High power laser calibrations at NIST

Li, Xiaoyü; Hadler, Joshua A.; Cromer, Christopher L.; Lehman, John H.; Dowell, Marla L.

doi:10.6028/nist.sp.250-77

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 1 and 2 list the source of uncertainties for the NIST [ 4 ] and AFPSL measurements, and Table 3 lists the relevant measurement conditions associated with the comparison and the calculated results for both laboratories. The uncertainty estimates for the NIST and AFPSL laser energy measurements were assessed by use of NIST recommended guidelines [ 5 ].…”

Section: Results Of Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between NIST and AF laser energy standards using high power lasers

Scott

Cromer

et al. 2007

J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report the results of a high-energy laser calorimeter comparison conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Boulder, Colorado and the U.S. Air Force Primary Standards laboratory (AFPSL), Heath, Ohio. A laser power meter, used as a transfer standard, was calibrated at each laboratory, sequentially, and the measurement results were compared. These measurements were performed at a nominal power of 800 W and a wavelength of 10.6 μm using CO2 lasers. Excellent measurement agreement (1.02 %) was demonstrated, which was well within each of the expanded uncertainties from the two laboratories involved in this comparison.

show abstract

Section: Results Of Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between NIST and AF laser energy standards using high power lasers

Scott

Cromer

et al. 2007

J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Laser power measurement is by electrical substitution with traceability through a NIST-calibrated voltmeter and shut resistor and the injection time through the second. The relative expanded uncertainty is typically 1.1%-1.5% [58].…”

Section: C-series Calorimeter (100 µW-2 W 325 Nm-2000 Nm)-primary Sta...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta-study of laser power calibrations ranging 20 orders of magnitude with traceability to the kilogram

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laser power metrology at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) ranges 20 orders of magnitude from photon-counting (10 3 photons/s) to 100 kW (10 23 photons/s at a wavelength of 1070 nm). As a part of routine practices, we perform internal (unpublished) comparisons between our various power meters to verify correct operation. Here we use the results of these intercomparisons to demonstrate an unbroken chain tracing each power meter's calibration factor to the NIST cryogenic radiometer (our lowest uncertainty standard, whose SI traceability is established through the volt and ohm units). This yields the expected result that all the NIST primary standard measurement techniques agree with each other to within their measurement uncertainty. Then, these intercomparison results are re-mapped to describe the agreement of the various techniques with our radiation-pressure-based power measurement approach, whose SI traceability is established through the kilogram. Again, agreement is demonstrated to within the measurement uncertainty. This agreement is reassuring because the measurements are compared with two entirely different traceability paths and show expected agreement in each case. The ramifications of this agreement as well as potential means to improve on it are discussed.We demonstrate SI measurement traceability of our single-photon power measurement through the kilogram with less than 3 % relative expanded uncertainty (obtained for a coverage factor k=2 defining an interval having a level of confidence of approximately 95 %). I. (cesium hyperfine splitting frequency), and c (the speed of light in vacuum). *At the time of publication, the NextGenC is not yet fully validated as a primary standard but is included for completeness.

show abstract

“…Several years ago, we re-designed our calibration system to incorporate a monitor detector and second shutter combination [ 4 ], at which time the ROC technique became the only beamsplitter technique used for both 1.06 μm and 10.6 μm high-power measurements. Figure 2 shows a diagram of the current NIST high-power laser detector calibration system.…”

Section: Nist High-power Calibration Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflective Optical Chopper Used in NIST High-Power Laser Measurements

Li¹,

Scott²,

Cromer³

et al. 2008

J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For the past ten years, NIST has used high-reflectivity, optical choppers as beamsplitters and attenuators when calibrating the absolute responsivity and response linearity of detectors used with high-power CW lasers. The chopper-based technique has several advantages over the use of wedge-shaped transparent materials (usually crystals) often used as beam splitters in this type of measurement system. We describe the design, operation and calibration of these choppers. A comparison between choppers and transparent wedge beampslitters is also discussed.

show abstract

High power laser calibrations at NIST

Cited by 7 publications

References 7 publications

Comparison between NIST and AF laser energy standards using high power lasers

Comparison between NIST and AF laser energy standards using high power lasers

Meta-study of laser power calibrations ranging 20 orders of magnitude with traceability to the kilogram

Reflective Optical Chopper Used in NIST High-Power Laser Measurements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About