Abstract

The scratch standard (MIL-O-13830A) is a cosmetic standard effected by a visual comparison with a set of secondary standards that are in turn evaluated by comparison with a set of master standards. Both manufacture and certification of the secondary standards are somewhat unreliable. This paper shows that they can be classified according to the relative power scattered at a relatively small angle and describes experiments with etched gratings that have the appearance of scratches but diffract light into a broad peak between 5 and 10° off the axis of the incident beam. Some prototypes have been classified both by comparison to the master standards and by a photoelectric measurement; agreement between the two methods is good. Such gratings, used as the secondary standards, should display less intersample variation than scribed or other artifacts. The paper concludes by presenting evidence that the original primary standards have been stable over a long time.

© 1986 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. Military Specification MIL-O-13830A (1963).
  2. H. E. Bennett, “Insensitivity of the Catastrophic Damage of Laser Optics to Dust and Other Surface Defects,” in Proceedings, Conference Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials, 1982, Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Spec. Publ. 669, 151 (1982).
  3. M. Young, “Scratch Standards Should Not Be Used to Predict Damage Thresholdin Proceedings, Conference Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials, 1982, Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Spec. Publ. 669, 151 (1982).
  4. L. R. Baker, “Microscope Image Comparator,” Opt. Acta. 31, 611 (1984).
    [Crossref]
  5. J. M. Elson, H. E. Bennett, J. M. Bennett, Scattering from Optical Surfaces,” in Applied Optics and Optical Engineering, Vol. 7, R. R. Shannon, J. C. Wyant, Eds. (Academic, New York, 1979).
    [Crossref]
  6. M. Young, “Objective Measurement and Characterization of Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 362, 94 (1983).
  7. M. Young, “Can You Describe Optical Surface Quality with One or Two Numbers?Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 406, 12 (1983). See also transcript of workshop on optical specifications, pp. 119–131.
  8. M. Young, E. G. Johnson, R. Goldgraben, “Tunable Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 525, 70 (1985).
  9. M. Young, E. G. Johnson, “Redefining the Scratch Standards,” Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Tech. Note 1080 (1985).
  10. E. G. Johnson, “Simulating the Scratch Standards for Optical Surfaces: Theory,” Appl. Opt. 22, 4056 (1983).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  11. M. Young, “Optics and Lasers, Including Fibers and Optical Waveguides,” (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1986).
  12. J. R. Goldgraben, J. Salerno, “Improvement of Manufacturing Techniques and Quality of Optical Scratch Standards for Fire Control Systems,” Contractor Report ARPAD-CR-85001, Army Research and Development Center, Dover, NJ (1985).
  13. M. Young, “The Scratch Standard Is Only a Performance Standard,” in Proceedings, Conference Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials (1985); also published in part in Laser Focus, 138, 140 (Nov.1985), and “The Scratch Standard Is Not a Performance Standard,” in Technical Digest, Optical Fabrication & Testing Workshop (Optical Society of America, Washington, DC, 1985), paper ThAA4.
  14. J. H. McLeod, W. T. Sherwood, “A Proposed Method of Specifying Appearance Defects of Optical Parts,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 35, 136 (1945).
    [Crossref]
  15. M. V. Swain, “Microfracture about Scratches in Brittle Solids,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 366, 575 (1979).
    [Crossref]
  16. J. A. Detrio, S. M. Miner, “Standardized Total-Integrated-Scatter Measurements of Optical Surfaces,” Opt. Eng. 24, 419 (1985).
    [Crossref]
  17. E. L. Church, H. A. Jenkinson, J. M. Zavada, “Measurement of the Finish of Diamond-Turned Metal Surfaces by Differential Light Scattering,” Opt. Eng. 18, 125 (1979).

1985 (3)

M. Young, E. G. Johnson, R. Goldgraben, “Tunable Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 525, 70 (1985).

M. Young, E. G. Johnson, “Redefining the Scratch Standards,” Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Tech. Note 1080 (1985).

J. A. Detrio, S. M. Miner, “Standardized Total-Integrated-Scatter Measurements of Optical Surfaces,” Opt. Eng. 24, 419 (1985).
[Crossref]

1984 (1)

L. R. Baker, “Microscope Image Comparator,” Opt. Acta. 31, 611 (1984).
[Crossref]

1983 (3)

M. Young, “Objective Measurement and Characterization of Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 362, 94 (1983).

M. Young, “Can You Describe Optical Surface Quality with One or Two Numbers?Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 406, 12 (1983). See also transcript of workshop on optical specifications, pp. 119–131.

E. G. Johnson, “Simulating the Scratch Standards for Optical Surfaces: Theory,” Appl. Opt. 22, 4056 (1983).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

1979 (2)

E. L. Church, H. A. Jenkinson, J. M. Zavada, “Measurement of the Finish of Diamond-Turned Metal Surfaces by Differential Light Scattering,” Opt. Eng. 18, 125 (1979).

M. V. Swain, “Microfracture about Scratches in Brittle Solids,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 366, 575 (1979).
[Crossref]

1945 (1)

Baker, L. R.

L. R. Baker, “Microscope Image Comparator,” Opt. Acta. 31, 611 (1984).
[Crossref]

Bennett, H. E.

H. E. Bennett, “Insensitivity of the Catastrophic Damage of Laser Optics to Dust and Other Surface Defects,” in Proceedings, Conference Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials, 1982, Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Spec. Publ. 669, 151 (1982).

J. M. Elson, H. E. Bennett, J. M. Bennett, Scattering from Optical Surfaces,” in Applied Optics and Optical Engineering, Vol. 7, R. R. Shannon, J. C. Wyant, Eds. (Academic, New York, 1979).
[Crossref]

Bennett, J. M.

J. M. Elson, H. E. Bennett, J. M. Bennett, Scattering from Optical Surfaces,” in Applied Optics and Optical Engineering, Vol. 7, R. R. Shannon, J. C. Wyant, Eds. (Academic, New York, 1979).
[Crossref]

Church, E. L.

E. L. Church, H. A. Jenkinson, J. M. Zavada, “Measurement of the Finish of Diamond-Turned Metal Surfaces by Differential Light Scattering,” Opt. Eng. 18, 125 (1979).

Detrio, J. A.

J. A. Detrio, S. M. Miner, “Standardized Total-Integrated-Scatter Measurements of Optical Surfaces,” Opt. Eng. 24, 419 (1985).
[Crossref]

Elson, J. M.

J. M. Elson, H. E. Bennett, J. M. Bennett, Scattering from Optical Surfaces,” in Applied Optics and Optical Engineering, Vol. 7, R. R. Shannon, J. C. Wyant, Eds. (Academic, New York, 1979).
[Crossref]

Goldgraben, J. R.

J. R. Goldgraben, J. Salerno, “Improvement of Manufacturing Techniques and Quality of Optical Scratch Standards for Fire Control Systems,” Contractor Report ARPAD-CR-85001, Army Research and Development Center, Dover, NJ (1985).

Goldgraben, R.

M. Young, E. G. Johnson, R. Goldgraben, “Tunable Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 525, 70 (1985).

Jenkinson, H. A.

E. L. Church, H. A. Jenkinson, J. M. Zavada, “Measurement of the Finish of Diamond-Turned Metal Surfaces by Differential Light Scattering,” Opt. Eng. 18, 125 (1979).

Johnson, E. G.

M. Young, E. G. Johnson, R. Goldgraben, “Tunable Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 525, 70 (1985).

M. Young, E. G. Johnson, “Redefining the Scratch Standards,” Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Tech. Note 1080 (1985).

E. G. Johnson, “Simulating the Scratch Standards for Optical Surfaces: Theory,” Appl. Opt. 22, 4056 (1983).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

McLeod, J. H.

Miner, S. M.

J. A. Detrio, S. M. Miner, “Standardized Total-Integrated-Scatter Measurements of Optical Surfaces,” Opt. Eng. 24, 419 (1985).
[Crossref]

Salerno, J.

J. R. Goldgraben, J. Salerno, “Improvement of Manufacturing Techniques and Quality of Optical Scratch Standards for Fire Control Systems,” Contractor Report ARPAD-CR-85001, Army Research and Development Center, Dover, NJ (1985).

Sherwood, W. T.

Swain, M. V.

M. V. Swain, “Microfracture about Scratches in Brittle Solids,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 366, 575 (1979).
[Crossref]

Young, M.

M. Young, E. G. Johnson, R. Goldgraben, “Tunable Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 525, 70 (1985).

M. Young, E. G. Johnson, “Redefining the Scratch Standards,” Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Tech. Note 1080 (1985).

M. Young, “Objective Measurement and Characterization of Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 362, 94 (1983).

M. Young, “Can You Describe Optical Surface Quality with One or Two Numbers?Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 406, 12 (1983). See also transcript of workshop on optical specifications, pp. 119–131.

M. Young, “Scratch Standards Should Not Be Used to Predict Damage Thresholdin Proceedings, Conference Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials, 1982, Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Spec. Publ. 669, 151 (1982).

M. Young, “The Scratch Standard Is Only a Performance Standard,” in Proceedings, Conference Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials (1985); also published in part in Laser Focus, 138, 140 (Nov.1985), and “The Scratch Standard Is Not a Performance Standard,” in Technical Digest, Optical Fabrication & Testing Workshop (Optical Society of America, Washington, DC, 1985), paper ThAA4.

M. Young, “Optics and Lasers, Including Fibers and Optical Waveguides,” (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1986).

Zavada, J. M.

E. L. Church, H. A. Jenkinson, J. M. Zavada, “Measurement of the Finish of Diamond-Turned Metal Surfaces by Differential Light Scattering,” Opt. Eng. 18, 125 (1979).

Appl. Opt. (1)

J. Opt. Soc. Am. (1)

Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Tech. Note 1080 (1)

M. Young, E. G. Johnson, “Redefining the Scratch Standards,” Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Tech. Note 1080 (1985).

Opt. Acta. (1)

L. R. Baker, “Microscope Image Comparator,” Opt. Acta. 31, 611 (1984).
[Crossref]

Opt. Eng. (2)

J. A. Detrio, S. M. Miner, “Standardized Total-Integrated-Scatter Measurements of Optical Surfaces,” Opt. Eng. 24, 419 (1985).
[Crossref]

E. L. Church, H. A. Jenkinson, J. M. Zavada, “Measurement of the Finish of Diamond-Turned Metal Surfaces by Differential Light Scattering,” Opt. Eng. 18, 125 (1979).

Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A (1)

M. V. Swain, “Microfracture about Scratches in Brittle Solids,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 366, 575 (1979).
[Crossref]

Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. (3)

M. Young, “Objective Measurement and Characterization of Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 362, 94 (1983).

M. Young, “Can You Describe Optical Surface Quality with One or Two Numbers?Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 406, 12 (1983). See also transcript of workshop on optical specifications, pp. 119–131.

M. Young, E. G. Johnson, R. Goldgraben, “Tunable Scratch Standards,” Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 525, 70 (1985).

Other (7)

J. M. Elson, H. E. Bennett, J. M. Bennett, Scattering from Optical Surfaces,” in Applied Optics and Optical Engineering, Vol. 7, R. R. Shannon, J. C. Wyant, Eds. (Academic, New York, 1979).
[Crossref]

Military Specification MIL-O-13830A (1963).

H. E. Bennett, “Insensitivity of the Catastrophic Damage of Laser Optics to Dust and Other Surface Defects,” in Proceedings, Conference Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials, 1982, Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Spec. Publ. 669, 151 (1982).

M. Young, “Scratch Standards Should Not Be Used to Predict Damage Thresholdin Proceedings, Conference Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials, 1982, Natl. Bur. Stand. U.S. Spec. Publ. 669, 151 (1982).

M. Young, “Optics and Lasers, Including Fibers and Optical Waveguides,” (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1986).

J. R. Goldgraben, J. Salerno, “Improvement of Manufacturing Techniques and Quality of Optical Scratch Standards for Fire Control Systems,” Contractor Report ARPAD-CR-85001, Army Research and Development Center, Dover, NJ (1985).

M. Young, “The Scratch Standard Is Only a Performance Standard,” in Proceedings, Conference Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials (1985); also published in part in Laser Focus, 138, 140 (Nov.1985), and “The Scratch Standard Is Not a Performance Standard,” in Technical Digest, Optical Fabrication & Testing Workshop (Optical Society of America, Washington, DC, 1985), paper ThAA4.

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 (10)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Experimental apparatus. Dashed lines show how the image of the aperture stop is projected into the plane of the sample.6

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Intensity as a function of position in the plane of the sample. Resolution limit is 25 μm.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Measured transmittance of a filter at various intensities. The horizontal scale is the nominal optical density of filters used to attenuate the beam. The solid line is a line of best fit and shows a slope of ~0.1%/decade.

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

Power scattered as a function of angle for a set of scratches designated 1 on a semilogarithmic scale. Curve labeled No scratch shows a beam with no sample present.6

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

As in Fig. 4, power scattered by three scratches that had been classified visually as S-40.

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

Power scattered at ±5 and ±10° as a function of scratch number. Open circles are averages of four artifacts (eight points); closed circles are extrema.6

Fig. 7
Fig. 7

Power scattered by single etched groove nominally 1.0 μm wide and 0.55 μm deep. Lower curve is calculated for rectangular groove with those dimensions.

Fig. 8
Fig. 8

Power scattered as function of angle by ten-groove artifact that has been classified S-40 trained observers.

Fig. 9
Fig. 9

Power scattered by etched artifacts at ±5 and ±10° as a function of visual classification as in Fig. 6. Solid line is the solid line in Fig. 6. H and L stand for high and low in appearance.

Fig. 10
Fig. 10

As in Fig. 4. The scratch has been aged for 12 days in a high humidity environment at 70°C. Scattering between 5 and 10° is not measurably affected by aging. Lower right shows scattering by substrate alone and demonstrates that increased scattering at higher angles is due to etching of the substrate.

Tables (2)

Tables Icon

Table I Relative Power Detected at ±5 and ±10°a

Tables Icon

Table II Abbreviated History of the Scratch-and-Dig Standard

Equations (3)

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

E ( θ ) sinc ψ + 2 i b B exp ( i Δ / 2 ) sin ( Δ / 2 ) sinc ϕ ,
I s ( 0 ) / I 0 ( 0 ) = 4 ( b / B ) 2 sin 2 ( Δ / 2 ) ,
w λ d v / D ,

Metrics