OSA's Digital Library

Optical Materials Express

Optical Materials Express

  • Editor: David J. Hagan
  • Vol. 2, Iss. 6 — Jun. 1, 2012
  • pp: 789–798
« Show journal navigation

Direct volume variation measurements in fused silica specimens exposed to femtosecond laser

Audrey Champion and Yves Bellouard  »View Author Affiliations


Optical Materials Express, Vol. 2, Issue 6, pp. 789-798 (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OME.2.000789


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (1343 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We introduce a new method to investigate localized volume variations resulting from laser exposure. Our method is based on the measurement of fused silica cantilevers deflection from which we calculate the effective stress and density variation in laser-affected zones. Specifically, we investigate density variations in fused silica exposed to femtosecond laser exposure in the regime where nanogratings are found. We demonstrate that a volume expansion is taking place in that particular regime.

© 2012 OSA

1. Introduction

Fused silica (a-SiO2) exposure to low-energy (i.e. below the ablation threshold) femtosecond laser pulses, leads to interesting effects such as a local increase of refractive index [1

1. K. M. Davis, K. Miura, N. Sugimoto, and K. Hirao, “Writing waveguides in glass with a femtosecond laser,” Opt. Lett. 21(21), 1729–1731 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and/or a local increase of etching rate [2

2. A. Marcinkevičius, S. Juodkazis, M. Watanabe, M. Miwa, S. Matsuo, H. Misawa, and J. Nishii, “Femtosecond laser-assisted three-dimensional microfabrication in silica,” Opt. Lett. 26(5), 277–279 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. When exposing fused silica to femtosecond laser beams, three types of structural modifications (commonly labeled “Type I, II and III”) have been reported as a function of fluence and pulse duration.

In the first regime (type I), homogeneous modifications are observed in the laser affected zone (LAZ) leading to an increase of refractive index [1

1. K. M. Davis, K. Miura, N. Sugimoto, and K. Hirao, “Writing waveguides in glass with a femtosecond laser,” Opt. Lett. 21(21), 1729–1731 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and an increase of etching rate [2

2. A. Marcinkevičius, S. Juodkazis, M. Watanabe, M. Miwa, S. Matsuo, H. Misawa, and J. Nishii, “Femtosecond laser-assisted three-dimensional microfabrication in silica,” Opt. Lett. 26(5), 277–279 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Experimental evidences suggesting localized densifications for type I structures, have been reported in [3

3. Y. Bellouard, E. Barthel, A. A. Said, M. Dugan, and P. Bado, “Scanning thermal microscopy and Raman analysis of bulk fused silica exposed to low-energy femtosecond laser pulses,” Opt. Express 16(24), 19520–19534 (2008), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,4

4. Y. Bellouard, T. Colomb, C. Depeursinge, M. Dugan, A. A. Said, and P. Bado, “Nanoindentation and birefringence measurements on fused silica specimen exposed to low-energy femtosecond pulses,” Opt. Express 14(18), 8360–8366 (2006), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. In the intermediate regime (type II) – regime on which our paper is focused, self-organized patterns consisting of “nanogratings” are found [5

5. Y. Shimotsuma, P. G. Kazansky, J. R. Qiu, and K. Hirao, “Self-organized nanogratings in glass irradiated by ultrashort light pulses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91(24), 247405 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7

7. P. P. Rajeev, M. Gertsvolf, C. Hnatovsky, E. Simova, R. S. Taylor, P. B. Corkum, D. M. Rayner, and V. R. Bhardwaj, “Transient nanoplasmonics inside dielectrics,” Opt. Phys. 40(11), S273–S282 (2007). [CrossRef]

]. These patterns present interesting optical properties such as form-birefringence [8

8. E. Bricchi, B. G. Klappauf, and P. G. Kazansky, “Form birefringence and negative index change created by femtosecond direct writing in transparent materials,” Opt. Lett. 29(1), 119–121 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] giving the possibility to create novel photonics devices such as polarization converters [9

9. M. Beresna, M. Gecevičius, P. G. Kazansky, and T. Gertus, “Radially polarized optical vortex converter created by femtosecond laser nanostructuring of glass,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 98(20), 201101 (2011). [CrossRef]

]. Interestingly and although their structures seem to be radically different than for type I modifications, nanogratings also lead to a local increase of etching rate strongly dependent on the polarization [10

10. C. Hnatovsky, R. S. Taylor, E. Simova, V. R. Bhardwaj, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Polarization-selective etching in femtosecond laser-assisted microfluidic channel fabrication in fused silica,” Opt. Lett. 30(14), 1867–1869 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Finally, Type III modifications refer to voids in the material [11

11. E. N. Glezer and E. Mazur, “Ultrafast-laser driven micro-explosions in transparent materials,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 71(7), 882–884 (1997). [CrossRef]

]. Exposure conditions to obtain the three different types of modifications are summarized in [12

12. C. Hnatovsky, J. R. Taylor, P. P. Rajeev, E. Simova, V. R. Bhardwaj, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Pulse duration dependence of femtosecond-laser-fabricated nanogratings in fused silica,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 87(1), 014104 (2005). [CrossRef]

] for a given set of experimental conditions.

The physical mechanism responsible for the formation of nanogratings is not fully understood and various models have been proposed (see for instance [5

5. Y. Shimotsuma, P. G. Kazansky, J. R. Qiu, and K. Hirao, “Self-organized nanogratings in glass irradiated by ultrashort light pulses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91(24), 247405 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and [6

6. V. R. Bhardwaj, E. Simova, P. P. Rajeev, C. Hnatovsky, R. S. Taylor, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Optically produced arrays of planar nanostructures inside fused silica,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96(5), 057404 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,7

7. P. P. Rajeev, M. Gertsvolf, C. Hnatovsky, E. Simova, R. S. Taylor, P. B. Corkum, D. M. Rayner, and V. R. Bhardwaj, “Transient nanoplasmonics inside dielectrics,” Opt. Phys. 40(11), S273–S282 (2007). [CrossRef]

]). From a material point-of-view, the nature of structural changes remains elusive. Shimotsuma et al. [5

5. Y. Shimotsuma, P. G. Kazansky, J. R. Qiu, and K. Hirao, “Self-organized nanogratings in glass irradiated by ultrashort light pulses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91(24), 247405 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] indicated that nanogratings contain oxygen depleted-zones. To explain the enhanced etching mechanism in the nanogratings regime, a model based on oriented nanocracks was proposed [13

13. R. Taylor, C. Hnatovsky, and E. Simova, “Applications of femtosecond laser induced self‐organized planar nanocracks inside fused silica glass,” Laser Photonics Rev. 2(1-2), 26–46 (2008). [CrossRef]

]. In this model, nanogratings are interpreted as a set of oriented cracks. However, recent SEM observations [14

14. J. Canning, M. Lancry, K. Cook, A. Weickman, F. Brisset, and B. Poumellec, “Anatomy of a femtosecond laser processed silica waveguide,” Opt. Mater. Express 1(5), 998–1008 (2011), doi:. [CrossRef]

] showing the presence of a porous structure inside the lower-index zone of the nanogratings contradicts this interpretation. In addition, we have shown [15

15. S. Rajesh and Y. Bellouard, “Towards fast femtosecond laser micromachining of fused silica: The effect of deposited energy,” Opt. Express 18(20), 21490–21497 (2010), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] that, in the nanogratings regime, the etching rate first reaches a maximum for a given amount of deposited energy regime and then decays for higher amount of deposited energy. This observation cannot be explained with a model where an accelerated etching rate is driven by the presence of oriented cracks. Indeed, according to this nanocrack model, the etching rate should keep on increasing (or at least not diminish) with the increasing amount of deposited energy (i.e. the number of nanocracks should increase with the energy deposited). Therefore, another type of physical mechanism is responsible for the accelerated etching rate. In particular, we suspect localized densification coupled to stress accumulation and relaxation to account for the accelerated etching in laser affected zones consisting of nanogratings.

To further understand the etching mechanism, it is essential to be able to quantify possible volume changes and deformation resulting from the possible presence of stress. In this paper, we introduce a new experimental technique for quantifying density variations resulting from laser exposure that we apply here to the regime where nanogratings form. Note that the methodology proposed here could be used in a variety of situation involving structural changes introduced by laser exposure.

2. Methodology for laser-induced volume variation measurement

Our method is based on micro-cantilevers deflections. The working principle is outlined in Fig. 1
Fig. 1 Left: Working principle for measuring volume changes using on cantilever deflection. The laser exposure takes place only near the anchoring point of the cantilever and only in its upper-half thickness and forms a bimorph composite structure that induces a local bending of the cantilever. The deflection, measured at the tip of the cantilever, is effectively amplified by the length of the cantilever. Right: Schematic of the cantilever cross-section and definition of the geometrical parameters used in the paper.
. A transparent cantilever is exposed locally to a laser beam, but only close to its anchoring point and only on the upper part (but below surface). In the cantilever portion exposed to the laser beam, the modified zone and the unaffected layers form a bimorph composite structure (see Fig. 1). If a volume expansion or reduction occurs in the laser affected zone, the bimorph element will respectively bend down or up. The bimorph-zone forms a hinge. Any resulting displacement is amplified by the cantilever arm. Note that because of the geometrical amplification, the volume that needs to be laser-irradiated can be minimized to as little as a single scanned line. The deflection amplification provides a simple and yet efficient method for increasing the measurement range and achieving high resolution. In the experiments reported here, the total length of the cantilever largely exceeds the bimorph structure length.

Based on the measured deflection, the localized volume expansion in the laser affected zone is extracted. To do so, we use two mechanical models. The first one considers the laser affected zone as a continuously and homogeneously modified layer on a bulk-unmodified substrate. Effectively, this is similar to a bimorph structure made of two different materials. We use the Stoney equation [16

16. G. G. Stoney, “The tension of metallic films deposited by electrolysis,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A Contain. Pap. Math. Phys. Character 82(553), 172–175 (1909). [CrossRef]

] to calculate the stress in the laser affected portion of the cantilever and then, to estimate the volume variation. Here, we assume that the boundaries between the two layers are in a first approximation well-defined. Stoney equation enables us to calculate the strain in the upper layer as a function of the radius of curvature of the bimorph and is expressed by:
σzz=Esds26R(1ν2)df
(1)
where Es is the young modulus of the ‘substrate’ (here the bulk unmodified fused silica), ds the substrate thickness, df the thickness of the laser-affected layer, ν the Poisson ratio of the unmodified zone and R the radius of curvature (of the bimorph zone).

We assume that R is measured along the neutral axis of the cantilever beam. R is calculated from the deflection measurement (see Fig. 1, right for the geometrical parameters).
R=sα=wlazαδ=Lsinα}RwlazLδ
(2)
In a bent cantilever beam, the strain along the cantilever axis is given by:
ε(y)=yR
(3)
where y is the position within the thickness beam relatively to its neutral axis (i.e. where the stress is zero).

In our case, since the thickness of the laser affected layer is much smaller than the thickness of the unaffected layer, we have ds >> df and the maximum strain in the laser affected layer can be approximated by:

εmaxds2R
(4)

Using Eqs. (1), (2) and (4), from the deflection of the cantilever, with this simple continuous model, we calculate the average strain and stress in the laser affected zone.

ε(δ)(ds2wlaz)δL,σzz(δ)[Esds26wlaz(1ν2)df]δL
(5)

This model considers a continuous zone. To test the influence of the sequential nature of laser scanning (laser affected zones are typically formed by juxtaposing multiple adjacent laser-affected zones) one can used finite-element modeling (FEM).

Here, the model used considers a plane-strain hypothesis with elliptical cross-section representative of the laser affected zones. The FEM model is implemented in software commercially available (COMSOL). We used adaptive meshing to locally increase the density of elements near the laser-affected-zones.

To simplify, we assume that the nanogratings structures, from a micromechanical and volume variation point-of-view, can be represented by a homogeneously modified elliptical zone that defines a representative volume element (RVE). This choice is supported by scanning thermal microscopy measurements of laser affected zones created under similar conditions [3

3. Y. Bellouard, E. Barthel, A. A. Said, M. Dugan, and P. Bado, “Scanning thermal microscopy and Raman analysis of bulk fused silica exposed to low-energy femtosecond laser pulses,” Opt. Express 16(24), 19520–19534 (2008), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Note that this model could be further refined by adopting a multi-scale modeling approach. In this model, the representative volume elements are loaded with a uniform stress distribution normal to their contours. The stress sign is chosen according to the measured deflection (δ). In this case, a tensile stress is applied. The finite element model is used to derive a stress versus deflections relation which is then used to extrapolate the corresponding stress for any measured deflection.

3. Experimental results

3.1 Sample preparation

Laser system

We use a femtosecond laser oscillator (t-Pulse 500 from Amplitude Systèmes) emitting 380 fs-pulses at 1030 nm and at a chosen repetition rate of 860 kHz. The pulse energy is 220 nJ. The focusing optic consists of a microscope objective (OFR, LMH X20-1064) with a numerical aperture of 0.40. With these laser exposure specifications, we are in the second regime as confirmed by backscattered scanning electron microscope (SEM) observations. In another paper [10

10. C. Hnatovsky, R. S. Taylor, E. Simova, V. R. Bhardwaj, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Polarization-selective etching in femtosecond laser-assisted microfluidic channel fabrication in fused silica,” Opt. Lett. 30(14), 1867–1869 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], we demonstrated the influence of the amount of deposited energy on the etching rate. Here, in these experiments and to compare with the influence of etching, we tested various levels of deposited energy, namely from 6 J/mm2 to 150 J/mm2.

Cantilever preparation

The cantilevers (shown in Fig. 2
Fig. 2 (a) Top view shown the contour of the cantilevers (dark line) and the areas exposed to the laser beam after etching (light grey). To save space, the cantilevers are folded one on another. (b) Images of the cantilevers taken with an optical microscope in reflection. The modified zones are clearly visible.
) are fabricated using the same laser than specified above and following a process described in another paper [17

17. Y. Bellouard, A. Said, M. Dugan, and P. Bado, “Fabrication of high-aspect ratio, micro-fluidic channels and tunnels using femtosecond laser pulses and chemical etching,” Opt. Express 12(10), 2120–2129 (2004), http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-12-10-2120. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. As processing parameters, here we have used a scanning speed of 5 mm/s, a pulse energy of 250 nJ, a repetition rate of 860 kHz and a NA of 0.40. After chemical etching in low-concentration HF (2.5%), the cantilevers are again exposed to the laser beam but only in their upper-half thickness. The substrates used are 25 mm-squares with a thickness of 500 microns. The material is OH-rich fused silica. The cantilever exposure is made by scanning adjacent lines (going back and forth) with two-micron spacing over a width of 5 mm. The writing speed was varying in order to obtain the specified deposited energy. The writing was tested with two linear polarizations along and perpendicular to the cantilever axis).

Lines for etching comparison

Using the same type of substrate, we made a series of lines below the surface with the same energy deposition and exposure conditions. This specimen is used to correlate the measured deflections with the etching rate. The experimental protocol to measure the etched length is described in [14

14. J. Canning, M. Lancry, K. Cook, A. Weickman, F. Brisset, and B. Poumellec, “Anatomy of a femtosecond laser processed silica waveguide,” Opt. Mater. Express 1(5), 998–1008 (2011), doi:. [CrossRef]

].

3.2 Deflection measurement

Figure 3
Fig. 3 (a): Deflection measurements for different levels of energy deposition with longitudinal and transverse polarization. (b): Equivalent elongation calculated and compared with the simulation. The FEM model predicts in average a 5% higher stress than for the continuous analytical model. The deflection measurement error is +/− 0.1 μm.
shows the cantilever deflection as a function of the energy deposition. It is displayed for both polarizations (transverse/parallel to the writing direction). A confocal microscope (Sensofar -PLµ2300) is used to measure the deflection with an error of +/− 0.1 µm. Thanks to the amplification mechanism, the data span from 50 to 90 µm. For this particular exposure condition (regime II), we observe a deflection in the opposite direction from the LAZ indicating a volume expansion after exposure. Furthermore, we note a possible weak-dependence with the polarization.

3.3 Corresponding stress in the laser affected zones

Using Eq. (5) applied to the deflection measurements shown in Fig. 3, we estimate the principal stress in the laser affected zones (Fig. 4
Fig. 4 Calculated stress using the continuous and discrete model for transverse (a) and longitudinal (b) polarization defined with respect to the writing direction (s).
). The data are also compared with the results from the FEM simulations.

The maximum elongation variation is estimated to be 0.03%. The FEM model predicts in average a 5% higher stress than for the continuous analytical model.

3.4 Effect of the energy deposition on the etching rate

The maximum cantilever deflections and the maximum etched lengths are found at about the same energy deposition level (i.e. between 10 and 30 J/mm2), illustrating a strong correlation between the two phenomena.

3.5 Evolution of Raman spectra as a function of the deposited energy

Raman spectra of the laser exposed areas for the same energy depositions used in the etching experiment discussed above, were measured. Characteristics Raman spectra are shown in Fig. 6
Fig. 6 Raman spectra for two polarizations (longitudinal and perpendicular to the writing direction) compared to a reference spectrum, measured in the pristine material. These curves are obtained after heating up the material at 150°C to remove colored-centers. The laser exposures for the longitudinal and perpendicular cases are: 10 J/mm2 and 16 J/mm2 respectively.
. The reference spectrum is taken in the pristine zone of the silica. Measurements made without post-processing show a strong fluorescence background, due essentially to the color-centers (NBO) introduced by the laser that get excited with our Raman illumination conditions (632 nm-laser source). To remove the color-centers, the specimen is heated up to 150°C for 10 hours. Note that the tip deflections measured after the 10h-heating period does not change compared to their initial procedure, indicating that the post-processing step-conditions do not modify the mechanical state of the cantilevers.From each Raman spectrum taken at various levels of deposited energy and for the two polarization states, the D2 peaks are extracted after normalization and compared. The results are shown in Fig. 7
Fig. 7 D2-peak variation as a function of the energy deposition level for both polarizations after heating at 150°C during 10 hours (to annihilate color-centers).
.

We observe a shift of the D0-peak to lower wave-number after exposure and an increase of the D2-peak. These observations are consistent with our own observations made on mainly type I modifications, but also on nanogratings [3

3. Y. Bellouard, E. Barthel, A. A. Said, M. Dugan, and P. Bado, “Scanning thermal microscopy and Raman analysis of bulk fused silica exposed to low-energy femtosecond laser pulses,” Opt. Express 16(24), 19520–19534 (2008), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The bond angle decreases after laser exposure, indicating the possible presence of compressive stress in or around the LAZ, as well as the formation of lower-order rings. These Raman observations point towards a possible densification of the glass matrix.

This is apparently contradicting the expansion phenomena observed for the cantilever. Note that the trend observed in Fig. 7 is the same than for the etching length and for the cantilever deflection: a sharp increase followed by a gradual decay. This observation hints a rapid buildup of stress associated with structural modifications.

4. Discussion and interpretation

We note that the etching rate also depends on the deposited energy. A maximum etching rate is observed for a given level, here about 20 J/mm2. The presence of this maximum suggests that the stress gradually builds up as the material is repeatedly ‘hammered’ by the femtosecond laser. When this stress becomes too high, cracks nucleate randomly and stress relaxation is observed globally in the LAZ explaining the reduced etching rate as well as the lowering of the cantilever deflection. The cantilevers do not completely recover their deformation due to the formation of irreversible, non-affine open interfaces (see Fig. 8). The increased etching rate is also still observed because some irreversible densification took place in an earlier phase of the process, prior to the formation of cracks. The presence of open pores may offer a path for the etchant to penetrate inside the material but overall, the etching mechanism is much less efficient than the densification-driven and stress-induced ones. This model is also compatible with the etching rate polarization anisotropy [10

10. C. Hnatovsky, R. S. Taylor, E. Simova, V. R. Bhardwaj, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Polarization-selective etching in femtosecond laser-assisted microfluidic channel fabrication in fused silica,” Opt. Lett. 30(14), 1867–1869 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The laser exposure condition segregates densified zones in the narrow bands forming the nanogratings. If these zones are connected longitudinally, it will indeed favor the etching rate, while a parallel assembly of nanogratings will be less efficient. Our observations show that in both polarization cases, the formation of cracks slow down substantially the etching rate and are counter-productive.

5. Conclusion

We have demonstrated a method to quantitatively estimate the level of volume changes in the laser affected zone after femtosecond laser exposure. In particular, we have shown that for nanogratings, a volume expansion is taking place and that the energy deposition has an influence on the volume variation that can be correlated to both, Raman spectra and etching rate. We interpret these phenomena by the formation of a porous structure in the nanogratings (consistent with experimental observations [14

14. J. Canning, M. Lancry, K. Cook, A. Weickman, F. Brisset, and B. Poumellec, “Anatomy of a femtosecond laser processed silica waveguide,” Opt. Mater. Express 1(5), 998–1008 (2011), doi:. [CrossRef]

]), that locally stresses and densifies the material – explaining the peak observed for etching rate, Raman spectra and volume expansion; followed by crack formation and stress relaxation that accounts for the less efficient etching observed at higher energy deposited. This work emphasizes the role of the stress in the etching rate and its importance for accurately controlling etched patterns.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Marco Hendrix for his help with the Raman setup and for the Chemical department for letting us use their Raman instruments. This work is supported by the European Commission through the Seventh Framework program (http://www.femtoprint.eu/) [Project Femtoprint, NMP, project no 260103].

References and links

1.

K. M. Davis, K. Miura, N. Sugimoto, and K. Hirao, “Writing waveguides in glass with a femtosecond laser,” Opt. Lett. 21(21), 1729–1731 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2.

A. Marcinkevičius, S. Juodkazis, M. Watanabe, M. Miwa, S. Matsuo, H. Misawa, and J. Nishii, “Femtosecond laser-assisted three-dimensional microfabrication in silica,” Opt. Lett. 26(5), 277–279 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3.

Y. Bellouard, E. Barthel, A. A. Said, M. Dugan, and P. Bado, “Scanning thermal microscopy and Raman analysis of bulk fused silica exposed to low-energy femtosecond laser pulses,” Opt. Express 16(24), 19520–19534 (2008), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

Y. Bellouard, T. Colomb, C. Depeursinge, M. Dugan, A. A. Said, and P. Bado, “Nanoindentation and birefringence measurements on fused silica specimen exposed to low-energy femtosecond pulses,” Opt. Express 14(18), 8360–8366 (2006), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5.

Y. Shimotsuma, P. G. Kazansky, J. R. Qiu, and K. Hirao, “Self-organized nanogratings in glass irradiated by ultrashort light pulses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91(24), 247405 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6.

V. R. Bhardwaj, E. Simova, P. P. Rajeev, C. Hnatovsky, R. S. Taylor, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Optically produced arrays of planar nanostructures inside fused silica,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96(5), 057404 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

P. P. Rajeev, M. Gertsvolf, C. Hnatovsky, E. Simova, R. S. Taylor, P. B. Corkum, D. M. Rayner, and V. R. Bhardwaj, “Transient nanoplasmonics inside dielectrics,” Opt. Phys. 40(11), S273–S282 (2007). [CrossRef]

8.

E. Bricchi, B. G. Klappauf, and P. G. Kazansky, “Form birefringence and negative index change created by femtosecond direct writing in transparent materials,” Opt. Lett. 29(1), 119–121 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

9.

M. Beresna, M. Gecevičius, P. G. Kazansky, and T. Gertus, “Radially polarized optical vortex converter created by femtosecond laser nanostructuring of glass,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 98(20), 201101 (2011). [CrossRef]

10.

C. Hnatovsky, R. S. Taylor, E. Simova, V. R. Bhardwaj, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Polarization-selective etching in femtosecond laser-assisted microfluidic channel fabrication in fused silica,” Opt. Lett. 30(14), 1867–1869 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11.

E. N. Glezer and E. Mazur, “Ultrafast-laser driven micro-explosions in transparent materials,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 71(7), 882–884 (1997). [CrossRef]

12.

C. Hnatovsky, J. R. Taylor, P. P. Rajeev, E. Simova, V. R. Bhardwaj, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Pulse duration dependence of femtosecond-laser-fabricated nanogratings in fused silica,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 87(1), 014104 (2005). [CrossRef]

13.

R. Taylor, C. Hnatovsky, and E. Simova, “Applications of femtosecond laser induced self‐organized planar nanocracks inside fused silica glass,” Laser Photonics Rev. 2(1-2), 26–46 (2008). [CrossRef]

14.

J. Canning, M. Lancry, K. Cook, A. Weickman, F. Brisset, and B. Poumellec, “Anatomy of a femtosecond laser processed silica waveguide,” Opt. Mater. Express 1(5), 998–1008 (2011), doi:. [CrossRef]

15.

S. Rajesh and Y. Bellouard, “Towards fast femtosecond laser micromachining of fused silica: The effect of deposited energy,” Opt. Express 18(20), 21490–21497 (2010), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16.

G. G. Stoney, “The tension of metallic films deposited by electrolysis,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A Contain. Pap. Math. Phys. Character 82(553), 172–175 (1909). [CrossRef]

17.

Y. Bellouard, A. Said, M. Dugan, and P. Bado, “Fabrication of high-aspect ratio, micro-fluidic channels and tunnels using femtosecond laser pulses and chemical etching,” Opt. Express 12(10), 2120–2129 (2004), http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-12-10-2120. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18.

H. Sugiura and T. Yamadaya, “Raman-scattering in silica glass in the permanent densification region,” J. Non-Cryst. Solids 144, 151–158 (1992). [CrossRef]

19.

J. Bell and P. Dean, “Atomic vibrations in vitreous silica,” Discuss. Faraday Soc. 50, 55–61 (1970). [CrossRef]

20.

F. L. Galeener, “Band limits and the vibrational spectra of tetrahedral glasses,” Phys. Rev. B 19(8), 4292–4297 (1979). [CrossRef]

21.

M. Okuno, B. Reynard, Y. Shimada, Y. Syono, and C. Willaime, “A Raman spectroscopy study of shock-wave densification of vitreous silica,” Phys. Chem. Miner. 26(4), 304–311 (1999). [CrossRef]

22.

J. W. Chan, T. Huser, S. Risbud, and D. M. Krol, “Structural changes in fused silica after exposure to focused femtosecond laser pulses,” Opt. Lett. 26(21), 1726–1728 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

23.

W. J. Reichman, D. M. Krol, L. Shah, F. Yoshino, A. Arai, S. M. Eaton, and P. R. Herman, “A spectroscopic comparison of femtosecond-laser-modified fused silica using kilohertz and megahertz laser systems,” J. Appl. Phys. 99(12), 123112 (2006). [CrossRef]

24.

A. Agarwal and M. Tomozawa, “Correlation of silica glass properties with the infrared spectra,” J. Non-Cryst. Solids 209(1-2), 166–174 (1997). [CrossRef]

OCIS Codes
(160.2750) Materials : Glass and other amorphous materials
(230.4000) Optical devices : Microstructure fabrication
(320.2250) Ultrafast optics : Femtosecond phenomena
(320.7130) Ultrafast optics : Ultrafast processes in condensed matter, including semiconductors

ToC Category:
Glass and Other Amorphous Materials

History
Original Manuscript: March 21, 2012
Revised Manuscript: April 27, 2012
Manuscript Accepted: May 3, 2012
Published: May 14, 2012

Citation
Audrey Champion and Yves Bellouard, "Direct volume variation measurements in fused silica specimens exposed to femtosecond laser," Opt. Mater. Express 2, 789-798 (2012)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/ome/abstract.cfm?URI=ome-2-6-789


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. K. M. Davis, K. Miura, N. Sugimoto, and K. Hirao, “Writing waveguides in glass with a femtosecond laser,” Opt. Lett.21(21), 1729–1731 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. A. Marcinkevičius, S. Juodkazis, M. Watanabe, M. Miwa, S. Matsuo, H. Misawa, and J. Nishii, “Femtosecond laser-assisted three-dimensional microfabrication in silica,” Opt. Lett.26(5), 277–279 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Y. Bellouard, E. Barthel, A. A. Said, M. Dugan, and P. Bado, “Scanning thermal microscopy and Raman analysis of bulk fused silica exposed to low-energy femtosecond laser pulses,” Opt. Express16(24), 19520–19534 (2008), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Y. Bellouard, T. Colomb, C. Depeursinge, M. Dugan, A. A. Said, and P. Bado, “Nanoindentation and birefringence measurements on fused silica specimen exposed to low-energy femtosecond pulses,” Opt. Express14(18), 8360–8366 (2006), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Y. Shimotsuma, P. G. Kazansky, J. R. Qiu, and K. Hirao, “Self-organized nanogratings in glass irradiated by ultrashort light pulses,” Phys. Rev. Lett.91(24), 247405 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. V. R. Bhardwaj, E. Simova, P. P. Rajeev, C. Hnatovsky, R. S. Taylor, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Optically produced arrays of planar nanostructures inside fused silica,” Phys. Rev. Lett.96(5), 057404 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. P. P. Rajeev, M. Gertsvolf, C. Hnatovsky, E. Simova, R. S. Taylor, P. B. Corkum, D. M. Rayner, and V. R. Bhardwaj, “Transient nanoplasmonics inside dielectrics,” Opt. Phys.40(11), S273–S282 (2007). [CrossRef]
  8. E. Bricchi, B. G. Klappauf, and P. G. Kazansky, “Form birefringence and negative index change created by femtosecond direct writing in transparent materials,” Opt. Lett.29(1), 119–121 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. M. Beresna, M. Gecevičius, P. G. Kazansky, and T. Gertus, “Radially polarized optical vortex converter created by femtosecond laser nanostructuring of glass,” Appl. Phys. Lett.98(20), 201101 (2011). [CrossRef]
  10. C. Hnatovsky, R. S. Taylor, E. Simova, V. R. Bhardwaj, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Polarization-selective etching in femtosecond laser-assisted microfluidic channel fabrication in fused silica,” Opt. Lett.30(14), 1867–1869 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. E. N. Glezer and E. Mazur, “Ultrafast-laser driven micro-explosions in transparent materials,” Appl. Phys. Lett.71(7), 882–884 (1997). [CrossRef]
  12. C. Hnatovsky, J. R. Taylor, P. P. Rajeev, E. Simova, V. R. Bhardwaj, D. M. Rayner, and P. B. Corkum, “Pulse duration dependence of femtosecond-laser-fabricated nanogratings in fused silica,” Appl. Phys. Lett.87(1), 014104 (2005). [CrossRef]
  13. R. Taylor, C. Hnatovsky, and E. Simova, “Applications of femtosecond laser induced self‐organized planar nanocracks inside fused silica glass,” Laser Photonics Rev.2(1-2), 26–46 (2008). [CrossRef]
  14. J. Canning, M. Lancry, K. Cook, A. Weickman, F. Brisset, and B. Poumellec, “Anatomy of a femtosecond laser processed silica waveguide,” Opt. Mater. Express1(5), 998–1008 (2011), doi:. [CrossRef]
  15. S. Rajesh and Y. Bellouard, “Towards fast femtosecond laser micromachining of fused silica: The effect of deposited energy,” Opt. Express18(20), 21490–21497 (2010), doi:. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. G. G. Stoney, “The tension of metallic films deposited by electrolysis,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A Contain. Pap. Math. Phys. Character82(553), 172–175 (1909). [CrossRef]
  17. Y. Bellouard, A. Said, M. Dugan, and P. Bado, “Fabrication of high-aspect ratio, micro-fluidic channels and tunnels using femtosecond laser pulses and chemical etching,” Opt. Express12(10), 2120–2129 (2004), http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-12-10-2120 . [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. H. Sugiura and T. Yamadaya, “Raman-scattering in silica glass in the permanent densification region,” J. Non-Cryst. Solids144, 151–158 (1992). [CrossRef]
  19. J. Bell and P. Dean, “Atomic vibrations in vitreous silica,” Discuss. Faraday Soc.50, 55–61 (1970). [CrossRef]
  20. F. L. Galeener, “Band limits and the vibrational spectra of tetrahedral glasses,” Phys. Rev. B19(8), 4292–4297 (1979). [CrossRef]
  21. M. Okuno, B. Reynard, Y. Shimada, Y. Syono, and C. Willaime, “A Raman spectroscopy study of shock-wave densification of vitreous silica,” Phys. Chem. Miner.26(4), 304–311 (1999). [CrossRef]
  22. J. W. Chan, T. Huser, S. Risbud, and D. M. Krol, “Structural changes in fused silica after exposure to focused femtosecond laser pulses,” Opt. Lett.26(21), 1726–1728 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. W. J. Reichman, D. M. Krol, L. Shah, F. Yoshino, A. Arai, S. M. Eaton, and P. R. Herman, “A spectroscopic comparison of femtosecond-laser-modified fused silica using kilohertz and megahertz laser systems,” J. Appl. Phys.99(12), 123112 (2006). [CrossRef]
  24. A. Agarwal and M. Tomozawa, “Correlation of silica glass properties with the infrared spectra,” J. Non-Cryst. Solids209(1-2), 166–174 (1997). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited