Abstract

A fully automated magnetron-sputtering system for the deposition of complicated optical multilayer structures is described. The process control includes the real-time determination of the deposited layer thicknesses and adjustment of the remaining layer thicknesses to reoptimize the final performance of the multilayer system. With this deposition system it should be possible to produce almost any all-dielectric filter that can be designed, subject only to limitations imposed by time, cost, and mechanical stability of the coatings. To demonstrate the performance of the deposition system, five complex multilayer systems were fabricated. The theoretical and measured spectral transmittance curves of these multilayer systems closely agree with one another over broad spectral regions. The equipment is capable of unattended operation over periods of 24 h or more.

© 1993 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. B. T. Sullivan, J. A. Dobrowolski, “Deposition of optical multilayer coatings with automatic error compensation. I. Theoretical description,” Appl. Opt. 31, 3821–3835 (1992).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  2. C. Holm, “Optical thin film production with continuous reoptimization of layer thicknesses,” Appl. Opt. 18, 1978–1982 (1979).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  3. L. Li, Y.-H. Yen, “Wideband monitoring and measuring system for optical coatings,” Appl. Opt. 28, 2889–2894 (1989).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  4. J. A. Dobrowolski, J. R. Pekelsky, R. Pelletier, M. Ranger, B. T. Sullivan, A. J. Waldorf, “Practical magnetron sputtering system for the deposition of optical multilayer coatings,” Appl. Opt. 31, 3784–3789 (1992).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  5. C. Montcalm, B. T. Sullivan, H. Pepin, J. A. Dobrowolski, G. D. Enright, “Multilayer mirrors for XUV Ge-laser wavelengths,” in Multilayer Optics for Advanced X-Ray Applications, N. M. Ceglio, ed., Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.1547, 127–133 (1991).
  6. J. A. Dobrowolski, “Optical interference filters for the adjustment of spectral response and spectral power distributions,”Appl. Opt. 9, 1396–1402 (1970).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  7. J. A. Dobrowolski, R. A. Kemp, “Interface design methods for two-material optical multilayer coatings,” Appl. Opt. 31, 6747–6756 (1992).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  8. J. A. Dobrowolski, “Computer design of optical coatings,” Thin Solid Films 163, 97–110 (1988).
    [Crossref]
  9. J. A. Dobrowolski, D. Lowe, “Optical thin film synthesis program based on the use of Fourier transforms,” Appl. Opt. 17, 3039–3050 (1978).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  10. P. G. Verly, J. A. Dobrowolski, “Iterative correction process for optical thin film synthesis with Fourier transform method,” Appl. Opt. 29, 3672–3684 (1990).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]

1992 (3)

1990 (1)

1989 (1)

1988 (1)

J. A. Dobrowolski, “Computer design of optical coatings,” Thin Solid Films 163, 97–110 (1988).
[Crossref]

1979 (1)

1978 (1)

1970 (1)

Dobrowolski, J. A.

J. A. Dobrowolski, J. R. Pekelsky, R. Pelletier, M. Ranger, B. T. Sullivan, A. J. Waldorf, “Practical magnetron sputtering system for the deposition of optical multilayer coatings,” Appl. Opt. 31, 3784–3789 (1992).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

B. T. Sullivan, J. A. Dobrowolski, “Deposition of optical multilayer coatings with automatic error compensation. I. Theoretical description,” Appl. Opt. 31, 3821–3835 (1992).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

J. A. Dobrowolski, R. A. Kemp, “Interface design methods for two-material optical multilayer coatings,” Appl. Opt. 31, 6747–6756 (1992).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

P. G. Verly, J. A. Dobrowolski, “Iterative correction process for optical thin film synthesis with Fourier transform method,” Appl. Opt. 29, 3672–3684 (1990).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

J. A. Dobrowolski, “Computer design of optical coatings,” Thin Solid Films 163, 97–110 (1988).
[Crossref]

J. A. Dobrowolski, D. Lowe, “Optical thin film synthesis program based on the use of Fourier transforms,” Appl. Opt. 17, 3039–3050 (1978).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

J. A. Dobrowolski, “Optical interference filters for the adjustment of spectral response and spectral power distributions,”Appl. Opt. 9, 1396–1402 (1970).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

C. Montcalm, B. T. Sullivan, H. Pepin, J. A. Dobrowolski, G. D. Enright, “Multilayer mirrors for XUV Ge-laser wavelengths,” in Multilayer Optics for Advanced X-Ray Applications, N. M. Ceglio, ed., Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.1547, 127–133 (1991).

Enright, G. D.

C. Montcalm, B. T. Sullivan, H. Pepin, J. A. Dobrowolski, G. D. Enright, “Multilayer mirrors for XUV Ge-laser wavelengths,” in Multilayer Optics for Advanced X-Ray Applications, N. M. Ceglio, ed., Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.1547, 127–133 (1991).

Holm, C.

Kemp, R. A.

Li, L.

Lowe, D.

Montcalm, C.

C. Montcalm, B. T. Sullivan, H. Pepin, J. A. Dobrowolski, G. D. Enright, “Multilayer mirrors for XUV Ge-laser wavelengths,” in Multilayer Optics for Advanced X-Ray Applications, N. M. Ceglio, ed., Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.1547, 127–133 (1991).

Pekelsky, J. R.

Pelletier, R.

Pepin, H.

C. Montcalm, B. T. Sullivan, H. Pepin, J. A. Dobrowolski, G. D. Enright, “Multilayer mirrors for XUV Ge-laser wavelengths,” in Multilayer Optics for Advanced X-Ray Applications, N. M. Ceglio, ed., Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.1547, 127–133 (1991).

Ranger, M.

Sullivan, B. T.

Verly, P. G.

Waldorf, A. J.

Yen, Y.-H.

Appl. Opt. (8)

Thin Solid Films (1)

J. A. Dobrowolski, “Computer design of optical coatings,” Thin Solid Films 163, 97–110 (1988).
[Crossref]

Other (1)

C. Montcalm, B. T. Sullivan, H. Pepin, J. A. Dobrowolski, G. D. Enright, “Multilayer mirrors for XUV Ge-laser wavelengths,” in Multilayer Optics for Advanced X-Ray Applications, N. M. Ceglio, ed., Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.1547, 127–133 (1991).

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 (12)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Schematic of the automated deposition system for realtime deposition-error compensation showing four main components of the system and their interaction with one another.

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Block diagram of the sequence of operations that occur during real-time deposition-error compensation.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Quarter-wave stack. Theoretical and measured transmittance of a filter, (HL)5H L/2, for use on an optical fiber to provide a reflectance of 95% at λ0 = 1535 nm. The filter was deposited without reoptimization, and there is good agreement between the theory and measured curves across a broad spectral region.

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

10-nm Edge filter (λ0 = 835 nm) with no reoptimization. (a) Measured (optical monitor with 1.5-nm resolution) and theoretical transmittance curves over the wavelength range of interest. (b) Measured (spectrophotometer with 0.5-nm resolution) and theoretical transmittance curves over a larger wavelength region. In both cases the theoretical transmittance curves were calculated based on the original multilayer system. Note the good agreement between the theory and measured curves outside the wavelength region of interest.

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

10-nm edge filter (λ0 = 835 nm) with reoptimization. (a) The effect of random errors with a Gaussian standard deviation of 3% on the performance of the 41-layer edge filter. The dashed curve indicates the transmittance that would be expected if these errors were not corrected for. (b) The measured transmittance curve of the filter produced, with random errors added, when reoptimization of the remaining layers were used to achieve the desired performance. The theoretical curve based on the original system with no errors is shown for comparison.

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

x ̅ λ filter. Transmittance curves of a x ̅ λ filter for tristimulus colorimetry. The heavy curve corresponds to the desired solution while the 10 other curves represent the effect of randomly perturbed multilayers with a Gaussian standard deviation of ±3%. As can be seen the peak at 450 nm is quite sensitive to random errors.

Fig. 7
Fig. 7

x ̅ λ filter. Measured transmittance curves of two filters (a) and (b) deposited with reoptimization. For comparison the theoretical curve based on the original multilayer system and the theoretical curve based on the determined layer thickness are also shown. Notice the discrepancy between the determined and the measured curves at 450 nm. It indicates that one or more layer thicknesses were not determined accurately.

Fig. 8
Fig. 8

x ̅ λ filter with reoptimization. (a) Measured and theoretical transmittance curves based on the original multilayer system obtained by using two monitor slides during deposition. (b) The effect of adding random thickness errors to layers 13–24 during deposition. The two theoretical curves show the filter performance with and without the errors added, while the measured curve shows what was actually obtained. The reoptimization was able to recover from most of the errors.

Fig. 9
Fig. 9

Infrared notch filter. (a) Target and theoretical and experimental transmittance curves for a notch filter centered at 2.0 μm. (b) The refractive index versus metric thickness for the 20-layer notch filter.

Fig. 10
Fig. 10

Taj Mahal filter. Filter with a spectral reflectance curve approximating the silhouette of the Taj Mahal. (a) Target and theoretical reflectance curves. (b) Refractive-index profile of the 60-layer system with the above performance.

Fig. 11
Fig. 11

Taj Mahal filter with no reoptimization. The measured reflectance curve of the deposited filter with (a) the target curve and (b) the theoretical curve based on the original multilayer system. The thicknesses of the original and deposited layers were within ±1 nm for all 60 layers.

Fig. 12
Fig. 12

Taj Mahal filter with reoptimization. (a) Target curve with the measured reflectance of a deposited multilayer system with a 3-nm error in layer 5. The large oscillations indicate how sensitive the finely tuned system is to errors in deposition. The reoptimization procedure was not able to recover from the error in this layer. (b) Target curve with the measured reflectance of a second deposited multilayer system. Except near the central peak of the filter, the performance of this filter is not significantly better than that achieved without reoptimization [Fig. 11(a)].

Metrics