxide iron layer: Efficiency enhancement due to electrochemical induced absorptivity change. Appl Phys A 1999; 69(Suppl.):S727–S730.

388

References

25. Oltra R, Arenholz E, Leiderer P, et al. Modelling and diagnostic of pulsed laser-solid interactions. Applications to laser cleaning. In: Proc SPIE 3885 (Phipps CR, Niino M, eds. High-power laser ablation II ); 2000: 499–508. 26. Cortona A, Kautek W. Microcorrosion and shock-affected zone investigation at anodic films on aluminium alloys by pulse laser depassivation. Phys Chem Chem Phys 2001; 3:5283–5289. 27. Savina M, Xu Z, Wang Y, et al. Laser ablation of concrete. In: ICALEO’98 Proceedings, Orlando, Florida, 16–19 November 1998. IEEE; 1998:220–226. 28. Savina M, Xu Z, Wang Y, et al. Efficiency of concrete removal with a pulsed Nd:YAG laser. J Laser Appl 2000; 12(5):200–204. 29. Robinson K. Lasers tackle radioactive concrete. Photon Spectra 2001; 35(4):30. 30. Piper LG, Frish MB, Pierce VG, et al. Laser cleaning of cryogenic optics. In: Proc SPIE 1329 (Glassford APM, ed. Optical system contamination: Effects, measurement, control II ); 1990:110–126. 31. PierceVG, Frish MB, Green BD, et al. Laser-mirror cleaning in a simulated space environment. In: Proc SPIE 1329 (Glassford APM, ed. Optical system contamination: effects, measurement, control II ); 1990:134–140. 32. Lim H, Kim D. Laser-assisted chemical cleaning of thin oxide films on carbon steel surfaces. In: Proc SPIE 5063(1) (Miyamoto I, Ostendorf A, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Fourth international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2003:38–43. 33. Lim H, Kim D. Laser-assisted chemical cleaning for oxide-scale removal from carbon steel surfaces. J Laser Appl 2004; 16(1):25–30. 34. Hidai H, Tokura H. Cleaning with water decomposed products obtained by laser irradiation. Appl Surf Sci 2006; 253(3):1431–1434. 35. Dolgaev SI, Kirichenko NA, Kulevskii LA, et al. Laser purification of ultradispersed diamond in aqueous solution. Kvant lektron – Quant Electron 2004; 34(9):860–864. 36. Halfpenny DR, Kane DM, Lamb RN, et al. Surface modification of silica with ultraviolet laser radiation. Appl Phy A 2000; 71:147–151. 37. Fernandes AJ, Kane DM, Gong B, et al. UV laser-induced dehydroxylation of fused silica surfaces. In: Kane DM, ed. Laser cleaning II. New Jersey:World Scientific; 2006:147–171. 38. Widmann A,Yogev D, Uziel Y. Iced film substrate cleaning. Patent US2004140298, 2004. 39. Soltani M,Ahmadi G. Detachment of rough particles with electrostatic attraction from surfaces in turbulent flows. J Adhesion Sci Technol 1999; 13(3):325–355. 40. Bhattacharya S, Mittal KL. Mechanics of removing glass particulates from a solid surface. Surf Technol 1978; 7(5):413–425. 41. Bowling RA. A theoretical review of particle adhesion. In: Mittal KL, ed. Particles on surfaces 1. Detection, adhesion, and removal. New York: Plenum; 1988:129–142. 42. Kohli R. Adhesion of small particles and innovative methods for their removal. In: Mittal KL, ed. Particles on surfaces 7: Detection, adhesion and removal. Utrecht:VSP; 2002:113–149. 43. van Oss CJ. Inerfacial forces in aqueous media. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1994. 44. Visser J. Adhesion of colloidal particles. In: Matijevic E, ed. Surface and colloid science, vol. 8. New York: Wiley; 1976:3–84. 45. Wu X, Sacher E, Meunier M. The effects of hydrogen bonds on the adhesion of inorganic oxide particles on hydrophilic silicon surfaces. J Appl Phys 1999; 86(3):1744–1748. 46. Schuster P, Zandel G, Sandorfy C, eds. The hydrogen bond. New York: North-Holland; 1976. 47. Iler PK. The chemistry of silica: solubility, polymerization, colloid and surface properties, and biochemistry. New York: Wiley; 1979. 48. Gregory J. Approximate expressions for retarded van derWaals interaction. J Colloid Interface Sci 1981; 83(1):138–145. 49. Israelashvili JN. Intermolecular and surface forces, 2nd edn. London:Academic; 1992. 50. Visser J. Particle adhesion and removal: a review. Particulate Sci Technol 1995; 13:169–196. 51. Visser J. On Hamaker constants: A comparison between Hamaker constants and Lifshitz–Van der Waals constants. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 1972; 3:331–363. 52. Bergström L. Hamaker constants of inorganic materials. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 1997; 70:125–169. 53. Kimura K. Photoenhanced van der Waals attractive force of small metallic particles. J Phys Chem 1994; 98:11997–12002. 54. Deryabin VA, Farafontova EP. Surface attractive forces of glass batch particles. Glass Ceram 2005; 62(3–4):67–70. 55. Pakarinen OH, Foster AS, Paajanen M, et al. Towards an accurate description of the capillary force in nanoparticle-surface interactions. Model Simul Mater Sci Eng 2005; 13:1175–1186. 56. Arnold N, Schrems G, Bäuerle D. Ablative thresholds in laser cleaning of substrates from particulates. Appl Phys A 2004; 79:729–734. 57. Bäuerle D, Gumpenberger T, Brodoceanu D, et al. Laser cleaning and surface modifications: Applications in nanoand biotechnology. In: Kane DM, ed. Laser cleaning II. New Jersey:World Scientific; 2006:1–28.

References

389

58. Ranade MB. Adhesion and removal of fine particles on surfaces,Aerosol Sci Technol 1987; 7:161–176. 59. Hogg R, Healy TW, Fuerstenau DW. Mutual coagulation of colloidal dispersions. Trans Faraday Soc 1966; 62:1638–1651. 60. Vos R, Cornelissen I, Xu K, et al. Optimization of particle removal performance of dHF-based cleaning recipes. In: Mittal KL, ed. Particles on surfaces 7: Detection, adhesion and removal. Utrecht:VSP; 2002:427–442. 61. Hunter RJ. Zeta potential in colloid science – Principles and applications. London:Academic; 1981. 62. Hann WM. Dispersants. In: Kirk-Othmer encyclopedia of chemical technology, 4th edn., vol. 8. New York; Wiley; 1993:293–311. 63. Kamada K,Tokutomi M, Enomoto N, et al. Incorporation of oxide nanoparticles into barrier-type alumina film via anodic oxidation combined with electrophoretic deposition. J Mater Chem 2005; 15:3388–3394. 64. Kalin M, Novak S,Vižintin J. Surface charge as a new concept for boundary lubrication of ceramics with water. J Phys D:Appl Phys 2006; 39:3138–3149. 65. Kruusing A. Optimizing magnetization orientation of permanent magnets for maximal gradient force. J Magn Magn Mater 2001; 234(3):545–555. 66. Johnson KL, Greenwood JA. An adhesion map for the contact of elastic spheres. J Colloid Interface Sci 1997; 192(2):326–333. 67. Johnson KL. Mechanics of adhesion. Tribol Int 1998; 31(8):413–418. 68. Zhao YP,Wang LS,Yu TX. Mechanics of adhesion in MEMS: a review. J Adhes Sci Technol 2003; 17(4):519–546. 69. Cappella B, Dietler G. Force-distance curves by atomic force microscopy, Surf Sci Rep 1999; 34(1–3):1–104. 70. Maugis D. Adhesion of spheres: the JKR–DMT transition using a Dugdale model. J Colloid Interface Sci 1992; 150:(1)243–269. 71. Maugis D, Pollock HM. Surface forces, deformation and adherence at metall microcontacts. Acta Metall 1984; 32:1323–1334. 72. Quintanilla MAS, Valverde JM, Castellanos A. Adhesion force between fine particles with controlled surface properties. AIChE J 2006; 52(5):1715–1728. 73. Greenwood JA. Adhesion of elastic spheres. Proc Roy Soc Lond Ser A Math Phys Eng Sci 1997; 453(1961): 1277–1297. 74. Gilabert FA, Krivtsov AM, Castellanos A. A molecular dynamics model for single adhesive contact. Meccanica 2006; 41(3):341–349. 75. Krupp H. Particle adhesion. Theory and experiment. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 1967; 1:111–239. 76. Schrems G, Delamare MP, Arnold N, et al. Influence of storage time on laser cleaning of SiO2 on Si. Appl Phys A 2003; 76:847–849. 77. Kane DM, Fernandez AJ, Halfpenny DR. Pulsed laser cleaning of particles from surfaces and optical materials. In: Luk’yanchuk B, ed. Laser cleaning. New Jersey:World Scientific; 2002:181–228. 78. Kane D, Fernandes A. Laser cleaning of particles from surfaces – issues relating to sample preparation. In: Proc SPIE 4426 (Miyamoto I. Lu YF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Second international symposium on laser precision microfabrication). 2002:334–339. 79. Mosbacher M, Dobler V, Boneberg J, et al. Universal threshold for the steam laser cleaning of submicron spherical particles from silicon. Appl Phys A 2000; 70:669–672. 80. Leiderer P,Mosbacher M,DoblerV,et al. Steam laser cleaning of silicon surfaces: Laser–induced gas bubble nucleation and efficiency measurements. In: Luk’yanchuk B, ed. Laser cleaning. New Jersey:World Scientific; 2002:255–310. 81. Neves P, Arronte M, Vilar R, et al. KrF excimer laser dry and steam cleaning of silicon surfaces with metallic particulate contaminants. Appl Phys A 2002; 74:191–199. 82. Héroux JB, Boughaba S, Ressejac I, et al. CO2 laser-assisted removal of submicron particles from solid surfaces. J Appl Phys 1996; 79(6):2857–2862. 83. Fernandes AJ,Kane DM. An overview of experimental research into the laser cleaning of contaminants from surfaces, In: Kane DM, ed. Laser cleaning II. New Jersey:World Scientific; 2006:29–78. 84. Model 2300XP PSL & Process-Particle Wafer Deposition System. Datasheet, MSP Corporation, 6 pp. Available on-line: http://www.appliedphysicsusa.com/assets/pdf/2300XP1_Brochure.pdf 85. Meunier M,Wu X, Beaudoin F, et al. Excimer laser cleaning for microelectronics: modeling, applications and challenges. In: Proc SPIE 3618 (Dubowski JJ, Helvajian H, Kreutz E-W, et al., eds. Laser applications in microelectronic and optoelectronic Mmanufacturing IV ). 1999:290–301. 86. Tam AC, Park HK, Grigoropoulos CP. Laser cleaning of surface contaminants. Appl Surf Sci 1998; 127–129:721–725. 87. Wachs A, Zeid S, UzielY, et al. Contaminants removal from epi substrates using vapor-laser process. Diffusion Defect Data, Part B Solid State Phenom 2005; 103–104:189–192. 88. Kim D,Park HK,Grigoropoulos CP. Interferometric probing of rapid vaporization at a solid-liquid interface induced by pulsed-laser irradiation. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2001; 44:3843–3853. 89. Park HK, Kim D, Grigoropoulos CP, et al. Pressure generation and measurement in the rapid vaporization of water on a pulsed-laser-heated surface. J Appl Phys 1996; 80(7):4072–4081.

390

References

90. Leung PT, Do N, Klees L, et al.Transmission studies of explosive vaporization of a transparent liquid film on a opaque solid surface induced by excimer-laser-pulsed irradiation. J Appl Phys 1992; 72(6):2256–2263. 91. Zapka W, Ziemlich W, Leung WP, et al. Laser cleaning: Laser-induced removal of particles from surfaces. Adv Mater Opt Electron 1993; 2:63–70. 92. Zapka W, Ziemlich W, Leung WP, et al. Laser cleaning removes particles from surfaces. Microelectron Eng 1993; 20:171–183. 93. Do N, Klees L, Leung PT, et al. Temperature dependence of optical constants for amorphous silicon. Appl Phys Lett 1992; 60(18):2196–2188. 94. Zapka W. The road to ‘Steam laser cleaning’. In: Luk’yanchuk B, ed. Laser cleaning. New Jersey: World Scientific; 2002:23–48. 95. Park HK, Grigoropoulos CP, Leung WP, et al. A practical excimer laser-based cleaning tool for removal of surface contaminants. IEEE Trans Comp Packag Manufact Technol Part A 1994; 17(4):631–643. 96. Luk’yanchuk BS, Arnold N, Huang SM, et al. Three-dimensional effects in dry laser cleaning. Appl Phys A: Mater Sci Processing 2003; 77(2):209–215. 97. Mosbacher M, Bertsch M, Münzer H-J, et al. Laser cleaning of silicon wafers: mechanisms and efficiencies. In: Proc SPIE 4426 (Miyamoto I, LuYF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Second international symposium on laser precision microfabrication). 2002:308–314. 98. Grigoropoulos CP, Kim D. Liquid-assisted pulsed laser cleaning with near infrared and ultraviolet-pulsed lasers. In: Luk’yanchuk B, ed. Laser cleaning. New Jersey:World Scientific; 2002:229–254. 99. Dobler V, Oltra R, Boquillon JP, et al. Surface acceleration during dry laser cleaning of silicon. Appl Phys A 1999; 69(Suppl.):S335–S337. 100. Kim D, Lee J. On the physical mechanisms of liquid-assisted laser cleaning. J Appl Phys 2003; 93(1):762–764. 101. Kolomenskii AlA, Maznev AA. Visualization of laser-generated SAW beams by shake-off of fine particles. In: Proc. IEEE 1994 Ultrasonics symposium, 1–4 November 1994, Cannes, France. IEEE; 1994:351–354. 102. MikhalevichVG, Kolomenskii AlA, Benck EC, et al. The interaction of fine particles with laser-generated nonlinear surface acoustic waves. J de Physique IV Colloq 1994; 4(C7):709–711. 103. Kolomenskii AlA, Schuessler HA, MikhalevichVG, et al. Interaction of laser-generated surface acoustic pulses with fine particles: Surface cleaning and adhesion studies. J Appl Phys 1998;. 84(5):2404–2410. 104. Yavas O, Leiderer P, Park HK, et al. Optical and acoustic study of nucleation and growth of bubbles at a liquid-solid interface induced by nanosecond-pulsed-laser heating. Appl Phys A 1994; 58:407–415. 105. Park HK, Zhang X, Grigoropoulos CP, et al.Transient temperature during the vaporization of liquid on a pulsed laser-heated solid surface. Trans ASME 1996; 118:702–708. 106. Park HK, Grigoropoulos CP, Poon CC, et al. Optical probing of the temperature transients during pulsed-laser induced boiling of liquids. Appl Phys Lett 1996; 68(5):596–598. 107. Lang F, Leiderer P. Liquid-vapour phase transitions at interfaces: sub-nanosecond investigations by monitoring the ejection of thin liquid films. New J Phys 2006; 8(14). 108. Zapka W, Gollasch C, Lilischkis R, et al. Laser cleaning of silicon membrane stencil masks. In: Mittal KL, ed. Particles on surfaces 7: Detection, adhesion and removal. Utrecht:VSP; 2002:295–307. 109. Smith KM, Hussaini MY, Gelb ID, et al. Modeling laser-assisted particle removal using molecular dynamies. Appl Phys A 2003; 77:877–882. 110. Lu YF, Song WD, Zhang Y, et al. Laser removal of particles from solid surfaces. RIKEN Rev 2001; (32):64–70. 111. Wu X, Sacher E, Meunier M. The modeling of excimer laser particle removal from hydrophilic silicon surfaces. J Appl Phys 2000; 87(8):3618–3627. 112. Zhang F, Busnaina AA, Fury MA, et al. The removal of deformed submicron particles from silicon wafers by spin rinse and megasonics. J Electron Mater 2000; 29:199–204. 113. Kim S, Lawrence CJ. Suspension mechanics for particle contamination control, Chem Engin Sci 1988; 43:991–1016. 114. Leiderer P, Boneberg J, Mosbacher M, et al. Laser cleaning of silicon surfaces. In: Proc SPIE 3274 (Dubowski JJ, Dyer PE, eds. Laser applications in microelectronic and optoelectronic manufacturing III ); 1998:68–78. 115. Leiderer P, Boneberg J, Dobler V, et al. Laser-induced particle removal from silicon wafers. In: Proc SPIE 4065 (Phipps CR, ed. High-power laser ablation III ); 2000:249–259. 116. BeklemyshevVI, MakarovVV, Makhonin II, et al. Photodesorption of metal ions in a semiconductor-water system. JETP Lett 1987; 46(7):347–350. Original: Pis’ma Zh Eksp Teor Fiz 1987; 46(7):275–278. 117. Assendel’ft EYu, Beklemyshev VI, Makhonin II, et al. Photodesorption of microscopic particles from a semiconductor surface into a liquid. Soviet Techn Phys Lett 1989; 14(8):650–651. Original: Pis’ma Zh Tekhn Fiz 1988; 14(15–16):1494–1497. 118. Imen K, Lee SJ, Allen SD. Laser assisted micron scale particle removal. In: Summaries of papers presented at the Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics CLEO/IQEC ’90, 21–25 May 1990,Anaheim, California, USA; 1990:228. 119. Imen K, Lee SJ,Allen SD. Laser-assisted micron scale particle removal. Appl Phys Lett 1991; 58(2):203–205.

References

391

120. Lee SJ, Imen K,Allen SD. Threshold measurements in laser assisted particle removal. In: Proc SPIE 1598 (Braren B, ed. Lasers in microelectronic manufacturing); 1991:2–12. 121. Lee SJ, Imen K, Allen SD. CO2 laser assisted particle removal threshold measurements. Appl Phys Lett 1992; 61(19):2314–2316. 122. Lee SJ, Imen K, Allen SD. Laser-assisted particle removal from silicon surfaces. Microelectron Eng 1993; 20: 145–157. 123. Tam AC, Zapka W, Ziemlich W. Efficient laser cleaning of small particulates using pulsed laser irradiation synchronized with liquid-film deposition. In: Proc SPIE 1598 (Braren B, ed. Lasers in microelectronic manufacturing); 1991:13–18. 124. Zapka W, Ziemlich W,Tam AC. Efficient pulsed laser removal of 0.2 µm sized particles from a solid surface. Appl Phys Lett 1991; 58(20):2217–2219. 125. Zapka W, Tam AC, Ayers G, et al. Liquid film enhanced laser cleaning. Microelectron Eng 1992; 17:473–478. 126. Yavas O, Leiderer P, Park HK, et al. Optical reflectance and scattering studies of nucleation and growth of bubbles at a liquid-solid interface induced by pulsed laser heating. Phys Rev Lett 1993; 70(12):1830–1833. 127. Lee SJ, Imen K, Allen SD. Shock wave analysis of laser assisted particle removal. JAppl Phys 1993; 74(12):7044–7047. 128. Do N, Klees L, Tam AC, et al. Photodeflection probing of the explosion of a liquid film in contact with a solid heated by pulsed excimer laser irradiation. J Appl Phys 1993; 74(3):1534–1538. 129. Park HK, Grigoropoulos CP,Yavas O, et al. Practical applications of laser cleaning for removal of contaminants. In: 1994 Conference lasers and electro-optics europe, 28 August – 2 September. 1994:6–7. 130. Boughaba S, Sacher E, Meunier M. CO2 laser cleaning of hydrophilic oxidized silicon surfaces. Mater Res Soc Symp Proc 1996; 397:497–502. 131. Schilling A, Yava¸s O, Bischof J, et al. Absolute pressure measurements on a nanosecond time scale using surface plasmons. Appl Phys Lett 1996; 69(27):4159–4161. 132. Yavas O, Schilling A, Bischof J, et al. Bubble nucleation and pressure generation during laser cleaning of surfaces. Appl Phys A 1997; 64:331–339. 133. Yava¸s O, Schilling A, Bischof J, et al. Study of nucleation processes during laser cleaning of surfaces. Laser Phys 1997; 7(2):343–348. 134. Lu YF, Song WD, Zhang Y, et al. Theoretical model and experimental study for dry and steam laser cleaning. In: Proc SPIE 3550 (Deng S-S,Wang SC, eds. Laser processing of materials and industrial applications II ); 1998:7–18. 135. Lu YF, Zhang Y, Song WD, et al. A theoretical model for steam laser cleaning. Mater Res Soc Symp Proc 1998; 526:409–414. 136. Lu YF, Song WD, Zhang Y, et al. Laser surface cleaning of electronic materials. In: Proc SPIE 3618 (Dubowski JJ, Helvajian H, Kreutz E-W, et al., eds. Laser applications in microelectronic and optoelectronic manufacturing IV ); 1999:278–289. 137. LuYF, Song WD, Hong HM, et al. Laser surface cleaning aud real-time monitoring. In: Proc SPIE 4070 (Pustovoy VI, Konov VI, eds. ALT’99 International Conference on Advanced Laser Technologies); 2000:331–337. 138. Lu YF, Song WD, Hong MH, et al. Laser surface cleaning—Basic understanding, engineering efforts and technical barriers. In: Proc SPIE 4088 (Miyamoto I, Sugioka K, SigmonTW, eds. First International Symposium on Laser Precision Microfabrication); 2000:371–379. 139. DeJule R. Trends in wafer cleaning. Semicond Int 1998; 21(9):64–6, 68. 140. Beaudoin F, Meunier M, Simard-Normandin M, et al. Excimer laser cleaning of silicon wafer backside metallic particles. J Vac Sci Technol A 1998; 16(3):1976–1979. 141. Halfpenny DR, Kane DM. A quantitative analysis of single pulse ultraviolet dry laser cleaning. J Appl Phys 1999; 86(12):6641–6646. 142. Vereecke G, Röhr E, Heyns MM. Laser-assisted removal of particles on silicon wafers. J Appl Phys 1999; 85(7):3837–3843. 143. Vereecke G, Röhr E, Heyns MM, Evaluation of a dry laser cleaning process for the removal of surface particles. Solid State Phenom 1999; 65–66:187–190. 144. She M, Kim D, Grigoropoulos CP. Liquid-assisted pulsed laser cleaning using near-infrared and ultraviolet radiation. J Appl Phys 1999; 86(11):6519–6524. 145. Grigoropoulos CP, Kim D. Liquid-assisted pulsed laser cleaning with near-infrared and ultraviolet pulsed lasers. In: Proc SPIE 4426 (Miyamoto I, Lu YF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Second international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2002:315–321. 146. Lu YF, Zhang Y,Wan YH, et al. Laser cleaning of silicon surface with deposition of different liquid films. Appl Surf Sci 1999; 138–139:140–144. 147. Wu X, Sacher E, Meunier M. Excimer laser induced removal of particles from hydrophilie silicon surfaces. J Adhesion 1999; 70:167–178. 148. Mosbacher M, Chaoui N, Siegel J, et al. A comparison of ns and ps steam laser cleaning of Si surfaces. Appl Phys A 1999; 69(Suppl.):S331–S334.

392

References

149. Zapka W, Lilischkis R, Zapka KF. Laser cleaning of silicon membrane stencil masks. In: Proc SPIE 3996 (Behringer UFW, ed. 16th European conference on mask technology for integrated circuits and microcomponents); 2000:92–96. 150. Veiko VP, Shakhno EA, Nikolaev SV. Thermomechanical mechanisms of laser cleaning. In: Proc SPIE 4088 (Miyamoto I, Sugioka K, Sigmon TW, eds. First international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2000:179–182. 151. Veiko VP, Shakhno EA. Mechanisms of laser surface cleaning. Bull Russian Acad Sci Phys 2001; 65(4):638–642. Original: Izv Ross Akad Nauk, Ser Fiz 2001; 65(4):586–590. 152. Fourrier T, Schrems G, Mühlberger T, et al. Laser cleaning of polymer surfaces. Appl Phys A 2001; 72:1–6. 153. Neves P, Arronte M, Almeida A, et al. Excimer laser-assisted cleaning of single-crystal silicon wafers contaminated with metallic particles. In: 20th international congress on ICALEO 2001. Applications of lasers and electro-optics. Congress proceedings. Laser materials processing conference. Laser microfabrication conference, Laser Institute; America, Orlando, FL, USA: 2001:1744–1753. 154. Fernandes A, Kane D. Dry laser cleaning threshold fluence – how can it be measured accurately? In: Proc SPIE 4426 (Miyamoto I, Lu YF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Second international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2002:290–295. 155. Song WD, Hong MH, Zhang L, et al. Laser cleaning technology and its application. In: Proc. SPIE 4426 (Miyamoto I, Lu YF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Second international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2002:280–283. 156. Veiko VP, Shakhno EA,Volkovyski BV. Peculiarities of steam laser cleaning. In: Proc SPIE 4426 (Miyamoto I, Lu YF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Second international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2002:322–325. 157. Allen SD, Imen K. Laser assisted particle removal. In: Mittal KL, ed. Particles on surfaces 7: detection, adhesion and removal. Utrecht:VSP; 2002:253–260. 158. LuYF, Song WD, Zhang L, et al. Laser removal of particles from solid surfaces. In: Mittal KL, ed. Particles on surfaces 7: detection, adhesion and removal. Utrecht:VSP; 2002:261–273. 159. Mosbacher M, Münzer H-J, Bertsch M, et al. Laser assisted particle removal from silicon wafers. In: Mittal KL, ed. Particles on surfaces 7: detection, adhesion and removal, Utrecht:VSP; 2002:275–293. 160. Bregar VB, Možina I. Optoacoustic analysis of the laser-cleaning process. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 185:277–288. 161. Lee J, Jang D, Kim D. Physical mechanisms of liquid-assisted laser cleaning. In: Proc SPIE 4830 (Miyamoto I, Kobayashi KF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Third international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2003:290–295. 162. Lang F, Mosbacher M, Leiderer P. Near field induced defects and influence of the liquid layer thickness in steam laser cleaning of silicon wafers. Appl Phys A 2003; 77:117–123. 163. Leiderer P, Mosbacher M, Boneberg J, et al. Investigation of particle removal from silicon surfaces by means of dry and steam laser cleaning. Diffusion Defect Data, Part B Solid State Phenom 2003; 92:133–134. 164. Kudryashov SI,Allen SD. Optical transmission measurements of explosive boiling and liftoff of a layer of micron-scale water droplets from a KrF laser-heated Si substrate. J Appl Phys 2003; 93(7):4306–4308. 165. Kudryashov SI,Allen SD, Shukla S. Fast measurements with a slow detector: photoacoustic investigations of ‘steam’ laser cleaning. In: Proc SPIE 5339 (Herman PR, Fieret J, Pique A, et al., eds. Photon processing in microelectronics and photonics III ); 2004;579–586. 166. Arnold N, Schrems G, Bäuerle D. Ablative thresholds in laser cleaning of substrates from particulates. Appl Phys A 2004; 79:729–734. 167. Fernandes AJ, Kane DM. Enhanced laser cleaning via direct line beam irradiation. Appl. Phys. A 2004; 79(4–6):735–738. 168. Graf J, Lang F, Mosbacher M, et al. Laser cleaning of particles from silicon wafers: capabilities and mechanisms. Diffusion Defect Data, Part B Solid State Phenom 2005; 103–104:185–188. 169. Lang F, Leiderer P, Georgiou S. Phase transition dynamics measurements in superheated liquids by monitoring the ejection of nanometer-thick films. Appl Phys Lett 2004; 85:2759–2781. 170. Ulrich RK, Alkire RC. The initiation of single corrosion sites on iron by focused laser illumination. Corrosion Sci 1983; 23(11):1153–1162. 171. Oltra R, Boquillon JP. Depassivation par impacts laser. Electrochim Acta 1986; 31(7):869–872. 172. Osiecki RA, Magee TJ. Ultraviolet laser cleaning of mirrored surfaces. In: Proc SPIE 1329 (Glassford APM, ed. Optical system contamination: effects, measurement, control II ); 1990:127–133. 173. Oltra R, Indrianjafy GM, Keddam M, et al. Laser depassivation of a channel flow double-electrode: a new technique in repassivation studies. Corrosion Sci 1993; 35(1–4):827–832. 174. Jette AN, Benson RC. Modeling of pulsed-laser cleaning of metal optical surfaces at cryogenic temperatures. J Appl Phys 1994; 75(6):3130–3141. 175. Cooper MI, Emmony DC, Larson J. Characterization of laser cleaning of limestone. Optics Laser Technol 1995; 27(1):69–73. 176. Oltra R,Yava¸s O, Kerrec O. Pulsed laser cleaning of oxidized metallic surfaces in electrochemically controlled liquid confinement. Surf Coat Technol 1996; 88:157–161.

References

393

177. Halfpenny DR, Kane DM, Lamb RN, et al. In: Proceedings of 1996 conference on optoelectronic and microelectronic materials and devices, 8–11 December 1996. IEEE; 1997:470–473. 178. Ellegaard O, Schou J. Ablation of volatile films by laser heating of substrates. J Appl Phys 1998; 83(2): 1078–1086. 179. Lee YP, Lu YF, Chan DSH, et al. Steam laser cleaning of plasma-etch-induced polymers from via holes. Jpn J Appl Phys Part 1 1998; 37(5A):2524–2529. 180. Alloncle P, Isselin J-C, Provost M, et al. Mechanisms of laser surface cleaning in liquid media. In: Proc SPIE 3343 (Phipps CR, ed. High-power laser ablation); part, 1–2 1998:866–871. 181. Fernandes AJ, Kane DM, Gong B, et al. Dehydroxylation of UV fused silica slides via laser irradiation. In: Conference on optoelectronic and microelectronic materials and devices. 2002, 11–13 December 2002. IEEE; 2002:433–436. 182. Marczak J. Selection of radiation parameters of lasers used for artwork conservation. In: Proc SPIE 5229 (Wolinski WL, Jankiewicz Z, Romaniuk R, eds. Laser technology VII: applications of lasers); 2003:286–295. 183. Brennan JL, Forster RJ. Laser light and electrodes: Interaction mechanisms and electroanalytical applications. J Phys Chem B 2003; 107:9344–9350. 184. Kautek W, Daminelli G. Electrochemical reactivity of laser-machined microcavitics on anodised aluminium alloys. Electrochim Acta 2003; 48:3249–3255. 185. Yoda M, Chida I, Okada S, et al. Development and application of laser peening system for PWR power plants. In: Proceedings of ICONE14, 14th international conference on nuclear engineering, Miami, Florida, USA: 17–20 July 2006. ASME; 2006:ICONE14–89228. 186. Ding K,Ye L. Laser shock peening. Performance and process simulation. Cambridge:Woodhead; 2006. 187. Xing YM, Lu J. An experimental study of residual stress induced by ultrasonic shot peening. J Mater Process Technol 2004; 152:56–61. 188. Webster JR, Miles TJ. Gas turbine engine rotor blades. Patent US2002037219, 2002. 189. Shot Peening. Metal Improvement Co. Online. Available: http://www.metalimprovement.com/shot_peening.php 190. Peyre P, Fabbro R, Merrien P, et al. Laser shock processing of aluminium alloys. Application to high cycle fatigue behaviour. Mater Sci Eng A 1996; 210(1–2):102–113. 191. Hammersley G, Hackel LA, Harris F. Surface prestressing to improve fatigue strength of components by laser shot peening. Optics Lasers Eng 2000; 34:327–337. 192. Nalla RK,Altenberger I, Noster U, et al. On the influence of mechanical surface treatments – deep rolling and laser shock peening – on the fatigue behavior of Ti-6Al-4V at ambient and elevated temperatures. Mater Sci Eng 2003; A355:216–230. 193. Qin M, Ju DY, Oba R. Investigation of the influence of incidence angle on the process capability of water cavitation peening. Surf Coat Technol 2006; 201:1409–1413. 194. Kudryavtsev Y, Kleiman J, Lobanov L, et al. Fatigue life improvement of welded elements by ultrasonic peening. International Institute of Welding. IIW Document XIII-2010-04. 2004. 20 p. Online. Available: http://www.itlinc.com/pdf/38_IIW_Doc_XIII-2010-04.pdf 195. Prime MB. Residual stress measurement by successive extension of a slot: the crack compliance method. Appl Mech Rev 1999; 52(2):75–96. 196. Noyan IC, Cohen JB. Residual stresses. Measurement by diffraction and interpretation. New York: Springer; 1987. 197. Withers PJ, Bhadeshia HKDH. Residual stress. Part 2 – Nature and origins. Mater Sci Technol 2001; 17:366–375. 198. Kandil FA, Lord JD, Fry AT, et al. A review of residual stress measurement methods. A guide to technique selection. NPL Report MATC(A)04, National Physical Laboratory (Great Britain); 2001. 199. Totten G, Howes M, Inoue T, eds. Handbook of residual stress and deformation of steel. Materials Park: The Materials Information Society; 2002. 200. Withers PJ,Bhadeshia HKDH. Residual stress. Part 1 – Measurement techniques. Mater SciTechnol 2001; 17:355–365. 201. Lu J. Handbook of measurement of residual stresses. Society for Experimental Mechanics, Lilburn:The Fairmont Press, Inc.; 1996. 202. Flavenot JF. Layer removal method. In: Lu J, ed. Handbook of measurement of residual stresses. Lilburn: Society for Experimental Mechanics; 1996:35–48. 203. Eigenmann B, Macherauch E. Röntgenographische Untersuchung von Spannungszuständen in Werkstoffen,Teil I. Materialwiss Werkstofftechnik 1995; 26(3):148–160. 204. Yoshioka Y, Akita K, Suzuki H, et al. Residual stress measurements of laser peened steels by using synchrotron radiation. Mater Sci Forum 2002; 404–407:83–88. 205. Bruno G, Fanara C, Hughes DJ, et al. Procedures for interface residual stress determination using neutron diffraction: Mo-coated steel gear wheel. Nucl Instrum Meth Phys Res B: Beam Interact Mater Atoms 2006; 246(2):425–439. 206. Withers PJ, Preuss M, Webster PJ, et al. Residual strain measurement by synchrotron diffraction. Mater Sci Forum 2002; 404–407:1–12. 207. Withers PJ. Depth capabilities of neutron and synchrotron diffraction strain measurement instruments. I. The maximum feasible path length. J Appl Cryst 2004; 37:596–606.

394

References

208. Pirling T. Stress determination with high lateral resolution using neutron diffraction. Mater. Sci. Forum 2003; 426–432:3975–3980. 209. Edwards L,Wang DQ, Johnson MW, et al. Precise measurement of internal stresses within materials using pulsed neutrons (PREMIS). In: Proc ICRS 4, Baltimore, MA, USA: 1994:220–229. 210. Niku-Lari A, Lu J, Flavenot JF. Measurement of residual-stress distribution by the incremental hole-drilling method. J Mech Working Technol 1985; 11:167–188. 211. Lu J, Niku-Lari A, Flavenot J-F. Récents développements de la mesure des contraintes résiduelles par perçage incrémental. Matér techn 1985; 73(12):709–718. 212. Švantner M, Litoš Pa, Honner M, et al. Parametry mˇeˇrení odvrtávací metody zjišt’ování zbytkových napˇetí. Holedrilling residual stress method parameters determination. In Experimentální analýza napˇetí 2003: Proceedings of ˇ 41. mezinárodní konference Ceské spoleˇcnosti pro mechaniku, Fakulty strojního inženýrství,VUT Brno, 3rd–5th ˇ June 2003, Milovy, CR. Brno: Brno University of Technology, 2003:99–100. 213. Schajer GS, Roy G, Flaman MT, et al. Hole-drilling and ring core methods. In: Lu J, ed. Handbook of measurement of residual stresses. Lilburn: Society for Experimental Mechanics; 1996:5–34. 214. Rankin JE, Hill MR, Hackel LA. The effects of process variations on residual stress in laser peened 7049 T73 aluminum alloy. Mater Sci Eng 2003;A349:279–291. 215. Prime MB. Cross-sectional mapping of residual stresses by measuring the surface contour after a cut. Trans ASME, J Eng Mater Technol 2001; 123(2):162–168. 216. DeWald AT, Rankin JE, Hill MR, et al. Assessment of tensile residual stress mitigation in alloy 22 welds due to laser peening. Trans. ASME, J Eng Mater Technol 2004;126:465–473. 217. DeWald AT, Hill MR. Multi-axial contour method for mapping residual stresses in continuously processed bodies. Experim Mech 2006; 46:473–490. 218. Thompson RB, Lu W-Y, Clark AV Jr. Ultrasonic methods. In: Lu J, ed. Handbook of measurement of residual stresses. Lilburn: Society for Experimental Mechanics; 1996:149–178. 219. Tiitto S. Magnetic methods. In: Lu J, ed. Handbook of measurement of residual stresses. Lilburn: Society for Experimental Mechanics; 1996:179–224. 220. Ganesan S, Maradudin AA, Oitmaa J. A lattice theory of morphic effects in crystals of the diamond structure. Annals Phys 1970; 56:556–594. 221. Atkinson A, Jain SC. Spatially resolved stress analysis using Raman spectroscopy. J Raman Spectrosc 1999; 30: 885–891. 222. Miyagawa H, Kamiya D, Sato C, et al. Strain measurement for Raman-inactive substrates with PbO thin films using Raman coating method. J Mater Sci 1999; 34:105–110. 223. Ma Q, Clarke DR. Stress measurement in single-crystal and polycrystalline ceramics using their optical fluorescence. J Am Ceram Soc 1993;76(6):1433–1440. 224. Zandman F, Redner S, Dally JW. Photoelastic coatings. SESA monograph No 3. Westport: Society for Experimental Stress Analysis; 1977. 225. Dally JW, Riley WF. Experimental stress analysis, 2nd edn. Tokyo: McGraw-Hill; 1987. 226. Post D, Han B, Ifju P. High sensitivity Moiré: Experimental analysis for mechanics and materials. New York: Springer; 1994:Ch 4,135–223. 227. GuoY, Ifju P, Boeman R, et al. Formation of specimen gratings for moire interferometry applications. ExperimTechn 1999; 23(5):28–32. 228. Fox JA. Effect of water and paint coatings on laser-irradiated targets. Appl Phys Lett 1974; 24(10):461–464. 229. Peyre P, Chaieb I, Braham C. FEM calculation of residual stresses induced by laser shock processing in stainless steels. Model Simul Mater Sci Eng 2007; 15:205–221. 230. Peyre P, Fabbro R. Laser shock processing: a review of the physics and applications. Opt Quantum Electron 1995; 27(12):1213–1229. 231. Akita K, Tanaka H, Sano Y, et al. Compressive residual stress evolution process by laser peening. Mater Sci Forum 2005; 490–491:370–375. 232. Clauer AH, Walters CT, Ford SC. The effects of laser shock processing on the fatigue properties of 2024-T3 aluminium. In: Lasers in materials processing. Metals Park:ASM; 1983:7–22. 233. Fabbro R, Fournier J, Ballard P, et al. Physical study of laser-produced plasma in confined geometry. J Appl Phys 1990; 68(2):775–784. 234. Rohde RW, Jones OE. Mechanical and piezoelectric properties of shock-loaded x-cut quartz at 573◦ K. Rev Sci Instrum 1968; 39(3):313–316. 235. Graham RA, Ingram GE. Piezoeletric current from x-cut quartz subjected to short-duration shock-wave loading. J Appl Phys 1972; 43(3):826–835. 236. Oros C. Investigations involving shock waves generation and shock pressure measurement in direct ablation regime and confined ablation regime. Shock Waves 2002; 11:393–397.

References

395

237. Peyre P, Berthe L, Fabbro R, et al. Experimental determination by PVDF and EMV techniques of shock amplitudes induced by 0.3–3 ns laser pulses in a confined regime with water. J Phys D 2000; 33:498–503. 238. Yuan G, Feng R, GuptaYM. Compression and shear wave measurements to characterize the shocked state in silicon carbide. J Appl Phys 2001; 89(10):5372–5380. 239. Peyre P, Berthe L, Scherpereel X, et al. Experimental study of laser-driven shock waves in stainless steels. J Appl Phys 1998; 84(11):5985–5992. 240. Barker LM, Hollenbach RE. Laser interferometer for measuring high velocities of any reflecting surface. J Appl Phys 1972; 43(11):4669–4675. 241. Tollier L, Fabbro R, Bartnicki E. Study of the laser-driven spallation process by the velocity interferometer system for any reflector interferometry technique. I. Laser-shock characterization. J Appl Phys 1998; 83(3): 1224–1230. 242. Sano Y, Mukai N, Okazaki K, et al. Residual stress improvement in metal surface by underwater laser irradiation. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res B 1997; 121:432–436. 243. Peyre P, Fabbro R, Berthe L, et al. Laser shock processing of materials and related measurements. In: Proc SPIE 3343 (Phipps CR, ed. High-Power Laser Ablation); 1998:183–193. 244. Dubrujeaud B, Fontes A, Forget P, et al. Surface modification using high-power lasers: influence of surface characteristics on properties of laser processed materials. Surf Eng 1997; 13(6):461–470. 245. Forget P, Strudel JL, Jeandin M. Laser shock surface treatment of Ni-based superalloys. Mater Manufact Processes 1990; 5(4):501–528. 246. Masse JE. Laser generation of stress waves in metal. Surf Coat Technol 1995; 70(2–3):231–234. 247. Fournier J, Ballard P, Merrien P, et al. Mechanical effects induced by shock waves generated by high energy laser pulses. J Phys III France 1991; 1:1467–1480. 248. Mura T. Micromechanics of defects in solids. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff; 1987. 249. Korsunsky AM. Residual elastic strain due to laser shock peening: modelling by eigenstrain distribution. J. Strain Anal Eng Design 2006; 41(3):195–204. 250. Fabbro R, Peyre P, Berthe L, et al. Physics and applications of laser-shock processing. J Lasers Appl 1998; 10(6):265–279. 251. Colvin JD, Ault ER, King WE, et al. Computational model for a low-temperature laser-plasma driver for shock-processing of metals and comparison to experimental data. Phys Plasmas 2003; 10(7):2940–2947. 252. Zhang H, Zhang Y-K, Yu C-Y. Surface treatment of aluminium alloy by laser shock processing. Surf Eng 1999; 15(6):454–456. 253. Kusaka K,Tanaka T, Hanabusa T. Effect of laser power density and scanning speed on residual stress in laser-peened aluminum alloy. J Soc Mat Sci Jpn 2005; 54(7):672–678. 254. Sano Y, Obata M, Kubo T, et al. Retardation of crack initiation and growth in austenitic stainless steels by laser peening without protective coating. Mater Sci Eng A 2006; 417:334–340. 255. Fairand BP, Clauer AH. Laser generation of high-amplitude stress waves in materials. J Appl Phys 1979; 50(3):1497–1502. 256. Griffin RD, Justus BL, Campillo AJ, et al. Interferometric studies of the pressure of a confined laser-heated plasma. J Appl Phys 1986; 59(6):1968–1971. 257. Berthe L, Sollier A, Peyre P, et al. Physics of shock-wave generation by laser-plasma in water confinement regime. Proc SPIE 4065 (Phipps CR, ed. High-power laser ablation III ); 2000:511–520. 258. Berthe L, Fabbro R, Peyre P, et al. Wavelength dependent of laser shock-wave generation in the water-confinement regime. J Appl Phys 1999; 85(11):7552–7555. 259. Wu B, Shin YC. A self-closed thermal model for laser shock peening under the water confinement regime configuration and comparisons to experiments. J Appl Phys 2005; 97:113517. 260. Sollier A, Berthe L, Fabbro R. Numerical modeling of the transmission of breakdown plasma generated in water during laser shock processing. Eur Phys J Appl Phys 2001; 16:131–139. 261. Lee K, Lim CH, Kwon SO. Propagation of a laser-generated shock wave in a metal confined in water. J Korean Phys Soc 2006; 49(1):387–392. 262. Sollier A, Berthe L, Peyre P, et al. Laser-matter interaction in laser shock processing. In: Proc SPIE 4831 (Miyamoto I, Kobayashi KF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. First international symposium on high-power laser macroprocessing); 2003: 463–467. 263. Zhang W, Yao YL, Noyan IC. Microscale laser shock peening of thin films, Part 1: Experiment, modeling and simulation. Trans ASME, J Manufact Sci Eng 2004; 126:10–17. 264. Ballard P. Contraintes résiduelles induites par impact rapide: application au choc laser. Thèse de doctorat, École Polytechnique, Palaiseau, France, 1991, 217 pp. 265. Ballard P, Fournier J, Fabbro R, et al. Residual stresses induced by laser-shocks. J Phys IV (Coll.) 1991; 1(C3): 487–494.

396

References

266. Dubouchet C. Traitements thermomecaniques de surfaces metalliques a l’aide de lasers CO2 continus et de laser impulsionnel,Thèse de doctorat, Universite Paris Sud XI. Section Sciences. Orsay, Essonne, France, 1993, 223 pp. 267. Peyre P, Fabbro R, L. Berthe L, et al. Laser shock processing of materials, physical processes involved and examples of applications. J Laser Appl 1996; 8:135–141. 268. Wang L. Foundations of stress waves. Elsevier, Oxford; 2007. 269. Chen R-F, HuaY-Q, Cai L. Estimate of residual stress of steel materials induced by laser shock wave. Chinese J Lasers 2006; 33(2):278–282. 270. Braisted W, Brockman R. Finite element simulation of laser shock peening. Int J Fatigue 1999; 21:719–724. 271. More RM, Warren KH,Young DA, et al. A new quotidian equation of state (QEOS) for hot dense matter. Phys Fluids 1988; 31(10):3059–3078. 272. Peyre P, Sollier A, Chaieb I, et al. FEM simulation of residual stresses induced by laser Peening. Eur Phys J Appl Phys 2003; 23:83–88. 273. Fan Y, Wang Y,Vukelic S, et al. Wave-solid interactions in laser-shock-induced deformation processes. J Appl Phys 2005; 98:104904. 274. Steinberg DJ, Cochran SG, Guinan MW. A constitutive model for metals applicable at high-strain rate. J Appl Phys 1980; 51(3):1498–1504. 275. Zhang W,YaoYL. Improvement of laser induced redual stress distributions via shock waves. In: Proceedings of the laser materials processing conference ICALEO 2000, LIA, vol. 89; 2000:183–192. 276. Le code de simulation SHYLAC. Laboratoire d’Application des Lasers de Puissance (LALP). Online. Available: http://www.lalp.cnrs.fr/choc/mecarupture/mecarupt2.html 277. Sano Y,Yoda M, Mukai N, et al. Residual stress improvement mechanism on metal material by underwater laser irradiation. Nihon Genshiryoku Gakkaishi. J Atomic Energ. Soc Jpn 2000; 42(6):567–573. 278. Sano Y, Kimura M, Mukai N, et al. Process and applications of shock compression by nano-second pulses of frequency-doubled Nd:YAG laser. In: Proc SPIE 3888 (Chen X, Fujioka T, Matsunawa A, eds. High-power lasers in manufacturing); 2000:294–306. 279. Suh UW, Risbeck JD. Simultaneous offset dual sided laser shock peening. Patent EP1088903, 2001. 280. Sano Y, Mukai N, Yoda M, et al. Development and Applications of laser peening without coating as a surface enhancement technology. In: Proc SPIE 6343 (Mathieu P, ed. Photonics North 2006); 2006:634324. 281. Yoda M, Chida I, Okada S, et al. Development and application of laser peening system for PWR power plants. In: Proceedings of ICONE14, 14th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, Miami, Florida, USA: 17–20 July 2006, ICONE14–89228. 282. Sano Y, Akita K, Masaki K, et al. Laser peening without coating as a surface enhancement technology. JLMN – J Laser Micro/Nanoeng 2006; 1(3):161–166. 283. Askar’yan GA, Moroz EM. Pressure on evaporation of matter in radiation beam. Soviet Phys JETP 1963; 16:1638–1639. 284. White RM. Elastic wave generation by electron bombardment or electromagnetic wave absorption. J Appl Phys 1963; 34:2123–2124. 285. Neuman F. Momentum transfer and cratering effects produced by giant laser pulses. Appl Phys Lett 1964; 4(9):167–169. 286. Gregg DW, Thomas SJ. Momentum transfer produced by focused laser giant pulses. J Appl Phys 1966; 37(7):2787–2789. 287. Anderholm NC. Laser generated pressure waves. Bull Am Phys Soc 1968; 13:388. 288. Skeen CH,York CM. Laser-induced ‘blow-off ’ phenomena. Appl Phys Lett 1968; 12(11):369–371. 289. Anderholm NC. Laser generated stress waves. Appl Phys Lett 1970; 16(3):113–115. 290. Metz SA, Smidt FA Jr. Production of vacancies by laser bombardment. Appl Phys Lett 1971; 19(6):207–208. 291. Yang LC, MenichelliVJ. Detonation of insensitive high explosives by a Q-switched ruby laser. Appl Phys Lett 1971; 19(11):473–475. 292. Fairand BP,Wilcox BA, Gallagher WJ, et al. Laser shock-induced microstructural and mechanical property changes in 7075 alumnium. J Appl Phys 1972; 43(9):3893–3895. 293. O’Keefe JD, Skeen CH. Laser-induced stress-wave and impulse augmentation. Appl Phys Lett 1972; 21(10): 464–466. 294. Hsu TR. Application of the laser beam technique to the improvement of metal strength. J Testing Evaluat JTEVA 1973; 1(6):457–458. 295. O’Keefe JD,Skeen CH. Laser-induced deformation modes in thin metal targets. JAppl Phys 1973; 44(10):4622–4626. 296. Fairand BP, Clauer AH, Jung RG, et al. Quantitative assessment of laser-induced stress waves generated at confined surfaces. Appl Phys Lett 1974; 25(8):431–433. 297. Yang LC. Stress waves generated in thin metallic films by a Q-switched ruby laser. JAppl Phys 1974; 45(6):2601–2608. 298. Steverding B, Dudel HP. Laser-induced shocks and their capability ta produce fracture. J Appl Phys 1976; 47(5):1940–1945.

References

397

299. Clauer AH, Fairand BP,Wilcox BA. Laser shock hardening of weld zones in aluminum alloys. MetallurgTrans A 1977; 8A:1871–1876. 300. Fairand BP, Clauer H. Effect of water and paint coatings on the magnitude of laser-generated shocks. Optics Commun 1976; 18(4):588–591. 301. Fairand BP, Clauer AH. Use of laser generated shocks to improve the properties of metals and alloys. In: Proc SPIE 86 (Industrial applications of high power laser technology); 1976:112–119. 302. Clauer AH, Fairand BP,Wilcox BA. Pulsed laser induced deformation in an Fe-3 wt pct Si alloy. MetallTrans A 1977; 8A:119–125 303. Fairand BP, Clauer AH. Laser-generated stress waves:Their characteristics and their effects to materials. In: Ferris SD, Leamy NJ, Poate JM, eds. Laser-solid interactions and laser processing – 1978. Am Inst Phys, Conf Proc #50; 1979:27–42. 304. Clauer AH, Fairand BP. Interaction of laser-induced stress waves with metals. In: Applications of laser in material processing. Materials Park:ASM; 1979:291–315. 305. Clauer AH, Holbrook JH, Fairand BP. Effects of laser induced shock waves on metals. In: Meyers MA, Murr LE, ed. In: Shock waves and high-strain-rate phenomena in metals. Concepts and applications. New York: Plenum; 1981:675–702. 306. Schoen PE, Campillo AJ. Characteristics of compressional shocks resulting from picosecond heating of confined foils. Appl Phys Lett 1984; 45(10):1049–1051. 307. Fabbro R, Fournier J, Fabre E, et al. Experimental study of metallurgical evolutions in metallic alloys induced by laser generated high pressure shocks. In: Proc SPIE 668 (Laser processing: Fundamentals, applications, and systems engineering); 1986:320–324. 308. Walters CT, Clauer AH, Campbell BE. Laser shock effects on stressed structural materials – experimental results. In: Proceedings of the sixth DOD conference on DEW vulnerability, survivability and effects, Gaithersburg MD,12–15 May, 1987. 309. Ayrault D, Fabbro R, Fournier J, et al. Microstructures de déformation plastique induite par impulsion laser. C R Acad Sci Paris 1987; 305(Série II):353–358. 310. Fournier J, Fabbro R, Fabre E. Étude expérimentale des ondes de choc engendrées par laser pulsé de forte énergie. C. R. Acad. Sc. Paris 1987: 304(Série II)(17):1051–1054. 311. Hallouin M, Gerland M, Cottet F, et al. Effets métallurgiques induits dans le fer par choc laser. Mémoir Etud Sci Rev Métall 1987(Janvier):25–34. 312. Phipps CR Jr, Turner TP, Harrison RF, et al. Impulse coupling to targets in vacuum by KrF, HF, and CO2 single-pulse lasers. J Appl Phys 1988; 64(3):1083–1096. 313. Cottet F, Marty L, Hallouin M, et al. Two-dimensional study of shock breakout at the rear face of laser-irradiated metallic targets. J Appl Phys 1988; 64(9):4474–4477. 314. Ballard P, Fournier J, Fabbro R, et al. Study of the plastification of metallic targets shocked by a laser pulse of high energy. J Phys Coll C3 1988; 49(9)(Suppl.):401–406. 315. Bana´s G, Lawrence FV Jr. Shot peening versus laser shock processing. In: Proc. of 4th international conference on shot peening (ICSP-4). Tokyo:The Japan Society of Engineering; 1990:95–104. 316. Bana´s G, Elsayed-Ali HE, Lawrence FV Jr, et al. Laser shock-induced mechanical and microstructural modification of welded marging steel. J Appl Phys 1990; 67(5):2380–2384. 317. Romain JP, Darquey P. Shock waves and acceleration of thin foils by laser pulses in confined plasma interaction. J Appl Phys 1990; 68(4):1926–1928. 318. Hallouin M, Gerland M. Microstructure résiduelle d’un acier 304 soumis à un choc laser. Influence du flux et de la durée d’impulsion laser. J Phys IV Colloque C3 1991; 1:519–524. 319. Décamps B, Condat M, Puig T, et al. Shearing of γ’ precipitates in Waspaloy deformed by laser shock. phys stat sol a 1991; 125:K7. 320. Puig T, Decamps B, Bourda C, et al. Deformation of a γ/γ’ waspaloy after laser shock. Mater Sci Eng 1992; A154:183–191. 321. Clauer AH. Laser shock processing increases the fatigue life of metal parts. Mater Process Rep 1991; 6:3–5. 322. Clauer AH, Dulaney JL, Rice RC, et al. Laser shock processing for treating fastener holes in aging aircraft. In:Atluri SN, Harris CE, Hoggard A, et al., eds. Durability of metal aircraft structures, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Structural Integrity of Aging Airplanes, March 31 – April 2, 1992 Atlanta: Atlanta Technology Publications: 1992: 350–361. 323. Vaccari JA. Laser shocking extends fatigue life. Am Machinist 1992; (July):62–64. 324. Grevey D, Maiffredy L,Vannes AB. Laser shock on a TRIP alloy: mechanical and metallurgical consequences. J Mater Sci 1992; 27:2110–2116. 325. Gerland M, Hallouin M, Presles HN. Comparison of two new surface treatment processes, laser-induced shock waves and primary explosive: application to fatigue behaviour. Mater Sci Eng A 1992;A156:175–182. 326. Devaux D,Tollier L, Bartnicki E. Generation of shock waves by laser-induced plasma in confined geometry. J Appl Phys 1993; 74(4):2268–2273. 327. Gerland M, Hallouin M. Effect of pressure on the microstructure of an austenitic stainless steel shock-loaded by very short laser pulses. J Mater Sci 1994; 29:345–351.

398

References

328. Peyre P, Merrien P, Lieurade HP, et al. Laser induced shock waves as surface treatment for 7075-T7131 aluminium alloy. Surf Eng 1995; 11(1):47–52. 329. Forget P, Jeandin M. Déformation à l’échelle cristallographique d’alliages à base de nickel mono- et polycristallins par choc laser en mode confiné. J Phys III France 1995; 5(8):1133–1144. 330. Virmoux Ph, Dewulf JM, Dias AM, et al. Fatigue de contact en ambiance cryotechnique d’un acier à roulement traite superficiellement par chock laser. In : 8èmes journées de printemps de la SF2M: Fatigue et traitements de surface. PARIS 30–31 Mai 1995 – N˚ série 9. SF2M – Société Française de Métallurgie et de Matériaux; 1996:209–220. 331. Chu JP, Rigsbee JM, Bana´s G, et al. Effects of laser-shock processing on the microstructure and surface mechanical properties of Hadfield manganese steel. Metall Mater Trans A Phys Metall Mater Sci 1995; 26A(6):1507–1517. 332. Mukai N, Aoki N, Obata M, et al. Laser processing for underwater maintenance in nuclear plants. In: The 3rd JSME/ASME joint international conference on nuclear engineering. 23–27April 1995, Kyoto, Japan; vo1. 3. 1995:1489–1494. 333. Peyre P, Fabbro R, Berthe L, et al. Laser shock processing with small impacts. In: Proc SPIE 2789 (Sayegh G, Osborne MR, eds. High-power lasers: applications and emerging applications); 1996:125–132. 334. Berthe L, Fabbro R, Peyre P, et al. Laser shock processing of materials: study of laser induced breakdown in water confinement regime. In: Proc SPIE 2789 (Sayegh G, Osborne MR, eds. High-power lasers: applications and emerging applications); 1996:246–253. 335. Berthe L, Fabbro R, Peyre P, et al. Shock waves from a water-confined laser-generated plasma. J Appl Phys 1997; 82(6):2826–2832. 336. Konagai C, Sano Y, Aoki N. Underwater direct metal processing by high-power copper vapour laser. In: Little CE, Sabotinov NV, eds. Pulsed metal vapour lasers. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 1996:371–376. 337. Sano Y, Mukai N, Aoki N, et al. Laser processing to improve residual stress of metal components. In: IEEE/LEOS 1996 Summer topical meetings: advanced applications of lasers in materials processing/broadband optical networks/smart pixels/optical MEMs and their applications, 5–6 August 1996. New York: IEEE; 1996:30–31. 338. Romain JP,Auroux E. Acceleration-deceleration process of thin foils confined in water and submitted to laser driven shocks. J Appl Phys 1997; 82(3):1367–1373. 339. Sano Y, Yoda M, Mukai N, et al. Observation and modeling of laser peening phenomenon. Reza-kenkyu 1998; 26(11):793–799. 340. Clauer AH. Laser shock peening for fatigue resistance. In: Gregory JK, Rack HJ, Eylon D, eds. Surface performance of titanium. The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society; 1997:217–230. 341. Scherpereel X, Peyre P, Fabbro R, et al. Modifications of mechanical and electrochemical properties of stainless steels surfaces by laser shock processing. In: Proc SPIE 3097 (Beckmann LHJF, ed. Lasers in material processing); 1997:546–557. 342. Peyre P, Berthe L, Fabbro R, et al. Laser shock processing of materials: characterization and application of the process. In: Proc SPIE 3097 (Beckmann LHJF, ed. Lasers in material processing); 1997:558–569. 343. Peyre P, Berthe L, Scherpereel X, et al. Laser-shock processing of aluminium-coated 55C1 steel in waterconfinement regime, characterization and application to high-cycle fatigue behaviour. J Mater Sci 1998; 33(6):1421–1429. 344. Peyre P, Fabbro R, Berthe L. Laser shock processing to improve mechanical properties of metallic materials. In: Surface treatment. Computer methods and experimental measurements. Southampton: Computational Mechanics Publications; 1997:267–276. 345. Berthe L, Fabbro R, Peyre P, et al. Laser shock processing of materials: experimental study of breakdown plasma effects at the surface of confined water. In: Proc SPIE 3097 (Beckmann LHJF, ed. Lasers in material processing); 1997: 570–575. 346. Berthe L, Fabbro R, Peyre P, et al. Experimental study of the transmission of breakdown plasma generated during laser shock processing. Eur Phys J Appl Phys 1998; 3(2):215–218. 347. Dane CB, Hackel LA, Daly J, et al. Laser peening of metals – enabling laser technology. Mat Res Soc Sym. Proc. 1998; 499:73–85. 348. Dane CB, Hackel LA, Daly J, et al. Shot peening with lasers. Adv Mater Process 1998; 153:37–38. 349. Peyre P, Scherpereel X, Berthe L, et al. Current trends in laser shock processing. Surf Eng 1998; 14(5):377–380. 350. Berthe L, Fabbro R, Peyre P, et al. Study of physical processes involved in laser shock processing of materials. In: Proceedings of the laser materials processing conference ICALEO’98, Orlando: Laser Institute of America, vol. 85; 1998:121–129. 351. Berthe L, Sollier A, Peyre P, et al. Etude de l’interaction laser-matière en régime de confinement par eau : etude du plasma confiné. In: Rapport d’Activité LULI 1999 (Ecole Polytechnique, Palaiseau, France, 1999), B-8, p. 62–64. 352. Peyre P,Carboni C,Berthe L,et al. Reactivite electrochimique dans NaCl 0,05 M de l’acier 3l6L traite par impulsions laser de 3 ns. Rapport d’Activité LULI 1999, (Ecole Polytechnique, Palaiseau, France, 1999, B-9, pp. 65–67. 353. Ruschau JJ, John R,Thompson SR, et al. Fatigue crack growth rate characteristics of laser shock peened Ti-6Al-4V, Trans ASME. J Eng Mater Technol 1999; 121(3):321–329.

References

399

354. Chu JP, Rigsbee JM, Bana´s G, et al. Laser-shock processing effects on surface microstructure and mechanical properties of low carbon steel. Mater Sci Eng 1999;A260:260–268. 355. Brar NS, Hopkins A, Laber MW. Laser shock peening of titanium 6-4 alloy. In:AIP Conf Proc 505 (Shock compression of condensed matter 1999); 2000:435–438. 356. Fabbro R, Peyre P, Berthe L, et al. Physics and applications of laser shock processing of materials. In: Proc SPIE 3888 (Chen X, Fujioka T, Matsunawa A, eds. High-power lasers in manufacturing); 2000:155–164. 357. Obata M, Kubo T, Sano Y, et al. Development of stress improvement technique using pulse laser irradiation evaluation of stress improvement for type 304 stainless steel. – Zairyo J Soc Mat Sci Jpn 2000; 49(2):193–199. 358. Berthe L, Sollier A, Peyre P, et al. The generation of laser shock waves in a water-confinement regime with 50 ns and 150 ns XeCl excimer laser pulses. J Phys D 2000; 33:2142–2145. 359. Peyre P, Braham C, Ledion J, et al. Corrosion reactivity of laser-peened steel surfaces. J Mater Eng Perform 2000; 9(6):656–662. 360. Peyre P,Scherpereel X,Berthe L,et al. Surface modifications induced in 316L steel by laser peening and shot-peening. Influence on pitting corrosion resistance. Mater Sci Eng A Propert Microstruct Process 2000;A280(2):294–302. 361. Schmidt-Uhlig T, Karlitschek P,Yoda M, et al. Laser shock processing with 20 MW laser pulses delivered by optical fibers. Eur Phys J Appl Phys 2000; 9(3):235–238. 362. Schmidt-Uhlig T, Karlitschek P, Marowsky G, et al. New simplified coupling scheme for the delivery of 20 MW Nd:YAG laser pulses by large core optical fibers. Appl Phys B 2001; 72:83–186. 363. Tang Y, Zhang Y, Zhang H, et al. Effect of laser shock processing (LSP) on the fatigue resistance of an aluminum alloy. Trans ASME, J Eng Mater Technol 2000; 122:104–107. 364. Montross CS, Florea V, Brandt M, et al. Subsurface properties of laser peened 6061-T6 Al weldments. Surf Eng 2000; 16(2):116–121. 365. Clauer AH, Lahrman DF. Laser shock processing as a surface enhancement process. Key Eng Mater 2001; 197:121–144. 366. Fukumoto I, Ohmura E. Molecular dynamics analysis of laser shock phenomena due to Gaussian beam irradiation. Seimitsu Kogakkai-Shi 2001; 67(6):916–921. 367. Montross CS, Brandt M, Swain MV. Self-limiting hardness changes in laser peened 6061-T6 aluminium. Surf Eng 2001; 17(6):477–482. 368. Peyre P, Carboni C, Beranger G, et al. Influence of laser peening and high power diode laser melting on the pitting corrosion resistance of AISI 316L steel. In: ICALEO 2001 conference proceedings: proceedings of 20th international congress on applications of lasers & electro-optics, laser materials processing conference, laser microfabrication conference, October 15–18, 2001,Adam’s Mark Hotel, Jacksonville, Florida, USA: Laser Institute of America; 2001:43–52. 369. Kaspar J, Luft A. Microstructure formed in body centred cubic metals by laser shock processing. Surf Eng 2001; 17(5):379–383. 370. Yang J-M, Her YC, Han N, et al. Laser shock peening on fatigue behavior of 2024-T3 Al alloy with fastener holes and stopholes. Mater Sci Eng 2001;A298:296–299. 371. Zhang W,Yao YL. Modeling and simulation improvement in laser shock processing. In: 20th international conference on applications of lasers & electro-optics, laser materials processing conference, ICALEO, CD ROM Edition, 2001: 59–68. 372. Zhang W, Yao YL. Microscale laser shock processing – modeling, testing, and microstructure characterization. J Manufact Process 2001; 3(2):128–143. 373. Zhang YK, Hu CL, Cai L, et al. Mechanism of improvement on fatigue life of metal by laser-excited shock waves. Appl Phys A 2001; 72:113–116. 374. Zhang YK, Zhang XR,Wang XD, et al. Elastic properties modification in aluminum alloy induced by laser-shock processing. Mater Sci Eng 2001;A197:138–143. 375. Montross CS, Florea V, Swain MV. The influence of coatings on subsurface mechanical properties of laser peened 2011-T3 aluminum. J Mater Sci 2001; 36:1801–1807. 376. Yakimets I, Richard C, Béranger G, et al. Caractérisation physique et contribution à l’étude du com portement tribologique de l’acier de roulement 100Cr6 traité par choc laser. Matér Techn 2002; (3–4):3–10. 377. Yakimets I, Richard C, Beranger G, et al. Laser peening processing effect on mechanical and tribological properties of rolling steel 100Cr6. Wear 2004; 256(3–4):311–320. 378. Sano Y, Yoda M, Mukai N, et al. Residual stress improvement on inside wall of small-diameter pipe by underwater laser ablation. Trans Inst Electr Eng Jpn, Part C 2002; 122–C(1):156–162. 379. Zhang W, YaoYL. Micro scale laser shock processing of metallic components. Trans ASME, J Manufact Sci Eng 2002; 124:369–378. 380. Zhang YK, Zhang XR, Zhang SY, et al. Investigation of the effect of laser treatment on the longitudinal and transverse velocity of an aluminum alloy. J Appl Phys 2002; 91(9):5775–5781. 381. Montross CS, Wei T, Ye L, et al. Laser shock processing and its effects on microstructure and properties of metal alloys: a review. Int J Fatigue 2002; 24:1021–1036.

400

References

382. Peyre P, Carboni C,A. Sollier A, et al. New trends in laser shock waves physics and applications. In: Proc SPIE 4760 (Phipps CR, ed. High-power laser ablation IV ); 2002:654–666. 383. Rankin JE, Hill MR, Halpin J, et al. The effects of process variations on residual stress induced by laser peening. Mater Sci Forum 2002; 404–407:95–100. 384. Thorslund T, Kahlen F-J, Kar A. Temperatures, pressures and stresses during laser shock processing. Optics Lasers Eng 2003; 39:51–71. 385. Rodopoulos CA, Romero JS, Curtis AS, et al. Effect of controlled shot peening and laser shock peening on the fatigue performance of 2024–T351 aluminum alloy. J Mater Eng Perform 2003; 12(4):414–419. 386. Arif AFM. Numerical prediction of plastic deformation and residual stresses induced by laser shock processing. J Mater Process Technol 2003; 136:120–138. 387. Altenberger I, Stach EA, Liu G, et al. An in situ transmission electron microscope study of the thermal stability of near-surface microstructures induced by deep rolling and laser-shock peening. Scripta Mater 2003; 48:1593–1598. 388. Altenberger I, Nalla RK, Noster U, et al.Verhalten laserschockverfestigter und festgewalzter Randschichten der TiLegierungTi-6Al-4V bei schwingender Beanspruchung unter erhöhtenTemperaturen. MaterialwissWerkstofftechn 2003; 34(6):529–541. 389. Yilbas BS, Shuja SZ,Arif A, et al. Laser-shock processing of steel. J Mater Process Technol 2003; 135:6–17. 390. Ding K,Ye L. Three-dimensional dynamic finite element analysis of multiple laser shock peening processes. Surf Eng 2003; 19(5):351–358. 391. Wang H, Sun X, Li X. Laser shock processing of an austenitic stainlesss steel and a nickel-base superalloy. J Mater Sci Technol 2003; 19(5):402–404. 392. Hill MR, Dewald AT, Rankin JE, et al. The role of residual stress measurement in the development of laser peening. J Neutron Res 2003; 11(4):195–200. 393. Hill MR, DeWald AT, Demma AG, et al. Laser peening technology. Adv Mater Process 2003; 161(8):65–67. 394. Evans AD, King A, Pirling T, et al. Near surface residual stress determination of laser shock peening by neutron diffraction. J Neutron Res 2003; 11(4):229–233. 395. Rankin JE, Hill MR. Measurement of thickness-average residual stress near the edge of a thin laser peened strip. Trans ASME, J Eng Mater Technol 2003; 125:283–293. 396. Shaniavski AA,Artamonov MA. Fractal dimensions for fatigue fracture surfaces performed on micro- and meso-scale levels. Int J Fracture 2004; 128(1–4):309–314. 397. Cherepanov GP, Balankin AS, Ivanova VS. Fractal fracture mechanics – a review. Eng Fracture Mech 1995; 51(6):997–1033. 398. Hill MR,DeWald AT,Rankin JE,et al. Measurement of laser peening residual stresses. Materi SciTechnol 2005; 21:3–9. 399. Yilbas BS,Arif AFM, Shuja SZ, et al. Investigation into laser shock processing. J Mater Eng Perform 2004; 13(1):47–54. 400. Yilbas BS, Gondal MA, Arif AMF, et al. Laser shock processing of Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Proc Instn Mech Engrs Part B: J. Eng Manufact 2004; 218:473–482. 401. Zhang W,Yao YL, Noyan IC. Microscale laser shock peening of thin films, Part 2: High spatial resolution material characterization. Trans ASME, J Manufact Sci Eng 2004; 126:18–24. 402. Chen H, Kysar JW,Yao YL. Characterization of plastic deformation induced by microscale laser shock peening. Trans ASME J Appl Mech 2004; 71(5):713–723. 403. Chen H,Yao YL, Kysar JW. Spatially resolved characterization of residual stress induced by micro scale laser shock peening. Trans ASME, J Manufact Sci Eng 2004; 126:226–236. 404. Rubio-González C, Ocaña JL, Gomez-Rosas G, et al. Effect of laser shock processing on fatigue crack growth and fracture toughness of 6061-T6 aluminum alloy. Mater Sci Eng A 2004; 386:291–295. 405. Yang JC, Zhou JZ, ZhangYK, et al. Investigation on performance of QT700-2 material by laser peening. Mater Sci Forum 2004; 471–472:43–46. 406. Nikitin I, Scholtes B, Maier HJ, et al. High temperature fatigue behavior and residual stress stability of laser-shock peened and deep rolled austenitic steel AISI 304. Scripta Mater 2004; 50:1345–1350. 407. Nikitin I, Altenberger I, Scholtes B. Residual stress state and cyclic deformation behaviour of deep rolled and laser-shock peened AISI 304 stainless steel at elevated temperatures. Mater Sci Forum 2005; 490–491:376–383. 408. Shepard MJ. Laser shock processing induced residual compression: impact on predicted crack growth threshold performance. J Mater Eng Perform 2005; 14(4):495–502. 409. Mukai N, SanoY, Yoda M, et al. Preventive maintenance against stress corrosion cracking in nuclear power reactors by laser peening – remote delivery of high-power pulsed laser. – Reza-kenkyu Rev Laser Eng 2005; 33(7):444–451. 410. Aldajah SH,Ajayi OO, Fenske GR, et al. Effect of laser surface modifications on tribological performance of 1080 carbon steel. Trans ASME, J Tribol 2005; 127:596–604. 411. Altenberger I, Alternative mechanical surface treatments for fatigue strength enhancement. Mater Sci Forum 2005; 490–491:328–333.

References

401

412. King A, Evans AD, Withers PJ, et al. The effect of fatigue on residual peening stresses in aerospace components. Mater Sci Forum 2005; 490–491:340–345. 413. Schneider MS, Kad B, Kalantar DH, et al. Laser shock compression of copper and copper-aluminum alloys. Int J Impact Eng 2005; 32:473–507. 414. Cheng GJ, Shehadeh MA. Dislocation behavior in silicon crystal induced by laser shock peening: a multiscale simulation approach. Scripta Mater 2005; 53:1013–1018. 415. Chen H,Yao YL, Kysar JW, et al. Fourier analysis of X-ray micro-diffraction profiles to characterize laser shock peened metals. Int J Solids Struct 2005; 42:3471–3485. 416. Gomez-Rosas G, Rubio-Gonzalez C, Ocaña JL, et al. High level compressive residual stresses produced in aluminum alloys by laser shock processing. Appl Surf Sci 2005; 252:883–887. 417. Morales M, Molpeceres C, Porro JA, et al. Numerical simulation of laser shock processing of metal alloys. In: CLEO/Europe, conference on lasers and electro-optics Europe, 2005, 12–17 June 2005. 2005:649. 418. Bugayev AA, Gupta MC, Orr J, et al. Laser shot peening of Inconel 600 and surface morphology characterization. Mater Res Soc Symp Proc 2005; 850:123–127. 419. Bugayev AA, Gupta MC, Payne R. Laser processing of inconel 600 and surface structure. Optics Lasers Eng 2006; 44(2):102–111. 420. Korsunsky AM. On the modelling of residual stresses due to surface peening using eigenstrain distributions. J Strain Anal Eng Design 2005; 40(8):817–824. 421. Korsunsky AM. Residual elastic strain due to laser shock peening: modelling by eigenstrain distribution. J. Strain Anal Eng Design 2006; 41(3):195–204. 422. Sano Y, Obata M, Yamamoto T. Residual stress improvement of weldment by laser peening. Welding Int 2006; 20(8):598–601. 423. El-Dasher BS, Zaleski TM, Gray JJ, et al. Surface deformation behavior of beta solution treated and overaged Ti-6AI-4V during laser shock processing. J Appl Phys 2006; 99:103506. 424. Wu B, Shin YC. Laser pulse transmission through the water breakdown plasma in laser shock peening. Appl Phys Lett 2006; 88:041116. 425. Sánchez-Santana U, Rubio-González C, Gomez-Rosas G, et al. Wear and friction of 6061-T6 aluminum alloy treated by laser shock processing. Wear 2006; 260:847–854. 426. Hu Y, Yao Z, Hu J. 3-D FEM simulation of laser shock processing. Surf Coat Technol 2006; 201:1426–1435. 427. King A, Steuwer A,Woodward C, et al. Effects of fatigue and fretting on residual stresses introduced by laser shock peening. Mater Sci Eng A 2006; 435–436(5):12–18. 428. Ding K, Ye L. Simulation of multiple laser shock peening of a 35CD4 steel alloy. J Mater Process Technol 2006; 178:162–169. 429. Rubio-González C, Gomez-Rosas G, Ocaña JL, et al. Effect of an absorbent overlay on the residual stress field induced by laser shock processing on aluminum samples. Appl Surf Sci 2006; 252:6201–6205. 430. Korsunsky AM, Liu J, Laundy D, et al. Residual elastic strain due to laser shock peening: synchrotron diffraction measurement. J Strain Anal 2006; 41(2):113–120. 431. Ageev VA. Study of the light erosion of metals in liquids. Zh Prikl Spektrosk 1975; 23(1):42–46. 432. Dubrujeaud B, Jeandin M. Cladding by laser shock processing. J Mater Sci Lett 1994; 13(11):773–775. 433. Zhang Y, Zhou M, Cai L, et al. A study on the novel technique of laser shocking fine partial forming of metal sheet. In: Proc SPIE 4601 (Tien NC, Huang Q-A, eds. Micromachining and microfabrication process technology and devices); 2001:210–215. 434. Zhou JZ,Yang JC, Zhang YK, et al. A study on super-speed forming of metal sheet by laser shock waves. J Mater Process Technol 2002; 129:241–244. 435. Zhou M, ZhangY, Cai L. Laser shock forming on coated metal sheets characterized by ultrahigh-strain-rate plastic deformation. J Appl Phys 2002; 91(8):5501–5503. 436. Zhou M, Zhang YK, Cai L. Ultrahigh-strain-rate plastic deformation of a stainless-steel sheet with TiN coatings driven by laser shock waves. Appl Phys A 2003; 77:549–554. 437. Chen RF, Hua YQ, Yang JC, et al. Research on thickness of the free confinement medium in laser shock processing. Mater Sci Forum 2004; 471–472:811–815. 438. Zhou JZ, Zhang YK, Zuo DW, et al. Numerical simulation of sheet deforming caused by laser shocking. Mater Sci Forum 2004; 471–472:860–864. 439. Zhou JZ, Zhang YK, Zhang XQ, et al. The mechanism and experimental study on laser peen forming of sheet metal. Key Eng Mater 2006; 315–316:607–611. 440. Yamada K,Tobisawa S. SiC crystals derived from β-SiC Powder using a conically converging shock-wave technique. J Am Ceram Soc 1989; 72(11):2211–2214. 441. Nishida M, Chiba A, Imamura K, et al. Microstructures and mechanical properties of explosively consolidated Ti powder with a pressure medium. Metallurg Trans A 1989; 20A:2831–2839.

402

References

442. Sawai S, Kondo K-I. Essential factors for shock compaction of diamond composites. J Am Ceram Soc 1990; 73(8):2428–2434. 443. Zagouri D, Romain J-P, Dubrujeaud B, et al. Laser shock compaction of porous materials. J Phys IV 1991; 1 (C7):47–50. 444. Zagouri D, Romain J-P, Dubrujeaud B, et al. Densification superficielle de matériaux poreux par choc laser. J Phys IV 1991; 1(C3):495–502. 445. Dubrujeaud B,Vardavoulias M, Jeandin M, et al. Laser shock processing for superficial densification of P/M materials. In: Advances in powder metallurgy & particulate materials, vol. 4. Princeton, NJ: Metal Powder Industries Federation, MPIF; 1992:67–76. 446. Dubrujeaud B,Vardavoulias M, Jeandin M. Laser shock surface densification of a sintered ferrous alloy. Lasers Eng 1994; 3:29–42. 447. Dubrujeaud B,Vardavoulias M, Jeandin M. Dry sliding wear behaviour of a P/M ferrous alloy superficially densified by laser shock processing. Surf Coat Technol 1994; 67(1–2):125–132. 448. Schnick T, Tondu S, Peyre P, et al. Laser shock processing of Al-SiC composite coatings. JThermal SprayTechnol 1999; 8(2):296–300. 449. Podlesak H, Schnick T, Pawlowski L, et al. Microscopie study of Al-SiC particulate composites processed by laser shocks. Surf Coat Technol 2000; 124:32–38. 450. de Rességuier T, Romain JP. Investigation of the response of a porous steel to laser driven shocks. ShockWaves 2001; 11:125–132. 451. Benson DJ, Do I, Meyers MA. Computational modeling of the shock compression of powders. AIP Conf Proc 620 (Furnish MD, Thadhani NN, Horie Y, eds. Shock compression of condensed matter – 2001); Am Inst Phys 2002: 1087–1092. 452. Roth S, Geiger M. Novel technique for high-quality microstructuring with excimer lasers. In: Proc SPIE 3933 (Helvajian VH, Sugioka K, Gower MC, et al., eds. Laser applications in microelectronic and optoelectronic manufacturing); 2000:338–346. 453. Lizotte T. Cleaning laser debris from TAB circuits. Removal of UV YAG or excimer laer debris after microvia drilling. Adv Packag 2002; 11(1):38–40. 454. Brook MR, Shafeev GA. Laser-assisted engraving of HgCdTe under a liquid layer. Appl Surf Sci 1992; 54:336–340. 455. Morita N, Ishida S, Fujimori Y, et al. Pulsed laser processing of ceramics in water. Appl Phys Lett 1988; 52(23):1965–1966. 456. Shafeev GA, Obraztsova ED, Pimenov SM. Laser-assisted etching of diamonds in air and in liquid media. Appl Phys A 1997; 65(1):29–32. 457. Shafeev GA, Obraztsova ED, Pimenov SM. Laser-assisted etching of diamonds in air and in liquid media. Mater Sci Eng B 1997; 46(1–3):129–132. 458. Shafeev GA. Laser-assisted etching of diamonds in air and in liquid media. In: Proc SPIE 3484 (KonovVI,Ralchenko VG, eds. Lasers in synthesis, characterization, and processing of diamond); 1998:149–157. 459. Voronov VV, Dolgaev SI, Lyalin AA, et al. Laser-assisted etching of the surface of polycrystalline silicon carbide by copper-vapor-laser radiation. Quantum Electron 1996; 26(7):621–625. 460. Dolgaev SI, Lyalin AA, Shafeev GA, et al. Fast etching and metallization of SiC ceramics with copper-vapor-laser radiation. Appl Phys A 1996; 63(1):75–79. 461. Dolgaev SI,VoronovVV, Shafeev GA, et al. Laser-induced fast etching and metallization of SiC ceramics. Appl Surf Sci 1997; 109/110:559–562. 462. Misawa H, Koshioka M, Sasaki K, et al. Laser trapping, spectroscopy, and ablation of a single latex particle in water. Chem Lett 1990; 8:1479–1482. 463. Ramanathan D, Molian PA. Laser micromachining using liquid optics. Appl Phys Lett 2001; 78(11):1484–1486. 464. [Anonymous]. Process for laser beam processing for the laser cutting or laser welding of workpieces comprises coupling a laser beam in a fluid containing a molten salt heated to a predetermined temperature. Patent DE10238339, 2004. 465. Datta M, Romankiw LT, Vigliotti DR, et al. Laser etching of metals in neutral salt solutions. Appl Phys Lett 1987; 51(24):2040–2042. 466. Li L, Achara C. Chemical assisted laser machining for the minimisation of recast and heat affected zone. Annals CIRP 2004; 53(1):175–178. 467. Kim D, Lee H. Enhanced ablation and photoacoustic excitation in near-threshold laser ablation of liquid-coated surfaces. J Appl Phys 2001; 89(10):5703–5706. 468. Lapczyna M, Stuke M. Direct fabrication of micro mesas by VUV laser ablation of polymers: PMMA (polymethylmethacrylate). Appl Phys A 1998; 66:473–475. 469. Geiger M, Becker W, Rebhan T, et al. Increase of efficiency for the XeCl excimer laser ablation of ceramics. Appl Surf Sci 1996; 96–98:309–315.

References

403

470. Sakka T, Iwanaga S, Ogata YH, et al. Laser ablation at solid–liquid interfaces: an approach from optical emission spectra. J Chem Phys 2000; 112(19):8645–8653. 471. Shafeev GA, Simakin AV. Spatially confined laser-induced damage of Si under a liquid layer. Appl Phys A 1992; 54:311–316. 472. Dupont A, Caminat P, Bournot P. Enhancement of material ablation using 248, 308, 532, 1064 nm laser pulse with a water film on the treated surface. J Appl Phys 1995; 78(3):2022–2028. 473. Kim D, Oh B, Lee H. Effect of liquid film on near-threshold laser ablation of a solid surface. Appl Surf Sci 2004; 222:138–147. 474. Shafeev GA, Simahkin AV. Laser-assisted etching-like damage of Si under a liquid layer. Laser Phys 1994; 4(3):631–634. 475. Simakin AV, Shafeev GA. Laser-assisted etching-like damage of SiC. Appl Surf Sci 1995; 86:422–427. 476. Xia Y, Wang Q, Mei L, et al. Laser ablation of Si, Ge, ZrO2 and Cu in air. J Phys D 1991; 24:1933–1941. 477. Isselin J-C, Alloncle A-P, Autric M. On laser induced single bubble near a solid boundary: contribution to the understanding of erosion phenomena. J Appl Phys 1998; 84(10):5766–5771. 478. Hidai K, Tokura H. Hydrothermal reaction assisted laser processing for ceramics. J Jpn Soc Precision Eng 2001; 67:1448–1452. 479. Dolgaev SL, Karasev ME, Kulevskii LA, et al. Disolution in a supercritical liquid as a mechanism of laser ablation of sapphire. Quant Electron 2001; 31(7):593–596. 480. Ageev VA, Bokhonov AF, Zhukovskii VV, et al. J Appl Spectroscopy 1997; 64(5):683–688. 481. Zweig AD. Shock waves generated by confined XeCl excimer laser ablation of polyimide. Appl Phys B 1992; 54:76–84. 482. Zhu S, Lu YF, Hong MH, et al. Laser ablation of solid substrates in water and in ambient air. J Appl Phys 2001; 89(4):2400–2403. 483. Daminelli G, Krüger J, Kautek W. Femtosecond laser interaction with silicon under water confinement. Thin Solid Films 2004; 467:334–341. 484. Ohara J, Nagakubo M, Kawahara N, et al. High aspect ratio etching by infrared laser induced micro bubbles. In: Proceedings of the IEEE tenth annual international workshop on micro electro mechanical systems, New York: IEEE; 1997:175–179. 485. Geiger M, Roth S, BeckerW. Microstructuring and surface modification by excimer laser machining under thin liquid films. In: Proc SPIE 3404 (PustovoyVI, ed. ALT’97 International conference on laser surface processing); 1998:200–208. 486. Camp,T.R. Water and its impurities. New York: Reinhold; 1963. 487. Kruusing A, Petrêtis Br, Makarova O. Micromachining of magnetic materials. Sensor Actuator A 1999; 74(1–3):45–51. 488. Kruusing A, Uusimäki M. Rapid prototyping of silicon structures by aid of laser and abrasive-jet machining. In: Proc SPIE 3680 (Courtois B, Crary SB, Ehrfeld W, et al., eds. Design, test, and microfabrication of MEMS and MOEMS); part, 2, 1999:870–878. 489. Miyazawa H, Murakawa M. Laser processing of diamonds and sintered c-BN in liquid. New Diamond Frontier Carbon Technol 2000; 10(3):137–150. 490. Jee Y, Becker MF, Walser RM. Laser-induced damage on single-crystal metal surfaces. J Opt Soc Am B 1988; 5:648–659. 491. Choo KL, Ogawa Y, Kanbargi G, et al. Micromachining of silicon by short-pulse laser ablation in air and under water. Mater Sci Eng A 2004; 372:145–162. 492. Iwabuchi A, Choo C,Tanaka K. Titania nanoparticles prepared with pulsed laser ablation of rutile single crystals in water. J Phys Chem B 2004; 108:10863–10871. 493. Miyazawa H, Miyake S, Watanabe S, et al. Laser-assisted thermochemical processing of diamond. Appl Phys Lett 1994; 64(3):387–389. 494. LuYF,Ye KD. Application of laser microteching in formation of air-bearing surface for magnetic head sliders. Mat Res Soc Symp Proc 1996; 397:317–322. 495. Tsuji T, Kakita T,Tsuji M. Preparation of nano-size particles of silver with femtosecond laser ablation in water. Appl Surf Sci 2003; 206:314–320. 496. Kabashin AV, Meunier M. Synthesis of colloidal nanoparticles during femtosecond laser ablation of gold in water. J Appl Phys 2003; 94:7941–7943. 497. Bonse J, Baudach S, Kruger J, et al. Femtosecond laser ablation of silicon – modification thresholds and morphology. Appl Phys A: Mater Sci Process 2002; 74(1):19–25. 498. Katayama K, Yonekubo H,SawadaT. Formation of ring patterns surrounded by ripples by single-shot laser irradiation with ultrashort pulse width at the solid/liquid interface. Appl Phys Lett 2003; 82(24):4244–4246. 499. Shen YR. The principles of nonlinear optics. New York:Wiley-Interscience; 1984. 500. Lallemand P, Bloembergen N. Self-focusing of laser beams and stimulated Raman gain in liquids. Phys Rev Lett 1965; 15:1010–1012.

404

References

501. Sacchi CA. Self-focusing and self-trapping of intense laser beams. In: Sona A, ed. Laser appl NewYork: Gordon and Breach; 1976:561–578. 502. Arzuov MI, Dzhumabekov ZhI, Konov VI, et al. Underwater laser drilling of metals. Sov Techn Phys Lett 1987; 13(9):440–441; Original: Pis’ma Zh Tekhn Fiz 1987; 13(17–18):1055–1058. 503. Hussey BW, Haba B, Gupta A. Role of bubbles in laser-assisted wet etching. Appl Phys Lett 1991; 58(24):2851–2853. 504. Leung WP, Tam AC. Noncontact monitoring of laser ablation using a miniature piezoelectric probe to detect photoacoustic pulses in air. Appl Phys Lett 1992; 60(1):23–25. 505. von Gutfeld RJ, Sheppard KG. Electrochemical microfabrication by laser-enhanced photothermal processes. IBM J Res Develop 1998, 42(5):639–652. 506. Li J,Ananthasuresh GK. A quality study on the excimer laser micromachining of electro-thermal-compliant micro devices. J Micromech Microeng 2001; 11:38–47. 507. Zhu S, Lu YF, Hong MH. Laser ablation of solid substrates in a water-confined environment, Appl Phys Lett 2001; 79(9):1396–1398. 508. Sun J, Longtin JP. Ultrafast laser micromachining with a liquid film. In: 20th International Congress on ICALEO 2001. Applications of Lasers and Electro Optics. Congress Proceedings. Laser Materials Processing Conference. Laser Microfabrication Conference, Orlando: Laser Institute America, 2001:1571–1580. 509. Haefliger D, Stemmer A. Structuring of aluminum films by laser-induced local oxidation in water. Appl Phys A 2002; 74:115–118. 510. Koh ML, Hong MH, Zhu S, et al. Steam-assisted laser ablation of metal substrate. In: Proc SPIE 4426 (Miyamoto I, Lu YF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Second international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2002:47–50. 511. Hong MH, Koh ML, Zhu S, et al. Steam-assisted laser ablation and its signal diagnostics. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 197–198:911–914. 512. Chen X,Xu R,Shen Z,et al. Photodisruption effects of laser-matter interaction in liquids. In: Proc SPIE 5254 (Luo Q, TuchinVV,Gu M,et al., eds.Third international conference on photonics and imaging in biology and medicine); 2003:290–295. 513. Lu J, Xu RQ, Chen X, et al. Mechanisms of laser drilling of metal plates underwater. J Appl Phys 2004; 95(8):3890–3894. 514. Ito S, Ikegami H, Kawano K, et al. Novel laser ablation patterning with organic film in running water. In: Proc SPIE 5039 (Fedynyshyn TH, ed. Advances in resist technology and processing XX ); 2003:1220–1228. 515. Chen X, Xu R-Q, Shen Z-H, et al. Mechanisms of laser processing in water and air. Nanjing-Ligong-Daxuexuebao/Ziran-kexue-ban (J Nanjing Univ Sci Technol) 2004; 28(3):248–252. 516. Kazakevich PV, Simakin AV, Shafeev GA. Formation of periodic structures upon laser ablation of metal targets in liquids. Quantum Electron 2005; 35(9):831–834. 517. Ren J, Kelly M, Hesselink L. Laser ablation of silicon in water with nanosecond and femtosecond pulses. Optics Lett 2005; 30(13):1740–1742. 518. Jia T, Baba M, Huang M, et al. Femtosecond laser-induced ZnSe nanowires on the surface of ZnSe wafer in water. Solid State Commun 2007; 141(11):635–638. 519. Matsumoto O, Sugihara M, Miya K. Underwater cutting of reactor core internals by CO laser using local-dry-zone creating nozzle. J Nucl Sci Technol 1992; 29(11):1074–1079. 520. Alfille JP, Pilot G, de Prunelé D. New pulsedYAG laser performances in cutting thick metallic materials for nuclear applications. In: Proc SPIE 2789 (Sayegh G, Osborne MR, eds. High-power lasers: applications and emerging applications); 1996:134–144. 521. Alfille JP, Pilot G. Thick cutting of metallic material for nuclear dismantling applications with pulsed YAG laser. In: Proceedings of ICON 5: 5th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, 26–30 May 1997. Nice, France; 1997:1–12. 522. Haferkamp H, Bach F-W,Vinke T, et al. Laserstrahlschneiden mit Wasserkühlung. Schweißen und Schneiden 1990; 42(12):631–633. 523. Richerzhagen B, Jemelin V,Vulliamy J-M. Hochgeschwindigkeitsschneiden von Folien mit wasserstrahlgeführtem Laser (Microjet). Laser Opto 1999; 31(2): 36–39. 524. Richerzhagen B. Chip singulation process with a water jet-guided laser. Solid State Technol 2001; 44(4):S25–S28. 525. Gangemi D. Water jet slitter with laser finish and method. Patent US5068513, 1991. 526. Owaki K, Uehara M, Yamaoka H, et al. Underwater laser water jet composite cutting device. Patent JP11000786, 1999. 527. Owaki K, Uehara M,Yamaoka H, et al. Compound cutting device of pressure under water laser and water jet. Patent JP11000787, 1999. 528. Mori N, Furuya K, Ando N, et al. Method and device for performing composite working of laser and water jet. Patent JP2001062652, 2001. 529. Yoshida K, Kukino A, Goto M, et al. Method for machining hard material and hard material component machined thereby. Patent JP2003062683, 2003. 530. Ibe H, Morishita S, Anai K, et al. Method for cutting felt, apparatus therefore and felt for bearing device. Patent JP2002146669, 2002.

References

405

531. Mibu I, Mogaki K, Maeda K. Method and device for cutting by laser beam, and cutting method for graphite block when demolishing waste nuclear reactor. Patent JP2000317659, 2000. 532. Owaki K, Uehara M,Tsuchiya K, et al. Laser water jet composite cutting device. Patent JP11000780, 1999. 533. Owaki K, Uehara M,Tsuchiya K, et al. Laser-water jet composite cutting device. Patent JP11000841, 1999. 534. Schüning T, Rothe R. Laser cutting supported by wafer jet – development of a nozzle concept for high momentum transfer. In: Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics Europe. 2000. Nice, France. 10–15 September 2000. Conference Digest. 2000:213. 535. Owaki K, Uehara M,Yamaoka H, et al. Laser water jet composite cutting method and its device. Patent JP11000774, 1999. 536. Iwata N, Fujiwara K, Composite machine of water jet/laser beam. Patent JP4053699, 1992. 537. Bach F-W, Haferkamp H,Vinke T, et al. Laserstrahlschneiden unter Wasser-Verfahren,Anwendung, Entwicklung. In: 2. Europäische Konferenz über Laser-Materialbearbeitung ECLAT ’88 – 2nd European Conference on Laser Treatment of Materials, Bad Nauheim, 13–14 October 1988. DeutscheVerband für Schweißtechnik (DVS); 1988:24–27. 538. Haferkamp H, Bach F-W, Wendorff H-P, et al. Heißes Verfahren abgekühlt. Maschienenmarkt (Würzburg) 1989; 95(35):92–98. 539. Alfille JP, Schildknecht J, Ramaswami VS. Decoupe laser sous eau de structures metalliques. In: Colloque international sur le soudage et la fusion par faisceaux d’electrons et laser, 14–18 juin 1993, La Baule, France. Commissariat à l’énergie atomique; 1993:179–186. 540. Black I, Chua KL. Laser cutting of thick ceramic tile. Opt Laser Technol 1997; 29(4):193–205. 541. LiY, Liu J, Li W. Study of CO2 laser grooving under water on the outside of a cylinder casing. Chinese J Lasers 1999; A26(5):455–460. 542. Colladon D. Sur les réflexions d’un rayon de lumière à l’intérieur d’une veine liquide parabolique. Comptes Rendus 1842; 15:800–802. 543. Kshatriya A. Water jet as a laser light pipe. Am J Phys 1976; 44(6):604. 544. von Gutfeld RJ, Gelchinski MH, Romankiw LT, et al. Laser-enhanced jet plating: a method of high-speed maskless patterning. Appl Phys Lett 1983; 43(9):876–879. 545. Richerzhagen B. Entwicklung und Konstruktion eines Systems zur Übertragung von Laserenergie für die Laserzahnbehandlung. Thesis work, Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland, 1994. 546. Messal T, Merdan K, Shapovalov V, et al. System combining laser cutter and cleaner fluid jet. Patent WO2004094096, 2004. 547. Yano S. Method for dicing semiconductor wafer. Patent JP2003173988, 2003. 548. Owaki K, Uehara M,Tsuchiya K, et al. Laser water jet composite cutting device. Patent JP11000780, 1999. 549. Nishiwaki Y. Laser microjet working apparatus. Patent JP2004122173, 2004. 550. Mibu I, Mogaki, Maeda K. Method and device for cutting by laser beam and method for cutting graphite block in the case of dismantling waste nuclear reactor. Patent JP2000317661, 2000. 551. Battaglia J,MaiTA. Perrottet D,et al.Waterjet as a multimode waveguide – theoretical and experimental investigation of modal noise and beam propagation in material processing with lasermicrojet. In: Proceedings of the International Congress on Applications of Lasers and Electro-Optics, November 2006. (ICALEO 2006): 2006:90–94. 552. Couty P, Spiegel Á,Vágó N, et al. Laser-induced break-up of water jet waveguide. Exp Fluids 2004; 36:919–927. 553. Mayor L,Wagner F. New micromachining possibilities with the UV Microjet®. Lambda Highlights 2003; (63):3–5. 554. Carey,Van P. Liquid–vapor phase-change phenomena: an introduction to the thermophysics of vaporization and condensation processes in heat transfer equipment/Van P. Carey. Taylor and Francis,Washington, D.C.: Hemisphere; 1992. 555. Spiegel Á,Vágó N,Wagner FR. High efficiency Raman scattering in micrometer-sized water jets. Optical Eng 2004; 43(2):450–454. 556. Richerzhagen B. Cool heat that cuts. Europ Semicond 2001, (July):93–94. 557. Richerzhagen B, Kutsuna M, Okada H, et al. Waterjet-guided laser processing. In: Proc SPIE 4830 (Miyamoto I, Kobayashi KF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Third international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2003:91–94. 558. Alsered M. En ny metod för sågning av tunna substrat. Elektronik i Norden 2001; (18):20. 559. SYNAVA SA. Online. Available: http://www.synova.ch/pub_articles.php 560. von Gutfeld RJ,Vigliotti DR. High-speed electroplating of copper using the laser-jet technique. Appl Phys Lett 1985; 46(10):1003–1005. 561. Wagner FR, Spiegel A,Vago N, et al. Water-jet guided laser: possibilities and potential for singulation of electronic packages. In: Proc SPIE 4637 (Sugioka K, Gower MC, Haglund RF Jr, et al., eds. Photon processing in microelectronics and photonics); 2002:479–486. 562. Wagner FR, Boillat C, Buchilly J-M, et al. High-speed cutting of thin materials with a Q-switched laser in a water-jet versus conventional laser cutting with a free running laser. In: Proc SPIE 4977 (Pique A, Sugioka K, Herman PR, et al., eds. Photon processing in microelectronics and photonics II ); 2003:70–74. 563. Vágó N, Spiegel Á, Couty P, et al. New technique for high-speed microjet breakup analysis. Exp Fluids 2003; 35:303–309.

406

References

564. Uehara M, Owaki K, Nagasawa Y. Method for cutting off piping. Patent JP11058049, 1999. 565. Nielsen SE. Method and application of laser drilling. Patent WO8903274, 1989. 566. Warner BE, Rockhold CT. Method and apparatus for laser machining workpieces with liquid backing. Patent WO0069594, 2000. 567. Kihara N. Cutting method by laser beam. Patent JP2052188, 1990. 568. Onodera H. Laser beam machining method and equipment therefore. Patent JP8132270, 1996. 569. Kobayashi T, Miyamoto K. Method of laser beam machining and device for laser beam machining. Patent JP2002018586, 2002. 570. Mashino N. Laser beam machining method. Patent JP2004042082, 2004. 571. Leonov RK, Efimov VV, Zakharov SI, et al. Irradiation of a glass-liquid interface. Sov Phys Techn Phys 1975; 20(1):77–79; Original: Zh Tekhn Fiz 1975; 45(1):130–133. 572. Davidson GP, Emmony DC. Laser-induced damage in zinc selenide at a ZnSe/water interface. Philos Mag A 1980; 42(2):249–255. 573. Dolgaev SI, Lyalin AA, Simakin AV, et al. Fast etching of sapphire by visible range quasi-cw laser radiation. Appl Surf Sci 1996; 96–98:491–495. 574. Wang J, Niino H, Yabe A. Micromachining of transparent materials with super-heated liquid generated by multiphotonic absorption of organic molecule. Appl Surf Sci 2000; 154–155:571–576. 575. KawaguchiY, Sato T, Narazaki A, et al. Etching a micro-trench with a maximum aspect ratio of 60 on silica glass by laser-induced backside wet etching (LIBWE). Jpn J Appl Phys 2005; 44:L176–L178. 576. Thornell G, Spohr R, Jan vanVeldhuizen E, et al. Micromachining by ion track lithography. Sensor Actuator A Physical 1999;A73(1–2):176–183. 577. Varel H, Ashkenasi D, Rosenfeld A, et al. Micromachining of quartz with ultrashort laser pulses. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 1997; 65(4–5):367–373. 578. Schafer D, Ihlemann J, Marowsky G, et al. F2 -laser ablation patterning of dielectric layers. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 2001;A72(3):377–379. 579. Wang J, Niino H,Yabe A. One-step fabrication of optical materials by laser ablation of organic liquid. In: Summaries of papers presented at the conference on lasers and electro-optics, 1999. CLEO ’99, 23–28 May 1999, Baltimore, MD, USA: 1999:513. 580. Zhang J, Sugioka K,Wada S, et al. Dual-beam ablation of fused quartz using 266 nm andVUV lasers with different delay-times. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 1997;A64(5):477–481. 581. Guzzo PL, Shinohara AH, Raslan AA. A comparative study on ultrasonic machining of hard and brittle materials. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 2004; 26(1):56–61. 582. Herman PR, Marjoribanks RS, Oettl A, et al. Laser shaping of photonic materials: deep-ultraviolet and ultrafast lasers. Appl Surf Sci 2000; 154–155:577–586. 583. Lenzner M, Krausz F, Krüger J, et al. Photoablation with sub-10 fs laser pulses. Appl Surf Sci 2000; 154–155: 11–16. 584. Hwang DJ, ChoiTY, Grigoropoulos CP. Liquid-assisted femtosecond laser drilling of straight and three-dimensional microchannels in glass. Appl Phys A 2004; 79:605–612. 585. Zimmer K, Böhme R, Ruthe D, et al. Backside laser etching of fused silica using liquid gallium. Appl Phys A 2006; 84:455–458. 586. Böhme R, Zimmer K. Influence of the kind of absorbing liquid on fundamentals and application at laser-induced backside wet etching. In: Proc 2005 conference on lasers and electro-optics europe (CLEO/Europe 2005); 12–17 June 2005. IEEE; 2005:284. 587. Kopitkovas G, Lippert T, David C, et al. Laser micromachining of optical devices. In: Proc SPIE 5662 (Miyamoto I, Helvajian H, Itoh K, et al., eds. Fifth international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2004:515–525. 588. Böhme R, Zimmer K. Effects of halogenated organic solvents on laser-induced backside wet etching of fused silica. Appl Phys A 2006; 83:9–12. 589. Paraskevopoulos G, Singleton DL, Irwin RS, et al. Time-resolved reflectivity as a probe of the dynamics of laser ablation of organic polymers. J Appl Phys 1991; 70(4):1938–1946. 590. Cheng J-Y, Yen M-H, Wei C-W, et al. Crack-free direct-writing on glass using a low-power UV laser in the manufacture of a microfluidic chip. J Micromech Microeng 2005; 15:1147–1156. 591. Cheng J-Y,Yen M-H,Young T.-H. Crack-free micromachining on glass using an economic Q-switched 532 nm laser. J Micromech Microeng 2006; 16:2420–2424. 592. Böhme R, Zimmer K. Low roughness laser etching of fused silica using an adsorbed layer. Appl Surf Sci 2004; 239(1):109–116. 593. Böhme R, Spemann D, Zimmer K. Surface characterization of backside-etched transparent dielectrics. Thin Solid Films 2004; 453–454:127–132. 594. Dolgaev SI, Lyalin AA, Simakin AV, et al. Etching of sapphire assisted by copper-vapor laser radiation. Quantum Electron 1996; 26(1):65–68.

References

407

595. Dolgaev SI, Lyalin AA, Simakin AV, et al. Fast etching and metallization of via-holes in sapphire with the help of radiation by a copper vapor laser. Appl Surf Sci 1997; 109/110:201–205. 596. Murahara M. Photo-chemical polishing of fused silica optics by using ArF excimer laser. In: Proc SPIE 4347 (Exarhos GJ, Guenther AH, Kozlowski MR, et al., eds. Laser-induced damage in optical materials: 2000); 2001: 547–552. 597. Böhme R, Pissadakis S, Ehrhardt M, et al. Ultra-short laser processing of transparent material at the interface to liquid. J Phys. D:Appl Phys 2006; 39:1398–1404. 598. Ding X,Yasui Y, Kawaguchi Y, et al. Laser-induced back-side wet etching of fused silica with an aqueous solution containing organic molecules. Appl Phys A 2002; 75:437–440. 599. Wang J, Niino H,Yabe A. Etching of transparent materials by laser ablation of an organic solution. RIKEN Rev 2001; (32):43–46. 600. Yabe A, Niino H,Wang J, Micromachining of optically transparent materials by laser ablation of a solution containing pyrene. In: Proc SPIE 4157 (Veiko VP, ed. Laser-assisted microtechnology 2000); 2001:158–165. 601. Zimmer K, Böhme R, Ruthe D, et al. The influence of laser-induced surface modifications on the backside etching process. Appl Surf Sci 2007; 30 May, 253(15):6588–6594. 602. Vass Cs, Seb˝ok D, Hopp B. Comparing study of subpicosecond and nanosecond wet etching of fused silica. Appl Surf Sci 2006; 252(13):4768–4772. 603. Wang J, Niino H,Yabe A. Micromachining by laser ablation of liquid: superheated liquid and phase explosion. In: Proc SPIE 3933 (HelvajianVH, Sugioka K, Gower MC, et al., eds. Laser applications in microelectronic and optoelectronic manufacturing); 2000:347–354. 604. Vass Cs, Hopp B, Smausz T, et al. Experiments and numerical calculations for the interpretation of the backside wet etching of fused siIica. Thin Solid Films 2004; 453–454:121–126. 605. Vass C, SmauszT, Hopp B.Wet etching of fused silica: a multiplex study. J Phys D Appl Phys 2004; 37(17):2449–2454. 606. Böhme R, Zimmer K, Rauschenbach B. Laser backside etching of fused silica due to carbon layer ablation. Appl Phys A 2006; 82:325–328. 607. Niino H,Yasui Y, Ding X, et al. Surface micro-fabrication of silica glass by excimer laser irradiation of organic solvent. J Photoch Photobiol A: Chem 2003; 158(2–3):179–182. 608. Ding X, Kawaguchi Y, Niino H, et al. Laser-induced high-quality etching of fused silica using a novel aqueous medium. Appl Phys A 2002; 75:641–645. 609. Field JE. Experimental studies of bubble collapse. In: Blake JR, Boulton-Stone JM,Thomas NH, eds. Bubble dynamics and interface phenomena. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 1994:17–31. 610. Böhme R, Zimmer K. The influence of the laser spot size and the pulse number on laser-induced backside wet etching. Appl Surf Sci 2005; 247:256–261. 611. Böhme R, Braun A, Zimmer K. Backside etching of UV-transparent materials at the interface to liquids. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 186:276–281. 612. Kopitkovas G, Lippert T, David C, et al. Surface micromachining of UV transparent materials.Thin Solid Films 2004; 453–454:31–35. 613. Ihlemann J, Wolff-Rottke B. Excimer laser micro machining of inorganic dielectrics. Appl Surf Sci 1996; 106: 282–286. 614. Böhme R, Zajadacz J, Zimmer K, et al. Topography and roughness evolution of microstructured surfaces at laser-induced backside wet etching. Appl Phys A: Mater Sci Process 2005; 80:433–438. 615. Ding X, Kawaguchi Y, Sato T, et al. Micron- and submicron-sized surface patterning of silica glass by LIBWE method. J Photochem Photobiol A: Chem 2004; 166(1–3):129–133. 616. Böhme R, Hirsch D, Zimmer K. Laser etching of transparent materials at a backside surface adsorbed layer. Appl Surf Sci 2006; 252(13):4763–4767. 617. Zimmer K, Böhme R, Rauschenbach B. Laser etching of fused silica using an adsorbed toluene layer. Appl Phys A: Mater Sci Process 2004; 79:1883–1885. 618. Zimmer K, Böhme R, Pissadakis S, et al. Backside etching of fused silica with Nd:YAG laser. Appl Surf Sci 2006; 253(5):2796–2800. 619. Zimmer K, Böhme R, Rauschenbach B. Using IR laser radiation for backside etching of fused silica. Appl Phys A: Mater Sci Process 2007; 86(3):409–414. 620. Böhme R, Zimmer K. Indirect laser etching of fused silica: towards high etching rate processing. Appl Surf Sci 2007; 31 July, 253(19):8091–8096 621. Ikeno J, Kobayashi A, Kasai T. YAG laser processing of fused silica glass with the aid of solution. J Jpn Soc Precision Eng 1989; 55(2):335–340. 622. Simakin AV, Loubnin EN, Shafeev GA. Ablation of transparent solids during self-limited deposition of diamond-like films from liquid hydrocarbons. Appl Phys A l999; 69(Suppl.):S267–S269. 623. Lyalin AA, Simakin AV, Shafeev GA, et al. Laser deposition of amorphous diamond films from liquid aromatic hydrocarbons. Appl Phys A 1999; 68:373–376.

408

References

624. Wang J, Niino H,Yabe A. One-step microfabrication of fused silica by laser ablation of an organic solution. Appl Phys A 1999; 68:111–113. 625. Wang J, Niino H,Yabe A. Micromachining of transparent materials by laser ablation of organic solution. In: Proc SPIE 4088 (Miyamoto I, Sugioka K,TW Sigmon, eds. First international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2000:64–69. 626. Wang J, Niino H, Yabe A. Microfabrication of a fluoropolymer film using conventional Xecl excimer laser by laser-induced backside wet etching. Jpn J Appl Phys 1999; 38(Pt.2)(7A): L761–L763. 627. Wang J, Niino H, Yabe A. Micromachining of quartz crystal with excimer lasers by laser-induced backside wet etching. Appl Phys A 1999; 69(Suppl.):S271–S273. 628. Simakin AV, Lubnin EN, Shafeev GA. Self-limiting of the thickness of diamond-like films deposited in the laser pyrolysis of liquid aromatic hydrocarbons. Quantum Electron 2000; 30(3):263–267; Original: Kvant Elektron, Moskva 2000; 30(3):263–267. 629. Simakin AV, Shafeev GA, Loubnin EN. Laser deposition of diamond-like films from liquid aromatic hydrocarbons. Appl Surf Sci 2000; 154–155:405–410. 630. Nikiforov SM, Alimpiev SS, George MW, et al. Anomalous reflection of water surface during laser ablation. Optics Commun 2000; 182:17–24. 631. LiY, Itoh K,Watanabe W, et al. Three-dimensional hole drilling of silica glass from the rear surface with femtosecond laser pulses. Optics Lett 2001; 26(23):1912–1914. 632. Yasui Y, Niino H, Kawaguchi Y, et al. Microetching of fused silica by laser ablation of organic solution with XeCI excimer laser. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 186:552–555. 633. Zimmer K, Böhme R, Braun A, et al. Excimer laser-induced etching of sub-micron surface relief gratings in fused silica using phase grating projection. Appl Phys A 2002; 74:453–456. 634. Zimmer K, Braun A, Böhme R. Etching of fused silica and glass with excimer laser at 351 nm. Appl Surf Sci 2003; 208–209:199–204. 635. Niino H, Ding X, Kawaguchi Y, et al. Laser ablation of organic solvent: application for silica glass etching. Lambda Highlights 2003; (63):6–7. 636. Niino H, Ding X, Kurosaki R, et al. Surface micro-fabrication of UV transparent materials by laserinduced backside wet etching. In: Proceedings of the 5th Pacific rim conference on lasers and electro-optics, 2003. CLEO/Pacific Rim 2003, 15–19 December 2003, vol 2. IEEE; 2003:742. 637. Itoh K,Watanabe W. Toward nano- and microprocessing in glass with femtosecond laser pulses. RIKEN Rev 2003; (50):90–94. 638. Kawaguchi Y, Ding X, Narazaki A, et al. Transient pressure induced by laser ablation of liquid toluene: toward the understanding of laser-induced backside wet etching. Appl Phys A 2004; 79:883–885. 639. Kawaguchi Y, Ding X, Narazaki A, et al. Transient pressure induced by laser ablation of toluene, a highly laser-absorbing liquid. Appl Phys A 2005; 80(2):275–281. 640. Zimmer K, Böhme R. Precise etching of fused silica for micro-optical applications. Appl Surf Sci 2005; 243:415–420. 641. Böhme R, Pissadakis S, Ruthe D, et al. Laser backside etching of fused silica with ultra-short pulses. Appl Phy. A 2006; 85:75–78. 642. Böhme R,OttoT,Zimmer K. In situ reflectivity investigations of solid/liquid interface during laser backside etching. Appl Surf Sci 2006; 252(13):4392–4396. 643. Zimmer K, Böhme R, Hirsch D, et al. Backside etching of fused silica with UV laser pulses using mercury. Phys D: Appl Phys 2006; 39:4651–4655. 644. An R, Li Y, Dou Y, et al. Water-assisted drilling of microfluidic chambers inside silica glass with femtosecond laser pulses. Appl Phys A 2006; 83:27–29. 645. Vass Cs, Osvay K, Hopp B. Fabrication of 150 nm period grating in fused silica by two-beam interferometric laser induced backside wet etching method. Optics Express 2006; 14(18):8354–8359. 646. Sugimoto K, Aihara T, Kamata H, et al. Study on laser cutting assisted by water saturation of marble. Reza Kenkyu (Rev Laser Eng) 1996; 24(2):191–199. 647. Kobranova VN. Petrophysics. Moscow: Mir; 1989,Table 2. 648. Johnson BD. Pulsed lasers drill rock for fuels. Photon Spectra 2003; 37(1):47–48. 649. Xu Z, Reed CB, Konercki G, et al. Specific energy for pulsed laser rock drilling. J Laser Appl 2003; 15(1):25–30. 650. Liu X-H,Zhang X-G,Wang X-Y,et al. Solvation of magnesium oxide clusters with water in direct laser vaporization. Int J Mass Spectrum Ion Process 1997; 171:L7–L11. 651. GoldfarbV, Budny R, Dunton A, et al. Removal of surface layer of concrete by a pulse-periodical discharge. In: 11th IEEE International Pulsed Power Conference, 29 June – 2 July 1997, Baltimore, MA, USA: Digest of Technical Papers, IEEE; 1997:1078–1084. 652. O’Brien DG, Graves RM, O’Brien EA. Laser-rock-fluid interaction – application of free-electron laser (FEL) in petroleum well drilling and completions. In: Proc SPIE 3614 (Bennett HE, Dowell DH, eds. Free-electron laser challenges II ); 1999:168–176.

References

409

653. Lawrence J, Johnston EP, Li L. Determination of absorption length of CO2 and high-power diode laser radiation for ordinary Portland cement. J Phys D:Appl Phys 2000; 33:945–947. 654. Inoue H, Lisitsyn IV, Akiyama H, et al. Drilling of hard rocks by pulsed power. IEEE Electr Insul Mag 2000; 16(3):19–25. 655. Xu Z,Yamashita Y, Reed CB. Two-dimensional modeling of laser spallation drilling of rocks. In: 24th International Congress on Applications of Lasers and Electro-Optics, ICALEO 2005 – Congress Proceedings, Orlando, FL: Laser Institute of America; 2005; 723–728. 656. Chung J, Ko S, Grigoropoulos CP, et al. Damage-free low temperature pulsed laser printing of gold nanoinks on polymers. Trans ASME, J Heat Transfer 2005; 127:724–732. 657. Bieri NR, Chung J, Poulikakos D, et al. An experimental investigation of microresistor laser printing with gold nanoparticle-laden inks. Appl Phys A 2005; 80:1485–1495. 658. Rao BT, Kumar H, Nath AK. Processing of concretes with a high power CO2 laser. Optics Laser Technol 2005; 37:348–356. 659. Wang Z, Masuo S, Machida S, et al. Application of dopant-induced laser ablation to site-selective modification of sea-island structures of polystyrene-block-poly(4-vinylpyridine) films. Jpn J Appl Phys 2005; 44(12):L402–L404. 660. K. Bybee, Modeling laser-spallation rock drilling. J Petroleum Technol 2006; 58(2):62–64. 661. Flury R, Blumenthal M. Process for cutting aliment pellets. Patent EP 0 930 012 A1, 1999. 662. Kolar J, Strliˇc M, Marinˇcek M. IR pulsed laser light interaction with soiled cellulose and paper. Appl Phys A 2002; 75:673–676. 663. Kitano H, Adachi H, Murakami A, et al. Protein crystal processing using a deep-UV laser. Jpn J Appl Phys 2004; 43(1A/B):L73–L75. 664. Kitano H,Adachi H, Murakami A, et al. New approach to improve X-ray diffraction pattern of protein crystal using UV-laser ablative processing. Jpn J Appl Phys 2004; 43(2B):L297–L299. 665. Murakami A, Kitano H, Adachi H, et al. Universal processing technique for protein crystals using pulsed UV laser. Jpn J Appl Phys 2004; 43(7A):L873–L876. 666. Barcikowski S,Koch G,Odermatt J. Characterisation and modification of the heat affected zone during laser material processing of wood and wood composites. Holz als Roh- und Werkstoff 2006; 64:94–103. 667. Kurobe T, Ichikawa K, Nagai H. Breaking of silicon wafer by irradiation ofYAG laser. Zairyo (J Jpn SocTesting Mater) 1995; 44(497):159–163. 668. Allen SD, Porteus JO, Faith WN. Infrared laser-induced desorption of H2 O and hydrocarbons from optical surfaces. Appl Phys Lett 1982; 41(5):416–418. 669. Cranmer DC, Freiman SW, White GS, et al. Moisture- and water-induced crack growth in optical materials. In: Proc SPIE 1330 (Musikant S, ed. Optical surfaces resistant to severe environments); 1990:152–163. 670. Kashii M, Kitano H, Hosokawa Y, et al. Femtosecond laser processing of protein crystals in crystallization drop. Jpn J Appl Phys 2005; 44(27):L873–L875. 671. Kashii M, Hosokawa Y, Kitano H, et al. Femtosecond laser-induced cleaving of protein crystal in water solution. Appl Surf Sci 2007; 253(15):6447–6450. 672. Tsuji T, Tsuboi Y, Kitamura N, et al. Microsecond resolved imaging of laser ablation at solid liquid interface: investigation of formation process of nano size metal colloids. Appl Surf Sci 2004; 229:365–371. 673. Bozon-Verduraz F, Brayner R,VoronovVV, et al. Production of nanoparticles by laser induced ablation of metals in liquids. Quantum Electron 2003; 33:714–720. Original: Kvant Elektron Moskva 2003; 33:714–720. 674. Pearce SRJ, Henley SJ, Claeyssens F, et al. Production of nanocrystalline diamond by laser ablation at the solid/liquid interface. Diam Related Mater 2004; 13:661–665. 675. Mafuné F,Kohno J,TakedaY,et al. Formation of gold nanoparticles by laser ablation in aqueous solution of surfactant. J Phys Chem B 2001; 105:5114–5120. 676. Brause R, Moltgen H, Kleinermans K. Characterization of laser ablated and chemically reduced silver colloids in aqueous solution by UV/VIS spectroscopy and STM/SEM microscopy. Appl Phy B Laser Optic 2002; B75: 711–716. 677. Kelly KL, Coronado E, Zhao LL, et al. The optical properties of metal nanoparticles: the influence of size, shape, and dielectric environment. J Phys Chem B 2003; 107:668–677. 678. Creighton, JA, Eadon DG. Ultraviolet-visible absorption spectra of the colloidal metallic elements. J Chem Soc Faraday Trans 1991; 87:3881–3891. 679. Kreibig U,Vollmer M. Optical properties of metal clusters. Berlin: Springer; 1995. 680. Mie G. Beiträge zur Optik trüber Medien, speziell kolloidaler Metallösungen. Annal Physik, vierte Folge 1908; 25:377–445. 681. Perenboom JAAJ, Wyder P, Meier F. Electronic properties of small metallic particles. Phys Rep 1981; 78(2): 173–292. 682. Mafuné F, Kohno J,TakedaY, et al. Growth of gold clusters into nanoparticles in a solution following laser induced fragmentation. J Phys Chem B 2002; 106:8555–8561.

410

References

683. Mafuné F, Kohno J,TakedaY, et al. Dissociation and aggregation of gold nanoparticles under laser irradiation. J Phys Chem B 2001; 105:9050–9056. 684. Kitazawa S, Abe H, Yamamoto S. Formation of nanostructured solid-state carbon particles by laser ablation of graphite in isopropyl alcohol. J Phys Chem Solids 2005; 66:555–559. 685. Pyatenko A, Shimokawa K,Yamaguchi M, et al. Synthesis of silver nanoparticles by laser ablation in pure water. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 2004;A79:803–806. 686. Tsuji T, Tsuji M. Preparation of nano structures of metal by using laser ablation in water. Rev Laser Eng 2005; 33:36–40. 687. Tsuji T, Iryo K, Nishimura Y, et al. Preparation of metal colloids by a laser ablation technique in solution: influence of laser wavelength on the ablation efficiency (II). J Photochem Photobiol A: Chem 2001; 145:201–207. 688. Tsuji T, Tatsuyama Y, Tsuji M, et al. Preparation of LiMn2 O4 nanoparticles for Li ion secondary batteries by laser ablation in water. Mater Lett 2007; 61(10):2062–2065. 689. Kamat PV. Photophysical, photochemical and photocatalytic aspects of metal nanoparticles. J Phys Chem B 2002; 106:7729–7744. 690. Englebienne P, Englebienne P, Van Hoonacker A, et al. Surface plasmon resonance: principles, methods and applications in biomedical sciences. Spectroscopy 2003; 17:255–273. 691. Mafuné F, Kondow T. Selective laser fabrication of small nanoparticles and nano-networks in solution by irradiation of UV pulsed laser onto platinum nanoparticles. Chem Phys Lett 2004; 383(3–4):343–347. 692. Neddersen J, Chumanov G, Cotton TM. Laser ablation of metals: a new method for preparing SERS active colloids. Appl Spectroscopy 1993; 47(12):1959–1964. 693. Sambles JR. An electron microscope study of evaporating gold particles: the Kelvin equation for liquid gold and the lowering of the melting point of solid gold particles. Proc R Soc Lond A 1971; 324:339–351. 694. Reiss H,Wilson IB. The effect of surface on the melting point. J Coll Sci 1948; 3:551–561. 695. Curzon AE. The use of electron diffraction in the study of (1) Melting and supercooling of thin films; and (2) Magnetic crystals. PhD Thesis, University of London (Imperial College of Science and Technology), 1959–60. 696. Inasawa S, Sugiyama M, Koda S. Size controlled formation of gold nanoparticles using photochemical growth and photothermal size reduction by 308 nm laser pulses. Jpn J Appl Phys 2003; 42:6705–6712. 697. Mafuné F, Kohno J,Takeda Y, et al. Structure and stability of silver nanoparticles in aqueous solution produced by laser ablation. J Phys Chem B 2000; 104(35):8333–8337. 698. Mafuné F, Kohno J,Takeda Y, et al. Formation and size control of silver nanoparticles by laser ablation in aqueous solution. J Phys Chem B 2000; 104:9111–9117. 699. Mafuné F, Kohno J, Takeda Y, et al. Formation of stable platinum nanoparticles by laser ablation in water. J Phys Chem B 2003; 107:4218–4223. 700. Sylvestre JP, Kabashin AV, Sacher E, et al. Femtosecond laser ablation of gold in water: influence of the laser produced plasma on the nanoparticle size distribution. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 2005;A80:753–758. 701. Bae CH, Nam SH, Park SM. Formation of silver nanoparticles by laser ablation of a silver target in NaCl solution. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 197–198:628–634. 702. Takami A, Kurita H, Koda S. Laser-induced size reduction of noble metal particles. J Phys Chem B 1999; 103:1226–1232. 703. Takami A,Yamada H, Nakano K, et al. Size reduction of silver particles in aqueous solution by laser irradiation. Jpn J Appl Phys 1996; 35:L781–L783. 704. Hodak JH, Henglein A, Giersig M, et al. Laser-induced inter-diffusion in AuAg core-shell nanoparticles. J Phys Chem B 2000; 104(49);11708–11718. 705. Kamat PV, Flumiani M, Hartland GV. Picosecond dynamics of silver nanoclusters. Photoejection of electrons and fragmentation. J Phys Chem B 1998; 102:3123–3128. 706. Link S, Burda C, Nikoobakht B, et al. Laser-induced shape changes of colloidal gold nanorods using femtosecond and nanosecnd laser pulses. J Phys Chem B 2000; 104:6152–6163. 707. Link S,Wang ZL, El-Sayed MA. How does a gold nanorod melt? J Phys Chem B 2000; 104(33):7867–7870. 708. Jin R, Cao Y, Mirkin CA, et al. Photoinduced conversion of silver nanospheres to nanoprisms. Science 2001; 294:1901–1903. 709. Jin R, CaoYC, Hao E, et al. Controlling anisotropic nanoparticle growth through plasmon excitation. Nature 2003; 425:487–490. 710. Izgaliev AT, Simakin AV, Shafeev GA. Formation of the alloy of Au and Ag nanoparticles upon laser irradiation of the mixture of their colloidal solutions. Quantum Electron; 34:47–50, Original: Kvant Elektron Moskva 2004; 34(1). 711. Dawson A, Kamat PV. Semiconductor-metal nanocomposites. Photoinduced fusion and photocatalysis of gold-capped TiO2 (TiO2 /gold) nanoparticles. J Phys Chem B 2001; 105(5):960–966.

References

411

712. Chandrasekharan N, Kamat PV, Hu J, et al. Dye-capped gold nanoclusters: photoinduced morphological changes in gold/Rhodamine 6G nanoassemblies. J Phys Chem B 2000; 104:11103–11109. 713. Tsuji T,Watanabe N, Kakita T, et al. Preparation and morphology control of silver colloids by laser ablation in water. CLEO/Pacific rim 2003.The 5th Pacific rim conference on lasers and electro optics. Taipei,Taiwan. 15–19 December. IEEE; vol. 2; 2003:670. 714. Tsuji T, Watanabe N, Tsuji M. Laser induced morphology change of silver colloids: formation of nano size wires. Appl Surf Sci 2003; 211:189–193. 715. Chen C-D,Yeh Y-T, Wang CRC. The fabrication and photo-induced melting of networked gold nanostructures and twisted gold nanorods. J Phys Chem Solids 2001; 62:1587–1597. 716. Shafeev GA, Bozon-Verduraz F, Robert M. Experimental evidence of transformation of Hg into Au under laser exposure of Hg in D2 O. Preprint IOFRAN No 45, Moskva, Rossiska akademi nauk Institut obwe fiziki im. A.M. Prohorova (Preprint IOFAN no 45, Moskva, Ross Akad nauk, Inst Obshch fiz AM Prokhorova). 10.04. 2006, 16 pp. 717. Hasegawa H, Satoh N,Tsujii K, et al. Fractal analysis of the coalescence process of Au nano-meter particles dispersed in 2-propanol. Z Phys D – Atoms Moleculs Clusters 1991; 20:325–327. 718. Fujisaki A, Sano K, Kinoshita T, et al. lmplantation of neutral atoms into liquid helium by laser sputtering. Phys Rev Lett 1993; 71(7):1039–1042. 719. Eckstein H, Kreibig U. Light induced aggregation of metal clusters. Z Phys D 1993; 26:239–241. 720. Fojtik A, Henglein A. Laser ablation of films and suspended particles in a solvent: formation of cluster and colloid solutions. Ber Bunsenges Phys Chem 1993; 97(2):252–254. 721. Henglein A. Physiochemical properties of small metal particles in solution:‘microelectrode’reactions, chemisorption, composite metal particles, and the atom-to-metal transition. J Phys Chem 1993; 97:5457–5471. 722. Satoh N, Hasegawa H, Tsujii K, et al. Photoinduced coagulation of Au nanocolloids. J Phys Chem 1994; 98:2143–2141. 723. Persson JL, Hui Q, Nakamura M, et al. Optical spectra of metal dimers in superfluid helium. Phys Rev A 1995; 52(3):2011–2015. 724. Hui Q, Persson JL, Beijersbergen JHM, et al. Spectroscopy and dynamics of neutral atoms in superfluid helium. Z Phys B 1995; 98:353–357. 725. Sibbald MS, Chumanov G, CottonTM. Reduction of cytochrome c by halide-modified, laser-ablated silver colloids. J Phys Chem 1996; 100:4672–4678. 726. Persson JL, Hui Q, Jakubek ZJ, et al. Formation of AgHe2 exciplex in liquid helium. Phys Rev Lett 1996; 76(9):1501–1504. 727. Takeuchi Y, Ida T, Kimura K. Colloidal stability of gold nanoparticles in 2-propanol under laser irradiation. J Phys Chem B 1997; 101:1322–1327. 728. Procházka M, Štepánek J, Vlcková B, et al. Laser ablation: preparation of ‘chemically pure’ Ag colloids for surface-enhanced Raman scattering spectroscopy. J Mol Struct 1997; 410–411:213–216. 729. Procházka M, Mojzeš P, Št˘epánek J, et al. Probing applications of laser-ablated Ag colloids in SERS spectroscopy: improvement of ablation procedure and SERS spectral testing. Anal Chem 1997; 69:5103–5108. 730. Hui Q,Takami M. Phonon-bands associating optical transitions of Eu atoms in bulk liquid helium. In: Pacific rim conference on lasers and electro-optics,1997. CLEO/Pacific Rim ’97. 14–18 July 1997. 1997:47–48. 731. Hui Q, Takami M. Spectroscopy of Eu atoms in bulk liquid helium: a novel probe for quantum liquid. In: The Pacific rim conference on lasers and electro-optics, 1999. CLEO/Pacific Rim ’99. 30 August–3 September 1999, vol. 4; 1999:1257–1258. 732. Hui Q,Takami M. Formation of solid helium-rings surrounding Mg and Be atoms in liquid helium. In:Technical digest. Summaries of papers presented at the international quantum electronics conference, 1998. IQEC 98. 3–8 May 1998, 1998:79–80. 733. Srnová I, Procházka M, Vlçková B, et al. Surface-enhanced Raman scattering-active systems prepared from Ag colloids laser-ablated in chemically modified aqueous media. Langmuir 1998; 14:4666–4670. 734. Jeon J-S,Yeh C-S. Studies of silver nanoparticles by laser ablation method. J Chinese Chem Soc 1998; 45:721–726. 735. Yeh M-S,YangY-S, LeeY-P, et al. Formation and characteristics of Cu colloids from CuO powder by laser irradiation in 2-propanol. J Phys Chem B 1999; 103:6851–6857. 736. Kurita H,Takami A, Koda S. Size reduction of gold particles in aqueous solution by pulsed laser irradiation. Appl Phys Lett 1998; 72(7):789–791. 737. Fujiwara H,Yanagida S, Kamat PV.Visible laser induced fusion and fragmentation of thionicotinamide-capped gold nanoparticles. J Phys Chem B 1999: 103:2589–2591. 738. Chang S-S, Shih C-W, Chen C-D, et al. The shape transition of gold nanorods. Langmuir 1999; 15:701–709. 739. Link S, Burda C, Mohamed MB, et al. Laser photothermal melting and fragmentation of gold nanorods: energy and laser pulse-width dependence. J Phys Chem A 1999; 103(9):1165–1170.

412

References

740. Link S, Burda C, Nikoobakht B, et al. How long does it take to melt a gold nanorod? A femtosecond pump-probe absorption spectroscopic study. Chem Phys Lett 1999; 315:12–18. 741. McGrath TE, Beveridge AC, Diebold GJ. Laser-induced ‘Regeneration’ of colloidal particles: the effects of thermal inertia on the chemical reactivity of laser-heated particles. Angew Chem Int Ed 1999; 38(22): 3353–3356. 742. Tsuji T, Iryo K, Ohta H, et al. Preparation of metal colloids by a laser ablation technique in solution: influence of laser wavelength on the efficiencies of colloid formation. Jpn J Appl Phys part 2 2000; 39(10A): L981–983. 743. Niidome Y, Hori A, Sato T, et al. Enormous size growth of thiol-passivated gold nanoparticles induced by near-IR laser light. Chem Lett 2000; (4):310–311. 744. Kapoor S, Palit DK. Laser-induced fragmentation and melting of cadmium and copper nanoparticles. Mater Res Bull 2000; 35(13):2071–2079. 745. Link S, El-Sayed MA. Spectroscopic determination of the melting energy of a gold nanorod. J Chem Phys 2001; 114(5):2362–2368. 746. Poondi D, Ddobbins T, Singh J. A novel laser-liquid-solid interaction technique for synthesis of silver, nickel and immiscible silver-nickel alloys from liquid precursors. J Mater Sci 2000; 35:6237–6243. 747. Chen Y-H,Yeh C-S. A new approach for the formation of alloy nanoparticles: laser synthesis of gold-silver alloy from gold-silver colloidal mixtures. Chem Comm (Cambridge) 2001; (4):371–372. 748. Kapoor S, Palit DK, Mukherjee T. Laser induced changes in Pt and Tl metal nanoparticles. Chem Phys Lett 2001; 349(1–2):19–24. 749. Lee I, Han SW, Kim K. Simultaneous preparation of SERS-active metal colloids and plates by laser ablation. J Raman Spectrosc 2001; 32:947–952. 750. Simakin AV, Voronov VV, Shafeev GA, et al. Nanodisks of Au and Ag produced by laser ablation in liquid environment. Chem Phys Lett 2001; 348(3–4):182–186. 751. Abid J-P,Girault HH,Brevet PF. Selective structure changes of core-shell gold-silver nanoparticles by laser irradiation: homogeneisation vs. silver removal. Chem Commun 2001; 9:829–830. 752. Chen Y-H, Tseng Y-H, Yeh C-S. Laser-induced alloying Au-Pd and Ag-Pd colloidal mixtures: the formation of dispersed Au/Pd and Ag/Pd nanoparticles. J Mater Chem 2002; 12:1419–1422. 753. Dolgaev SI, Simakin AV,VoronovVV, et al. Nanoparticles produced by laser ablation of solids in liquid environment. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 186(1–4):546–551. 754. Mafuné F, Kohno J, Takeda Y, et al. Full physical preparation of size selected gold nanoparticles in solution: laser ablation and laser induced size control. J Phys Chem B 2002; 106:7575–7577. 755. Compagnini G, Scalisi AA, Puglisi O. Ablation of noble metals in liquids: a method to obtain nanoparticles in a thin polymeric film. Phys Chem Chem Phys 2002; 4:2787–2791. 756. Tsuji T, Iryo K,Watanabe N, et al. Preparation of silver nanoparticles by laser ablation in solution: influence of laser wavelength on particle size. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 202:80–85. 757. Mafune F, Kohno J, Takeda Y, et al. Nanoscale soldering of metal nanoparticles for construction of higher-order structures. J Am Chem Soc 2003; 125(7):1686–1687. 758. Mafune F, Kohno J-y,Takeda Y, et al. Formation of gold nanonetworks and small gold nanoparticles by irradiation of intense pulsed laser onto gold nanoparticles. J Phys Chem B 2003; 107(46);12589–12596. 759. Mortier T, Verbiest T, Persoons A. Laser ablation of gold in chloroform solutions of cetyltrimethylammoniumbromide. Chem Phys Lett 2003; 382:650–653. 760. Compagnini G, Scalisi AA, Puglisi O. Production of gold nanoparticles by laser ablation in liquid alkanes. J Appl Phys 2003; 94:7874–7877. 761. Compagnini G. Noble metal particles for polymer-based nanostructured thin films. Appl Surf Sci 2004; 226: 216–225. 762. Kabashin, AV, Meunier M, Luong JHT. Femtosecond laser ablation of gold in aqueous biocompatible solutions to produce colloidal gold nanoparticles. In: Proc SPIE 4977 (Pique A, Sugioka K, Herman PR, et al., eds. Photon processing in microelectronics and photonics II ); 2003:609–614. 763. Kabashin AV, Meunier M, Kingston C, et al. Fabrication and characterization of gold nanoparticles by femtosecond laser ablation in an aqueous solution of cyclodextrins. J Phys Chem B 2003; 107:4527–4531. 764. Kabashin AV, Meunier M. Laser-assisted methods for nanofabrication. In: Proc SPIE 5339 (Herman PR, Fieret J, Pique A, et al., eds. Photon processing in microelectronics and photonics III ); 2004:631–643. 765. Simakin AV, Voronov VV, Kirichenko NA, et al. Nanoparticles produced by laser ablation of solids in liquid environment. In: Proc SPIE 5121 (Dausinger FH, Konov V I, Baranov VY, et al., eds. Laser processing of advanced materials and laser microtechnologies); 2003:212–221. 766. Simakin AV, Voronov VV, Kirichenko NA, et al. Nanoparticles produced by laser ablation of solids in liquid environment. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 2004;A79:1127–1132.

References

413

767. Izgaliev AT, Simakin AV, Shafeev GA. Formation of the alloy of Au and Ag nanoparticles upon laser irradiation of the mixture of their colloidal solutions. Quantum Electron 2004; 34:47–50, Original: Kvant Elektron, Moskva 2004; 34(1). 768. Pfleger J, Smejkal P,Vlckova B, et al. Preparation of Ag nanoparticles by two wavelength laser ablation and fragmentation. In: Proc SPIE 5122 (Krumins A, Millers D, Muzikante I, et al., eds. Advanced organic and inorganic optical materials); 2003:198–205. 769. Chen GX, Ming HH, Xiao HL, et al. Laser ablation induced nanoparticles in water. In: Proc SPIE 4830 (Miyamoto I, Kobayashi KF, Sugioka K, et al., eds. Third international symposium on laser precision microfabrication); 2003:222–227. 770. Callegari A,Tonti D, Chergui M. Photochemically grown silver nanoparticles with wavelength-controlled size and shape. Nano Letters 2003; 3(11):1565–1568. 771. Shafeev GA, Freysz E, Bozon-Verduraz F. Self-influence of a femtosecond laser beam upon ablation of Ag in liquids. Appl Phys A 2004; 78:307–309. 772. Kazakevitch PV,Voronov VV, Simakin GA, et al. Production of copper and brass nanoparticles upon laser ablation in liquids. Kvant lektron – Quant Electron 2004; 34(10):951–956. 773. Karavanskii VA, Simakin AV, Krasovskii VI, et al. Nonlinear optical properties of colloidal silver nanoparticles produced by laser ablation in liquids. Quant Electron 2004; 34:644–648, Original: Kvant Elektron, Moskva 2004; 34: 644–648. 774. Ganeev RA, Baba M, Ryasnyansky AI, et al. Characterization of optical and nonlinear optical properties of silver nanoparticles prepared by laser ablation in various liquids. Optics Comm 2004; 240:437–448. 775. Ganeev RA. Nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption of various media. J Opt A: Pure Appl Opt 2005; 7:717–733. 776. Compagnini G, Scalisi AA, Puglisi O. Synthesis of gold colloids by laser ablation in thiol alkane solutions. J Mater Res 2004; 19:2795–2798. 777. Chen TC, Su WK, LinYL. A surface plasmon resonance study of Ag nanoparticles in an aqueous solution. Jpn J Appl Phys, part 2, Lett 2004; 43:L119–L122. 778. Chen GX, Hong MH, Lan B, et al. A convenient way to prepare magnetic colloids by direct Nd:YAG laser ablation. Appl Surf Sci 2004; 228:169–175. 779. Tsuji T, Hamagami T, Kawamura T, et al. Laser ablation of cobalt and cobalt oxides in liquids: influence of solvent on composition of prepared nanoparticles. Appl Surf Sci 2005; 243:214–219. 780. Tsuji T, Higuchi T,Tsuji M. Laser-induced structural conversions of silver nanoparticles in pure water – influence of laser intensity. Chem Lett 2005; 34(4):476–477. 781. Kil D, Suh Y, Jang H, et al. Nanosize particles of ZrVFe alloy by pulsed laser ablation in ethanol. Mater Trans 2005; 46(11):2509–2513. 782. BurakovVS,Tarasenko NV, Butsen AV, et al. Formation of nanoparticles during double pulse laser ablation of metals in liquids. Eur Phys J,Appl Phys 2005; 30:107–112. 783. Tarasenko N, Butsen A, Shevchenko G, et al. Laser-induced size and shape transformation of silver colloidal nanoparticles. Sol State Phenom 2005; 106:27–30. 784. Tarasenko NV, Butsen AV, Nevar EA. Laser-induced modification of metal nanoparticles formed by laser ablation technique in liquids. Appl Surf Sci 2005; 247:418–422. 785. Tarasenko NV, Butsen AV, Nevar EA, et al. Synthesis of nanosized particles during laser ablation of gold in water. Appl Surf Sci 2006; 252:4439–4444. 786. Tsuji T, Okazaki Y, Higuchi T, et al. Laser-induced morphology changes of silver colloids prepared by laser ablation in water. Enhancement of anisotropic shape conversions by chloride ions. J Photochem Photobiol A: Chem 2006; 183:297–303. 787. Wang JB,Yang GW, Zhang CY, et al. Cubic BN nanocrystals synthesis by pulsed laser induced liquid solid interfacial reaction. Chem Phys Lett 2003; 367:10–14. 788. Ishikawa Y, Shimizu Y, Sasaki T, et al. Preparation of zinc oxide nanorods using pulsed laser ablation in water media at high temperature. J Coll Interf Sci 2006; 300:612–615. 789. Sasaki T, ShimizuY, Koshizaki N. Preparation of oxide nanomaterials using pulsed laser ablation. – Reza-kenkyu (Rev Laser Eng) 2005; 33(1):18–23. 790. Kruusing A. Underwater and water-assisted laser processing: Part 2 – Etching, cutting and rarely used methods. Optics Lasers Eng 2004; 41(2):329–352. 791. Chien AT, Sachleben J, Kim JH, et al. Synthesis and characterization of PbTiO3 powders and heteroepitaxial thin films by hydrothermal synthesis. J Mater Res 1999; 14:3303–3311. 792. Peterson CR, Slamovitch EB. Effect of processing parameters on the morphology of hydrothermally derived PbTiO3 powders. J Am Ceram Soc 1999; 82:1702–1710. 793. Villegas M, Caballero AC, Moure C, et al. Factors affecting the electrical conductivity of donor-doped Bi4Ti3 O12 piezoelectric ceramics. J Am Ceram Soc 1999; 82:2411–2416.

414

References

794. Swartz S, Schulze WA, Biggers JV. Fabrication and electrical properties of grain oriented Bi4Ti3 O12 ceramics. Ferroelectrics 1981; 38:765–768. 795. Hill RF, Danzer R, Paine RT. Synthesis of aluminium oxide platelets. J Am Ceram Soc 2001; 84:514–520. 796. Zhu H,Yang D, JiY, et al. Two-dimensional SnS nanosheets fabricated by a novel hydrothermal method. J Mater Sci 2005; 40:591–595. 797. Byrappa, K,Yoshimura M. Handbook of hydrothermal technology. Park Ridge: Noyes; 2001. 798. Wang J, Hu Z, Liu Q, et al. Nano-crystallite preparation by pulsed-Iaser induced reaction at liquid-solid interface. In: Proc SPIE 3550 (Deng S-S, Wang SC, eds. Laser processing of materials and industrial applications II ); 1998:65–71. 799. Yang GW, Wang JB. Carbon nitride nanocrystals having cubic structure using pulsed laser induced liquid-solid interfacial reaction. Appl Phys A: Mater Sci Process 2000; 71(3):343–344. 800. Liu CH, Peng W, Sheng LM. Carbon and boron nanoparticles by pulsed-laser vaporization of boron carbide in liquids. Carbon 2001; 39:144–148. 801. Sugiyama M, Okazaki H, Koda S. Size and shape transformation of TiO2 nanoparticles by irradiation of 308-nm laser beam. Jpn J Appl Phys 2002; 41:4666–4674. 802. Anikin KV, Melnik NN, Simakin AV, et al. Formation of ZnSe and CdS quantum dots via laser ablation in liquids. Chem Phys Lett 2002; 366:357–360. 803. Zhang W, Zhang Y,Tang, J, et al. Study on preparation and optic properties of nano europium oxide ethanol sol by pulsed laser ablation. Thin Solid Films 2002; 417:43–46. 804. Ganeev RA, Ryasnyansky AI, UsmanovT. Nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption of As2 S3 aqueous solution. In: 2003 European Quantum Electronics Conference EQEC 2003. Munich ICM, Germany 22–27 June 2003. IEEE; 2003:60. 805. Ganeev RA, Ryasnyansky AI, UsmanovT. Nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption of As2 S3 aqueous solution. Optics Quant Electron 2003; 35(3):211–219. 806. Ganeev RA, Ryasnyansky AI, Tugushev RI, et al. Investigation of nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption of semiconductor nanoparticle solutions prepared by laser ablation. J Opt A: Pure Appl Opt 2003; 5(4): 409–417. 807. Liang C, Shimizu Y, Sasaki T, et al. Synthesis of ultrafine SnO2x nanocrystals by pulsed laser induced reactive quenching in liquid medium. J Phys Chem B 2003; 107:9220–9225. 808. Liu QX,Wang CX, Zhang W, et al. Immiscible silver-nickel alloying nanorods growth upon pulsed-laser induced liquid/solid interfacial reaction. Chem Phys Lett 2003; 382:1–5. 809. Liu QX,Wang CX,Yang GW. Formation of silver particles and silver oxide plume nanocomposites upon pulsed laser induced liquid solid interface reaction. Eur Phys J B 2004; 41:479–483. 810. Liang C, Sasaki T, ShimizuY, et al. Pulsed-laser ablation of Mg in liquids: surfactant-directing nanoparticle assembly for magnesium hydroxide nanostructures. Chem Phys Lett 2004; 389:58–63. 811. Sasaki T, Liang C, Nichols WT, et al. Fabrication of oxide base nanostructures using pulsed laser ablation in aqueous solutions. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 2004;A79:1489–1492. 812. Liang C,ShimizuY,Masuda M,et al. Preparation of layered zinc hydroxide/surfactant nanocomposite by pulsed-laser ablation in a liquid medium. Chem Mater 2004; 16:963–965. 813. Liang C, ShimizuY, Sasaki T, et al. Synthesis, characterization, and phase stability of ultrafine TiO2 nanoparticles by pulsed laser ablation in liquid media. J Mater Res 2004; 19:1551–1557. 814. Tsuji T, Kakita T, Hamagami T, et al. Preparation of nanoparticles of LiCoO2 using laser ablation in liquids. Chem Lett 2004; 33(9):1136–1137. 815. Lalayan AA. Formation of colloidal GaAs and CdS quantum dots by laser ablation in liquid media. Appl Surf Sci 2005; 248:209–212. 816. Usui H, Shimizu Y, Sasaki T, et al. Photoluminescence of ZnO nanoparticles prepared by laser ablation in different surfactant solutions. J Phys Chem B 2005; 109:120–124. 817. Usui H, Sasaki T, Koshizaki N. Ultraviolet emission from layered nanocomposites of Zn(OH)2 and sodium dodecyl sulfate prepared by laser ablation in liquid. Appl Phys Lett 2005; 87:063105. 818. Chen J,Yang J, Lian J. Nanoparticles and films formed by pulsed laser irradiation on the CeO2 target in the liquid. Mater Sci Forum 2005; 475–479:3843–3846. 819. Liang CH, ShimizuY, Sasaki T, et al. Preparation of ultrafine TiO2 nanocrystals via pulsed laser ablation of titanium metal in surfactant solution. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 2005;A80:819–822. 820. Ganeev RA, Baba M, Ryasnyansky AI, et al. Laser ablation of GaAs in liquids: structural, optical, and nonlinear optical characteristics of colloidal solutions. Appl Phys B 2005; 80:595–601. 821. Ganeev RA, Ryasnyanskii AI, Kuroda H. Laser ablation of gallium arsenide in different solutions. Optics Spectrosc 2005; 99(6):1006–1011. 822. Ganeev RA, Ryasnyansky AI. Influence of laser ablation parameters on optical and nonlinear optical characteristics of semiconductor solutions. Optics Commun 2005; 246:163–171.

References

415

823. Liu QX,Wang CX,Yang GW. Nucleation thermodynamics of cubic boron nitride in pulsed-laser ablation in liquid. Phys Rev B 2005; 71:155422. 824. Zeng H, Cai W, Li Y, et al. Composition/structural evolution and optical properties of ZnO/Zn nanoparticles by laser ablation in liquid media. J Phys Chem B 2005; 109(39):18260–18266. 825. Golightly JS, Castleman AW Jr. Analysis of titanium nanoparticles created by laser irradiation under liquid environments. J Phys Chem B 2006; 110:19979–19984. 826. Ryu JH, Choi BG,Yoon J-W, et al. Synthesis of CaMoO4 nanopartices by pulsed laser ablation in deionized water and optical properties. J Lumin 2007; 124:67–70. 827. Tsuji T, Tatsuyama Y, Tsuji M, et al. Preparation of LiMn2 O4 nanoparticles for Li ion secondary batteries by laser ablation in water. Mater Lett 2007; 61(10):2062–2065. 828. Kawaguchi K, Jaworski J, IshikawaY, et al. Preparation of gold/iron-oxide composite nanoparticles by a unique laser process in water. J Magn Magn Mater 2007; 310(2)[Part 3]:2369–2371. 829. Chen GX, Hong MH, Chong TC, et al. Preparation of carbon nanoparticles with strong optical limiting properties by laser ablation in water. J Appl Phys 2004; 95:1455–1459. 830. Tsuji M, Kuboyama S,Tsuji T, et al. Formation of C2n H2 polyynes by laser ablation of graphite, coal or C60 particles suspended in selected solvents. In: Cataldo F, ed. Polyynes. Boca Raton: CRC; 2006:127–153. 831. Ogale SB, Malshe AP, Kanetkar SM, et al. Formation of diamond particulates by pulsed ruby laser irradiation of graphite immersed in benzene. Solid State Commun 1992; 84(4):371–373. 832. Gaumet JJ, El Ouachini A, Peter S, et al. Formation of carbon clusters Cn (1 ≤ n ≤ 4) by laser vaporization of graphite and a study of their chemical reactivity by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. J Chem Soc, Faraday Trans 1996; 92(11),1831–1834. 833. Chen H, McGrath TE, Diebold GJ. Laser chemistry in suspensions: New products and unique reaction conditions for the carbon-steam reaction. Angew Chem Int Ed 1997; 36(1/2):163–166. 834. Chen SY, Dong WG, Liu, CS, et al. Preparation nano graphite by pulsed laser deposition in liquid. J Northeastern Univ Nat Sci 2002; 23:1079–1082. 835. Tsuji M,Tsuji T, Kuboyama S, et al. Formation of hydrogen-capped polyynes by laser ablation of graphite particles suspended in solution. Chem Phys Lett 2002; 355:101–108. 836. Tsuji M, Kuboyama S, Matsuzaki T, et al. Formation of hydrogen-capped polyynes by laser ablation of C60 particles suspended in solution. Carbon 2003; 41:2141–2148. 837. Tabata H, Fujii M, Hayashi S. Laser ablation of diamond nanoparticles suspended in solvent: synthesis of polyynes. Chem Phys Lett 2004; 395:138–142. 838. Chen GX, Hong MH, Ong TS, et al. Carbon nanoparticles based nonlinear optical liquid. Carbon 2004; 42:2735–2777. 839. Wang CX, Liu P, Cui H, et al. Nucleation and growth kinetics of nanocrystals formed upon pulsed-laser ablation in liquids. Appl Phys Lett 2005; 87:201913. 840. Miyazaki M, MiuraY,Yui K, et al. Morphology change under pulsed laser irradiation of carbon particles suspended in water. Carbon 2006; 44:3348–3378. 841. 841 Xiao R-F. Growing diamond films from an organic liquid. Appl Phys Lett 1995; 67(21):3117–3119. 842. Xiao R-F. Liquid target pulsed laser deposition. Appl Phys Lett 1995; 67(7):1022–1024. 843. Bundy FP, Bassett WA,Weathers MS, et al. The pressure-temperature phase and transformation diagram for carbon; updated through 1994. Carbon 1996; 34(2):141–153. 844. Wang JB, Yang GW. Phase transformation between diamond and graphite in preparation of diamonds by pulsed-laser induced liquid-solid interface reaction. J Phys: Condens Matter 1999; 11:7089–7094. 845. Yang G-W, Wang J-B, Liu Q-X. Preparation of nano-crystalline diamonds using pulsed laser induced reactive quenching. J Phys: Condens Matter l998; 10:7923–7927. 846. Yang GW, Wang JB. Pulsed-laser-induced transformation path of graphite to diamond via an intermediate rhombohedral graphite. Appl Phys A 2001; 72:475–479. 847. Lu YF, Huang SM, Wang XB, et al. Laser-assisted growth of diamond particulates on a silicon surface from a cyclohexane liquid. Appl Phys A 1998;A66:543–547. 848. Sharma AK,Vispute RD, Joag DS, et al. Diamond nucleation at the organic liquid-metal interface by laser-induced reactive quenching. Mater Lett 1993; 17:42–48. 849. Singh J, Vellaikal M, Narayan J. Laser-enhanced synthesis and processing of diamond films from liquid hydrocarbons. J Appl Phys 1993; 73(9):4351–4356. 850. Shafeev GA, Simakin AV, Lyalin AA, et al. Laser writing of glassy carbon features on Si from liquid toluene. Appl Surf Sci 1999; 138–139:461–464. 851. Hidai H,Tokura H. Carbon film synthesis on the water by excimer laser irradiation. J Jpn Soc Precision Eng 2000; 66(3):409–413. 852. Wang JB, Zhang CY, Zhong XL, et al. Cubic and hexagonal structures of diamond nanocrystals formed upon pulsed laser induced liquid-solid interfacial reaction. Chem Phys Lett 2002; 361:86–90.

416

References

853. Simakin AV, Loubnin EN, Shafeev GA, et al. Laser-assisted deposition of Pd-doped diamond-like films from liquid hydrocarbons and their use for glass metallization. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 186:227–231. 854. Hidai H,Tokura H. Diamond like carbon particle synthesis in the water by laser irradiation. J Jpn Soc Precision Eng 2002; 68(8):1072–1076. 855. Shi J, Cherukuri R, Lu F, et al. Near field effects in Visible and UV laser assisted deposition of DLC. In: Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, 2005. (CLEO), 22–27 May, vol. 3; 2005:1739–1741. 856. Wang CX,YangYH,Yang GW. Thermodynamical predictions of nanodiamonds synthesized by pulsed-laser ablation in liquid. J Appl Phys 2005; 97:066104. 857. TamakiY,Asahi T, Masuhara H. Nanoparticle formation of vanadyl phthalocyanine by laser ablation of its crystalline powder in a poor solvent. J Phys Chem A 2002; 106:2135–2139. 858. Sugiyama T, Asahi T, Takeuchi H, et al. Size and phase control in quinacridone nanoparticle formation by laser ablation in water. Jpn J Appl Phys 2006; 45(1B):384–388. 859. Tamaki Y,Asahi T, Masuhara H. Tailoring nanoparticles of aromatic and dye molecules by excimer laser irradiation. Appl Surf Sci 2000; 168:85–88. 860. Tamaki Y, Asahi T, Masuhara H. Solvent dependent size and phase of vanadyl phthalocyanine nanoparticles formed by laser ablation of VOPc crystal dispersed solution. Jpn J Appl Phys, Pt 1 2003; 42:2725–2729. 861. Li B, Kawakami T, Hiramatsu M. Enhancement of organic nanoparticle preparation by laser ablation in aqueous solution using surfactants. Appl Surf Sci 2003; 210(3–4):171–176. 862. Li B,KawakamiT,Hiramatsu M. Surfactant effects on optical absorption spectra of iron phthalocyanine nanoparticles in water. Mater Res Bull 2004; 39:1265–1269. 863. Polman A, Sinke W, Saris FW. Quench rate enhancement in pulsed laser melting of Si by processing under water. Appl Phys Lett 1988; 52(7):535–537. 864. Polman A, Sinke W, Uttormark MJ, et al. Transient processes at the Si-water interface during pulsed laser irradiation. Mat Res Soc Symp Proc 1988; 100:555–560. 865. Polman A, Sinke WC, Uttormark MJ, et al. Pulsed-laser induced transient phase transformations at the Si-H2 O interface. J Mater Res 1989; 4(4):843–856. 866. Kanetkar SM, Ogale SB. Pulsed laser reactive quenching at liquid-solid interface. Bull Mater Sci 1988; 11(2–3):167–190. 867. Imai H, Hirashima H, Awazu K. Alternative modification methods for sol-gel coatings of silica, titania and siIica-titania using ultraviolet irradiation and water vapor. Thin Solid films 1999; 351:91–94. 868. Watanabe H, Sameshima T. High-pressure H2 O vapor heat treatment used to fabricate poly-Si thin film transistors. Jpn J Appl Phys part, 2 2002; 41(9A/B):L974–L977. 869. Patil PP, Phase DM, Kulkarni SA, et al. Pulsed-laser- induced reactive quenching at a liquid-solid interface: aqueous oxidation of iron. Phys Rev Lett 1987; 58(3):238–241. 870. Ogale SB, Patil PP, Phase DM, et al. Synthesis of metastable phases via pulsed-laser-induced reactive quenching at liquid-solid interfaces. Phys Rev B 1987; 36(16):8237–8250. ´ 871. Jendrzejewski R, Sliwi´ nski G. Laser treatment of the 38HMJ steel surface in a liquid nitrogen environment. In: Proc SPIE 2000, 4238 (Woli´nski WL, Jankiewicz Z, eds. Laser technology VI: applications); 2000:149–154. 872. Haefliger D, Stemmer A. Nanostructuring of aluminum-coated scanning near-field optical microscope probes by direct, laser thermal oxidation in water. Microelectron Eng 2002; 61–62:523–527. 873. Haefliger D, Cahill BP, Stemmer A. Rapid prototyping of micro-electrodes on glass and polymers by laser-assisted corrosion of aluminum films in water. Microelectron Eng 2003; 67–68:473–478. 874. Heitz J, Niino H,Yabe A. Surface modification of fluorocarbon polymers by vacuum-UV excimer lamp irradiation in reactive gas atmosphere. Jpn J Appl Phys Pt 1 1996; 35(7):4110–4116. 875. Murahara M, Okoshi M,Toyoda K. Excimer laser induced photochemical surface treatment of teflon for adhesion. In: Proc SPIE 2502 (BohnWL, Hügel H, eds. Gas flow and chemical lasers: tenth international symposium); 1995:611–616. 876. Murahara M, Toyoda K. Excimer laser-induced photochemical modification and adhesion improvement of a fluororesin surface. J Adhesion Sci Technol 1995; 9(12):1601–1609. 877. Hatao K,Toyoda K, Murahara M. Development of a continuous surface modification system of fluorocarbon resin for strong adhesion. In: Mat Res Soc Symp Proc 451 (Electrochemical synthesis and modification of materials: symposium held 2–5 December, 1996, Boston, Massachusetts, USA); 1997:527–531. 878. Lou Q. Surface alteration of polymer by UV laser ablation. In: Proc SPIE 3519 (Sulzmann A, Nelson BJ, eds. Microrobotics and micromanipulation); 1998:219–223. 879. Huang F,Lou Q,Xu J,et al. Polymer surface treatment by XeCl excimer laser. Chinese J Lasers 1999;A26(8):745–748. 880. Hopp B, Smausz T, Kresz N, et al. Adhesion strength measurements of excimer laser treated PTFE surfaces using liquid photoreagents. In: Proc SPIE 5131 (Carabelas A, Baldacchini G, Di Lazzaro P, et al., eds.Third GR-I international conference on new laser technologies and applications); 2003:190–194. 881. Doeswijk LM, de Moor HHC, Blank DHA, et al. Passivating TiO2 coatings for silicon solar cells by pulsed laser deposition. Appl Phys A 1999; 69(Suppl.):S409–S411.

References

417

882. Chrisey DB, Huber GK, eds. Pulsed laser deposition of thin films. New York:Wiley; 1994. 883. Arias JL, García-Sanz FJ, Mayor MB, et al. Physicochemical properties of calcium phosphate coatings produced by pulsed laser deposition at different water vapour pressures. Biomaterials 1998; 19:883–888. 884. Bagratashvili VN, Antonov EN, Sobol EN, et al. Macroparticle distribution and chemical composition of laser deposited apatite coatings. Appl Phys Lett 1995; 66(19):2451–2463. 885. Cotell CM. Pulsed laser deposition and processing of biocompatible hydroxylapatite thin films. Appl Surf Sci 1993; 69:140–148. 886. Rigo ECS, dos Santos LA, de Oliveira LC, et al. Biomimetic method for obtaining hydroxylapatite. Mater Sci Forum 1999; 299–300:99–103. 887. Jelínek M, Dostálová T, Fotakis C, et al. Laser deposition and analysis of biocompatible ceramic films – experiences and overview. Laser Phys 1996; 6(1):144–149. 888. Fernández-Pradas JM, Sardin G, Clèries L, et al. Deposition of hydroxyapatite thin films by excimer laser ablation. Thin Solid Films 1998; 317:393–396. 889. Serra P, Morenza JL. Analysis of hydroxyapatite laser ablation plumes in a water atmosphere. Appl Phys A 1998; 67:289–294. 890. Serra P, Morenza JL. Evidence of chemical reactions in the hydroxyapatite laser ablation plume with a water atmosphere. J Appl Phys 1999; 85(6):3289–3293. 891. Serra P, Fernández-Pradas JM, Navarro J, et al. Study of the plume generated by Nd:YAG laser ablation of a hydroxyapatite target. Appl Phys A 1999; 69(Suppl.): S183–S186. 892. Fernández-Pradas JM, Clèries L, Martínez E, et al. Calcium phosphate coatings deposited by laser ablation at 355 nm under different substrate temperatures and water vapour pressures. Appl Phys A 2000; 71:37–42. 893. Arias JL, Mayor MB, Pou J, et al. Transport of ablated material through a water vapor atmosphere in pulsed laser deposition of hydroxylapatite. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 186:448–452. 894. Arias JL, Mayor MB, Pou J, et al. Laser ablation rate of hydroxylapatite in different atmospheres. Appl Surf Sci 2003; 208–209:57–60. 895. Jiménez E, Arias JL, León B, et al. Electric discharge assisted pulsed laser deposition of hydroxylapatite. Thin Solid Films 2004; 453–454:422–426. 896. Willmott PR, Antoni F, Döbeli M. Kinetic, crystallographic, and optical studies of GaN and Alx Ga1x N thin films grown on Si(111) by pulsed reactive crossed-beam laser ablation using liquid alloys and N2 or NH3 . J Appl Phys 2000; 88(1):188–195. 897. Sankur H, Gunning WJ, DeNatale J, et al. High-quality optical and epitaxial Ge films formed by laser evaporation. J Appl Phys 1989; 65(6):2475–2478. 898. Götz T, Stuke M. Short-pulse UV laser ablation of solid and liquid metals: indium. Appl Phys A 1997; 64:539–543. 899. FranghiadakisY, Fotakis C,Tzanetakis P. Energy distribution of ions produced by excimer-laser ablation of solid and molten targets. Appl Phys A 1999; 68:391–397. 900. Tóth Z, Hopp B, Smausz T, et al. Excimer laser ablation of molten metals as followed by ultrafast photography. Appl Surf Sci 1999; 138–139:130–134. 901. Kiso M, Mizuno K, Suzuki J, et al. Laser ablation of a molten Ga target; comparison of experiments and simulation. Appl Phys A 2002; 74:139–141. 902. Ishiguro T, Shoji T, Inada R. Synthesis of C-N and Si-C films by pulsed laser ablation with frozen N2 and CH4 targets. Appl Phys A 1999; 69(Suppl.):S149–S152. 903. Hanabusa M, Tsujihara K. Diamond-like carbon films deposited by laser ablation using frozen acetylene targets. J Appl Phys 1995; 78(6):4267–4269. 904. Hiroshima Y, Ishiguro T, Esaki K. Applications of pulsed excimer laser deposition with a frozen nitrogen target to deposition of NbN and BN films. Jpn J Appl Phys Pt 1 1997; 36(4A);2267–2271. 905. Hiroshima Y, Ishiguro T, Esaki K. Formation of a frozen nitrogen target and characterization for the application of pulsed laser deposition. Jpn J Appl Phys Pt 1 1997; 36(2):798–804. 906. Ishiguro T, Esaki K, Hiroshima Y. Synthesis of carbon films using pulsed laser deposition method with frozen CH4 and CO2 targets. Appl Surf Sci 1998; 127–129:553–558. 907. Niino H, Sato T,Yabe A. ps-laser photolysis of nitrogen solid films at a cryogenic temperature. In: Conference digest of conference on lasers and electro-optics europe 2000. Nice, France. 10–15 September 2000. 2000:CWF51. 908. Niino H, Sato T, Narazaki A, et al. Laser ablation of solid-nitrogen film by UV ps-laser irradiation. In: The 4th pacific rim conference on lasers and electro-optics, 2001. CLEO/Pacific rRim 2001. Chiba, Japan; 15–19 July 2001, vol. 1; 2001:308–309. 909. Niino H, Sato T, Narazaki A, et al. Laser ablation and photo-dissociation of solid-nitrogen film by UV ps-laser irradiation. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 197–198:67–71. 910. Piqué A, McGill RA, Chrisey DB, et al. Growth of organic thin films by the matrix assisted pulsed laser evaporation (MAPLE) technique. Thin Solid Films 1999; 355–356:536–541.

418

References

911. Wu PK, Ringeisen BR, Callahan J, et al. The deposition, structure, pattern deposition, and activity of biomaterial thin-films by matrix-assisted pulsed-laser evaporation (MAPLE) and MAPLE direct write. Thin Solid Films 2001; 398–399:607–614. 912. Piqué A,Wu P, Ringeisen BR, et al. Processing of functional polymers and organic thin films by the matrix-assisted pulsed laser evaporation (MAPLE) technique. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 186:408–415. 913. Toftmann B, Rodrigo K, Schou J, et al. High laser-fluence deposition of of organic materials in water ice matrices by ‘MAPLE’. Appl Surf Sci 2005; 247:211–216. 914. Mercado AL, Allmond CE, Hoekstra JG, et al. Pulsed laser deposition vs. matrix assisted pulsed laser evaporation for growth of biodegradable polymer thin films. Appl Phys A 2005; 81:591–599. 915. Karaiskou A, Zergioti I, Fotakis C, et al. Microfabrication of biomaterials by the sub-ps laser-induced forward transfer process. Appl Surf Sci 2003; 208–209:245–249. 916. Serra P, Fernández-Pradas JM, Berthet FX, et al. Laser direct writing of biomolecule microarrays. Appl Phys A: Mater Sci Process 2004; 79(4–6):949–952. 917. Fernández-Pradas JM, Colina M, Serra P, et al. Laser-induced forward transfer of biomolecules. Thin Solid Films 2004; 453–454:27–30. 918. Ogawa Y. Mechanized underwater welding and cutting for VLFS. In: Proceedings of the 2002 international symposium on underwater technology 2002, 16–19 April 2002. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; c2002:87–92. 919. Fulton R. Advances in underwater welding. Oceans 1986; 18:121–126. 920. Kojima T, Ohwaki K, Tsuchiya K, et al. Development of underwater welding with high power YAG laser. Ishikawajima-Harima Giho – Ishikawajima-Harima Eng Rev 1997; 37(4):303–308. 921. Tamura M, Kawano S, Kouno W, et al. Development of underwater laser cladding and underwater laser seal welding techniques for reactor components. In: Proceedings of 13th international conference of nuclear engineering, 2005, Beijing, China. May 16–20. 2005:ICONE13–50141. 922. Tamura M, Kawano S, Kouno W, et al. Development of underwater laser cladding and underwater laser seal welding techniques for reactor components (II). Proceedings of ICONE14, International Conference of Nuclear Engineering, July 17–20, 2006, Miami, USA: 2006:ICONE14–89346. 923. Zhang X, Chen W, Ashida E, et al. Laser-material interaction and process sensing in underwater Nd:yttriumaluminum-garnet laser welding. J Laser Appl 2003; 15(4):279–254. 924. Szelagowski H, Sepold G. Wet underwater welding with high power CO2 lasers. In: Russell JD, ed. International conference on power beam technology. Abington:Welding Institute; 1987: 235–242. 925. Uehara M, Owaki K,Tsuchiya K, et al. Underwater laser beam torch. Patent JP10180476, 1998. 926. Owaki K, Kanazawa Y,Tsuchiya K, et al. Underwater laser welding equipment. Patent JP9010980, 1997. 927. Yamashita Y, Kawano T, Mann K. Underwater laser welding by 4 kW CW YAG laser. J Nucl Sci Technol 2001; 38(10):891–895. 928. Yamashita Y, Kato T, Koshiishi M. Device and method of underwater laser welding. Patent JP2000280087, 2000. 929. Whitney E, Rhoads W. Wet welding and cladding using a 3kW Nd:YAG laser. In: Proceedings of the laser materials processing conference, ICALEO 2000, Laser Institute America (LIA), vol. 89; 2000:C-146–155. 930. Fujimori H, Matsui T, Ajiro T, et al. Detection of fine particles in liquids by laser breakdown method. Jpn J Appl Phys 1992; 31:1514–1518. 931. Carls JC, Seo Y, Brock JR. Laser-induced breakout and detonation waves in droplets. II. Model. J Opt Soc Am B Opt Phys 1991; 8(2):329–336. 932. Silfvast W. Laser fundamentals. Cambridge: Cambridge University; 1996. 933. Paul B. Compilation of evaporation coefficients. ARS J 1962; 32:1321–1328. 934. Miotello A, Kelly R. Critical assessment of thermal models for laser sputtering at high fluences. Appl Phys Lett 1995; 67(24):3535–3537. 935. Fisher JC. The fracture of liquids. J Appl Phys 1948; 19(11):1062–1067. 936. Kiselev SB. Kinetic boundary of metastable states in superheated and stretched liquids. Physica A: Statistical Mech Appl 1999; 269(2–4):252–268. 937. Feder J, Russell KC, Lothe J, et al. Homogeneous nucleation and growth of droplets in vapours. Adv Phys 1966; 15(57):111–178. 938. Dömer H, Bostanjoglo O. Phase explosion in laser-pulsed metal films. Appl Surf Sci 2003; 208–209:442–446. 939. Dou Y, Zhigilei LV,Winograd N, et al. Explosive boiling of water films adjacent to heated surfaces: a microscopic description. J Phys Chem A 2001; 105:2748–2755. 940. Brujan E-A. Collapse of cavitation bubbles in blood. Europhys Lett 2000; 50(2):175–181. 941. Brenner MP, Hilgenfeldt S, Lohse D. Single-bubble sonoluminescence. Rev Mod Phys 2002; 74:425–484. 942. Robinson AJ, Judd RL. Bubble growth in a uniform and spatially distributed temperature field. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2001; 44(14):2699–2710. 943. Young FR. Cavitation. London: Imperial College; 1999.

References

419

944. Mitrovic J. Formation of a liquid jet after detachment of a vapour bubble. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 1997; 40(18):4309–4317. 945. Robinson PB, Blake JR. Interaction of cavitation bubbles with a free surface. J Appl Phys 2001; 89(12): 8225–8237. 946. Blake JR, Keen GS,Tong RP, et al. Acoustic cavitation: the fluid dynamics of non-spherical bubbles. Phil Trans R Soc London, Ser A Math, Phys Eng Sci 1999; 357(1751):251–267. 947. Tomita Y, Shima A. Mechanisms of impulsive pressure generation and damage pit formation by bubble collapse. J Fluid Mech 1986; 169:535–564. 948. Chen X, Xu R, Shen Z, et al. Impact of a liquid-jet produced by the collapse of laser-induced bubbles against a solid boundary. Microwave Optical Technol Lett 2006; 48(8):1525–1528. 949. Wolfrum B, Kurz T, Mettin R, et al. Shock wave induced interaction of microbubbles and boundaries. Phys Fluids 2003; 15(10):2916–2922. 950. Antonov AV, Bunkin NF, Lobeev AV. On the mechanism of optical breakdown in transparent liquids. Bull Russ Acad Sci Phys 1992; 56(9):1342–1344; Original: Izv Ross Akad Nauk, Ser Fiz 1992; 56(9):78–80. 951. Bunkin NF, Bunkin FV. Bubbstons: stable microscopic gas bubbles in very dilute electrolytic solutions. Sov Phys JETP 1992; 74(2):271–278; Original: Zh Eksperim Teor Fiz 1992; 101(2):512–527. 952. Brenner MP, Hilgenfeldt S, Lohse D. Single-bubble sonoluminescence. Rev Mod Phys 2002; 74:425–484. 953. Mason T, Peters D. Practical sonochemistry. Uses and applications of ultrasound, 2nd edn. Chichester: Horwood; 2002. 954. Keldysh LV. Ionization in the field of a strong electromagnetic wave. Sov Phys JETP 1965; 20:1307–1314. Original: Zh Eksp Teor Fiz 1964; 47. 955. Kennedy PK. A first-order model for computation of laser-induced breakdown thresholds in ocular and aqueous media. I. Theory. IEEE J Quantum Electron 1995; 31:2241–2249. 956. Vogel A, Noack J, Hüttman G, et al. Mechanisms of femtosecond laser nanosurgery of cells and tissues. Appl Phys B 2005; 81(8):1015–1047. 957. Zel’dovichYaB, RaizerYuP. Physics of shock waves and high temperature hydrodynamic phenomena. Mineola: Dover; 2001. 958. Bäuerle D. Laser processing and chemistry, 3rd edn. Berlin: Springer; 2000. 959. Hughes TP. Plasmas and laser light. London: Hilger; 1975. 960. Docchio F. Lifetimes of plasmas induced in liquids and ocular media by single Nd:YAG laser pulses of different duration. Europhys Lett 1988; 6(5):407–412. 961. Nikogosyan DN, Oraevsky AA, Rupasov VI. Two-photon ionization and dissociation of liquid water by powerful laser UV radiation, Chem Phys 1983; 77(1):131–143. 962. Spitzer L. Physics of fully ionized gases. New York: Interscience; 1962. 963. Rozmus W, Offenberger AA. Thermal conductivity for dense, laser-compressed plasmas. Phys Rev A 1985; 31:1177–1179. 964. Noack J,Vogel A. Laser-induced plasma formation in water at nanosecond to femtosecond time scales: calculation of thresholds, absorption coefficients, and energy density. IEEE J Quantum Electron 1999; 35(8):1156–1167. 965. Mao X, Russo RE. Observation of plasma shielding by measuring transmitted and reflected laser pulse temporal profiles. Appl Phys A: Mater Sci Process 1997;A64:1–6. 966. Malone RC, McCrory RL, Morse RL. Indications of strongly flux-limited electron thermal conduction in laser-target experiments. Phys Rev Lett 1975; 34:721–724. 967. Bond DJ. Approximate calculation of the thermal conductivity of a plasma with an arbitrary temperature gradient. J Phys D 1981; 14:L43–6. 968. Bunkin NF,Lobeev AV. Bubbston-cluster structure under conditions of optical breakdown in a liquid. Quant Electron 1994; 24(4):297–301; Original: Kvant Elektron Moskva 1994; 21(4):319–323. 969. Izumida S, Onishi K, Saito-M. Estimation of laser-induced breakdown threshold of microparticles in water. Jpn J Appl Phys Part, 1 1998; 37(4A):2039–2042. 970. Bunkin NF. Lobeyev AV. Influence of dissolved gas on optical breakdown and small-angle scattering of light in liquids. Phys Lett A 1997; 229(5):327–333. 971. Bunkin NF, Bakum SI. Role of a dissolved gas in the optical breakdown of water. Quant Electron 2006; 36(2):117–124. 972. Kennedy PK, Hammer DX, Rockwell BA. Laser-induced breakdown in aqueous media. Prog Quantum Electron 1997; 21(3):155–248. 973. Saito K,Takatani K, Sakka T, et al. Observation of the light emitting region produced by pulsed laser irradiation to a solid-liquid interface. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 191–198:56–60. 974. Sakka T, Oguchi H, Masai S, et al. Use of a long-duration ns pulse for efficient emission of spectral lines from the laser plume in water. Appl Phys Lett 2006; 88(6):061120. 975. Henderson Le Roy E. General laws for propagation of shock waves through matter. In: Ben-Dor G,Igra O,ElperinT, eds. Handbook of shock waves, vol. 1. San Diego:Academic Press; 2001:143–183.

420

References

976. Nagayama K. Shock waves in solids. In: Ben-Dor G, Igra O, Elperin T, eds. Handbook of shock waves, vol. 1. San Diego:Academic Press; 2001:315–338. 977. He HL, Bouse M, Arrigoni M, et al. Hugoniot measurement of water from the impact of laser driven mini-flyers. AIP Conf Proc 2004; 706:1393–1396. 978. Brown JM, Fritz JN, Hixson RS. Hugoniot data for iron. J Appl Phys 2000; 88(9):5496–5498. 979. Marsh SP, ed. LASL shock Hugoniot data. Berkeley: University of California; 1980. 980. Itoh S. Shock waves in liquids. In: Ben-Dor G, Igra O, Elperin T, eds. Handbook of shock waves, vol 1. San Diego: Academic Press; 2001:263–314. 981. Zakharov SI, Lokhov YuN, Fiveiskii YuD. Generation of shock waves in an optically transparent dielectric by a focused laser pulse. Fiz Khim Obr Mater 1974; (4):16–21. 982. Wakisaka A, Gaumet JJ, ShimizuY, et al. Growth of carbon clusters. J Chem Soc FaradayTrans 1993; 89(7):1001–1005. 983. Gaumet JJ, El Ouachini A, Peter S, et al. Formation of carbon clusters Cn (1 ≤ n ≤ 4) by laser vaporization of graphite and a study of their chemical reactivity by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. J Chem Soc, Faraday Trans 1996: 92(11):1831–1834. 984. McGrath TE, Diebold GJ, Bartels DM, et al. Laser initiated chemical reactions in carbon suspensions. J Phys Chem A 2002: 106:10072–10078. 985. Glemser O, Stöcker U,Wendlandt HG. Zur Reaktion von festen Oxiden mit hochverdichtetem Wasser bei höheren Temperaturen. Ber Bunsenges 1966; 70:1129–1134. 986. Matson DW. Smith RD. Supercritical fluid technologies for ceramic-processing applications. J Am Ceramic Soc 1989; 71:811–881. 987. Krikorian OH. Predictive calculations of volatilities of metals and oxides in steam-containing environments. High Temp-High Pressure 1982; 14:387–397. 988. Jacobson N, Myers D, Opila E. et al. Interactions of water vapor with oxides at elevated temperatures. J Phys Chem Solids 2005; 66:471–478. 989. Ueno I, Shoji M. Thermal-fluid phenomena induced by nanosecond-pulse heating of materials in water. Trans ASME J Heat Transfer 2001; 123(6):1123–1132. 990. Sakka T,Takatani K, OgataYH, et al. Laser ablation at the solid–liquid interface: transient absorption of continuous spectral emission by ablated aluminium atoms. J. Phys D:Appl Phys 2002; 35:65–73. 991. Sakka T, Saito K, Ogata YH. Emission spectra of the species ablated from a solid target submerged in liquid: vibrational temperature of C2 molecules in water-confined geometry. Appl Surf Sci 2002; 197–198:246–250. 992. Saito K, Sakka T, Ogata YH. Rotational spectra and temperature evaluation of C2 molecules produced by pulsed laser irradiation to a graphite-water interface. J Appl Phys 2003;. 94(9):5530–5536. 993. Sakka T, Saito K, Ogata YH. Confinement effect of laser ablation plume in liquids probed by self-absorption at C2 Swan band emission. J Appl Phys 2005; 97: 014902. 994. Geretovszky Zs, Kelemen L, Piglmayer K. Temperature distribution in multilayers covered by liquid layer and processed by focused laser beam. Appl Surf Sci 1996; 106:422–428. 995. CRC handbook of chemistry and physics: a ready-reference book of chemical and physical data,Editor-in-chief David R. Lide; Associate Editor: H. P. R. Frederikse, 76th ed., Boca Raton: FL, CRC Press, 1995. 996. Paquin RA. Properties of metals. In: Bass M,Van Stryland EW,Williams DR, eds. Handbook of optics, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1995, Chapter 35. 997. Semiconductors on NSM. Online. Available: http://www.ioffe.rssi.ru/SVA/NSM/Semicond/ 998. Iida T. The physical properties of liquid metals. Oxford: Clarendon; 1988. 999. Ohring M. The materials science of thin films. Boston:Academic; 1992. 1000. Perry DL, Phillips SL. Handbook of inorganic compounds. Boca Raton: CRC; 1995. 1001. Meyer RJ, Pietsch EHE, Kotowski A, Becke-Goehring M. (eds.) Gmelin handbook of inorganic and organometallic chemistry, 8th edn. Berlin: Springer; 1990–1997. 1002. Morgan JJ,StummW.Water (properties). In: Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of chemicaltechnology, 4th edn, vol. 25. NewYork: Wiley; 1998:382–405. 1003. [Anonymous]. Infrared spectra handbook of common organic solvents. Sadtler Research Laboratories; 1983. 1004. Schrader B. Raman/infrared atlas of organic compounds. Weinheim:VCH; 1989. 1005. Perkampus H-H. UV-VIS atlas of organic compounds, 2nd edn. part 2, Spectra D1/1-M19. Weinheim:VCH; 1992. 1006. Riddick JA, Bunger WB, Sakano TK. Organic solvents. Physical properties and methods of purification, 4th edn. (Techniques in Chemistry, vol. 2). New York:Wiley; 1986. 1007. Marcus Y. The properties of solvents. Chichester:Wiley; 1998. 1008. Poling BE, Prausnitz JM, O’Connell JP. The properties of gases and liquids, 5th edn. Boston: McGraw-Hill; 2001. 1009. Merck Chemicals. Online. Available: http://www.merck.de/servlet/PB/menu/1001796/index.html 1010. NIST Chemistry WebBook. Online. Available: http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry 1011. Jacobsen RT, Penoncello SG, Lemmon EW. Thermodynamic properties of cryogenic fluids. New York: Plenum; 1997.

References

421

1012. Mackanos MA,Jansen ED,Shaw BL,et al. Delivery of midinfrared (6 to 7-µm) laser radiation in a liquid environment using infrared-transmitting optical fibers. J Biomed Optics 2003; 8(4):583–593. 1013. Nakamura M,Tamura K, Murakami S. Isotope effects on thermodynamic properties: mixtures of x(D2 O or H2 O) + (1–x)CH3 CN at 298.15 K. Thermochim Acta 1995; 253:127–136. 1014. Cook P, Hands BA. Cryogenic fluids databook, 1st edn. Leatherhead: British Cryoengineering Society; 1015. ChemExper Chemical Directory. Online. Available: http://www.chemexper.com/ 1016. Sigma-Aldrich Corporation. Online. Available: http://www.sigmaaldrich.com 1017. Liquid Synthetic Air, Safety Data Sheet. BOC Gases. Online. Available: http://www.wessingtoncryogenics.co.uk/ Liquid%20Air%20Data%20Sheet.pdf 1018. Eisenberg D, Kauzmann W. The structure and properties of water. London: Oxford University; 1969. 1019. Horita J, Cole DR. Stable isotope partitioning in aqueous and hydrothermal systems to elevated temperatures, In: Palmer DA, Fernández-Prini R, Harvey AH, eds. Aqueous systems at elevated temperatures and pressures: physical chemistry in water, steam and hydrothermal solutions. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2004:277–319. 1020. Revised release on the IAPS formulation 1985 on the thermal conductivity ofordinary water substance. IAPWS; 1998. 1021. IAPWS Release on surface tension of ordinary water substance, September 1994. IAPWS; 1994. 1022. Flynn TM. Cryogenic engineering, 2nd edn. New York: Dekker; 2005. 1023. IAPWS Revised release on the IAPS formulation 1985 for the viscosity of ordinary water substance. Vejle: IAPWS; 2003. 1024. Release on viscosity and thermal conductivity of heavy water substance, September 1982. IAPS; 1982. 1025. Siedler P. Physical properties (general) of sea water. In: Landolt Börnstein, numerical data and functional relationships in science and technology, new series. Group II: atomic and molecular physics, vol. 5/3a. Springer-Verlag, Berlin a.o.; 1986:223–262. 1026. Rodnikova MN,Val’kovskaya TM, Kartzev VN, et al. About elasticity of spatial H-bond network in liquids, J Mol Liquids 2003; 106:219–222. 1027. RSHydro www-page: Sound Speeds inWater, Liquids and Materials. Online. Available: http://www.rshydro.co.uk/ sound-speeds.shtml 1028. Beyer RT. Nonlinear acoustics. Washington, DC: US Naval Sea Systems Command; 1974:101. 1029. Rice MH,Walsh JM. Equation of state of water to 250 kilobars. J Chem Phys 1957; 26(4):824–830. 1030. Schaaffs W. Molecular acoustics. In: Landolt Börnstein, Numerical data and functional relastionships in science and technology, new series. Group II: atomic and molecular physics, vol. 5. Berlin: Springer; 1967:254. 1031. SkripovVP, Sinitsyn EN, Pavlov PA, et al. Thermophysical properties of liquids in the supercritical (superheated) state. New York: Gordon and Beach; 1988. 1032. Avedisian CT. The homogeneous nucleation limits of liquids. J Phys Chem Ref Data 1985; 14(3):695–729. 1033. Sartori E. A critical review on equations employed for the calculation of the evaporation rate from free water surfaces. Solar Energy 2000; 68(1):77–89. 1034. PadfieldT. Equations describing the physical properties of moist air. Online. Available: http://www.natmus.dk/cons/ tp/atmcalc/atmoclc1.htm 1035. Greenwood NN, Earnshaw A. Chemistry of the elements, 2nd edn. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann; 1036. Kennish MJ, ed. Practical handbook of marine science. Boca Raton: CRC; 1989. 1037. Antoine-Gleichung. Wikipedia. Online. Available: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine-Gleichung 1038. Pashley RM, Rzechowicz M, Pashley LR, et al. De-gassed water is a better cleaning agent. J Phys Chem B 2004; 109:1231–1238. 1039. Suresh SJ, NaikVM. Hydrogen bond thermodynamic properties of water from dielectric constant data. J Chem Phys 2000; 113:9727–9732. 1040. Reichardt C. Solvents and solvent effects in organic chemistry, 3rd edn. Weinheim:Wiley-VCH; 2003. 1041. Harvey AH, Gallagher JS, Levelt Sengers JMH. Revised formulation for the refractive index of water and steam as a function of wavelength, temperature and density, J Phys Chem Ref Data 1998; 27:761–774. 1042. Forsythe WE. Smithsonian physical tables, 9th edn. New York: Knovel; 2003. 1043. Bechmann R, Capeller U, Hellwege AM, et al., eds. Landolt Börnstein, Zahlenwerte und Funktionen aus Physik, Chemie, Astronomie, Geophysik und Technik, 6th edn. II Band: Eigenschaften der Materie in ihren Aggregatzuständen. 8. Teil Optische Konstanten. Berlin: Springer; 1963:5–815. 1044. Fabelinskii IL. Molecular scattering of light. New York: Plenum; 1968. 1045. Hirayama K. Handbook of ultraviolet and visible absorption spectra of organic compounds. New York: Plenum, 1967. 1046. G. F. Phillips, 3.8.7. UV-visible spectroscopy. Online. Available: http:// kayelaby.npl.co.uk/chemistry/3_8/3_8_7/ .html 1047. Fogg PGT, Gerrard W. Solubility of gases in liquids. A critical evaluation of gas/liquid systems in theory and practice. Chichester:Wiley; 1991. 1048. Dias AMA, Freire M, Coutinho JAP, et al. Solubility of oxygen in liquid perfluorocarbons. Online. Available: symp15.nist.gov/pdf/p193.pdf

422

References

1049. Battino R, Rettich TR, Tominaga T. The solubility of nitrogen and air in liquids. J Phys Chem Ref Data 1984; 13(2):563–600. 1050. Sowers BL, Birkhoff RD, Arakawa ET. Optical absorption of liquid water in the vacuum ultraviolet. J Chem Phys 1972; 57(1):583–584. 1051. Hale GM, Querry MR. Optical constants of water in the 200-nm to 200-µm wavelength region. Appl Opt 1973; 12(3):555–563. 1052. Laser specification tables (Buyers Guide 2001). Laser focus world 2000; 36(12)(Suppl.):66–286. 1053. Ratcliffe CI, Irish DE. Raman studies of liquid water up to 300◦ C. J Phys Chem 1982; 86(25);4897–4905. 1054. Bernath PF. Spectra of atoms and molecules. New York: Oxford University; 1995. 1055. M. Chaplin,Water Structure and Behavior. Online. Available: http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/index2.html 1056. Wagner W, Pruß A. The IAPWS formulation 1995 for the thermodynamic properties of ordinary water substance general and scientific use. J Phys Chem Ref Data 2002; 31(2):387–535. 1057. WagnerW,Cooper JR,Dittmann A,et al.The IAPWS industrial formulation 1997 for the thermodynamic properties of water and steam. J Eng Gas Turbines Power 2000; 122(1):150–180. 1058. WagnerW,Kruse A. Properties of water and steam, Zustandsgrößen vonWasser undWasserdampf. Berlin: Springer; 1998. 1059. Parry WT, Bellows JC, Gallagher JS, et al. ASME international steam tables for industrial use. New York:ASME; 2000. 1060. Lin J, Brown CW. Universal approach for determination of physical and chemical properties of water by near-IR spectroscopy. Appl Spectrosc 1993; 47(10):1720–1727. 1061. Dougherty RC, Howard LN. Equilibrium structural model of liquid water: Evidence from heat capacity, spectra, density, and other properties. J Chem Phys 1998; 109(17):7379–7393. 1062. Dorsey EN. Properties of ordinary water-substance. New York: Reinhold; 1940. 1063. Quan X, Fry ES. Empirical equation for the index of refraction of seawater. Appl Opt 1995; 34:3477–3480. 1064. Huibers PDT. Models for the wavelength dependence of the index of refraction of water. Appl Opt 1997; 36(16):3785–3787. 1065. Friel PJ, Goetz RC. The composition and enthalpy of dissociated water vapor. J Phys Chem 1960; 64:175–177. 1066. Häussinger P. Hydrogen. In: Elvers B, RounsavilIe JF, SchulzG, eds. Ullmann’s encyclopedia of industrial chemistry, vol. A13. Weinheim:VCH; 1989:297–438. 1067. Maxwell Garnett JC. Colours in metal glasses and in metallic films. Phil Trans R Soc Ser A 1904; 203:385–420.

Further Reading

1. Drawin HW. Thermodynamic properties of the equilibrium and nonequilibrium states of plasmas. In: Venugopalan M, ed. Reactions under plasma conditions, New York: Wiley; 1971:53–284. Diagram of composition of water plasma from 2 to 30 kK (Fig. 15b on page 97). 2. Yang GW. Laser ablation in liquids: applications in the synthesis of nanocrystals. Prog Mater Sci 2007; 52:648–698. A review article.

Glossary

ABAQUS A commercial general-purpose finite element program, designed primarily to model the behaviour of solids and structures under externally applied loading. Ablation Material ejection by laser light irradiation due to several mechanisms such as photothermal heating, boiling, optical breakdown, plasma formation, (chain) chemical reaction, etc. Absorbance, Aλ In spectroscopy, the absorbance Aλ is defined as Aλ = − log(I /I0 ), where I is the intensity of light at a specified wavelength λ that has passed through a sample (transmitted light intensity) and I0 is the intensity of the light before it enters the sample (or incident light intensity). Absorption (of light or sound) Conversion of the transmitted energy into another form, usually thermal. Absorption coefficient, a A measure of the attenuation caused by absorption of energy that results from its passage through a medium, for a plane wave in homogeneous medium I = I0 e −ax (Beer–Lambert law). ACCIC A code for simulation of laser-confined target interaction, developed at CLEA-LALP,Arcueil, France. Accommodation coefficient The ratio of the average energy actually transferred between a surface and impinging gas molecules scattered by the surface, to the average energy, which would theoretically be transferred if the impinging molecules reached complete thermal equilibrium with the surface. Acoustic impedance, Z The ratio of the amplitude of the sound pressure p and the amplitude of the particle velocity v of an acoustic wave, p Z = = ρ · c, v where ρ is the density of the medium and c is the speed of sound. Reflected power at an interface of two media with acoustic impedances Z1 and Z2 is expressed by Z2 − Z 1 2 Prefl = . Pinc Z2 − Z 1 The acoustic impedance of air is ≈0.0004 Mrayls (MPa s/m). Acoustic nonlinearity parameter, B/A Ratio of the coefficients A and B in the Taylor expansion of the dependence of the pressure p on the density ρ of a fluid for the isentropic case p = p0 + As +

B 2 C 3 s + s + ..., 2! 3!

where p0 notes the equilibrium pressure and s = (ρ − ρ0 )/ρ0 , where ρ0 is the equilibrium density. Sound speed dependence on parameter s is expressed as B C 2 2 2 s+ s + ... . v = v0 1 + A 2A Usually the terms beginning with s2 will be neglected and the nonlinear acoustic properties will be determined by B/A only. Handbook of Liquids-Assisted Laser Processing ISBN-13: 978-0-08-044498-7

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

423

424

Glossary

Due to sound speed dependence on pressure, sinusoidal wave will transform into sawtooth one in an acoustically nonlinear medium:

Adiabatic compressibility A measure of the relative volume change of fluid or solid as a response to a pressure change at constant entropy, 1 ∂V , κS = − V ∂p S where V is volume and p is pressure. The inverse of the compressibility is called the bulk modulus. Adiabatic exponent, γ Material parameter defined by v ∂2 e 1 a2 v ∂p γ= = = , =− p ∂v2 S pKs pv p ∂v S where v – volume, p – pressure, e – internal energy, Ks – compressibility, a – speed of sound. AIST National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology,Tsukuba, Japan. Alcohol An organic compound in which a hydroxyl group (—OH) is bound to a carbon atom of an alkyl or substituted alkyl group. The general formula for a simple acyclic alcohol is Cn H2n+1 OH. Aliphatic compounds Organic compounds in which carbon atoms are joined together in straight or branched chains as opposed to aromatic compounds which include a benzene ring. Alkanes Acyclic saturated hydrocarbons comprising a long chain of carbon linked together by single bonds. Alkanes are aliphatic compounds. The general formula for alkanes is Cn H2n+2 . Alkyl A univalent radical containing only carbon and hydrogen atoms arranged in a chain. The general formula for alkyles is Cn H2n+1 . ANSYS A commercial multiphysics finite element simulation program. Antoine equation Widely used approximation of the dependence of vapour pressure p on temperature T : log p = A −

B , T −C

where A, B, and C are constants. Antoine equation is useable from the triple point up to the reduced temperature of 0.85 (T = 0.85Tc ). ARL Anti-reflective layer (anti-reflective coating), a thin opaque coating having high optical absorbance, or a quarter-wavelength low-index layer suppressing reflected light due to destructive interference of light reflecting from the top and from the bottom of the ARL. Aromatic compound An organic chemical compound that contains aromatic rings (arenes) like benzene, pyridine, or indole. Aromaticity A chemical property in which a conjugated ring of unsaturated bonds, lone pairs, or empty orbitals exhibit a stabilization stronger that would be expected by the stabilization of conjugation alone. Attainable atmospheric superheat temperature Highest temperature to which the liquid may be heated without boiling. The attainable superheat temperature is determined by the homogeneous nucleation rate. Impurities in liquids lower the attainable superheat temperature because they serve as bubble nucleation centres. Barkhausen noise Noise in the magnetization or magnetic flux density of a ferromagnet when the magnetizing force applied to it is changed. Bauschinger effect The decrease in flow stress shown by materials when the direction of plastic deformation is reversed (e.g. first in compression, then in tension).

425

Glossary

Beam quality parameter, M 2 Is the ratio of the laser beam’s multimode diameter-divergence product to the ideal diffraction limited (TEM00 ) beam diameter-divergence product. It can also be given by the square of the ratio of the multimode beam diameter to the diffraction-limited beam diameter, Dm · m M = = d0 · 0 2

Dm d0

2 .

In the equation above, Dm is the measured beam waist diameter, m is the measured full-angle divergence, d0 is the theoretical ‘imbedded Gaussian’ beam diameter, and 0 is the theoretical diffraction-limited divergence. Beer–Lambert law States that in any medium that is absorbing light, the decrease in intensity I per unit length z is proportional to the instantaneous value of I , dI (z) = −αI (z), dz where α is the absorption coefficient of the material for that wavelength of electromagnetic radiation. The solution of this equation is I (z) = I0 e −αz , Beilstein Registry Number (BRN) Numeric identifier of chemical substances used in Beilstein Information System. The Beilstein Registry Number is the accession number of the substance record in CrossFire Beilstein/ Gmelin and in the Beilstein Online database. Bessel beam A beam of electromagnetic radiation with complex field amplitude ψ distribution ψ(r, t) = J0 (k sin αρ)e i(k cos αz−ωt) , where J0 is the Bessel function, k is the wavenumber, ρ = x2 + y2 , α is a parameter, and ω is the angular frequency. BFV (back free velocity) The velocity of target’s free back side. Binodal Curve on state diagram where the phase change occurs. Bohr radius, a0 Smallest possible radius of the orbit for the electron, orbiting the hydrogen nucleus; a0 = 5.291772108(18) × 10−11 m. Boiling point The boiling point of a liquid is the temperature at which the liquid and vapour phases are in equilibrium with each other at a specified pressure. Therefore, the boiling point is the temperature at which the vapour pressure of the liquid is equal to the applied pressure on the liquid. Bremsstrahlung Electromagnetic radiation produced by the acceleration of a charged particle, such as an electron, when deflected by another charged particle, such as an atomic nucleus. Brewster’s angle, θB Angle of incidence that produces a 90◦ angle between the reflected and refracted ray. When p-polarized light strikes a surface at Brewster’s angle, it propagates without reflection losses. θB = arctan (n2 /n1 ), where n1 and n2 are the refractive indices of the two media. BSTOA (beta solution treated and overaged) A heat treatment of an alloy first at temperature where only β-phase exists with subsequent rapid cooling following a second heat treatment at intermediate temperatures up to the times when the meanwhile increased hardness starts to decrease again. Bulk modulus, B The inverse of the compressibility; B = 1/κ. Capillary condensation Multilayer adsorption in porous solids or in a gap from a vapour reaching a situation at which pore spaces are (gap is) filled with liquid separated from the gas phase by menisci. Capillary force Surface tension originating force between two bodies connected by a liquid bridge. Capillary wave A wave travelling along the interface between two fluids, whose dynamics are dominated by the effects of surface tension. The wavelength of capillary waves are typically less than about a centimetre. CAS Registry Number (CASRN) Numeric identifier of chemical substances allocated by CAS (Chemical Abstracts Service). Cavitation Forming of cavities in the liquid due to a sudden pressure decrease. Chlorinity A measure of the chloride content, by mass, of seawater (grams per kilogram of seawater, or per mille) (see also salinity). CMC See critical micelle concentration. Compressibility factor, Z It is defined as: Z=

pVm RT

426

Glossary

where p – pressure, Vm – molecular volume, R – universal gas constant, T – temperature. Ideal gases at low temperatures have Z = 1. At higher pressures the real gases have Z > 1. Critical compressibility factor Zc is the compressibility factor at critical point. Conjugated system A chemically conjugated system is a system of atoms covalently bonded with alternating single and multiple (e.g. double) bonds (e.g. C=C C=C C) in a molecule of an organic compound. Contour method A method for determination of residual stresses. The part containing residual stresses is cut in half along a straight line, and the deformations of the cut surface are used to compute the initial residual stress field. The advantage of contour method is its simplicity. Correlated plasma Synonym for coupled plasma (see strongly coupled plasma). Coulomb explosion Disintegration of a body due to Coulomb repulsion between the positive ions after binding electrons ejection. Coupling parameter of plasma See strongly coupled plasma. Coverage, Fc In laser processing defined as follows: Fc = (As Np )/At , where At is the area to be processed, As is the beam spot area, and Np is the cumulative number of laser pulses. Creep The tendency of a material to move or to deform permanently to relieve stresses. Critical compressibility factor (critical coefficient), Zc See compressibility factor. Critical micelle concentration, cM (CMC, c.m.c.) Concentration of the surfactant in a solution above which the surfactant molecules spontaneously form micelles. Critical molar volume See vapour/liquid critical parameters. Critical pressure See vapour/liquid critical parameters. Critical temperature See vapour/liquid critical parameters. CW (continuous wave) Applied to lasers generating essentially steady (not pulsed) light. Debye length The scale over which mobile charge carriers (e.g. electrons) screen out electric fields in plasmas and other conductors. In a plasma, the Debye length is ε0 kB /e 2 , λD = ne /Te + ij j 2 nij /Ti where ε0 is vacuum permittivity, kB is Boltzmann’s constant, e is the electron charge, Te and Ti are the temperatures of the electrons and ions, respectively, ne is electrons density, nij is the density of atomic species i, with positive ionic charge je. Deep rolling A cold work deformation process used to improve the fatigue strength and smoothen the surface of metals by hydrostatically seated spherical rolling element. Deep rolling provides 2–3 times deeper plastically affected zone than shot peening. Defervescence See superheating. Degeneracy The number of different arrangements of the system which have the same energy. Degenerated plasma Plasma is called degenerate if the electron temperature is less than EF /kB , Te <

EF , kB

where EF is the Fermi energy for electrons, and kB is the Boltzmann’s coefficient. EF =

2 8me

3 ne π

2 3

,

where = h/2π, h is Planck’s constant, me is the mass of electron, and ne is the density of electrons. Density The ratio of an object’s mass to its volume. For non-ordered liquids, the density decreases with the increasing temperature (e.g. liquid argon shrinks 12 per cent on freezing). Density anomaly (increase of density with the increasing temperature) has been observed for example in water (density maximum at 3.984◦ C), D2 O (density maximum at 11.185◦ C), Ge15Te85 , and liquid silica. Depolarization factor Depolarization factor of an ellipsoid with semiaxes a, b and c is given as Lx = ∞ abc 0 2(s+a2 )3/2 (s+b2 )1/2 (s+c 2 )1/2 ds, while Ly and Lz are obtained by performing cyclic changes. Lx + Ly + Lz ≡ 1. See also light depolarization factor.

Glossary

427

DGTPM Diffractive gray tone phase mask. Diamond-like carbon (DLC)Amorphous carbon materials with significant amounts of sp3 hybridized carbon atoms. Dielectric constant, ε (dielectric permittivity) A measure of the polarizability of materials by electric field, D = εr ε0 E, where εr is the relative permittivity and ε0 is the permittivity of the vacuum; D is the electrical displacement and E is the electrical field. εr is a scalar if the medium is isotropic or a 3-by-3 matrix (tensor) otherwise. Diffusion coefficient (self-diffusion coefficient) The diffusion coefficient of species (atoms, molecules, etc.) in the absence of a chemical potential gradient. Discrete element method (DEM) A family of numerical methods for computing the motion of a large number of particles. In case on molecules, ions or atoms, Coulomb force, Pauli repulsion, and van der Waals force are considered, usually by appropriate potential distributions. DLC Dry laser cleaning: microparticles removal from solid surfaces by laser irradiation without applying liquids of steam to surface. DLC See diamond-like carbon. DR See deep rolling. Dynamic viscosity, η The ratio of shear stress τ between the fluid layers to the velocity gradient, ∂u/∂y, in the direction perpendicular to the layers, ∂u τ=η . ∂y EG/EC number Numeric identifier of chemical substances allocated by the Commission of the European Communities. Eigenstrain Non-stress strain. Elastic precursor Because shock wave velocities in liquids and solids are generally lower than elastic wave velocities, the shock waves are preceded by an elastic wave known as the elastic precursor. Electrical conductivity (specific conductivity), σ Proportionality constant between electrical current density and electrical field strength, j = σE (Ohm’s law). In anisotropic materials, electrical conductivity is a secondrank tensor. Electrical conductivity of liquids is often an indicator of their purity. Electrical double layer A layer with different from bulk electrolyte charge distribution at an interface consisting of a surface charge layer (i.e. a 2D-distribution of one type of ions) and a diffuse charge layer (counter-ions distributed over the space region next to the surface). Electrical double layer force Force between two particles or between a particle and a solid surface in an electrolyte solution due to the double layer charges. Electrical double layer forces are often repulsive. Electro-optical effect Optical effect caused by the applied steady or a low-frequency electric field. When the constant relative permittivity, εr is expanded into a power series of the amplitude of the electric field (E), the linear term in E represents the Pockels effect. The quadratic field-dependent term is known as the dc Kerr effect. Electrostatic image force Force between an electrically charged body and an uncharged plane surface. The force can be calculated by replacing the plane by an image of the body, at an equal distance from the plane and having opposite charge. Electrostriction Decrease in dimension of a substance in an electric field. EMV gauge Electromagnetic displacement gauge, the operation relies on change of magnetic flux due to change of current carrying loop area. Enthalpy Also called heat content, is the sum of the internal energy of a thermodynamic system plus the energy associated with work done by the system on the atmosphere which is the product of the pressure times the volume, H = U + PV, where H is the enthalpy, U is the internal energy, P is the pressure of the system, and V is the volume. Enthalpy of melting (standard enthalpy change of fusion, heat of fusion, latent heat of fusion) The amount of thermal energy which must be absorbed or lost for a definite quantity of a substance, for example 1 kg of 1 mol to change states from a solid to a liquid or vice versa and constant temperature. Enthalpy of vaporization (heat of vaporization, latent heat of vaporization) The amount of thermal energy required to vaporize a definite quantity, for example 1 kg of 1 mol of a liquid at constant pressure and constant temperature.

428

Glossary

Ester Organic compounds in which an organic group R’ replaces a hydrogen atom (or more than one) in an oxygen acid. An oxygen acid is an acid whose molecule has an —OH group from which the hydrogen (H) can dissociate as an H+ ion.

Ether Chemical compound which contains an ether group – an oxygen atom connected to two (substituted) alkyl groups (e.g. diethyl ether): Evaporation rate, in BuOAc units Relative to n-butyl acetate evaporation time as compared by Shell Automatic Thin Film Evaporator. Another commonly used reference liquid is ether. The liquids with small BuOAc evaporate more intensively. Extinction Reduction of the intensity of light of a directly transmitted beam in the media. Extinction coefficient, c (attenuation coefficient) A measure of reduction of the intensity of a light beam travelling through a medium, due to both absorption and scattering: ln(I /I0 ) , x where x – length of light path, I – intensity of light after distance, I0 – initial intensity of light, a – absorption coefficient, and b – scattering coefficient. Extinction coefficient, k Imaginary part of the complex index of refraction: n˜ = n − ik, where n is the index of refraction. Extinction coefficient k relates to absorption coefficient a as c =a+b =−

2ωk , c where ω is the angle frequency of the light and c is the speed of light. fs-CACO Femtosecond laser-induced cut and cleave operation. Flash point The minimum temperature at which the equilibrium vapour of a liquid in admixture with air at normal pressure will be ignited by an external ignition source applied in a specified manner over the surface of the liquid. Fluorescence Spontaneously emitted radiation that ceases immediately after the exciting radiation is removed. Fractal dimension A statistical quantity that gives an indication of how completely a fractal appears to fill space, as one zooms down to finer and finer scales. There are several definitions of fractal dimension, for example the Hausdorff dimension, Rényi dimension. In applications, usually the packaging (box-counting) dimension is used. Freezing point The temperature at which a substance changes its state from liquid to solid. In the presence of nucleating substances the freezing point of liquids is the same as the melting point, in the absence of nucleators it may be substantially lower, for example water can supercool to −42◦ C (231 K) before freezing. Helium does not freeze at all at normal pressure, even at absolute zero. Fresnel lens A lens comprising a set of concentric annular sections (Fresnel zones): a=

FWHM Full-width half maximum. Gaussian beam (named after mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauß) A beam of electromagnetic radiation with electric (or magnetic) field complex amplitude E distribution is −r 2 r2 w0 E(r, z) = E0 exp exp −ikz − ik + iζ(z) , w(z) w 2 (z) 2R(z) where w0 is a parameter (waist radius), r = x2 + y 2 ,

w(z) = w0 1 +

z z0

2 ,

429

Glossary

k is the wavenumber,

R(z) = z 1 +

and

z 2 0

z

,

z . z0 Gibbs energy (Gibbs free energy) The energy portion of a thermodynamic system available to do work, G ≡ H − TS. Grüneisen coefficient (Mie–Grüneisen coefficient), It is defined as

ζ(z) = arctan

V ∂2 e V ∂T Vβ =− =− = , T ∂v∂S T ∂V S C V KT where V – volume, T – temperature, e – internal energy, S – entropy, β – thermal expansion, CV – heat capacity, KT – compressibility. Halocarbons Organic compounds containing covalently bonded fluorine, chlorine, bromine, or iodine. HAZ (heat affected zone) Region in material having permanent changes in the structure due to applied heat during processing (e.g. by laser beam). Heat capacity (specific heat capacity; specific heat), c Rate of change of temperature T as heat Q is added to a body at the given conditions and state (without phase change) of the body (foremost at constant temperature or constant pressure, cT and cp ): ∂Q . dT ρcp is called ‘volumetric heat capacity’, where ρ is the density. Heat conductivity coefficient (coefficient of thermal conductivity), λ Rate of heat flow dQ/dt due to the temperature gradient dT /dx through a homogenous solid through an area A normal to the direction of heat flow dQ/dt = −λAdT /dx under steady state conditions and when the heat transfer is dependent only on the temperature gradient. Heat transfer Transfer of thermal energy through the process of conduction, convection, and radiation. These processes may occur singly or in conjunction. Heat transfer coefficient A measure of interface thermal resistance, defined as c=

h=

Q , AT

where Q is the heat flux, A is area, and T is temperature jump across the interface. HEL See Hugoniot elastic limit. Hildebrandt solubility parameter, δ A measure of solvent polarity, is defined as square root of the cohesive energy density, Ec δ= , Vm where Ec is cohesive energy, and Vm molar volume. If the solvent and the solute have close parameters δ, then usually the solute dissolves well in the solvent. As the cohesive energy is Ec = v H 0 − RT , the solubility parameter may be expressed also as: 0 − RT Hvp , δ= V 0 is the heat of vaporization at normal pressure. where Hvp

430

Glossary

Hole drilling method (incremental hole drilling method) A stress release method for determination of the residual stress field in solids. A hole is incrementally drilled into material while the surface strain is measured by strain gauges. The strain vs. depth data is then used to compute the stress profile. Hugoniot data Shock velocity Us vs. particle velocity up data. Hugoniot elastic limit Compressive yield strength of a material under a shock condition. HV (Vickers hardness) A method for measuring of surface hardness of materials using square-based diamond pyramid as an indenter. Suits well for spatially resolved hardness (microhardness) measurements. HVOF (high velocity oxy-fuel) A thermal spray technology for materials coating by powders where the powder is heated and carried by oxygen flame of propylene, hydrogen, propane, or kerosene. Hydrocarbon A chemical compound that consists only of the elements carbon (C) and hydrogen (H). Hydrocarbons contain a backbone consisting of carbon atoms, called a carbon skeleton with hydrogen atoms attached to that backbone. IAPWS (International Association for the Properties of Water and Steam) An international non-profit association of national organizations concerned with the properties of water and steam, particularly thermophysical properties and other aspects of high-temperature steam, water, and aqueous mixtures that are relevant to thermal power cycles and other industrial applications (www.iapws.org/). Ignition temperature (autoignition temperature) The lowest temperature at which a chemical will spontaneously ignite in a normal atmosphere, without an external source of ignition, such as a flame or spark. The ignition temperature decreases as the pressure increases or oxygen concentration increases. Index of refraction (refractive index), n Ratio of the speed of light in vacuum to the phase velocity of light in the medium, n ≡ c/vphase . For light absorbing substances a complex index of refraction is defined as n2 =

c 2 k2 4πσ =ε+ i, ω2 ω

where k is the wavenumber, ω is the angular frequency, ε is the electric permittivity, and σ is the electrical conductivity. It is common to specify the refractive indexes of materials for yellow sodium light (the D line, 589 nm), nD . Index of refraction of air at sea level is about 1.000292. Inverse Bremsstrahlung Absorption (IBA) Absorption process of electromagnetic radiation (e.g. laser light), whereas the energy of electromagnetic radiation is converted into kinetic energy of charged particles, for example electrons or ions in the plasma; inverse effect to Bremsstrahlung. Ionic strength It is defined as 1 2 I= ci zi , 2 where ci is the molarity concentration of ith ion present in the solution and zi is its charge. Summation is done for all charged particles present in the solution. Ionization energy (ionization potential) The minimum energy required to remove an electron from the ground state of the isolated gaseous atom or molecule. Isoelectric point pH value at which the zeta potential of a substance is zero. Colloids are least stable near the isoelectric point. Isothermal compressibility, κT A measure of the relative volume V change of fluid or solid as a response to a pressure p change at constant temperature T , 1 ∂V . κT = − V ∂p T IUPAC International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry. Kerr coefficient (Kerr constant), K The proportionality factor in relation n = λKE 2 , where n is the change of the index of refraction, λ is the light wavelength, and E is the electric field strength (see also Kerr effect). Some polar liquids, such as nitrotoluene (C7 H7 NO2 ) and nitrobenzene (C6 H5 NO2 ) exhibit very large Kerr constants. Kerr effect (Kerr electro-optic effect, DC Kerr effect, quadratic electro-optic effect, QEO effect) A change in the refractive index of a material in response to an electric field. Under the influence of the applied

431

Glossary

field, the material becomes birefringent, with different indexes of refraction for light polarized parallel to or perpendicular to the applied field. The difference in index of refraction, n, is given by: n = λKE 2 , where λ is the wavelength of the light, K is the Kerr constant, and E is the amplitude of the electric field. Ketone A ketone is either the functional group characterized by a carbonyl group (O=C) linked to two other carbon atoms or a chemical compound that contains this functional group. A ketone can be generally represented by the formula: R1 (CO)R2 .

Kinematic viscosity, ν The ratio of dynamic viscosity to the density of the fluid, ν=

η . ρ

Knudsen layer The gas layer near a gas–liquid phase interface not in translational equilibrium.The translational equilibrium is achieved within a few mean free paths (thickness of the Knudsen layer) by collisions between particles. LAD Laser assisted deposition (of thin films). LALP Liquid-assisted laser processing (also Laboratoire pour l’Application des Lasers de Puissance, France). LAPR Laser-assisted particles removal (from solid surfaces). Laser peening See laser shock processing and peening. Laser shock processing Treatment of solid materials by laser-generated mechanical impacts. The main application of laser shock processing is laser peening. Lennard-Jones potential (L-J potential, 6–12 potential) Interatomic/intermolecular potential expressed by

σ 12 σ 6 , − V (r) = 4ε r r where ε is the depth of the potential well, σ is the (finite) distance at which the potential is zero, and r is the distance between atoms or molecules. Alternatively, Lennard-Jones potential can be written as r 6 rmin 12 min , −2 V (r) = ε r r √ where rmin = 6 2σ is the distance at the minimum of the potential. LESAL (laser etching using a surface adsorbed layer) A laser machining method of transparent materials using a thin layer adsorbed onto the back side of the material that absorbs the laser radiation and causes the etching of the material surface. LIBS (laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy) A technique for elemental analysis utilizing laser excitation (including vaporization and plasma generation) of elemental emission spectra. LIBWE (laser-induced backside wet etching) A technique of machining of transparent to laser light materials at which the opposite to laser beam side of the material is in contact with an absorbing of laser light liquid. The laser energy absorbed in contacting the solid layer of the liquid is transferred to the liquid–solid interface where the material removal takes place. It is used for fine machining of optical materials. LIFT (laser-induced forward transfer) also called MWD (MAPLE direct write) A technique of fabricating of patterned thin films of organic materials. The starting material film (target) is backside irradiated by laser beam (fixed, scanned of patterned); the irradiated parts of the film are propelled onto a substrate located ∼0.1 mm away from the target. A matrix material of the target (liquid of frozen liquid) enhances the film transfer and protects the functional material form excessive heat.

432

Glossary

Light depolarization factor Ratio of the perpendicular and parallel-scattered intensities at right angles, I⊥ . u = III =π/2 The light depolarization factor reflects the anisotropy of the substance. Light scattering coefficient, R90 It is defined by R90 =

I90 L 2 , I0 V

where I90 – intensity of the light scattered at an angle 90◦ to the direction of the incident light, I0 – intensity of the incident light, L – distance between scattering volume and observation point, and V – scattering volume. In the Table 8.8 the R90 values are given relative to benzene. The absolute scattering coefficient of benzene at 546.1 nm and 25◦ C is R90 = 15.6–17.6 × 10−6 /cm. For water at 435.8 nm and 25◦ C, R90 = 4.3 cm−1 × 10−6 /cm. (The values in literature scatter considerably.) LIPAA (laser-induced plasma-assisted ablation) A technique for dry laser backside etching of transparent materials, where the etching is induced by the plasma, generated by laser beam irradiation of a opaque target near (some hundreds of µm) the backside of the workpiece. The technique enables micromachining of brittle optical materials without cracking. LLNL Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. LLSC (liquid-assisted laser shock cleaning) Combination of steam laser cleaning (SLC) with laser shock cleaning (LSC) where the surface to be cleaned is first covered by a liquid film and then subjected to laser heating and shock wave simultaneously. LP Laser peening, often a synonym to laser shock processing. LP-PLA Liquid-phase pulsed laser ablation. LPPC, LPwC Laser peening without protective coating. LSC (laser shock cleaning) A technique of removal of particles from solid surfaces due to a shock wave generated in gas (air) above the surface to be cleaned. The shock wave is commonly generated by gas breakdown by a focused pulsed laser beam. LSP (laser shock processing, laser peening) Treatment of solid parts by laser ablation-generated mechanical impulses. LULI Laboratoire d’Utilisation des Lasers Intenses, Ecole Polytechnique, Palaiseau, France. Magnetic susceptibility, χv (volume magnetic susceptibility, volumetric magnetic susceptibility, bulk magnetic susceptibility) A measure of the degree of magnetization of a material in response to an applied magnetic field, M = χv H, where M is the magnetization and H is the magnetic field strength. µ − 1, χv = µr − 1 = µ0 where µr is the ratio of the magnetic permeability of a specific medium µ to the permeability of free space µ0 . MALDI (matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization) A technique of ionization of molecules with the purpose of their mass spectrometric analysis. The matrix absorbs the most of the laser light and also protects the fragile molecules from being destroyed by laser beam. MAPLE (matrix-assisted pulsed-laser evaporation) Laser deposition using a frozen matrix consisting of a solution of a polymeric organic compound dissolved in a relatively volatile solvent. Marangoni flow (thermocapillary surface flow, Rayleigh–Benard–Marangoni flow) Surface tension gradientdriven flow, a liquid flow from regions of low surface tension to the regions of high surface tension. Marangoni flow is often the major cause of liquid convection at laser processing. Maxwell-Garnett effective medium theory (as applied to a bubbly liquid) According to the theory, the ensemble of small bubble and the liquid can be treated as a single medium with an effective dielectric constant, 3f (εl − εv ) , εeff = εl 1 − 2εl + εv + f (εl − εv ) where εl is the dielectric √ constant of liquid, εv is the dielectric constant of vapour, f denotes the volume fraction of the bubbles. εeff = n, where n is the conjugate of complex refractive index of the bubble medium

433

Glossary

[1067]. The theory was used to interpret the interferometric measurements of bubble layer thickness in steam laser cleaning by Kim et al. [88]. Megasonic cleaning Cleaning of surfaces from particulate using agitated by 800–2000 kHz acoustic waves liquid. Melting point The melting point of a crystalline solid is the temperature at which it changes state from solid to liquid. The melting point of a pure substance is always higher than the melting point of that substance when a small amount of an impurity is present. The more impurity is present, the lower the melting point. Liquid CO2 forms only at pressures above 5.11 atm; at atmospheric pressure, it passes directly between the solid phase (dry ice) and the gaseous phase in a process called sublimation. MIC Metal Improvement Company. Micelle An aggregate of surfactant molecules with the hydrophilic ‘head’ regions in contact with surrounding solvent, sequestering the hydrophobic tail regions in the micelle centre.

Mie–Grüneisen equation of state An equation of state particularly useful at high pressure, relates the density and pressure of compressive matter in an adiabatic process: ρ0 C02 η η · 1 − + ρ0 (e − e0 ) p = p0 (1 − η) + 2 (1 − sη)2 where

ρ0 β V ∂T = , ρ0 , , =− · ρ T ∂V S κ · ρ · cV ρ0 is the density, C0 is the speed of the sound, = 0 is the (dimensionless) Grüneisen coefficient in normal state, e − e0 is specific internal energy, s is linear Hugoniot slope coefficient s = Us /up (see Hugoniot data), β is volumetric thermal expansion coefficient, κ is isothermal compressibility, and cV is heat capacity at constant volume. For water, s = 1.79 and = 1.65. Molar magnetic susceptibility, χm It is defined as η=1−

χm = χv

M , ρ

where M is the molar mass and ρ is the density of the substance. Negative values of magnetic susceptibility of liquids in Table 8.8 indicates, that the liquids are diamagnetic. In non-uniform magnetic field these liquids are driven in direction opposite to the field gradient. Molar mass The mass of one mole of a chemical element or chemical compound. Molar volume (molecular volume) The volume occupied by one mole, numerically equal to the molecular weight divided by the density. Mole The amount of substance of a system which contains as many elementary entities as there are atoms in 12 g of carbon 12, where the carbon 12 atoms are unbound, at rest and in their ground state. Molecular dipole moment, p (dipole moment of molecule) A measure of the torque τ exercised by electric field E on molecules, τ = p × E. Table 8.8 presents the modules of permanent dipole moments of molecules. Dipole moments values of molecules in liquid and in gas phase are close. Molecular dynamics method (MD) See discrete element method. Momentum trap A solid plate in contact with the backside of laser-shocked sample, in purpose to avoid wave reflecting from backside of the sample. MWD (MAPLE direct write) See LIFT.

434

Glossary

Normal temperature and pressure 20◦ C (293.15 K) and 1 atm (101 325 Pa) Nucleation The onset of a phase transition in a small region. The phase transition can be the formation of a bubble or of a crystal from a liquid or a droplet from vapour. Numerical aperture, NA A dimensionless number that characterizes the range of angles over which the system can accept or emit light. For objectives and lenses, NA is defined as NA = n sin θ, where n is the index of refraction of the medium (gas or liquid) and θ is the half-angle of the maximum cone of light that can enter or exit the objective or the lens. OKO See optical Kerr effect. OPO (optical parametric oscillator) An parametric oscillator which oscillates at optical frequencies. In laser materials processing, OPO is used as a generator of coherent light whose wavelength can be tuned in wide range (e.g. 0.7–5 µm). Optical breakdown Catastrophic breakdown in a transparent medium by a strong electromagnetic field. Optical Kerr effect (OKE,AC Kerr effect) Double refraction (birefringence) in liquids or solids induced by an electric field of radiation. Optical Kerr effect is partly responsible for the self-focusing of intense laser light in liquids. Orientational correlation function (of molecules) It is defined as

N N

µi (0) µj (t)

M(0) M(t) i j

= γ(t) = N N

M(0) M(0) µi (0) µj (0) i

j

where M(t) is a vector sum of N polar molecules with dipole moment µi (t) in unit volume at time t. Orientational relaxation time, τR (rotational relaxation time, rotational correlation time) Time constant used in the approximation of the first-order orientational correlation function γ(t): γ(t) ∝ exp[−t/τR ]. τR corresponds to the time of decay of anisotropy of a liquid induced by an external field (e.g. by polarized light). Ostwald ripening In this book, the growth of larger crystals from those of smaller size which have a higher solubility than the larger ones. Due to Ostwald ripening the total surface area of the particle system will be reduced. Particle image velocimetry (PIV) An optical method used to measure velocities and related properties in fluids. The fluid is seeded with particles, and velocity information is calculated from the images of these particles. Partition function Number of possible states of a closed thermodynamical system as a function of temperature, volume, total energy, or chemical potential. Most of the thermodynamic variables of the system (of a substance) can be calculated from the partition function. PAZ Plastically affected zone. Peening A cold work process in which the surface of the cold metal is expanded, thereby relieving tensile stresses and/or inducing compressive stresses. Peening also encourages strain hardening of the surface metal. Perfluorocarbons Organic non-toxic compounds derived from hydrocarbons by replacement of all hydrogen atoms by fluorine atoms. PFC See perfluorocarbons. Phase explosion (explosive boiling) Sharp increase of homogeneous nucleation in a superheated liquid. Phase grating A diffraction grating with all lines transparent but of alternating optical thickness. Phase mask An optical mask where the patterns are formed by areas of alternating optical thickness. Phosphorescence Spontaneously emitted radiation that may persist for long periods, typically from seconds to milliseconds. Note: In molecular terms the term designates luminescence involving the change in electron spin multiplicity, typically from triplet to singlet or vice versa. The luminescence from a quartet state to a doublet state is also phosphorescence. Pitting corrosion A localized form of corrosion by which cavities or ‘holes’ are produced in the material. Pitting is considered to be more dangerous than uniform corrosion damage because it is more difficult to detect, predict, and design against. Pitting potential The ‘pitting potential’ corresponds to the potential at which the current starts to increase on the anodic scan. The ‘repassivation potential’ corresponds to the potential at which the current becomes

435

Glossary

negligible on the reverse (cathodic) scan. The more anodic the ‘pitting potential’, the less subject to pitting the sample. A ‘repassivation potential’ close to the ‘pitting potential’ indicates that the sample is capable of reprotecting itself easily after pitting. Pitzer acentric factor (acentric factor), ω It is defined as ω = − log

ps pc

Tr =0.7

− 1,

where ps – saturation pressure of vapour, pc – critical temperature, Tr – reduced temperature. Acentric factor is a measure for the temperature dependence of the vapour pressure. For unpolar substances, the dependence of vapour pressure near critical point on the inverse temperature is nearly linear with the slope ω. PIV See particle image velocimetry. PLA Pulsed laser ablation. PLAL Pulsed laser ablation in liquid medium. Plasmon Collective oscillations of the free electron gas at optical frequencies. PLD Pulsed-laser deposition. PLIIR Pulsed-laser-induced liquid–solid interfacial interaction. PLIRQ Pulsed-laser-induced reactive quenching. Polyyne Organic compound with alternating single and triple bonds. Polyynes are believed to serve as novel 1D-conducting materials,‘molecular wires’. p-polarization Polarization of the electrical field (of light) is parallel to the mirror symmetry plane. PULSA Pulsed-UV laser soft ablation. PVDF Polyvinylidene fluoride, a high performance piezoelectric polymer, –(CH2 CF2 )n –. Radicals Atomic or molecular species with unpaired electrons on an otherwise open shell configuration. These unpaired electrons are usually highly reactive, so radicals are likely to take part in chemical reactions. Reduced temperature The ratio of the temperature of a substance to its critical temperature, Tr = T /Tc . Reflectivity Ratio of the intensity of the reflected light from a surface to that of the incident light. Repassivation potential See pitting potential. RH (relative humidity) Ratio of the partial pressure of water vapour in a gaseous mixture of air and water to the saturated vapour pressure of water at a given temperature. RMS (r.m.s.) Root mean square value of a function, for example of surface roughness, 2 h x, y − h x, y , where h is the local height of the surface topography. Rq = RT (room temperature) An indoor temperature of from ∼20◦ C to 25◦ C. Salinity The total amount of dissolved solids in seawater in parts per thousand (‰) by weight when all the carbonate has been converted to oxide, the bromide and iodide to chloride, and all organic matter is completely oxidized. These qualifications result from the chemical difficulty in drying the salts in seawater. In practice, salinity is not determined directly but is computed from chlorinity, electrical conductivity, refractive index, or some other property with a relationship to salinity that is well established. Salinity S and the total dissolved salts in seawater are related to chlorinity Cl by S = 0.03 + 1.805Cl respectively = 0.07 + 1.811Cl. Saturation concentration in air The concentration of vapour of a liquid in the air in equilibrium with the liquid. SAW (surface acoustic wave) An acoustic wave travelling along the surface of a material with an amplitude that typically decays exponentially with the depth of the substrate. SC (single crystalline, monocrystalline) Applied for materials having essentially regular crystalline structure over the entire specimen volume. Scattering A phenomenon in which the direction, frequency, or polarization of the wave is changed when the wave encounters discontinuities in the medium, or interacts with the material at the atomic or molecular level.

436

Glossary

Scattering coefficient (dissipation coefficient), b The fractional decrease in intensity of a beam of electromagnetic radiation or particles per unit distance traversed, which results from scattering rather than absorption (see also Extinction coefficient). SCC See stress corrosion cracking SCE (saturated calomel electrode) A reference electrode based on the reaction between elemental mercury and mercury (I) chloride (Hg2 Cl2 ,‘calomel’). Self-defocusing Defocusing effect of a laser beam by the refractive index change due to the laser light itself. Self-focusing Focusing effect of a laser beam by the refractive index change due to the laser light itself. SERS (surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy) A kind of Raman spectroscopy whereas the Raman signal is enhanced by local electromagnetic field enhancement by surface plasmon resonance at metal nanoparticles or rough metal surfaces. The increase in Raman scattering intensity by as much as 14 orders of magnitude enables detection of submonolayer amounts of absorbents. Shear viscosity See viscosity. Shock impedance It is defined by Z = ρ0 Us , where ρ0 is the equilibrium density and Us is the shock velocity. Shock velocity, Us Velocity of propagation of the shock wave front. In an ideal gas, Us =

γ +1 P · , 2 ρ

where γ is the ratio of specific heats at constant pressure and constant volume, P is shock pressure, and ρ is the equilibrium density of the gas. In liquids and solids, the shock velocity is lower than the sound velocity. Shock wave A mechanical wave of large amplitude, across which pressure or stress, density, particle velocity, temperature, and related properties change in a nearly discontinuous manner. Unlike acoustic waves, shock waves are characterized by an amplitude-dependent wave velocity. Shock waves are often generated at laser interaction with matter, and may cause chemical reactions in fluids and permanent structural changes in solids. Shot peening A cold work process used to produce a decorative finish and to modify mechanical properties of metals by impacting a surface with metal shots or glass beads. SHYLAC (Simulation Hydrodynamique Lagrangienne des Chocs) A computer code for hydrodynamic simulation of fluid motion and shock wave propagation, developed at LCD-ENSMA Poitiers, France. Skin depth Depth at which the amplitude of electromagnetic field, usually of high frequency, decreases to 1/e of the incident amplitude. SLC See steam laser cleaning. Slitting method (crack compliance method) A method for determination of residual stresses in solids. The general procedure for the slitting method is to gradually extend a slit into the specimen surface and measure near-slit strain as a function of slit depth. The strain vs. depth data are then used to compute the variation of the pre-slit residual stress component normal to the slit face with depth from the surface (i.e. the stress profile). SOG (spin on glass)Thin layer of glass deposited by spin-on of liquids precursors (usually silicates or siloxanes). The glass forms after thermal cure (hundreds of ◦ C) of the spinned-on film. Solubility of gases in liquids, xg The maximum quantity of solute that can dissolve in a certain quantity of solvent or quantity of solution at a specified temperature. In Table 8.8 the solubilities are expressed in mole fractions, ng , xg = ng + n s where ng and ns are the number of moles of gas and of solvent, respectively. Solubility may be characterized also by Ostwald coefficient: Vg , L21 T , p = Vl equil where Vg is the volume of the dissolved gas, Vl – total volume of the liquid solution after equilibrium is reached. An increase in temperature decreases both the solubility and rate of solution of gases. For gaseous solutes, an increase in pressure increases solubility.

437

Glossary

Solvatochromic dyes Dyes which change colour according to the polarity of the liquid in which they are dissolved (e.g. phenolbetaine). Solvent polarity (polarity of solvent) The capacity of a solvent for solvating dissolved charged or neutral, apolar of dipolar, species. The solubility of the species is the better the more similar the interaction forces between the particles of the solvent and the interaction forces between the particles of the solute are, for example polar substances dissolve better in polar solvents and vice versa. Solvent polarity parameter, ETN (normalized polarity parameter) It is defined as ETN =

ET (solvent) − ET (TMS) ET (solvent) − 30.7 = , ET (water) − ET (TMS) 32.4

where TMS is tetramethylsilane. ET (kcal/mol) is defined as ET = h · c · ν˜ · NA = 2.859 · 10−3 · ν˜ , where h is the Planck’s constant, c is the speed of light, ν˜ is the wavenumber of the light producing the electronic excitation, and NA is Avogadro’s number. Tetramethylsilane and water are used in the definition of ETN as extreme reference solvents. The definition of solvent polarity parameter by molar energy transition energy ET origins from the practice to measure solvent polarity using solvatochromic dyes. SP (shot peening) See LSP. Speed of sound, v Speed of propagation of plane sound waves. The speed of sound in an ideal gas is expressed by cp RT . v= cv √ For most of the liquids, the speed of sound may be estimated by v = K /ρ, where K is the bulk modulus and ρ is the density. Near normal temperature, the speed of sound in liquids generally decreases with the increase of temperature. In contrast, in water the speed of sound near normal temperature increases with the increase temperature, and reaches maximum at 74◦ C and decreases with further increase of temperature. Spinodal Locus of states of infinite compressibility (∂p/∂V )T = 0; spinodal is the boundary of unstable and metastable regions on state diagram. Spinodal decomposition Phase separation in a mixture of two partly miscible liquids due to diffusion instability in a region of (∂2 g/∂x2 )p,T < 0, where g is the free energy of mixing, and x is the concentration. s-polarization Polarization of the electrical field (of light) is perpendicular to the mirror symmetry plane (from the German ‘senkrecht’). SPR See surface plasmon resonance. Standard state The state of a pure substance in its thermodynamically most stable state at standard temperature and pressure (commonly at 298.15 K and 101326 Pa). Standard state enthalpy of formation The enthalpy change for the forming of the compound, in its standard state, from its constituent elements in their standard states (e.g. C, S, O2 , H2 ). Standard state Gibbs energy of formation The Gibbs energy changes for the forming of the compound, in its standard state, from its constituent elements in their standard states. Standard temperature and pressure 0◦ C (273.15 K) and 100 000 Pa (IUPAC since 1997).There are different definitions in use in different sources. Steam laser cleaning A process for microparticles removal from solid surfaces by laser irradiation assisted by applying steam to surface. Stereolithography An additive freeform fabrication process relying on laser solidification of liquid photopolymers. Stimulated Brillouin scattering Scattering process due to the sound wave generated by photoirradiation. Stimulated light scattering Scattering process due to material response created by light irradiation. In spontaneous light scattering, radiation is diffracted as a Fourier component of a spontaneous statistical fluctuation of material response. In analogy with classical light scattering, light can be scattered by temporal and spatial modulation of material response induced by light. When the light scattering is stimulated by an optically created grating, it is one of the transient grating spectroscopies. Stimulated Raman scattering Scattering process due to molecular vibration produced by light irradiation.

438

Glossary

Stimulated Rayleigh scattering Scattering process due to temperature fluctuation of the medium generated by light irradiation. Strain hardening See work hardening. Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) The cracking induced from the combined influence of tensile stress and a corrosive environment. The impact of SCC on a material usually falls between dry cracking and the fatigue threshold of that material. The required tensile stresses may be in the form of directly applied stresses or in the form of residual stresses. Stress corrosion cracks propagate over a range of velocities from about 10−3 to 10 mm/h, depending upon the combination of alloy and environment involved. (http://www.corrosiondoctors.org/Forms/scc.htm), SCC can be effectively suppressed by LSP conversion of surface residual tensile stresses to compressive ones. Strongly coupled plasmas Plasmas which exhibit Coulomb interaction energies comparable to or greater than the kinetic energy, that is, the coupling parameter is greater than unity, where = (Z ∗ e)2 /rkB T . Here r is average the ion separation, Z ∗ the effective ion charge, and T the temperature. The properties of such plasmas, including their equations of state and transport coefficients are predicted to deviate significantly from those of classical plasmas. √ Sublayer flow Laminar boundary layer flow of thickness δ = ν/ τ/ρ in a turbulent flow. ν – kinematic viscosity, τ – shear stress, ρ – density. Supercritical state The state of a substance above the critical temperature and critical pressure. In supercritical state, the boundary between gas and liquid disappears and the substance acts like a gas in some ways and like a liquid in some ways. Superheating (boiling retardation, boiling delay) Heating of liquids to a temperature higher than its standard boiling point, without actually boiling. The superheated state of liquids is metastable state. Superheating of liquids and molten solids is rather common in laser processing of materials due to short heating time. Surface contour method See contour method. Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) Resonance oscillation of surface plasmons. Nanoparticles of noble metals exhibit strong ultraviolet-Visible SPR absorption bands. Surface tension A property of liquids arising from unbalanced molecular cohesive forces at or near the surface, as a result of which the surface tends to contract and has properties resembling those of a stretched elastic membrane. Dependence of surface tension on temperature of solute concentration gives rise to Marangoni flow. Surface tension coefficient, γ Free energy F per unit area of new surface formation at constant temperature; γ = dF/dA. Surfactant Wetting agents that lower the surface tension of a liquid, allowing easier spreading, and lower the interfacial tension between two liquids. TAB circuits Tape Automated Bonding integrated electronic circuit. Taylor factor, M The ratio of accumulated slip to macroscopic deformation. It is given by: M=

i

ε

γi ,

where γ is the amount of slip on slip system i, and ε is the macroscopic strain imposed on the material. Temperature coefficient of density, ∂ρ/∂T Derivative of the density with respect to temperature. Temperature coefficient of dielectric constant, ∂ ln ε/∂T – relative derivative of the dielectric constant with respect of the temperature, ∂ ln ε 1 ∂ε = . ε ∂T ∂T Temperature coefficient of the index of refraction, ∂n/∂T Derivative of the index of refraction with respect to temperature. Temperature coefficient of viscosity, ∂η/∂T Derivative of the viscosity with respect to temperature. Thermal conductivity, λ Tensor quantity relating the heat flux, Jq , to the temperature gradient, Jq = −λ grad T .

439

Glossary

Thermal diffusivity, α The ratio of thermal conductivity λ to volumetric heat capacity ρcp : α=

λ , ρcp

where ρ is the density and cp heat conductivity at constant pressure. Thermal diffusivity characterizes the capability of matter to spread the heat: ∂T (r, t) = α∇ 2 T (r, t) ∂t Substances with high thermal diffusivity rapidly adjust their temperature to that of their surroundings. Thermal expansion coefficient, α (linear thermal expansion coefficient) Fractional change in linear dimensions L of a body per degree of temperature change, α=

1 ∂L . L ∂T

For liquids the volumetric thermal expansion coefficient β is commonly used. It measures the fractional change in density as temperature increases at constant pressure 1 ∂ρ 1 ∂V =− , β= V ∂T p ρ ∂T p where T is the temperature, V is the volume, ρ is the density, derivatives are taken at constant pressure p. Thermal piston effect Modulated heat flow from a heated condensed phase into an adjacent gas layer, causing thermally modulated expansion and contraction of the gas layer over a thickness approximately equal to the thermal diffusion length. The modulated gas layer expansion acts as a piston that drives acoustic waves into the gas column. Transient grating spectroscopy See stimulated light scattering. TWIN-LIBWE Two-beam interferometric laser induced backside wet etching. Ultrasound absorption coefficient, a The acoustic pressure amplitude p(x) of the progressive ultrasound wave of initial acoustic pressure amplitude p(0), at a distance x for a non-diverging beam, in any uniform medium, is described by the relationship: p(x) = p (0) e −ax . Ultraviolet 5 per cent absorption point, L0 Light wavelength in ultraviolet region at which the absorbance of a substance on a 10 mm path reaches the value 0.05 (relative to water). Ultraviolet cut-off point, L1 Light wavelength in ultraviolet region at which the absorbance of a substance on a 10 mm path reaches the value 1.0 (relative to water). van der Waals force A relatively weak attractive force between atoms or non-polar molecules caused by polarization induced in each particle by the presence of other particles. Vaporization coefficient The ratio of the rate of vaporization of a solid or liquid at a given temperature and corresponding vapour pressure to the rate of vaporization that would be necessary to produce the same vapour pressure at this temperature if every vapour molecule striking the solid or liquid were absorbed there. Vapour explosion range (vapour flammable range) The range of a gas or vapour concentration that will burn or explode if an ignition source is introduced. Vapour/liquid critical compressibility factor, Zc It is defined as Zc =

pc Vm,c ; RTc

Zc is close to 3/8 = 0.375 (equals to 3/8 for a van der Waals fluid). Vapour/liquid critical parameters The critical temperature, Tc , of a substance is the temperature above which distinct liquid and gas phases do not exist. As the critical temperature is approached, the properties of

440

Glossary

the gas and liquid phases become the same. Above the critical temperature, there is only one phase: that of supercritical fluid. The critical pressure is the vapour pressure at the critical temperature. The critical molar volume is the volume of one mole of material at the critical temperature and pressure. Vapour pressure Pressure exerted by the vapour when in equilibrium with the liquid or solid phase. The temperature dependence of vapour pressure of liquids is commonly expressed by the Antoine equation. Vena contracta effect Contraction in the edges of the flow streamlines as they move through an orifice. VISAR (Velocimetry Interferometer System for Any Reflector) A Doppler effect-based surface velocity measurement system, designed for measurement of shock transients. Viscosity A measure of the resistance of a fluid to deform under shear stress. With rising temperature the viscosity of liquids decreases. Work hardening An increase in mechanical strength of materials due to plastic deformation. In metallic solids, work hardening is due to increase of dislocations density. Yield strength The stress at which a material exhibits a specified deviation from proportionality of stress and strain. Z-scan (in optics) a technique for measuring the strength of the Kerr nonlinearity of a material, relying on self-focusing. The sample is scanned along the optical axis through the focus of a focused light beam. Intensitydependent refractive index change affects the propagation of the beam what will be detected (e.g. by a small aperture light detector). The method is an easy and relatively simple way for measuring nonlinear absorption coefficients as well as nonlinear refractive indices for a wide variety of optically interesting materials. In neutron diffraction A technique for avoiding the influence of partial filling of the gauge volume by scanning the sample in a direction normal to the incident and diffracted beams; used for example in residual stress measurement. ζ-potential Electrical potential at the shear plane of a particle in electrolyte solution. The zeta potential of a particle can be calculated by 2εζf (ka) Ue = , 3η where Ue is the electrophoretic mobility, ε is the dielectric constant of the sample, ζ is the zeta potential, ka is the ratio of particle radius to double layer thickness, η is the viscosity of the solvent, and f (ka) is Henry’s function. For particles in polar media the maximum value of f (ka) is 1.5 (Smoluchowski approximation) and for particles in non-polar media the minimum value of f (ka) is 1 (Hükel approximation). Electrophoretic mobility is defined as follows: v Ue = , E where v is the particle’s velocity and E is the electric field strength. Ions inside of the shear plane (sliding surface) will accompany with a moving particle. Colloids of particles with zeta potentials in range −30 to +30 mV are considered unstable. Zeta potentials are commonly determined by electrophoretic light scattering.

Subject Index

ABAQUS 102, 103, 119, 122, 125, 126, 128, 130, 136, 137, 138, 423 ABCD-method 287–288 Ablation 14, 15, 31, 63, 65, 92, 110, 124, 126, 144, 145, 147. 148, 149, 150–151, 153, 156, 161, 162, 163, 166, 177, 178, 182, 196, 209, 216, 224, 236, 240, 243, 251, 254, 259, 262, 301–302 ablation, efficiency 66, 149–151, 158–166, 204 ablation mask, liquid 156, 157 ablator (protective coating), in laser peening 77, 78 absorbance 110, 212, 228, 231, 439 absorption 3, 5, 46, 78, 88, 94, 110, 132, 177, 178, 179, 181, 183, 203, 224, 296, 299, 379 absorption coefficient 91, 181, 186, 192, 285, 296, 297 absorption of light in plasma 91, 296, 297 acceleration, of laser heated particles and substrates 37–38 ACCIC code 93, 119, 126, 139, 161, 423 accommodation coefficient 289, 423 acentric factor 355, 356, 357, 358, 435 acoustic emission 33, 147 acoustic emission at laser cleaning 33 acoustic impedance 70, 108, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 423 acoustic nonlinearity parameter 332, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 423–424 acoustic pressure 13 acoustical (acoustic) impedance 294, 423 acoustical signals 64, 159 adhesion map 27, 28 adhesion of particles 17–30 adhesion resisting moment 43 adhesion, thermodynamic work of 18 adhesive strength, of fluorocarbon resins 265 adiabatic compressibility 424 adiabatic exponent 424 adsorbed liquid layer technique (LESAL) 189–192, 431 aeroplane components, shock processing of 103 aggregated particles 217, 224 aggregation, of nanoparticles 221 agitation by ultrasound 30, 189, 190, 191 AIST 197, 246 alcohol 12, 52, 57, 144, 161, 224, 253, 276, 322 aliphatic compounds 424 alkanes 237, 424 alkyl 424 amorphization, of silica 186 ANN, artificial neural network 131 anodic oxide 65, 66, 67 ANSYS 136, 139, 424

anti-reflective coating (ARL) 424 anti-reflective layer (ARL) 424 Antoine equation 424, 440 ARL – anti-reflective coating 424 aromatic compound 250, 257, 424 aromaticity 424 artificial neural network (ANN) 131 atomic nitrogen 274 atomic transmutations 222–223 attainable superheat temperature 424 attenuation coefficient 428 autofocusing (self-focusing) 153 autoignition temperature 376, 430 avalanche ionization 93, 123, 295, 296–297, 314 back free velocity (BFV) 116, 139, 425 Barkhausen noise 76, 424 Bauschinger-effect 78, 424 beam quality parameter M 2 282, 425 Beer–Lambert law 425 Beilstein Registry Number (BRN) 425 Berman–Simon line 258 Bernoulli’s equation (shock wave) 303 Bessel beam 425 beta solution treated and overaged (BSTOA) 135, 425 BFV – back free velocity 116, 425 bimodal particle size distribution function 238 binary gratings 199 binodal 290, 425 biological materials 203, 207 biosensors 277 Bohr radius 297, 425 boiling delay 438 boiling point 425 boiling retardation 438 boiling, explosive 290, 434 boundary flow 43, 294 Bradley’s model 26 Bremsstrahlung 88, 94, 182, 295, 296, 297, 425, 430 Brewster’s angle 214, 425 Brillouin scattering, stimulated 437 BRN – Beilstein Registry Number 425 BSTOA – beta solution treated and overaged 425 Bubble 37, 43, 53, 57, 145, 147, 148, 150, 158, 159, 164, 183, 184, 186, 189, 193, 196, 197, 198, 225, 226, 238, 250, 267, 277, 292, 293, 294, 312 bubble collapse induced flow 13–14, 43, 294 bubble dynamics 3, 65, 292–294 441

442 bubble generation rate 42, 43, 147, 148, 237 bubble-growth induced pressure 40, 51, 53 bubble growth velocity 43, 50, 52, 57, 158, 198, 235, 292, 313 bubble nucleation threshold 37, 39–40, 45, 50 bubble pressure 183, 199, 292 bubble, decay at interfaces 293–294 bubble, hemispherical 293 bubble, nucleation of 39, 51, 52, 290, 311, 333 bubbles discharge rate 148 bubbles oscillation 153, 164, 292–293 bubbles, ultramicroscopic metastable 50 bubbston 294 Bueckner’s superposition principle 75 bulk modulus 424, 425 BuOAc units 333, 348, 349, 350, 351, 428 burnout 168, 170 capillary condensation 18, 22, 425 capillary condensed liquid, volume of 22 capillary condensed water, effect in cleaning 45, 52, 53 capillary force 12, 22, 28, 56, 425 capillary pressure force 22, 28 carbon deposit 186, 199, 248, 254 carbon, phase diagram 257 CAS Registry number (CASRN) 425 cascade ionization 295, 296–297, 299 CASRN – CAS Registry number 425 cathodic polarization (of oxide layer) 15, 66 cavitation 6, 12, 61, 69, 71, 292, 294, 425 cavitation bubbles 147, 190 cavitation impact 60, 145 cavitation, memory effect 294 CCUP (C-CUIP) procedure 205 cement, Portland 204, 205 channels, fabrication of 178, 191 chemical bond force 17, 19–20 chemical machining 72, 74 chlorinity 425 cladding, underwater 277, 279 Clausius-Clapeyron equation 289 cleaning by acoustic waves in liquid 13 cleaning by supercritical solution 16 cleaning by water decomposition products 16 cleaning efficiency 45, 50, 56, 60, 62, 64 cleaning threshold 12, 44–45, 46, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 60 cleaning, backside by laser 12–13 cleaning, by bubble collapse induced flow 13–14 cleaning, by laser ablation/spallation in liquid 14–15 cleaning, ice-assisted 17 cleaning, by liquid-assisted laser shock 13, 43, 432 cleaning, steam laser 12, 13, 33, 432, 437 cleaving, of crystals 203

Subject Index

CMC – critical micelle concentration 234, 236, 248, 426 coagulation, of nanoparticles 20, 220, 232 coagulation, of particles by laser irradiation 221, 225, 226 cohesion energy 17–18, 243 colloid 6, 20, 209, 210, 221, 224, 225, 226, 229, 230, 231, 233, 234, 237, 239, 244, 248, 259, 440 colloids, aggregation 224 colloids, magnetic 214 colloids, noble metals 214 colloids, stability 210, 227, 233 complex beam parameter 282, 283, 287 compressibility 424, 425 compressibility factor 425, 439 compressibility, isothermal 430, 433 compression, hydrostatic 305 concrete, laser machining of 204, 206 confinement medium (tamper) 69–70, 91 confocal parameter 282, 283 conjugated system 426 constitutive relations, of solids 93, 101 contact hardness 28 contact potential 19 contact radius, of a particle 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 43 contour method 75–76, 130, 137, 426 convection, convective flow 147, 148, 159 core-shell particles 219, 229, 230, 236, 248 corrosion 3, 5, 6, 11, 69, 103, 116, 118, 119, 120, 121, 126, 135, 264, 277 corrosion, pitting 123, 434 Coulomb explosion 217, 218, 426 Coulomb force 19 Coulomb’s friction law 103 Coulomb logarithm 298 coupling parameter of plasma 121, 438 coverage, of laser impacts 104, 105, 114, 131, 426 crack compliance method 74–75, 436 crack front contour 87 crack propagation 87, 138, 203 creep 30, 70, 426 critical compressibility factor 426 critical micelle concentration (CMC, cmc) 217, 245, 249, 426 critical molar volume 426, 440 critical nucleation rate 290 critical nucleus 256, 290 critical pressure 426 critical radius of nuclei 247, 256 critical temperature 39, 59, 426 curvature method 74 cut quality 143, 168, 170, 204 CW – continuous wave 426

443

Subject Index

Dawson probability integral 296 DC Kerr effect 427, 430 debris, at laser machining 143 Debye-Hückel inverse double-layer thickness 23 Debye length 426 decommissioning, of nuclear facilities 204 decomposition, of chemical substances 186, 214 decontamination, of nuclear facilities 204 deep rolling (DR) 70, 71, 84, 127, 128, 131, 426 defervescence 426 defocus distance 255 degenerated plasma 426 dehydroxylation of silica surface 16–17, 68 DEM – discrete element method 427 densification, of porous materials 141 density 381, 426, 438 depassivation of electrodes 63 depolarization factor, of light 432 deposition of debris 177 deposition, by laser ablation (LAD, PLD) 31, 257, 262, 266, 272 desorption of metal ions 48 DGTPM 427 diamond, formation probability 254, 258 diamond-like carbon (DLC) 254–256, 427 dielectric constant 427 dielectric permittivity 427 dielectrophoretic force 19 diffraction limited beam 282, 425 diffractive gray tone phase mask (DGTPM) 198 diffusion coefficient 427 diffusion loss, of electrons 297 ‘Dip and tap’ method 30, 31 dipole moment, of molecule 433 discrete element method (DEM) 427 dislocation density 69, 88, 111, 124, 130, 133 dislocations 69, 106, 107, 109, 113, 119, 123, 131, 133, 142, 159 dismantling, of nuclear reactors 167 displacement measurement 79–80, 80–81 dissociation length, of hydrogen bond 20 dissolution, electrochemical 150 dissolution, of workpiece in supercritical water 147, 150, 184, 185 distribution function of particle size, bimodal 238 divergence, of laser beam 283, 425 DLC – diamond-like carbon 254, 427 DLC – dry laser cleaning 12, 317, 427 Doppler shift 80 double-layer force 23, 24, 25 double layer, electrical (electrochemical) 427 double-layer thickness, Debye–Hückel inverse 23, 24 dough, machining by laser 207 drag force on spheres 147

droplet, on surface 12, 52, 59 droplets, light focusing in 59 Drude plasma frequency 212 Drude theory 212 dry laser cleaning (DLC) 12, 317, 427 dry reactive plasma etching 179 Dugdale stress 28 Dupré energy 18 Dupré equation 17 dynamic viscosity 427 EG/EC number 427 eigenstrain 86, 87, 134, 136, 137, 427 ejection force, in steam laser cleaning 42–43 elastic modulus, combined 25, 122, 125 elastic precursor 117, 305, 427 elastic–plastic shock wave 106, 128, 305 elasto-plastic body 82, 136 electrical discharge machining (EDM) 74, 75 electrical conductivity 427 electrical double layer 23, 427 electrical double layer force 23, 427 electrochemical dissolution 150 electroless metal deposition 147 electromagnetic force 80 electro-optical effect 427 electrophoretic light scattering 440 electrophoretic mobility 440 electroplating 7, 175 electrostatic forces 19, 23 electrostatic image force 19, 427 electrostriction 427 enbrittlement, hydrogen induced 15, 277 embryonic nucleation 40, 51 EMV gauge 79–80, 121, 427 energy-coupling efficiency 149 engine fuel injectors 177 enthalpy 427 enthalpy of melting 427 enthalpy of vaporization 427 equations of state (EOS) 100, 433 ester 428 etch rate 144, 150, 153, 158, 160, 179, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 191, 192, 195, 196, 197, 199, 200 ether 428 evaporation rate 290, 428 exciplexes 225 explosive boiling 290, 434 explosives 37, 43, 105, 141, 250, 262 extinction 211, 238, 428 extinction coefficient 36, 66, 180, 428 extrinsic size effect 212

444 fatigue damage 145, 159 fatigue life 84, 87, 106, 108, 114, 116, 118, 122, 124, 127, 128, 131, 138 fatigue strength, of laser shocked bodies 86, 87, 108 Fermi level 19 films, diamond 11, 250, 257 films, DLC 250, 254, 255, 256, 270, 272, 274 Fisher limit 290 flash point 428 flexure strength 151 fluorescence 76, 428 fluorescent lamps 219, 220, 239 fluoropolymers 262 flyers 70, 141 forward transfer, laser induced (LIFT, MDW) 273, 277, 278, 317, 431 fractal dimension 130, 428 fragmentation, of nanoparticles 232 freezing point 428 Fresnel lens 189, 428 fretting fatigue 136 friction velocity 44 frozen gas and liquid layers, removal of 15–16 frozen target 272–273, 274, 317 fs-CACO 203, 428 FWHM, definition of 428 gas well drilling 202 Gaussian beam, characteristics 282–285 Gaussian beam, propagation 287–288 Gaunt factor 296 Gibbs energy 429, 437 Gibbs free energy 429 Gouy phase shift 283 gratings, fabrication of 196 gratings, binary 199 gratings, sinusoidal 196 gravitational settling velocity 147 Grüneisen coefficient 429 Grüneisen equation of state 100, 305, 433 Grüneisen parameter 100 halocarbons 429 halogenated hydrocarbons 179 halogenated solvents 200 Hamaker constant 18, 20, 21 hardening 101, 102, 120, 124, 127, 128, 150, 440 HAZ 167, 429 heat affected zone (HAZ) 167, 429 heat capacity 381, 429 heat capacity, specific 429 heat capacity, volumetric 429 heat conductivity coefficient 429 heat flux to the liquid-vapour interface 290

Subject Index

heat of vaporization 148, 427 heat transfer 181, 216, 429 heat transfer coefficient 39, 57, 290, 429 heavy water 222 HEL 97, 127, 430 helium, liquid 210 Helmholtz free energy 100, 381 hen egg white lysozyme (HEWL) 203, 207 Henry’s function 440 Hertz model 25 Hertz theory 25, 26 Hertz–Knudsen equation 94, 290 Hertz–Knudsen theory 92 heterogeneous nucleation 37, 290, 291–292 HEWL 203, 207 HFF 24 high velocity oxy-fuel (HVOF) 142, 430 Hildebrandt solubility parameter 429 history, of steam laser cleaning 56 Hogg-Healy-Fuerstenau (HFF) equations 24 hole drilling method 74, 75 430 homogeneous nucleation 290–291, 424 Hooke’s law 99 Hugoniot data 430 Hugoniot elastic limit (HEL) 92, 97, 98, 430 Hugoniot equation 303 Hugoniot slope coefficient 81, 100, 102 HV – Vickers hardness 430 HVOF 142, 430 HYADES code 134 Hükel and Smoluchowski approximations 440 hydrocarbon 56, 181, 308, 312, 430 hydrofluoric acid, laser-generated 181 hydrogen, in materials 15, 277 hydrogen bond force 19–20, 54 hydronium ion 384 hydrophilic surface 265 hydrophilization, of fluoropolymers 262, 266 hydrosols 209 hydrostatic pressure (shock wave) 305 hydrothermal dissolution 184, 308 hydrothermal growth 240, 242–249 hydrothermal reactions 149, 162, 308–310 hydroxides, volatile 309 hydroxoapatite (hydroxylapatite) 262, 267 hydroxyl groups, on silica surface 16 IAPWS 381, 430 ice, dry 433 ice, removal of layers 15 ice-assisted laser particles removal 17 ignition temperature 430 image force 19

445

Subject Index

impulse momentum, generated by confined plasma 91, 92 incident angle of laser beam, in peening 129 incremental hole drilling method 74, 75, 430 incubation 150, 159, 196 incubation effect 150, 181, 186, 200 index of refraction 34, 149, 236, 237, 244, 430, 438 inertial force, in laser cleaning 39, 57 information storage, optical 219 injection needles 177 injectors, of engine fuel 177 ink, curing of 205 interference, of high-intensity laser beams 88 interferometric probe 33, 34 intrinsic size effect 211 inverse Bremsstrahlung (IB) 88, 94 inverse Bremsstrahlung absorption (IBA) 182, 295, 296, 430 ionic strength 23, 430 ionization, multiphonon 295 ionization, tunnel 295 ionization energy 430 ionization potential 295, 296, 430 ionization, avalanche 93, 123, 295, 296–297, 314 ionization, cascade 92, 295, 296–297, 299 ionization, thermal 295, 297 isoelectric point 23, 24, 430 isothermal compressibility 430 IUPAC 430 jet stability 173 jet, formation at bubble collapse 13, 14, 165, 294 jet, liquid 171, 294 JKR model 26–27 Johnson, Kendall and Roberts adhesion model 26–27 Johnson-Cook (plasticity) law 101, 127 Keldysh equations 295 Keldysh parameter 296 Kelvin radius 22 Kerr coefficient (Kerr constant) 430 Kerr effect (Kerr electro-optic effect) 430–431 ketone 431 kinematic viscosity 431 Knudsen layer 291, 431 Kramer’s formula 88 LAD 266, 431 LALP 2, 3, 4, 431 Laplace equation 289 LAPR 431 laser ablation, steam-assisted 146 laser beam, diffraction limited 282 laser beam, Gaussian 282, 284, 287, 428

laser beam,TEM00 282, 283, 425 laser induced forward transfer (LIFT, MDW) 273, 277, 278, 431 Laser MicroJet 171, 175 laser peening (LP) 71, 86, 88, 103, 104, 112, 120, 131, 133, 431 laser peening without protective coating (LPwC) 77–78, 79, 432 laser peening, fibre-delivered laser beam 104 laser shock peening (LSP) 77, 78, 88, 105 laser shock processing 8–9, 69, 431 LASNEX code 94, 129 latent heat of vaporization 427 layer removal method 74 Lennard–Jones potential 26, 29, 431 LESAL 189, 191, 192, 431 LIBS 431 LIBWE 178, 179, 431 LIBWE, ultrasound assisted 190, 191 LIF 119, 226 LIFT 273, 277, 278, 431 light depolarization factor 432 light pressure 105, 286–287 light scattering coefficient 432 linear bulk viscosity stress 102–103 linear equation of state 101 LIPAA 432 liquid as an ablation mask 156, 157 liquid disc, formation in laser cleaning 56 liquid film, dynamics on heated surface 61, 62, 313 liquid film, thickness measurement 31, 163 liquid helium 210 liquid jet guided laser beam 171–176 liquid metals 179, 192 liquid nitrogen 144, 262 liquid optics 156, 157 liquid target 257, 266, 270, 272 LLNL 117, 129, 432 LLSC 13, 14, 432 longitudinal waves, elastic and plastic 95, 98 LP 112, 123, 131, 432 LPPC, LPwC 135–136, 432 LP-PLA 432 LPwC 78, 79, 86, 138, 432 LSC 13, 432 LULI 432 luminescence 147, 198, 246, 301, 434 machining, from backside by laser 177 machining, from frontside by laser 143 machining, having water at backside 177 magnetic force 25 magnetic measurement of stress 76

446 magnetic susceptibility 432 magnetic susceptibility, molar 433 magnetization 432 MALDI 432 MAPLE 272–273, 275, 276, 432 MAPLE Direct Write (MWD) 273, 431, 433 Marangoni convection (Marangoni flow) 148, 432 Matrix-assisted pulsed-laser evaporation (MAPLE) 272–273, 275, 276, 432 Maugis and Dugdale adhesion model 27–28 Maugis–Pollock adhesion model 28–29 Maxwell–Garnett effective medium theory 49, 432 MD model 27–28 MDW 273, 277, 278 megasonic cleaning 43, 433 melting point 428, 433 memory effect in cavitation 294 mercury lamp, use of 192, 224, 239 metal ions, desorption 5, 48 metals, physical properties 317–318 metastable compound 50, 259 metastable ultramicroscopic bubbles 50 micelle 217, 245, 426, 433 microbubbles 160, 294 microfuidic devices 189 microjet, at bubble collapse 145, 179, 183, 294 microlens, fabrication of 198 microreactors, fabrication of 199 micro-sandblasting 179 microscale laser impacts 93 microtiter plates, fabrication of 188 Mie resonance 20, 37, 211 Mie–Grüneisen coefficient 102, 429 Mie–Grüneisen equation of state 100, 102, 103, 305, 433 Moiré interferometry 77 molar magnetic susceptibility 433 molar mass 433 molar volume 433 mole 433 molecular dipole moment 433 molecular dynamics method (MD) 29, 123, 292, 433 molecular volume 433 molten salt 174, 242 momentum trap 78, 108, 433 MP model 28–29 multi-axial contour method 137 multiphonon ionization 92, 93, 274, 295 multiphotonic absorption 181, 183 MWD 273, 431, 433 nanocomposite, organic/inorganic 241 nanodendrites 245 nanonetworks 221, 233

Subject Index

nanoparticles, aggregation of 221, 232, 258 nanoparticles, alloyed 230, 232, 234 nanoparticles, average size 228, 230, 232, 233 nanoparticles, carbon 193 nanoparticles, coagulation 220 nanoparticles, core-shell 219, 222, 236, 248 nanoparticles, diamond 11, 250 nanoparticles, disk-shaped 231 nanoparticles, DLC 250 nanoparticles, dynamic formation mechanism 216 nanoparticles, enlargement in size 220 nanoparticles, extrinsic size effect 212 nanoparticles, fabrication 210 nanoparticles, fragmentation by laser 232 nanoparticles, fusion of 222, 229, 232 nanoparticles, heat transfer from 217 nanoparticles, interband absorption 211 nanoparticles, intrinsic size effect 212 nanoparticles, magnetic 11, 214 nanoparticles, melting by laser 219 nanoparticles, melting temperature 214 nanoparticles, Mie resonance 37, 221, 222 nanoparticles, modification by laser 217–218 nanoparticles, of noble metals 214, 217 nanoparticles, of inorganic compounds 240, 243 nanoparticles, optical absorption spectra 215 nanoparticles, optical nonlinearity of 214 nanoparticles, optical properties 210–212 nanoparticles, organic 241, 258, 259 nanoparticles, Raman scattering at 214 nanoparticles, rod-shaped 219 nanoparticles, shape transformation of 219 nanoparticles, φ-shaped 220 nanoparticles, of silicon 250 nanoplatelets 240, 242 nanoplatelets, multilayer 245, 246 nanoprisms 219, 231, 235, 237 nanorods 228, 230, 237, 240 nanowires 230, 233, 241 neutron diffraction 73–74, 440 neutrons, generation of 239 nitriding 72, 262, 271 nitrogen, atomic 274 nitrogen, liquid 144, 158, 262 nitrogen, solid film 272, 274 nonlinear refractive index 236, 244, 247 normal temperature and pressure 434 normalized polarity parameter 437 notched test sample 87 nuclear reactions 222 nuclear reactor components, laser maintenance of 103 nucleation 39, 40, 51, 204, 290–292, 434 nucleation, of vapour bubbles 290–292 nucleation rate, critical 290

Subject Index

nucleation threshold, of bubbles 50, 291 nucleation, heterogeneous 291–292 nucleation, homogeneous 290–291 numerical aperture 434 OKO 434 oleophilic surface 265 OPO 434 optical breakdown 295–302, 434 optical breakdown, threshold 177, 300, 301 optical information storage 219 optical matching 149 optical materials, machining of 177, 178 optical nonlinearity 247 optical nonlinearity, of nanoparticles 214 optical reflectance probe 35 optically smooth surfaces, fabrication of 177 orientational correlation function 434 orientational relaxation time 434 Ostwald coefficient 436 Ostwald ripening 216, 434 overlapping impacts, in laser peening 83 oxidation by laser 262 oxidation cutting 174 oxide layers, removal by laser 11, 14–15, 63 oxides, physical properties 308–314 oxides, solubility in water 308 paper, machining by laser 203, 207 particle image velocimetry (PIV) 13, 61, 434 particle, deformation of 25–30 particle, long-time stability of the contact with a surface 30 particle, magnetized 25 particle, ray tracing in 38 particle, rough 19 particles covered surfaces, preparation of 30 particles, electrophoretical deposition 31 particles, laser ablation deposition 31 particles, plastic deformation of 28 particles, removal efficiency 13, 44, 45 particles, removal threshold 44–45 partition function 434 passive film 123, 150 PAZ 110 peening methods, comparison of 71 peening, by shots 70 peening, by laser shock 77–103 peening, ultrasonic by shots 70, 71 peening, ultrasonic by strikers 70 peening, water cavitation 70 perfluorocarbons (PFC) 434 petroleum well drilling 204

447 PFC 434 phase change, liquid-gas 289–290 phase explosion 290, 291, 434 phase grating 434 phase mask 434 phase mask, diffractive gray tone (DGTPM) 427, 434 phosphorescence 434 photoacoustic deflection 35, 50 photodeflection 49 photodissolution 217, 220, 235 photoelastic coatings 77 photoenhanced van der Waals force 20–21 photoexcitation of electrons 227 photo-oxidation 231, 239 piezoelectric polymers 79 piezoelectric probe 33, 34 piezoelectric quartz transducer 79 piezospectroscopy 76 pitting corrosion 434 pitting potential 434–435 Pitzer acentric factor 435 PIV 13, 434 PLAL 435 plasma 69, 81, 88–95, 110, 297, 299, 300, 301 plasma pressure, experiment 81, 82, 88, 90, 92, 301 plasma pressure, theories 81–95 plasma resonance 211, 212, 214 plasma, coupling parameter 426 plasma, degenerated 426 plasma, self-absorption parameter 313 plasma, strongly coupled 438 plasma, thermal conductivity of 298 plasma, transmission of light by 92 plasmons 435 plastically affected depth 85 PLD 262, 266, 435 PLIIR 257, 435 polarity of solvent 429, 437 polarization effects, at laser cutting 15 polarization force, in particle adhesion 19 polymerization, of working liquids 181 polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) 79, 435 polyynes 250, 251, 252, 253, 435 pores, porosity 141, 202 porosity, residual, at shock compression 141 Portland cement, machining of 205 powder compacting 141 p-polarization 435 pressurized water reactors (PWR) 138 probe, interferometric 33, 34 probe, optical reflectance 35, 36 probe, piezoelectric 33, 34 probe, surface plasmon 34, 36 protective coating (ablator), in laser peening 77, 78, 81

448 protective coatings, water-soluble 144 protein crystals 203, 207 protein microarrays, fabrication of 277 pull-off force, of a particle at cleaning 26, 27, 29 PULSA 207, 435 pump-probe investigations 228 PVDF 79, 121, 311, 435 PWR 138 pyranine 180, 181, 316 pyrene 177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 316 QEO effect 430–431 quadratic bulk viscosity 103 quadratic electro-optic effect 430–431 quartz pressure transducer 79 quench rate 261 quenching, laser induced 261–262, 263 quotidian equation of state 100–101 radicals, generation of 251, 252, 435 Raman scattering 214, 437 Raman spectroscopy, for stress measurement 76 Raman spectroscopy, surface enhanced 224, 226, 231, 436 Raman-active material 76 Rankine–Hugoniot relations 303 rate equation, for free electrons 298–299 Rayleigh equations, of shock wave 303 Rayleigh length 283 Rayleigh wave (surface wave) 82, 83 Rayleigh–Benard–Marangoni flow 432 Rayleigh–Plesset equation 292 reactive quenching, laser induced 7, 261–262, 263 recombination loss, of electrons in plasma 92, 298 redeposition of debris, at dry laser machining 167 reduced temperature 435 reflected light, for laser cleaning monitoring 77 reflection of light, theory 285 reflectivity, measurement at laser processing 263 refractive index 15, 34, 36, 153, 237, 381, 430 refractive index, nonlinear 153, 236, 244 regrowth velocity, of melted silicon 261, 263 relaxation methods, for residual stress determination 77 relaxation time, orientational of molecule 332, 374, 434 release waves, in laser peening 82 repassivation potential 435 residual stresses, formation 71 residual stresses, measurement techniques 70, 72, 73 Reynolds number, shear 44 ring core method 74, 75 ring patterns, formation at laser melting 153 ripples, formation at laser melting 153 river line patterns 87 rock, porosity 202

Subject Index

rock, machining 202–203 rod-shaped nanoparticles 219 Rose Bengal dye 180, 181, 183, 185 rough particles, adhesion of 19 Saha’s equation 297 salinity 319, 332, 435 salts, molten; properties: 315, use: 174 saturation concentration of vapours in air 333, 376, 435 SAW 52, 435 scale removal by laser shock in liquid 16 scattered light, measurement of 34, 35 scattering, definition 435 scattering coefficient, of light 333, 377, 432 scattering of light by bubbles 150 scattering, stimulated Raman 176, 437 scattering, stimulated Rayleigh 438 SCC 103, 120, 121, 135, 436, 438 SCE 436 SHOCKLAS 134 sea water, composition of 319 self-absorption parameter, of plasma 313 self-defocusing 436 self-diffusion coefficient 332, 373, 427 self-focusing (autofocusing) 144, 153, 163, 238, 436 self-modulation, of the laser etching process 177, 178 SERS 224, 226, 231, 436 settling velocity of particles, gravitational 147 shear flow, linear 43 shear stress, in fluid 44 shear viscosity 436 shock cladding 140 shock forming 140 shock impedance 304, 436 shock measurement techniques 79 shock pressure 79, 81–82, 83, 107, 305 shock pressure, laser generated 69, 81, 115 shock pressure, measurement 79 shock propagation, in laser peening 82, 95 shock wave 11, 13, 16, 49, 69, 77, 78, 90, 105, 117, 120, 123, 134, 147, 150, 177, 178, 197, 302, 436 shock wave, conservation relations 303 shock wave, elastic–plastic 305 shock velocities, in iron and in water 304 shock velocities, in liquids 305 shock velocity 94, 134, 159, 304, 332, 375, 436 shock yield stress 305 shot peening 70, 71, 122, 436 SHYLAC code 102, 436 silica fibre lightguide, use of 122 silicon surface, oxidized 19 silicon, amorphous, temperature dependence of optical properties 36

Subject Index

silicon, crystalline, temperature dependence of optical properties 36 sin2 ψ technique 72–73, 74 sinusoidal gratings, fabrication of 196 skin depth, of light penetration 198, 436 SLC 12, 13, 31, 32, 33, 44, 436, 437 slip-twinning transition 133 slitting method 74, 75, 126, 129, 436 SOG 232, 436 sol-gel film, treatment of 263 solid nitrogen 65 solidification velocity 261 solubility of gases in liquids 436 solubility of oxides in water 308 solvatochromic dyes 437 solvent polarity 429, 437 solvent polarity parameter 333, 377, 437 sonoluminescence 292 spallation 14, 15, 102, 276 spalling, thermal 203, 205 specific heat capacity 429 speed of sound 437 spin on glass (SOG) 232, 436 spinodal 290, 291, 437 spinodal decomposition 437 Spitzer–Härm expression 298 s-polarization 437 SPP 34, 36 SPR 36, 236, 438 standard state 437 standard state enthalpy of formation 333, 378, 437 standard state Gibbs energy of formation 333, 378, 437 standard temperature and pressure 437 steam laser cleaning (SLC) 12, 13, 31, 32, 33, 44, 437 steam laser cleaning, optical effects in 37 steam laser cleaning, phenomenology 37 steam laser cleaning, universal threshold 45 steam-assisted laser ablation 146 Steinberg–Cochran–Guinan model 101–102 stereolithography 6, 437 stimulated Brillouin scattering 437 stimulated light scattering 437 stimulated Raman scattering 176, 437 Stokes formula 147 strain gauge 75, 126, 129 strain hardening 438 stress corrosion cracking (SCC) 103, 120, 121, 135, 438 stress relaxation, of laser shocked bodies 74, 75, 131, 136 strongly coupled plasma 119, 438 sublayer flow 438 supercritical solution, in cleaning 16 supercritical state 195, 438 supercritical water 147

449 superheat (superheating) temperature 39, 43, 57, 58, 333, 375, 424, 438 superheated liquid 43, 50, 290–292 superheated state 39, 290–292 superheating 57, 58, 291, 438 surface acoustic waves (SAW) 52, 435 surface contour method 75–76, 438 surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) 224, 226, 231, 436 surface hardness, changes at laser processing 69, 88, 108, 112, 113, 118 surface modification, by laser 261–262 surface plasmon probe 34, 36 surface plasmon resonance (SPR) 36, 236, 438 surface recession at vaporization 290 surface roughness, of laser etched surfaces 162, 186, 188, 192, 195 surface roughness, of laser shocked surfaces 88 surface tension 332, 374, 438 surface tension force 22 surface wave focusing, in laser peening 83 surface waves, laser-induced 38–39 surfaces, optically smooth, fabrication of 177 surfactants 216–217, 246, 248, 259 susceptibility, third order 236, 244, 247 synchrotron diffraction, in residual stress measurements 73 TAB circuit, cleaning of 438 Tait’s equation of state, of water 381 tamper layer (confinement medium) 69–70 target, frozen 272, 274 target, liquid 257, 266, 270, 272 Taylor factor 135, 438 TEM00 beam 282, 283 temperature transients at laser cleaning 39 thermal conductivity 438 thermal conductivity, coefficient of 429 thermal conductivity, of plasma 298 thermal diffusivity 439 thermal expansion coefficient 374, 439 thermal expansion coefficient, volumetric 332, 439 thermal expansion, effect in laser cleaning 12, 33, 37 thermal ionization 297 thermal piston effect 439 thermal spalling 203, 205 thermal stresses 127, 182 thermocapillary surface flow 432 thermoprotective coating 124 Thomas–Fermi statistical model 100 three-point bending machine, use of 87 transient grating experiments 228 transient grating spectroscopy 439 transient reflectivity, of laser irradiated interfaces 195, 200

450 transmutations, atomic 222–223 transparent materials, machining of 177 trenches, fabrication of 147, 190 tunnel ionization 295 TWIN-LIBWE 439 twinning at laser shock processing 107 ultrashort laser pulses (in laser machining) 143, 179 ultrasonic measurement of stress 72, 76 ultrasonic peening by strikers 70 ultrasonic shot peening 70 ultrasound absorption coefficient, of liquids 439 ultrasound agitation 189 ultrasound assisted LIBWE 190, 191 ultrasound velocity measurements 124 ultraviolet 5% absorption point, of liquids 378, 439 ultraviolet cut-off point, of liquids 378, 439 underwater cladding 277, 279 underwater cutting 167, 170 underwater welding 277, 279 universal threshold of steam laser cleaning 45 van der Waals force 20, 439 van der Waals force, photoenhanced 20–21 vaporization rate 290 vaporization coefficient 439 vaporization, enthalpy of 333, 427 vapour explosion range, of solvents 333, 439 vapour flammable range, of solvents 439 vapour pressure, theory 289, 333, 440 vapour pressure, dependence on surface curvature 289 vapour pressure, equilibrium 289 vapour pressure, of volatile hydroxides 309–310 vapour supply methods 31–32 vena contracta effect 172, 440 VISAR interferometry 80–81, 83, 440 viscosity, definition 440 viscosity, dynamic 332, 374, 381, 427 viscosity, kinematic 431 volatile hydroxides, properties 309–314

Subject Index

volumetric heat capacity 429 volumetric thermal expansion coefficient 100, 332, 439 von Mises yielding criterion 95, 97, 128, 136 vortices, at underwater laser cutting 167

water (jet) cavitation peening 70 water decomposition 16, 68, 294, 383–384, 422 water decomposition, use for cleaning of surfaces 16, 17 water jet, uses in laser machining 174 water jet guided laser beam 171–176 water vapour, thermal dissociation of 384–385 water, autoionization of 383–384 water, equations of state of 381 water, optical properties of 379 water, physical properties of 381 water, sea 319 water, state diagram of 380 water, thermal dissociation of 383–384 water, thermophysical properties of 382–383 waviness, induced by laser irradiation 125 web slitter 168, 169 welding, underwater 277, 279 work hardening 100, 101, 117, 121, 127, 128, 440

X-cut quartz, use of 79 X-ray diffraction, use in residual stress measurements 72–73 yield strength 86, 102, 106, 107, 129, 400 yield strength, dynamic 117, 128, 136 Young–Laplace equation 289 zeta potential 23, 440 z-scan; optical: 247, 440 neutron 74, 440

φ-shaped nanoparticles 221, 227, 229, 230 ζ-potential 23, 440

Liquids

Numbers of the liquids as used in Chapter 8 are in italic

2EE monoethyl ether (52) 2-ethoxyethanol (52) 2ME (51) 2-methoxy-2-methyl-propane (59) 2-methoxyethanol (51) 2-methoxyethyl ether (60) 2-methyl-1-propanol (46) 2-methyl-2-propanol (47) 2-methylbutane (2) 2-methylpropan-1-ol (46) 2-methylpropan-2-ol (47) 2-pentanone (70) 2-phenylpropane (33) 2-propanol (42) 2-propanone (68)

1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-tetradecafluoro-hexane (19) 1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4a,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,8a-octadecafluorodecalin (20) 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethene (18) 1,1,2-trichloroethene (17) 1,1 -oxybisethane (57) 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexafluorobenzene (26) 1,2,3-propanetriol (43) 1,2,4-TCB (24) 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (24) 1,2-diaminoethane (77) 1,2-dichlorobenzene (23) 1,2-dichloroethane (16) 1,2-dimethoxyethane (58) 1,2-dimethylbenzene (30) 1,2-ethanediamine (77) 1,3-dimethyl propane (1) 1,3-dimethylbenzene (31) 1,4-diethylene dioxide (56) 1,4-dimethylbenzene (32) 1,4-dioxacyclohexane (56) 1,4-dioxane (56) 1,4-epoxybutane (55) 1-butanol (44) 1-butoxybutane (62) 1-chloronaphthalene (34) 1-methoxy-2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethane (60) 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidinone (81) 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (81) 1-methylnaphthalene (35) 1-methylpyrrolidin-2-one (81) 1-octanol (50) 1-propanol (41)

acetic acid dimethylamide (79) acetic acid ethyl ester (64) acetic acid n-butyl ester (66) acetone (68) acetonitrile (76) ACN (76) air (100) alcohol C-8 (50) amide C1 (74) anisole (61) argon (95) azabenzene (80) azine (80)

2-(2-hydroxyethoxy)ethanol (53) 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol (39) 2,2,4-trimethylpentane (5) 2,2 ,2 -nitrilotriethanol (48) 2,2 -dihydroxydiethyl ether (53) 2,2 -oxydiethanol (53) 2-[bis(2-hydroxyethyl)-amino]ethanol (48) 2-aminoethanol (40) 2-aminoethyl alcohol (40) 2-butanol (45) 2-butanone (69) 2-butoxyethanol (54)

benzene (21) benzene methanol (49) benzoic acid methyl ester (67) benzol (21) benzonitrile (27) benzyl alcohol (49) biogas (99) bis(2-hydroxyethyl) ether (53) bis(2-methoxyethyl) ether (60) bromoform (11) butan-1-ol (44) butan-2-ol (45)

4-methyl-2-pentanone (72) 4-methylpentan-2-one (72) 5-methyl-2-hexanone (73) 5-methylhexan-2-one (73)

451

452 butan-2-one (69) butyl acetate (66) butyl alcohol (44) butyl cellosolve (54) butyl ether (62) butyl glycol (54) capryl alcohol (50) carbinol (36) carbon bisulfide (83) carbon dioxide (98) carbon disulfide (83) carbon sulfide (83) carbon tet (14) carbon tetrachloride (14) Cellosolve® (52) CFC-14 (14) chlorobenzene (22) chloroform (13) chloromethylene (12) clorius (67) cumene (33) cumol (33) cyclohexane (7) cyclohexanone (71) cyclohexatriene (21) cyclohexylmethane (8) cyclopentane (6) cyclopentyl (6) decahydronaphthalene (9) decalin (9) DEG (53) deuterium (90) deuterium oxide (87) diamide (82) diazane (82) dibutyl ether (62) dichloromethane (12) diethyl ether (57) diethyl methane (1) diethylene glycol (53) diethylene glycol dimethyl ether (60) diethylene oxide (56) diglycol (53) diglyme (60) dimethyl carbinol (42) dimethyl diglycol (60) dimethyl glycol (58) dimethyl ketone (68) dimethyl sulfoxide (84) dimethyldiglycol (60) dimethylglycol (58) di-n-butyl ether (62)

Liquids

dioxacylohexane (56) dioxane (56) DMAC (79) DME (58) DMF (78) DMFA (78) DMSO (84) DRIVERON® (59) EDC (16) EGMM (51) ethane-1,2-diamine (77) ethane-1,2-diol (38) ethanol (37) ethanolamine (40) ether (57) ethoxyethane (57) ethyl acetate (64) ethyl alcohol (37) ethyl cellosolve (52) ethyl ether (57) ethyl glycol (52) ethyl methyl ketone (69) ethylene chloride (16) ethylene dichloride (16) ethylene dioxide (56) ethylene glycol (38) ethylene glycol butyl ether (54) ethylene glycol dimethyl ether (58) ethylene glycol monobutyl ether (54) ethylene glycol monomethyl ether (51) ethylene tetrachloride (18) ethylene trichloride (17) ethylenediamine (77) EtOH (37) FC72 (19) fluorobenzene (25) fluoroform (15) fluoryl (15) formamide (74) formic acid (63) formic acid amide (74) formic acid dimethylamide (78) formic acid methyl ester (63) formic amide (74) freon 14 (14) freon 23 (15) freon 150 (16) glycerin (43) glycerine (43) glycerol (43)

453

Liquids

glycol (38) glycolethylether (56) grain alcohol (37) heavy water (87) helium (91) heptane (4) hexafluorobenzene (26) hexahydrobenzene (7) hexamethylene (7) hexane (3) HFC-23 (15) hydrazine (82) hydrogen (89) hydrogen oxide (86) hydroxyethane (37) hydroxymethane (36) IPA (42) isoamyl methyl ketone (73) isobutanol (46) iso-butanol (46) isobutyl alcohol (46) isobutyl methyl ketone (72) isobutylacetone (73) isobutyltrimethylmethane (5) isooctane (5) isopentane (2) iso-pentane (2) isopentyl methyl ketone (73) iso-propanol (42) isopropanol (42) isopropyl alcohol (42) isopropylacetone (72) isopropylbenzene (33) isopropylbenzol (33) krypton (96) levoxine (82) light water (86) ligroine (10) marsh gas (99) MEA (40) MEG (38) MEK (69) MeOH (36) meta-xylene (31) meta-xylol (31) methacrylic acid methyl ester (65) methane (99) methane amide (74)

methanedithione (83) methanol (36) methoxybenzene (61) methyl 2-methylprop-2-enoate (65) methyl 2-methylpropenoate (65) methyl alcohol (36) methyl benzoate (67) methyl cellosolve (51) methyl cyanide (76) methyl ester (63) methyl ethyl ketone (69) methyl formate (63) methyl glycol (51) methyl hydride (99) methyl isoamyl ketone (73) methyl isobutyl ketone (72) methyl methacrylate (65) methyl methanoate (63) methyl phenyl ether (61) methyl propyl ketone (70) methyl tert-butyl ether (59) methylbenzene (28) methylcyclohexane (8) methylene chloride (12) methylidyne trichloride (13) methylsulfinylmethane (84) methylsulfoxide (84) MIAK (73) MIBK (72) mineral spirit (10) MMA (65) monoethanolamine (40) monoethylene glycol (38) monofluorobenzene (25) monoglyme (58) mononitromethane (75) M-PYROL® (81) m-pyrrole (81) MTBE (59) m-xylene (31) N ,N -dimethylacetamide (79) N ,N -dimethylethanamide (79) N ,N -dimethylformamide (78) N ,N -dimethylmethanamide (78) naphtha petroleum (10) naphthene (7) n-butanol (44) n-butyl acetate (66) n-butyl alcohol (44) n-dipropylmethane (4) neon (94) n-heptane (4) n-heptylhydride (4)

454 n-hexane (3) niobe oil (67) nitrocarbol (75) nitrogen (92) nitromethane (75) N -methyl-2-pyrrolidinone (81) N -methyl-2-pyrrolidone (81) NMP (81) n-octanol (50) n-pentane (1) n-propanol (41) n-propyl alcohol (41) o-chlorobenzene (23) octadecafluorodecahydronaphthalene (20) octan-1-ol (50) octyl alcohol (50) ordinary water (86) ortho-xylene (30) ortho-xylol (30) oxacyclopentane (55) oxidane (86) oxolane (55) oxygen (93) o-xylene (30) para-xylene (32) para-xylol (32) PCE (18) p-dioxane (56) pentamethylene (6) pentan-2-one (70) pentane (1) PERC (18) perchloroethylene (18) perflexane (19) perfluorobenzene (26) perfluorodecahydronaphthalene (20) perfluorodecalin (20) perfluorohexane (19) perfluoro-n-hexane (19) petroleum benzin (10) petroleum ether (10) petroleum spirit (10) phenyl carbinole (49) phenyl chloride (22) phenyl cyanide (27) phenyl fluoride (25) phenyl methanol (49) phenylethylene (29) phenylmethanol (49) pimelic ketone (71) polydimethylsiloxane (85) polysilicone oil (85)

Liquids

PP1 (19) propan-1-ol (41) propan-2-ol (42) propane-1,2,3-triol (43) propanol (41) propanone (68) propyl alcohol (41) p-xylene (32) pyridine (80) sea water (88) sec-butyl alcohol (45) silicone oil (85) styrene (29) styrol (29) TCE (17) TEA (48) tert-butanol (47) tert-butyl alcohol (47) tert-butyl methyl ether (59) tetrachloroethene (18) tetrachloroethylene (18) tetrachloromethane (14) tetradecafluorohexane (19) tetrahydrofuran (55) tetramethylene oxide (55) THF (55) TL4N (53) toluene (28) toluol (28) tribromomethane (11) trichloroethene (17) trichloroethylene (17) trichloromethane (13) triethanolamine (48) trifluoroethyl alcohol (39) trifluoromethane (15) trimethyl carbinol (47) tris(2-hydroxyethyl)amine (48) vinylbenzene (29) water (86) water-d2 (87) wood alcohol (36) xenon (97) xylene (30,31,32) xylol (30,31,32) α-chloronaphthalene (34) α-methylnaphthalene (35) β, β, β-trifluoroethyl alcohol (39)