Abstract

This paper continues the discussion of the detailed experimental study conducted on adaptive optical control methodologies inside a laser resonator.1 In this paper we discuss the experimental results for the correction of tilt within a laser resonator utilizing a multidither zonal COAT system. The tilt aberration was introduced in three different ways: (1) static tilt was introduced while the COAT system was open loop and then the control loop closed, (2) static tilt was incrementally introduced while the COAT system control loop was closed loop (denoted as continuously closed loop), and (3) dynamic tilt was applied while the COAT system's control loop was closed. Experimental data are presented on the correction capability of the COAT system for each method of introduction of tilt over a large range of tilt angles and control loop configurations (open/closed and continuously closed). Limitations of the system are discussed, and design recommendations and conclusions are provided.

© 1981 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. J. M. Spinhirne, D. Anafi, R. H. Freeman, H. R. Garcia, Appl. Opt. 20, 972 (1981).
    [CrossRef]
  2. R. H. Freeman, R. J. Freiberg, H. R. Garcia, Opt. Lett. 2, 61 (1978).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. R. C. Harney, Appl. Opt. 17, 1671 (1978).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. R. R. Stephens, R. C. Lind, Opt. Lett. 3, 79 (1970).
    [CrossRef]
  5. J. E. Pearson, W. B. Bridges, S. Hanson, T. A. Nussmeier, M. E. Pedinoff, Appl. Opt. 15, 611 (1976).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. W. F. Krupke, W. K. Sooy, IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE-5, 575 (1969).
    [CrossRef]
  7. K. E. Oughstun, United Technologies Research Center, unpublished internal report.
  8. T. R. O'Meara, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 67, 318 (1977).
    [CrossRef]
  9. R. M. Elkow, G. R. Wisner, Opt. Lett. 5, 410 (1980).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. J. E. Pearson, S. Hansen, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 67, 325 (1977).
    [CrossRef]

1981 (1)

1980 (1)

1978 (2)

1977 (2)

1976 (1)

1970 (1)

1969 (1)

W. F. Krupke, W. K. Sooy, IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE-5, 575 (1969).
[CrossRef]

Anafi, D.

Bridges, W. B.

Elkow, R. M.

Freeman, R. H.

Freiberg, R. J.

Garcia, H. R.

Hansen, S.

Hanson, S.

Harney, R. C.

Krupke, W. F.

W. F. Krupke, W. K. Sooy, IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE-5, 575 (1969).
[CrossRef]

Lind, R. C.

Nussmeier, T. A.

O'Meara, T. R.

Oughstun, K. E.

K. E. Oughstun, United Technologies Research Center, unpublished internal report.

Pearson, J. E.

Pedinoff, M. E.

Sooy, W. K.

W. F. Krupke, W. K. Sooy, IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE-5, 575 (1969).
[CrossRef]

Spinhirne, J. M.

Stephens, R. R.

Wisner, G. R.

Cited By

OSA participates in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (18)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Schematic diagram of experimental setup.

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Photograph of experimental test apparatus.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Control loop block diagram (PIB optimization).

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

Intracavity mode and far-field intensity patterns for static tilt (base line).

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

Intracavity mode and far-field intensity patterns for static tilt (0.22 waves).

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

Intracavity mode and far-field intensity patterns for static tilt (0.44 waves).

Fig. 7
Fig. 7

Intracavity mode and far-field intensity patterns for static tilt (0.66 waves).

Fig. 8
Fig. 8

Intracavity mode and far-field intensity patterns for static tilt for continuously closed loop (0.22, 0.44, 0.66 waves).

Fig. 9
Fig. 9

Output power (P) vs tilt phase error (θc) for the static tilt test.

Fig. 10
Fig. 10

Power-in-the-bucket (PIB) about the beam centroid vs tilt phase error (θc) for static tilt tests.

Fig. 11
Fig. 11

Power-in-the-bucket (PIB) about the optic axis vs tilt phase error (θc) for the static tilt tests.

Fig. 12
Fig. 12

Resonator eigenvalue magnitude vs phase tilt perturbation.

Fig. 13
Fig. 13

Intracavity mode and far-field intensity patterns for dynamic tilt (0.22 waves).

Fig. 14
Fig. 14

Intracavity mode and far-field intensity patterns for dynamic tilt (0.44 waves).

Fig. 15
Fig. 15

Intracavity mode and far-field intensity patterns for dynamic tilt (0.66 waves).

Fig. 16
Fig. 16

Output power (P) vs tilt phase error (θc) for dynamic tilt test.

Fig. 17
Fig. 17

Power-in-the-bucket (PIB) about the beam centroid vs tilt phase error (θc) for dynamic tilt test.

Fig. 18
Fig. 18

Dynamic tilt aberration relationships between resonator mode and control system response.

Tables (3)

Tables Icon

Table I Resonator Parameters

Tables Icon

Table II Piezoelectric Tilt Actuator Specifications

Tables Icon

Table III Tilt vs. Induced-Mode Switching Frequency

Equations (2)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

Δ τ = D δ λ = δ 121 ,
1 Δ = π f cos 1 ( 1 0.05 × 2 Tilt amp ( P to P ) waves )

Metrics