Debris control and surface quality are potential major benefits of sample liquid immersion when laser micromachining; however, the use of an immersion technique potentially modifies the ablation mechanism in comparison with a common ambient air interaction. To investigate and quantify the possible gains and losses, equipment has been developed to allow feature machining under a controllable liquid film. The results showed a decrease in surface roughness at the bottom of the feature when using liquid immersion. To observe comparative ablation threshold and ablation rate measurements have been conducted on samples ablated in ambient air and immersed in a thin film laminar flow of water. In addition, to identify the cause of any differences the attenuation coefficient of the immersion liquid has also been measured. A change in ablation rate and ablation threshold was observed that is not directly explained by the attenuation coefficient of the water medium. It is believed that the change in ablation rate is generated by the increased confinement of the vapour plume by a liquid medium during immersion ablation, which in turn generates higher Bremsstrahlung attenuation of the beam; hence a greater proportion of material removal is conducted by the vapour plume during immersion ablation than in a dry interaction. On account of this vapour plume confinement the observed decrease in surface roughness resulted. It is believed this was due to the plume of the compression caused by immersion generated high vapour turbulence inside the plume causing a more homogenous removal rate of material than a homogenized excimer beam profile.

1.
C. F.
Dowding
,
J.
Lawrence
;
Journal of Laser Applications
, submitted,
2008
2.
C. F.
Dowding
; PhD Thesis,
Loughborough University
, in progress.
3.
C.
Abbott
,
R.
Allott
,
B.
Bann
,
K. L.
Boehlen
,
M. C.
Gower
,
P. T.
Rumsby
,
I.
Stassen-Beohlen
and
N.
Sykes
;
New techniques for laser micromachining MEMS devices
;
Proceedings of SPIE
,
4760
,
281
,
2002
4.
D. E.
Gray
, “American Institute of Physics Handbook,”
3
.
McGraw-Hill
,
London
,
1972
5.
E.
Hecht
, “
Optics
3
.
Addison Wesley Longman
,
New York
,
1998
6.
W. M.
Steen
, “
Laser Material Processing
3
.
Springer-Verlag
,
London
.
2003
7.
K. C.
Yung
,
S. M.
Mei
,
T. M.
Yue
;
International Journal Of Advanced Manufacturing Technology
;
26,
11
,
2005
8.
X. F.
Xu
;
Applied Surface Science
;
197
,
61
66
,
2002
9.
X. F.
Xu
,
K. H.
Song
;
Materials Science And Engineering A-Structural Materials Properties Microstructure And Processing
;
292
,
162
168
,
2000
10.
X. F.
Xu
,
K. H.
Song
;
Applied Physics A-Materials Science & Processing
69
,
1999
11.
M.
Prasad
,
P. F.
Conforti
,
B. J.
Garrison
;
Journal of Chemical Physics
,
127
,
8
,
2007
12.
J. B.
Cooper
,
B.
Julian
,
H.
Morrison
,
P.
Song
,
S.
Albin
,
J. L.
Zhen
;
Thin Solid Films
,
303
,
1
2
,
1997
13.
R.
Kelly
,
A.
Miotelo
;
Nuclear Instruments & Methods In Physics Research Section B
:
Beam Interactions With Materials And Atoms
,
141
,
1-4
,
1998
14.
S. K.
Lee
,
W. S.
Chang
,
S. J.
Na
;
Journal of Applied Physics
,
86
,
8
,
1999
15.
G. W.
Yang
,. “
Laser. ablation. in. liquids: Applications in the synthesis of nanocrystals
”,
Progress in Materials Science
,
52
,
2006
16.
R.
Fabbro
,
P.
Peyre
,
L.
Berthe
,
X. L.
Scherpereel
;
Journal of Laser Applications
,
10
,
1998
17.
S.
Zhu
,
Y. F.
Lu
,
M. H.
Hong
,
X. Y.
Chen
;
Journal of Applied Physics
,
89
,
2001
18.
P
Lemoine
,
JD
Magan
,
WJ
Blau
;
Proceedings of SPIE
,
1377
,
45
,
1991
19.
J. Y.
Kim
,
D.
Sohn
,
E. R.
Kim
;
Applied Physics A
,
72
,
2001
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.