Tinghao Liu, Qiang Liu, Zhan Sui, Mali Gong, Xing Fu, "Spatiotemporal characterization of laser pulse amplification in double-pass active mirror geometry," High Power Laser Sci. Eng. 8, 03000e30 (2020)

Search by keywords or author
- High Power Laser Science and Engineering
- Vol. 8, Issue 3, 03000e30 (2020)

Fig. 1. Optical paths in a double-pass laser amplifier with a single AM. (a) Three-dimensional view; (b) two-dimensional view on the xz plane, along with the initial distribution of stored energy density.

Fig. 2. Sequence diagrams of three types of overlap conditions. (a) C2PO; (b) N2PO; (c) 4PO.

Fig. 3. Experimental layout of the double-pass AM amplifier. PBS, polarization beam splitter; BS, beam splitter; QWP, quarter-wave plate; HR, high-reflection mirror; EM, energy meter; PD, photodetector.

Fig. 4. Instantaneous stored energy density and extracting beam intensity at M versus TOF. (a) Successive extraction with no overlap, considering a seed beam of zero temporal width; (b) C2PO; (c) N2PO; (d) 4PO.

Fig. 5. Relationship between ΔE st and instantaneous overall beam intensity ∑ I at location M for the C2PO condition.

Fig. 6. Instantaneous stored energy density at a given TOF in a double-pass amplifier with single AM.

Fig. 7. (a) p -τ diagram for GWB; (b) gain window for four pulse segments (PS #1–#4 from rays #1, #2) that participate in the same 4PO process at TOF of 25.5 ns; (c) p -τ diagram of GWF. The colorbar setting is the same as that for Figure 6 .

Fig. 8. Gain windows at different TOFs throughout the amplification. The colorbar setting is the same as that for Figure 6 .

Fig. 9. Pulse shape variation through the AM chain with D = 0.3 m. (a) Input energy of 0.1 J; (b) input energy of 1 J.

Fig. 10. Pulse shape for different D with an input energy of 1 J.

Fig. 11. Measured pulse profiles under the 4PO condition, along with predicted results, versus different input energies. (a) 0.1 J; (b) 1 J; (c) 1.8 J; (d) 3 J.

Fig. 12. Predicted and measured results for an amplified pulse profile under the N2PO condition versus input energy. (a) 0.1 J; (b) 1 J; (c) 1.8 J; (d) 3 J.

Fig. 13. Transverse intensity profiles of amplified beam versus the input energy. (a) 0.1 J; (b) 1 J; (c) 1.8 J; (d) 3 J.

Fig. 14. RSD of transverse intensity distribution versus the input energy and D .

Fig. 15. Energy-loss ratio of 4PO. (a) Versus η op; (b) versus the input energy.

Fig. 16. Influence of the number of AMs in a chain on the laser output characteristics. (a) Pulse shape; (b) intensity distribution; (c) RSD of intensity distribution; (d) energy-loss ratio.

Fig. 17. Evolution from an AM chain to zigzag geometry. (a) Four AM modules closely arranged; (b) zigzag geometry.

Fig. 18. Scaling factor (a) versus the ratio of H to H 0 and (b) versus the input fluence.

Fig. 19. Influence of spatiotemporal overlap on the amplified zigzag output. (a) Energy-loss ratio versus D (BN = 4); (b) energy-loss ratio versus BN (D = 0 m); (c) pulse shape versus input energy (BN = 4); (d) pulse shape versus BN (input energy of 0.1 J); (e) pulse shape versus input energy (BN = 8); (f) RSD of intensity profile versus BN.

Set citation alerts for the article
Please enter your email address