Talk:Nd:YAG laser

Untitled
Tripled Nd:YAG is 355 nm and fourth harmonic is 266 nm.

Can someone find and insert references? 129.78.208.4 03:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Khalitov, D.A., Longmire, E.K. "Simultaneous two-phase PIV by two-parameter phase discrimination". Experiments in Fluids, 32, pp. 252-268, 2002. is a citation I saw in a paper that described using Nd:YAG lasers for PIV, but it's not online. 70.108.0.199 00:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Assuming the request for reference is for "Tripled Nd:YAG is 355 nm and fourth harmonic is 266 nm." I don't know why you even need references. I mean, it's as simple as 1064 divided by 3 is about 355, and 1064 divided by 4 is about 266. Are we going to start requiring references for "1 + 1 = 2"? On the other hand, the reference that we should have is for "nonlinear optics" (since that's how these higher harmonics are obtained), and we have a link to that Wikipedia page (at least now ... more than one year later). novakyu (talk) 08:24, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Applications, laser ablation?
For the applications, in our lab, we are using an Nd:YAG laser at the fundamental frequency to do laser ablation (blasting of small pieces of sample through focused heating; we use it to make an atomic gas at low temperatures that can't support appreciable vapor pressure of the atomic species). My impression was there were a few other people doing some work involving laser ablation, but I don't know whether they all use some type of Nd:YAG laser, and frankly, I wouldn't know how to write the paragraph in ... general terms (i.e. not specific to our lab). novakyu (talk) 08:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Technology section
The technology section has a line that states: " Krypton flashlamps, with high output in those bands, are therefore more efficient for pumping Nd:YAG lasers than are xenon lamps, which produce more white light, and therefore waste more energy." This is slightly incorrect, as krypton has stronger lines in the yellow and green, and at greybody current densities produces a much warmer white than xenon. At low current densities both xenon and krypton, (and argon and neon), will produce an eerie colored flash made up mostly of spectral lines, with the highest output between 800 and 1000 nm. Most of xenon's output is around 900 nm, while krypton has stronger lines around the YAG absorption lies at 800 nm.

This info can be found in the newly revised flashtube article, and from these references: http://optoelectronics.perkinelmer.com/content/RelatedLinks/CAT_flash.pdf, A Comparison of Rare-Gas Flashlamps – J. R. Oliver and F. S. Barnes I.E.E.E. Journal of Quantum Electronics , Flashlamp Discharge and Laser Efficiency – R. H. Dishington, W. R. Hook and R. P. Hilberg. Applied Optics. Vol. 13, No. 1 0, http://www.rp-photonics.com/lamp_pumped_lasers.html , and http://www.heraeus-noblelight.com/en/laser-and-ipl-lamps/information-for-laser-lamps/services-and-events/flash-lamp-emission-spectra.html Zaereth (talk) 23:33, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you make an appropriate change in the article?--Srleffler (talk) 04:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * How about: When operated at low current densities, krypton flashlamps have higher output in those bands, and are therefore more efficient for pumping Nd:YAG lasers than are xenon lamps. Xenon, at low current densities, produces more light at the 800 and 900 nm lines, and therefore waste more energy."


 * I think that should let users understand better how to power their flashtubes, and that while krypton is better, xenon will also work. It is common for hobbiests, such as myself, to simply add more capacitance in an effort to increase output energy, without any increase in voltage, which is good for optical lasers, but a mistake for IR lasers, as spectral line emmision should be maintained. Zaereth (talk) 17:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I added a version of the above to the article, before your last edit. See if you like what I put there and tweak it, if not.--Srleffler (talk) 04:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. Thanks. Zaereth (talk) 17:09, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Transparant ceramic section
I have to question the new material added to the article as to what exactly it has to do with Nd:YAG lasers. While the information may be factually correct, it seems a little out of place in this article, as it rarely mentions YAG at all. Just wondering. Zaereth (talk) 21:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 01:00, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Dissecting Cellulitis
Changed this to a blue link and added a reference. (Peguin blue (talk) 07:21, 1 March 2017 (UTC))

Physics applications
Because there is so little information in the article about fluid dynamics, CRDS, LIBS, or laser pumping, could they perhaps be combined into one "Physics" or "Engineering" subheading? Alternatively, each could be expanded. Τηε ΓΟΟΔ (talk) 14:19, 24 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Expansion is always a wonderful thing. Just be sure to cite reliable sources so that it won't get deleted. I'm not sure the necessity of creating a subsection, but you're welcome to try it out and see how it looks. If someone comes along and changes it back then no big deal. Zaereth (talk) 18:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)