The disclosure relates generally to glass chamfering methods, and more particularly to glass chamfering methods that utilize a laser in conjunction with an ion exchange process.
No admission is made that any reference cited herein constitutes prior art. Applicant expressly reserves the right to challenge the accuracy and pertinency of any cited documents.
In all cases where glass panels are cut for applications in architectural, automotive, consumer electronics, to mention a few areas, there will be edges, which will very likely require attention. There are as many different methods to cut and separate glass. For example, glass can be cut mechanically (CNC machining, abrasive waterjet, scribing and breaking, etc), using electro-magnetic radiation (lasers, electrical discharges, gyrotron, etc). The more traditional and common methods (scribe and break or CNC machining) create edges that are populated with different types and sizes of defects. It is also common to find that the edges are not perfectly perpendicular to the surfaces. In order to eliminate the defects and give the edges a more even surface with improved strength, they are usually ground. The grinding process involves abrasive removal of edge material that can give it the desired finishing and also shape its form (bull nosed, chamfered, pencil shape, etc). In order to allow the grinding and polishing steps, it is necessary to cut parts that are larger than the final desired dimensions.
While it is well known and understood that eliminating defects will increase edge strength, there is not an agreement on the impact that shape has on edge strength. The confusion occurs mainly because it is well known that shape helps to increase damage resistance to impact and handling of the edges. The fact is that edge shape really does not determine edge strength as defined by resistance to flexural (or bending) forces, but the defects size and distribution do have a great impact. However, a shaped edge does help to improve impact resistance by creating smaller cross section and containing defects. For example, an edge with a straight face that is perpendicular to both major surfaces of the glass accumulates stress at these right angled corners, and will chip and break when it is impacted by another object. Because of the accumulated stress, the size of defects can be pretty big, which will diminish the strength of that edge considerably. On the other hand, due to its smoother shape, a rounded “bull-nosed” shaped edge will have lower accumulated stress and smaller cross section which helps to reduce the size and penetration of defects into the volume of the edge. Therefore, after an impact, a shaped edge should have higher “bending” strength than a flat edge.
For the reasons discussed above, it is often desirable to have the edges shaped, as opposed to flat and perpendicular to the surfaces. One important aspect of these mechanical cutting and edge shaping methods is the degree of maintenance of the machines. Both for cutting and grinding, old and worn down cutting heads or grinding rolls can produce damage which can significantly affect the strength of the edges, even if the naked eye cannot be see the differences. Other issues with mechanical cutting and grinding methods is that they are very labor intensive and require many grinding and polishing steps until the final desired finish, which generate a lot of debris and require cleaning steps to avoid introduction of damages to the surfaces.
Ablation by laser processing have been used to create shaped edges.
In general, ablative laser techniques tend to be slow due to the low material removal rate and they also generate a lot of debris and heat affected zones that lead to residual stress and micro-cracks. For the same reason, melting and reshaping of the edges are also plagued with a lot of deformation and accumulated thermal stress that can peel that processed area. Finally, for the thermal peeling or crack propagating techniques, one of the main issues encountered is that the peeling is not continuous.
Subsurface damage, or the small microcracks and material modification caused by any cutting process, is a concern for the edge strength of glass or other brittle materials. Mechanical and ablative laser process are particularly problematic with regard to subsurface damage. Edges cut with these processes typically require a lot of post-cut grinding and polish to remove the subsurface damage layer, thereby increasing edge strength to performance level required for applications such as in consumer electronics.
Embodiments described herein relate to processes of chamfering and/or beveling an edge of a glass substrate of arbitrary shape using lasers in conjunction with the ion exchange bath.
One embodiment of the disclosure relates a method for creating chamfers or bevels, the method comprising:
According to some embodiments the separated material is a glass sheet that has at least one chamfered surface, chamfered edge or a bevel.
According to some embodiments the at least one of the first and second angles of incidence is not a normal angle (not a 90° angle) with respect to the major surface of the material. For example, if the material is a glass sheet with two major flat surfaces (and a thickness that is much smaller than the width and the length of the sheet), the first and/or the second angle is greater than 0° and less than 90° relative to the normal to the major flat surface of the glass sheet.
According to some embodiments, during separating of the material along the first plane and the second plane, and the ion-exchange process is applied to the material for time t, wherein 15 min≤t≤120 min. In some embodiments 15 min≤t≤60 min, and in some embodiments 15 min≤t≤50 min or even 15 min≤t≤40 min. According to some embodiments the ion-exchange process is applied to the material at a temperature of 400° to 500° C.
According to some embodiments, the method further comprises subjecting the material to a second ion-exchange process, to strengthen the material and improve the resistance of material to subsequent damage.
One embodiment of the disclosure relates to a method of for creating chamfers or bevels work piece, the method comprising:
According to some embodiments, the method further comprises subjecting the material to a second ion-exchange process to strengthen the material and improve the resistance of material to subsequent damage.
According to some embodiments a method of making a chamfered and strengthened glass article, comprises:
(i) providing a glass article having a select contour and a glass surface, and a perforated edge and/or corner;
(ii) removing the a portion of the glass adjacent to the perforated edge and/or corner by subjecting the article to a first ion-exchange process (for example, for 20 to 60 min) to complete a full-body cut between perforations;
(iii) rinsing the glass article,
(iv) air drying the rinsed glass article; and then
(v) subjecting the glass article to a second ion-exchange process to strengthen the glass article and improve the resistance of the glass article to subsequent damage.
According to some embodiments the first ion exchange process is a DIOX process (dual stage IOX exchange process). According to some embodiments the second ion-exchange process is a DIOX process. According to some embodiments the first and the second ion exchange processes area DIOX processes.
Additional features and advantages will be set forth in the detailed description which follows, and in part will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art from the description or recognized by practicing the embodiments as described in the written description and claims hereof, as well as the appended drawings.
It is to be understood that both the foregoing general description and the following detailed description are merely exemplary, and are intended to provide an overview or framework to understand the nature and character of the claims.
The accompanying drawings are included to provide a further understanding, and are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification. The drawings illustrate one or more embodiment(s), and together with the description serve to explain principles and operation of the various embodiments
The foregoing will be apparent from the following more particular description of example embodiments of the disclosure, as illustrated in the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters refer to the same parts throughout the different views. The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating embodiments of the present disclosure.
FIGS. 3B1-3B4 are an illustrations of various possibilities to process the substrate by differently positioning the laser beam focal line relative to the substrate.
A description of exemplary embodiments follows.
Embodiments described herein relate to processes of chamfering and/or beveling an edge of a glass substrate and other transparent materials of arbitrary shape using lasers. A first embodiment involves cutting the edge with the desired chamfer shape utilizing an ultra-short pulse laser that may be optionally followed by a other process steps for fully automated separation. In the first method, the process fundamental step is to create fault lines on intersecting planes that delineate the desired edge shape and establish a path of least resistance for crack propagation and hence separation and detachment of the shape from its substrate matrix. This method essentially creates the shaped edge while cutting the part out of the main substrate. The laser separation method can be tuned and configured to enable manual separation, partial separation, or self-separation of the shaped edges out of the original substrate. The underlying principle to generate these fault lines is described in detail below and in U.S. Application No. 61/752,489 filed on Jan. 15, 2013.
In the first step the object to be processed is irradiated with an ultra-short pulsed laser beam that is condensed into a high aspect ratio line focus that penetrates through the thickness of the substrate. Within this volume of high energy density the material is modified via nonlinear effects. It is important to note that without this high optical intensity, nonlinear absorption is not triggered. Below this intensity threshold, the material is transparent to the laser radiation and remains in its original state as shown in
Turning to
As
As
Concrete optical assemblies 6, which can be applied to generate the focal line 2b, as well as a concrete optical setup, in which these optical assemblies can be applied, are described below. All assemblies or setups are based on the description above so that identical references are used for identical components or features or those which are equal in their function. Therefore only the differences are described below.
As the parting face eventually resulting in the separation is or must be of high quality (regarding breaking strength, geometric precision, roughness and avoidance of re-machining requirements), the individual focal lines to be positioned on the substrate surface along parting line 5 should be preferably generated using the optical assembly described below (hereinafter, the optical assembly is alternatively also referred to as laser optics). The roughness results particularly from the spot size or the spot diameter of the focal line. In order to achieve a small spot size of, for example, 0.5 μm to 2 μm in case of a given wavelength λ of laser 3 (interaction with the material of substrate 1), certain requirements are usually be imposed on the numerical aperture of laser optics 6. These requirements are met by laser optics 6 described below.
In order to achieve the required numerical aperture, the optics preferably should, on the one hand, dispose of the required opening for a given focal length, according to the known Abbe formulae (N.A.=n sin (theta), n: refractive index of the glass to be processes, theta: half the aperture angle; and theta=arctan (D/2f); D: aperture, f: focal length). On the other hand, the laser beam should preferably illuminate the optics up to the required aperture, which is typically achieved by means of beam widening using widening telescopes between laser and focusing optics.
The spot size should not vary too strongly for the purpose of a uniform interaction along the focal line. This can, for example, be ensured (see the embodiment below) by illuminating the focusing optics only in a small, circular area so that the beam opening and thus the percentage of the numerical aperture only vary slightly.
According to
Lens 7 centered on the central beam is deliberately designed as a non-corrected, bi-convex focusing lens in the form of a common, spherically cut lens. Put another way, the spherical aberration of such a lens is deliberately used. As an alternative, aspheres or multi-lens systems deviating from ideally corrected systems, which do not form an ideal focal point but a distinct, elongated focal line of a defined length, can also be used (i.e., lenses or systems which do not have a single focal point). The zones of the lens thus focus along a focal line 2b, subject to the distance from the lens center. The diameter of aperture 8 across the beam direction is approximately 90% of the diameter of the beam bundle (beam bundle diameter defined by the extension to the decrease to 1/e) and approximately 75% of the diameter of the lens of the optical assembly 6. The focal line 2b of a not aberration-corrected spherical lens 7 generated by blocking out the beam bundles in the center is thus used.
One disadvantage of this focal line is that the conditions (spot size, laser intensity) along the focal line, and thus along the desired depth in the material, vary and that therefore the desired type of interaction (no melting, induced absorption, thermal-plastic deformation up to crack formation) may possibly only be selected in a part of the focal line. This means in turn that possibly only a part of the incident laser light is absorbed in the desired way. In this way, the efficiency of the process (required average laser power for the desired separation speed) is impaired on the one hand, and on the other hand the laser light might be transmitted into undesired deeper places (parts or layers adherent to the substrate or the substrate holding fixture) and interact there in an undesirable way (heating, diffusion, absorption, unwanted modification).
In the case shown in
It is particularly advantageous to realize the focal line positioning in such a way that at least one surface 1a, 1b is covered by the focal line, i.e. that the section of induced absorption 2c starts at least on one surface. In this way it is possible to achieve virtually ideal drilling or cutting avoiding ablation, feathering and particulation at the surface.
However, the depicted layout is subject to the following restrictions: As the focal line of axicon 9 already starts within the lens, a significant part of the laser energy is not focused into part 2c of focal line 2b, which is located within the material, in case of a finite distance between lens and material. Furthermore, length l of focal line 2b is related to the beam diameter for the available refraction indices and cone angles of axicon 9, which is why, in case of relatively thin materials (several millimeters), the total focal line may be too long, having the effect that the laser energy is again not specifically (or not totally) focused into the material.
This is the reason for an enhanced optical assembly 6 which comprises both an axicon and a focusing lens.
It is therefore advantageous if the focal line is formed at a certain distance from the laser optics, and if the greater part of the laser radiation is focused up to a desired end of the focal line. As described, this can be achieved by illuminating a primarily focusing element 11 (lens) only circularly on a required zone, which, on the one hand, serves to realize the required numerical aperture and thus the required spot size, on the other hand, however, the circle of diffusion diminishes in intensity after the required focal line 2b over a very short distance in the center of the spot, as a basically circular spot is formed. In this way, the defect line formation is stopped within a short distance in the required substrate depth. A combination of axicon 10 and focusing lens 11 meets this requirement. The axicon acts in two different ways: due to the axicon 10, a usually round laser spot is sent to the focusing lens 11 in the form of a ring, and the asphericity of axicon 10 has the effect that a focal line is formed beyond the focal plane of the lens instead of a focal point in the focal plane. The length l of focal line 2b can be adjusted via the beam diameter on the axicon. The numerical aperture along the focal line, on the other hand, can be adjusted via the distance z1 axicon-lens and via the cone angle of the axicon. In this way, the entire laser energy can be concentrated in the focal line.
If the defect line formation is supposed to continue to the emergence side of the substrate, the circular illumination still has the advantage that, on the one hand, the laser power is used in the best possible way as a large part of the laser light remains concentrated in the required length of the focal line, on the other hand, it is possible to achieve a uniform spot size along the focal line—and thus a uniform separation process along the focal line—due to the circularly illuminated zone in conjunction with the desired aberration set by means of the other optical functions.
Instead of the plano-convex lens depicted in
In order to generate very short focal lines 2b using the combination of an axicon and a lens depicted in
Turning back to
The optical assembly 6 depicted in
In the depicted example it is possible to achieve a length of the focal line 1 of less than 0.5 mm using a typical laser beam diameter of 2 mm, a focusing lens 11 with a focal length f=25 mm, and a collimating lens with a focal length f′=150 mm. Furthermore applies Z1a=Z1b=140 mm and Z2=15 mm.
Once the lines with defects are created (also called herein fault lines or perforations), separation can occur via: process 1) manual or mechanical stress on or around the fault line; the stress or pressure should create tension that pulls both sides of the fault line apart and break the areas that are still bonded together; or 2) the stress created in the glass at or around the fault line-during an ion-exchange process and inducing partial or total self-separation. In both cases, separation depends on several of the process parameters, such as laser scan speed, laser power, parameters of lenses, pulse width, repetition rate, etc.
The second method takes advantage of an existing edge to create a chamfer by applying stress via ion exchange process (IOX). In at least some glasses, This combination of the two methods can yield better control of the chamfer edge shape and surface texture than would otherwise be seen by using solely method 1.
Ion-exchange process (IOX) can facilitate release of the glass from the chamfered edges at or around the fault lines creating either chamfered edges or incompletely chamfered edges. Additionally, the use of the picosecond laser process on either non-chamfered edges or incompletely chamfered edges, but that have “sacrificial” regions that control damage caused by edge impact is described below. Such IOX process is similar to IOX process(s) used for glass strengthening.
In the method for forming the desired shapes and edges using the short-pulse, burst pulse laser, the developed process relies on the material transparency to the laser wavelength in linear regime, or low laser intensity, which allows maintenance of a clean and high (or pristine) surface quality and on the reduced subsurface damage created by the area of high intensity around the laser focus. One of the important parameters of this process is the high aspect ratio of the defect created by the ultra-short pulsed laser. It allows creation of a long and deep fault or defect line (or perforation) that can extend from the top to the bottom surfaces of the material to be cut and chamfered. In principle, each defect can be created by a single pulse and if necessary, additional pulses can be used to increase the extension of the affected area (depth and width), or a single burst of pulses.
There are several methods to create that defect line. The optical method of forming the line focus can take multiple forms, using donut shaped laser beams and spherical lenses, axicon lenses, diffractive elements, or other methods to form the linear region of high intensity. The type of laser (picosecond, femtosecond, etc.) and wavelength (IR, green, UV, etc.) can also be varied, as long as sufficient optical intensities are reached to create breakdown of the substrate material.
In the present embodiment an ultra-short burst pulsed laser is used to create this high aspect ratio vertical defect line (perforation or hole) in a consistent, controllable and repeatable manner. The detail of the optical setup that enables the creation of this vertical defect line is described above. This embodiment utilizes an axicon lens element in an optical lens assembly to create a region of high aspect ratio taper-free microchannel using ultra-short (picoseconds or femtosecond duration) Bessel beams. In other words, the axicon condenses the laser beam into a region of cylindrical shape and high aspect ratio (long length and small diameter). Due to the high intensity created with the condensed laser beam, nonlinear interaction of the laser electromagnetic field and the material occurs and the laser energy is transferred to the substrate. However, it is important to realize that in the areas where the laser energy intensity is not high (i.e., glass surface, glass volume surrounding the central convergence line), nothing happens to the glass as the laser intensity is below the nonlinear threshold.
As illustrated in
In some cases, the created fault line is not enough to separate it automatically and a secondary step may be necessary. If so desired, in the case of non-chemically strengthened glass, separation can be achieved, after the creation of a defect line, by application of mechanical force, or by using an ion exchange (IOX) process to force the parts to self-separate. Either partial or total part separation can be achieved by choosing the appropriate dwell time for the part in the IOX bath.
Using the same principle illustrated in
Laser and Optical System:
For example, for the purpose of cutting glass or other transparent brittle materials, a process was developed that uses a (for example, 1064 nm, or 532 nm, or 266 nm) picosecond laser in combination with line-focus beam forming optics to create lines of damage (i.e., defect lines) in the substrates. A sample Corning® Gorilla® Glass code 2320 substrate with 0.7 mm thickness is positioned so that it is within the line-focus. With a line-focus of ˜1 mm extension, and a picosecond laser that produces output power of ˜>30 W at a repetition rate of 200 kHz (˜150 μJ/pulse), then the optical intensities in the line region can easily be high enough to create non-linear absorption in the material. A region of damaged, ablated, vaporized, or otherwise modified material is created that approximately follows the linear region of high intensity.
Note that the typical operation of such a picosecond laser creates a “burst” of pulses. (See, for example,
For example, teach burst of pulses may contain two pulses (also referred to as sub-pulses herein) or more (such as 3 pulses, 4 pulses, 5 pulses, 10 pulses, 15 pulses, 20 pulses, or more pulses within a burst) separated from each other by a duration in a range of between about 1 nsec and about 50 nsec, for example, 10 to 50 nsec (e.g., about 20 nsec, or 30 ns), and the burst repetition frequency (i.e., separation between the first pulses in two subsequent bursts) can be in a range of between about 1 kHz and about 200 kHz. The pulsed laser beam can have a wavelength selected such that the material is substantially transparent at this wavelength. Within the context of the present disclosure, a material is substantially transparent to the laser wavelength when the absorption is less than about 50% (e.g. <40%), more preferably less than 10%, and even more preferably less than about 1% per mm of material depth at this wavelength. This wavelength may be, for example, 1064 nm, 532 nm, 355 nm, or 266 nanometers. The average laser power measured at the material can be greater than 40 microJoules per mm thickness of material, for example between 40 microJoules/mm and 1000 microJoules, for example 100-900 μJ/mm, or between 100 and 650 microJoules/mm, with 200-400 μJ/mm being preferable.
For example, as illustrated in
The required energy to modify the material can be described in terms of the burst energy—the energy contained within a burst (each burst 500 contains a series of pulses 500A), or in terms of the energy contained within a single laser pulse (many of which may comprise a burst). For these applications, the energy per burst can be from 25-750 μJ, more preferably 50-500 μJ, 50-250 μu. In some embodiments the energy per burst is 100-250 μJ. The energy of an individual pulse within the burst will be less, and the exact individual laser pulse energy will depend on the number of pulses 500A within the burst 500 and the rate of decay (e.g., exponential decay rate) of the laser pulses with time as shown in
The use of laser capable of generating such burst pulses is advantageous for cutting or modifying transparent materials, for example glass. In contrast with the use of single pulses spaced apart in time by the repetition rate of the laser, the use of a burst pulse sequence that spreads the laser energy over a rapid sequence of sub-pulses (that comprise a burst 500) allows access to larger timescales of high intensity interaction with the material than is possible with single-pulse lasers. While a single-pulse can be expanded in time, as this is done the intensity within the pulse must drop as roughly one over the pulse width. Hence if a 10 psec single pulse is expanded to a 10 nsec pulse, the intensity drop by roughly three orders of magnitude. Such a reduction can reduce the optical intensity to the point where non-linear absorption is no longer significant, and light material interaction is no longer strong enough to allow for cutting. In contrast, with a burst pulse laser, the intensity during each sub-pulse 500A (or a pulse within 500A the burst 500) can remain very high—for example three 10 psec pulses 500A spaced apart in time by approximately 10 nsec still allows the intensity within each pulse to be approximately three times higher than that of a single 10 psec pulse, while the laser is allowed to interact with the material over a timescale that is now three orders of magnitude larger. This adjustment of multiple pulses 500A within a burst thus allows manipulation of time-scale of the laser-material interaction in ways that can facilitate greater or lesser light interaction with a pre-existing plasma plume, greater or lesser light-material interaction with atoms and molecules that have been pre-excited by an initial or previous laser pulse, and greater or lesser heating effects within the material that can promote the controlled growth of microcracks. The required amount of burst energy to modify the material will depend on the substrate material composition and the length of the line focus used to interact with the substrate. The longer the interaction region, the more the energy is spread out, and the higher the burst energy that will be required.
Hole or Damage Track Formation:
If the substrate or transparent material has sufficient stress (e.g. with post-ion exchanged glass), then the part will spontaneously crack and separate along the path of perforated damage traced out by the laser process. However, if there is not a lot of stress inherent to the substrate (for example, as is the case of Corning Eagle XG® compositions), then the picosecond laser will simply form damage tracks (i.e., defect lines or perforations) in the piece. These damage tracks generally take the form of holes with interior dimensions 0.5-1.5 μm, or 0.2 microns to 2 microns (for example, in some embodiments, 0.2 to 0.7 microns, or 0.3 to 0.6 microns). Preferably the holes are very small (single microns or less) in dimension.
The holes or defect lines can perforate the entire thickness of the material, and may or may not be a continuous opening throughout the depth of the material.
The lateral spacing (pitch) between these holes is determined by the pulse rate of the laser as the substrate is translated underneath the focused laser beam. Only a single picosecond laser pulse burst is necessary to form an entire hole, although multiple pulses may be used if desired. To form holes at different pitches, the laser can be triggered to fire at longer or shorter intervals. For cutting operations, the laser triggering generally is synchronized with the stage driven motion of the part beneath the beam, so laser pulses are triggered at a fixed interval, such for example as every 1 μm, or every 5 μm. The exact spacing is determined by the material properties that facilitate crack propagation from perforated hole to perforated hole, given the stress level in the substrate. However, in contrast to cutting a substrate, it is also possible to use the same method to only perforate the material. In this case, the holes are separated, for example, with a 5 μm pitch.
The laser power and lens focal length (which determines the defect line length and hence power density) are particularly critical parameters to ensure full penetration of the glass and low micro-cracking.
In general, the higher the available laser power, the faster the material can be cut with the above process. Processes disclosed herein can cut glass at a cutting speed of 0.25 m/sec, or faster. A cut speed (or cutting speed) is the rate the laser beam moves relative to the surface of the transparent material (e.g., glass) while creating multiple holes or modified regions.) High cut speeds, such as, for example 250 mm/sec 400 mm/sec, 500 mm/sec, 750 mm/sec, 1 m/sec, 1.2 m/sec, 1.5 m/sec, or 2 m/sec, or even 3.4 m/sec to 4 m/sec are often desired in order to minimize capital investment for manufacturing, and to optimize equipment utilization rate. The laser power is equal to the burst energy multiplied by the burst repetition frequency (rate) of the laser. In general, to cut such glass materials at high cutting speeds, the damage tracks are typically spaced apart by 1-25 microns, in some embodiments the spacing is preferably 3 microns or larger—for example 3-12 microns, or for example 5-10 microns.
For example, to achieve a linear cutting speed of 300 mm/sec, 3 micron hole pitch corresponds to a pulse burst laser with at least 100 kHz burst repetition rate. For a 600 mm/sec cutting speed, a 3 micron pitch corresponds to a burst-pulsed laser with at least 200 kHz burst repetition rate. A pulse burst laser that produces at least 40 μJ/burst at 200 kHz, and cuts at a 600 mm/s cutting speed needs to have laser power of at least 8 Watts. Higher cut speeds therefore require even higher laser powers.
For example a 0.4 m/sec cut speed at 3 μm pitch and 40 μJ/burst would require at least a 5 Watt laser, a 0.5 m/sec cut speed at 3 μm pitch and 40 μJ/burst would require at least a 6 Watt laser. Thus, preferably the laser power of the pulse burst ps laser is 6 watts or higher, more preferably at least 8 Watts or higher, and even more preferably at least 10 W or higher. For example in order to achieve a 0.4 m/sec cut speed at 4 μm pitch (defect lines pacing, or between damage tracks spacing) and 100 μJ/burst one would require at least a 10 Watt laser, and to achieve a 0.5 msec cut speed at 4 μm pitch and 100 μJ/burst one would require at least a 12 Watt laser. For example, to achieve a cut speed of 1 m/sec at 3 μm pitch and 40 μJ/burst one would require at least a 13 Watt laser. Also for example 1 m/sec cut speed at 4 μm pitch and 400 μJ/burst would require at least a 100 Watt laser. The optimal pitch between damage tracks and the exact burst energy is material dependent, and can be determined empirically. However, it should be noted that raising the laser pulse energy or making the damage tracks at a closer pitch are not conditions that always make the substrate material separate better or with improved edge quality. Too dense a pitch (for example <0.1 micron, in some exemplary embodiments <1 μm, or in some embodiments <2 μm) between damage tracks can sometimes inhibit the formation of nearby subsequent damage tracks, and often can inhibit the separation of the material around the perforated contour, and may also result in increased unwanted micro cracking within the glass. Too long a pitch (>50 μm, and in some glasses >25 μm or even >20 μm) may result in “uncontrolled microcracking”—i.e., where instead of propagating from hole to hole the microcracks propagate along a different path, and cause the glass to crack in a different (undesirable) direction. This may ultimately lower the strength of the separated glass part, since the residual microcracks will acts as flaws which weaken the glass. Too high a burst energy (e.g., >2500 μJ/burst, and in some embodiments >500 μJ/burst) used to form each damage track can cause “healing” or re-melting of already formed microcracks of adjacent damage tracks, which will inhibit separation of the glass. Accordingly, it is preferred that burst energy be <2500 μJ/burst, for example, ≤500 μJ/burst. Also, using a burst energy that is too high can cause formation of microcracks that are extremely large and create flaws which reduce the edge strength of the parts after separation. Too low a burst energy (<40 μJ/burst) may result in no appreciable damage track formed within the glass, and hence very high separation strength or complete inability to separate along the perforated contour.
Typical exemplary cutting rates (speeds) enabled by this process are, for example, 0.25 msec and higher. In some embodiments the cutting rates are at least 300 mm/sec. In some embodiments described herein the cutting rates are at least 400 mm/sec, for example 500 mm/sec to 2000 mm/sec, or higher. In some embodiments the picosecond (ps) laser utilizes pulse bursts to produce defect lines with periodicity between 0.5 microns and 13 microns, e.g. 0.5 and 3 microns. In some embodiments the pulsed laser has laser power of 10 W-100 W and the material and/or the laser beam are translated relative to one another at a rate of at least 0.25 m/sec, for example at the rate of 0.25 to 0.35 m/sec, or 0.4 m/sec to 5 m/sec. Preferably, each pulse burst of the pulsed laser beam has an average laser energy measured at the workpiece greater than 40 microJoules per burst mm thickness of workpiece. Preferably, each pulse burst of the pulsed laser beam has an average laser energy measured at the workpiece greater of less than 2500 microJoules per burst per mm thickness of workpiece, and preferably lass than about 2000 microJoules per burst per mm, and in some embodiments less than 1500 microJoules per burst per mm thickness of workpiece, for example not more than 500 microJoules per burst per mm thickness of workpiece.
It has been discovered that much higher (5 to 10 times higher) volumetric pulse energy density (μj/μm3) is required for perforating alkaline earth boro-aluminosilicate glasses with low or no alkali containing glasses as compared to that for glasses such as Corning Gorilla®. This can be achieved, for example, by utilizing pulse burst lasers, preferably with at least 2 pulses per burst and providing volumetric energy densities within the alkaline earth boro-aluminosilicate glasses (with low or no alkali) of about 0.05 μJ/μm3 or higher, e.g., at least 0.1 μJ/μm3, for example 0.1-0.5 μJ/μm3.
Accordingly, it is preferable that the laser produces pulse bursts with at least 2 pulses per burst. For example, in some embodiments the pulsed laser has laser power of 10 W-150 W (e.g., 10-100 W) and produces pulse bursts with at least 2 pulses per burst (e.g., 2-25 pulses per burst). In some embodiments the pulsed laser has the power of 25 W-60 W, and produces pulse bursts with at least 2-25 pulses per burst, and periodicity or distance between the adjacent defect lines produced by the laser bursts is 2-10 microns. In some embodiments the pulsed laser has laser power of 10 W-100 W, produces pulse bursts with at least 2 pulses per burst, and the workpiece and the laser beam are translated relative to one another at a rate of at least 0.25 m/sec. In some embodiments the workpiece and/or the laser beam are translated relative to one another at a rate of at least 0.4 m/sec.
For example, for cutting 0.7 mm thick non-ion exchanged Corning code 2319 or code 2320 Gorilla glass, it is observed that pitches of 3-7 microns can work well, with pulse burst energies of about 150-250 μJ/burst, and burst pulse numbers that range from 2-15, and preferably with pitches of 3-5 microns and burst pulse numbers (number of pulses per burst) of 2-5.
At 1 m/sec cut speeds, the cutting of thick Eagle XG® glass typically requires utilization of laser powers of 15-84 Watts, with 30-45 Watts often being sufficient. In general, across a variety of glass and other transparent materials, applicants discovered that laser powers between 10 and 100 W are preferred to achieve cutting speeds from 0.2-1 m/sec, with laser powers of 25-60 Watts being sufficient (and optimum) for many glasses. For cutting speeds of 0.4 m to 5 m/sec, laser powers should preferably be 10 W-150 W, with burst energy of 40-750 μJ/burst, 2-25 bursts per pulse (depending on the material that is cut), and hole separation (or pitch) of 3 to 15 μm, or 3-10 μm. The use of picosecond pulse burst lasers would be preferable for these cutting speeds because they generate high power and the required number of pulses per burst. Thus, according to some exemplary embodiments, the pulsed laser produces 10-100 W of power, for example 25 W to 60 Watts, and produces pulse bursts at least 2-25 pulses per burst and the distance between the defect lines is 2-15 microns; and the laser beam and/or workpiece are translated relative to one another at a rate of at least 0.25 m/sec, in some embodiments at least 0.4 m/sec, for example 0.5 m/sec to 5 m/sec, or faster.
Cutting and Separating Chamfered Edges:
Chamfer Method 1:
Different conditions were found that allow the separation of chamfered edges using unstrengthened Gorilla® Glass, specifically Corning code 2320. The first method is to use the picosecond laser only to create defect lines and forming a fault line following the desired shape (in this case a chamfered edge). After this step, mechanical separation can be accomplished by using a breaking plier, manually bending the part, or any method that creates tension that initiates and propagates the separation along the fault line. To create chamfered edges with defect lines in 700 μm thick unstrengthened (pre-ion exchanged) Gorilla® Glass and mechanically separate the parts, the best results were found for the following optics and laser parameters: Picosecond laser (1064 nm)
Input beam diameter to axicon lens ˜2 mm
Axicon angle=10 degrees
Initial collimating lens focal length=125 mm
Final objective lens focal length=40 mm
Focus set to be at z=0.7 mm (i.e. line focus set to be centered with regard to the glass thickness)
Laser power at 100% of full power (˜40 Watts)
Pulse repetition rate of the laser=200 kHz.
Pitch=5 μm
3 pulses/burst
Single pass per defect line
Sacrificial edges:
The presence of the remaining defect line inside the glass can be beneficial to arrest the propagation of cracks when the edge is impacted. In this case the defect line planes can be used to serve as damage arrest locations, in effect creating a “sacrificial” edge part of the region of glass that is on the outside relative to the defect lines. In fact, creation of sacrificial edges that simply have an extra defect line to the interior of the separated edge, or a set of defect lines that intersect to form a more complex interior bevel inside of the true edge, may be a method of creating increased part reliability without the need for any physical chamfer feature on the outside edge of the part, nor any mechanical grinding and polishing to create that feature. Some options for this type of sacrificial edge are shown in
Chamfer Method 2:
Exemplary Formation of Defect Lines:
To create chamfered edges with defect lines in 700 μm thick unstrengthened Gorilla® Glass and to separate the parts, according to one embodiment we utilized the following optics and laser parameters: Picosecond laser (1064 nm)
Input beam diameter to axicon lens ˜2 mm
Axicon angle=10 degrees
Initial collimating lens focal length=125 mm
Final objective lens focal length=40 mm
Focus set to be at z=0.7 mm (i.e. line focus set to be centered with regard to the glass thickness)
Laser power at 100% of full power (˜40 Watts)
Pulse repetition rate of the laser=200 kHz.
Pitch=5 μm
3 pulses/burst
Single pass per defect line
The separation of the outside glass edge pieces formed by the defect lines need not be done a mechanical force. Since the pre-ion exchanged glass is generally being cut and then sent to chemical strengthening afterwards (ion exchange), we discovered that ion exchange itself can create enough stress to pop the small chamfer regions or corner pieces off of the part. The introduction of new ions into the glass surface can create enough stress between the perforations or defect lines to cause the outside corner pieces to pop off, or the high temperature salt bath can create enough thermal stress to induce these small pieces to fall off. In either case, the ultimate result is an edge that better follows the existing defect lines and thus forms the desired chamfer shape. Without being bound by theory, applicants believe the ions entering the glass through the glass surface(s) will create high stress concentrations regions near the surfaces, and especially near the corners of the glass part. For example, there will be very high levels of tensile stress created near the corners of any part, which creates a condition that drives separation of glass along any pre-perforated zones (zones with defect lines) in these corners. See
The picosecond material (e.g., glass) perforation portion method has been combined with the IOX exchange to create a controlled separation guided by the defect line planes. More specifically, ion exchange (IOX) process is a process where silicate glass is immersed into molten alkali salt (e.g. potassium nitrate), at temperatures below glass transition temperature. During emersion, alkali ions from the glass close enough to the surface are exchanged for those from the molten salt. This process can be applied to transparent materials, for example thin glass (e.g., <2 mm), or curved glass, and the resultant glass has strong edges and of very high quality. The stress profile created by the ion exchange releases the perforated edges—i.e., the glass separates along the fault lines, creating chamfers. Typical treatment temperatures suitable for an IOX bath are >300° C., for example 400° C., or 450° C., or 500° C., or 550° C., or therebetween. According to some embodiments the treatment time for ion exchange bath that results in a good quality completely chamfered edges is >20 min, for example 30-60 min. For a partial chamfering the treatment time may be, for example 10-20 min or 30 min. The ion exchange process for chamfer creation or for creations of corners is similar or identical to the one used for glass strengthening, but when used for removal of glass along perforations (i.e., along defect line(s)) for making chamfers), the perforated glass part can be subjected to the ion exchange bath for a shorter time than the time used for IOX glass strengthening (e.g., for less than 1 hour, or for example 10 min to 40 min). While not wishing to be bound by theory, applicants believe that the mechanism for IOX chamfering is material separation along defect lines caused by the creation of regions of compressive stress (CS) and/or Central Tension (CT), also referred to as tensile stress, and which occurs within the material. Prior to the IOX bath the samples are heated to prevent thermal shock, which can shatter a glass part, and to minimize bath thermal loading (i.e., cooling) effects. The pre-heating temperature depends on the temperature of the salt bath. The IOX bath creates enough stress to cause the outside corner pieces or perforated areas to pop off, along or near the defect line(s).
Preferably, according to some embodiments, a method of making a chamfered and strengthened glass article, comprises:
(i) providing a glass article having a select contour and a glass surface, and a perforated (defect lines) edge and/or corner;
(ii) removing the a portion of the glass adjacent to the perforated edge and/or corner by subjecting the article to a first ion-exchange process (for example, for 20 to 60 min) to complete a full-body cut of the material between the perforations;
(iii) rinsing the glass article,
(iv) air drying the rinsed glass article; and then
(v) subjecting the glass article to a second ion-exchange process (for example, for at least 4 hrs, or for 4.5 to 10 hrs, and in some embodiments for 4.5 to 6 hrs) to strengthen the glass article and improve the resistance of the glass article to subsequent damage.
The use of the two-step ion exchange process ensures that any glass pieces removed are confined to the first bath, preventing contamination of the second bath. This extends the service life of the second ion exchange bath. By washing and rinsing the parts after the first bath, this method also reduces the problems that arise from small glass pieces adhering to the surface of the cut parts, which may shield small regions of the glass surfaces from being strengthened in the ion exchange process.
Either a IOX or DIOX process (dual stage IOX exchange process) can be utilized in step (ii) as the first ion-exchange process for removing the portion of the glass adjacent to the perforated edge and/or corner, to create the chamfered glass article. Either a IOX or DIOX process can also be utilized thereafter in the second ion exchange step (step (v), above) to fully strengthen glass to improve the resistance of the glass article to subsequent damage. It is noted that the second ion exchange step (the strengthening IOX step (v) described above), is significantly longer than the ion exchange process of step (ii) that separates or releases glass to create chamfers or bevels. For example, the time for the first ion exchange bath in the IOX step that facilitates glass release and bevel/chamfer formation in step (ii) may be 3 to 18 times shorter than the time for ion exchange bath in the IOX step (v) required to create strengthened or tempered glass (second ion exchange process).
A DIOX process is an ion exchange process where a chemically strengthenable glass is introduced into a first salt bath, and then into a second salt bath. The first salt bath and the second salt bath can comprise two different salt species, or they can be comprised of the same salt species (e.g. Li, Na, K, Cs, Rb). For example the first bath can be pure KCl2 and the second salt bath can be KCl2, with a different concentration of contaminates such as Na that is exchange from the glasses processed. It is also possible to utilize salt baths of differing species. This method helps extend the operational life of the salt baths.
Preferably the first ion exchange process is performed for 10 min to 120 min. More preferably to produce fully chamfered edges or corners the first ion exchange process is performed for 20 min to 120 min, for example, 20 min, 25 min, 30 min, 45 min, 60 min or 75 min. More preferably to produce fully chamfered edges or corners the first ion exchange process is performed for 20 min to 120 min, for example, 20 to 60 min, or 30 to 60 min, and according to some embodiments 30 to 50 min, or 30 to 40 min.
Also, either a IOX or DIOX process (dual stage IOX exchange process) can be utilized to strengthen the chamfered glass articles. For example, the method may include: a) providing a laser processed perforated glass article (e.g., alumina silicate glass); b) separating the glass along the fault line(s) via IOX bath and creating a chamfered edge and/or corner thereby creating a chamfered glass article, preferably for a time t such that 20 min≤t≤60 min, the chamfered glass having a plurality of first metal ions within the outer region; c) ion exchanging a first portion of the plurality of first metal ions in the glass with a plurality of second metal ions in a primary salt bath, wherein the primary salt bath is diluted with a first concentration of the first metal ions; and d) ion exchanging a second portion of the plurality of the first metal ions in the glass with a plurality of the second metal ions in a secondary salt bath, wherein the secondary salt bath has a second concentration of the first metal that is less than the first concentration. According to some embodiments the first metal is one of lithium, sodium, potassium, and cesium and the second metal is one of sodium, potassium, cesium, and rubidium.
Prior to immersion in the primary salt bath of the IOX bath, chamfered glass samples are preheated to prevent thermal shock and minimize bath loading (i.e., cooling) effects. The pre-heating temperature depends on the temperature of the salt bath. The sample is then immersed in the primary bath, and the primary ion exchange stage is carried out at a first predetermined temperature for a time sufficient to achieve a desired depth of layer, at which point the glass sample is removed from the primary salt bath and allowed to cool. The glass sample may be rinsed with water to remove residual dried salt and to prevent contamination of the secondary stage bath, and then dried to remove residual moisture. The glass may optionally be annealed between respective immersions in the primary and secondary salt baths (i.e., between steps c and d).
Before immersion in the secondary ion exchange bath, the glass sample is again pre-heated. The secondary ion exchange stage is carried out in the secondary stage bath having either fresh salt (or a significantly lower dilution rate than the primary stage) to increase or stabilize the compressive stress created in the primary stage ion exchange. The sample is immersed in the bath, and the secondary ion exchange stage is carried out at a second predetermined temperature for a time sufficient to achieve the desired compressive stress, at which point the glass sample is removed from the secondary salt bath and allowed to cool. The glass sample may be rinsed with water to remove residual dried salt and to prevent contamination of the secondary stage bath, and then dried to remove residual moisture. For both the primary and secondary ion exchange baths, the salt (or salts) is melted and heated to a predetermined temperature, typically in a range from about 380° C. up to about 450° C., and the bath is held at that temperature to stabilize for a predetermined time.
The methods described above provide the following benefits that may translate to enhanced laser processing capabilities and cost savings and thus lower cost manufacturing. In the current embodiment, the cutting and chamfering processes offer:
Chamfering or fully cutting parts with chamfered edges: the disclosed method is capable of completely separating/cutting Gorilla® Glass and other types of transparent glasses in a clean and controlled fashion. Full separation and/or edge chamfering were demonstrated using both methods. With method 1, the part is cut to size or separated from glass matrix with a chamfered edge and, in principle, no further post processing. With the second method, the part is already cut to size, perforated and IOX process is used to chamfer the edges.
Reduced subsurface defects: due to the ultra-short pulse interaction between laser and material, there is little thermal interaction and thus a minimal heat affected zone that can result in undesirable stress and micro-cracking. In addition, the optics that condenses the laser beam into the glass creates defect lines that are typically 2 to 5 microns diameter on the surface of the part. After separation, the subsurface damage can be as low as <90 μm, for example <75 μm, <50 μm, or <40 μm. This has great impact on the edge strength of the part and reduces the need to further grind and polish the edges, as these subsurface damages can grow and evolve into micro-cracks when the part is submitted to tensile stress and weaken the strength of the edge.
Process cleanliness: the exemplary embodiment methods of the disclosure are capable of chamfering glass in a clean and controlled fashion. It is very problematic to use conventional ablative processes because they generate a lot of debris. Such ablation generated debris is problematic, because it can be hard to remove even with various cleaning and washing protocols. Any adhered particulates can cause defects for later processes where the glass is coated or metalized to create thin film transistors, etc. The characteristics of the laser pulses and the induced interactions with the material of the disclosed method avoid this issue because they occur in a very short time scale and the material transparency to the laser radiation minimizes the induced thermal effects. Since the defect line is created within the object, the presence of debris and adhered particles during the cutting step is virtually eliminated. If there are any particulates resulting from the created defect line, they are well contained until the part is separated.
Elimination of Process Steps
The process to fabricate glass plates from the incoming glass panel to the final size and shape involves several steps that encompass cutting the panel, cutting to size, finishing and edge shaping, thinning the parts down to their target thickness, polishing, and even chemically strengthening in some cases. Elimination of any of these steps will improve manufacturing cost in terms of process time and capital expense. The presented method may reduce the number of steps by, for example:
Reduced debris and edge defects generation—potential elimination of washing and drying stations.
Cutting the sample directly to its final size with shaped edges, shape and thickness-reducing or eliminating need for mechanical finishing lines and a non-value added cost associated with them.
The relevant teachings of all patents, published applications and references cited herein are incorporated by reference in their entirety.
While exemplary embodiments have been described herein, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the scope of the invention encompassed by the appended claims.
This application claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. § 365 of U.S. International Patent Application Serial No. PCT/US15/13019 filed on Jan. 27, 2015 designating the United States of America, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/931,881 filed on Jan. 27, 2014, U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/022,885 filed on Jul. 10, 2014 and the benefit of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/530,410 filed on Oct. 31, 2014, the entire disclosures of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2015/013019 | 1/27/2015 | WO | 00 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2015/113024 | 7/30/2015 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1790397 | Woods et al. | Jan 1931 | A |
2682134 | Stookey | Jun 1954 | A |
2749794 | O'Leary | Jun 1956 | A |
3647410 | Heaton et al. | Mar 1972 | A |
3695497 | Dear | Oct 1972 | A |
3695498 | Dear | Oct 1972 | A |
3729302 | Heaton | Apr 1973 | A |
3775084 | Heaton | Nov 1973 | A |
4226607 | Domken | Oct 1980 | A |
4441008 | Chan | Apr 1984 | A |
4546231 | Gresser et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4646308 | Kafka et al. | Feb 1987 | A |
4764930 | Bille et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4891054 | Bricker et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
4907586 | Bille et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
4918751 | Pessot et al. | Apr 1990 | A |
4929065 | Hagerty et al. | May 1990 | A |
5035918 | Vyas | Jul 1991 | A |
5040182 | Spinelli et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
5104210 | Tokas | Apr 1992 | A |
5108857 | Kitayama et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5112722 | Tsujino et al. | May 1992 | A |
5114834 | Nachshon | May 1992 | A |
5265107 | Delfyett, Jr. | Nov 1993 | A |
5400350 | Galvanauskas | Mar 1995 | A |
5434875 | Rieger et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5436925 | Lin et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5553093 | Ramaswamy et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5574597 | Kataoka et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5586138 | Yokoyama | Dec 1996 | A |
5656186 | Mourou et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5676866 | In Den Baumen et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5684642 | Zumoto et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5696782 | Harter et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5736709 | Neiheisel | Apr 1998 | A |
5776220 | Allaire et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
6016223 | Suzuki et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6016324 | Rieger et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6033583 | Musket et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6038055 | Hänsch et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6055829 | Witzmann et al. | May 2000 | A |
6078599 | Everage et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6156030 | Neev | Dec 2000 | A |
6160835 | Kwon | Dec 2000 | A |
6186384 | Sawada | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6210401 | Lai | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6256328 | Delfyett et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6259151 | Morrison | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6259512 | Mizouchi | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272156 | Reed et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6301932 | Allen et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6322958 | Hayashi | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6339208 | Rockstroh et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6373565 | Kafka et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381391 | Islam et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6396856 | Sucha et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6407360 | Choo et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6438996 | Cuvelier | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6445491 | Sucha et al. | Sep 2002 | B2 |
6449301 | Wu et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6484052 | Visuri et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6489589 | Alexander | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6501578 | Bernstein et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6552301 | Herman et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6573026 | Aitken et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6592703 | Habeck et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6635849 | Okawa et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6635850 | Amako et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6720519 | Liu et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6729161 | Miura et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6737345 | Lin | May 2004 | B1 |
6744009 | Xuan et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6787732 | Xuan et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6800237 | Yamamoto et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6800831 | Hoetzel | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6958094 | Ohmi et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6992026 | Fukuyo et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7009138 | Amako et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7353829 | Wachter et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7402773 | Nomaru | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7511886 | Schultz et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7535634 | Savchenkov et al. | May 2009 | B1 |
7633033 | Thomas et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7642483 | You et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7649153 | Haight et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7726532 | Gonoe | Jun 2010 | B2 |
8104385 | Hayashi et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8118971 | Hori et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8132427 | Brown et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8168514 | Garner et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8245539 | Lu et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8245540 | Abramov et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8269138 | Garner et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8283595 | Fukuyo et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8292141 | Cox et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8296066 | Zhao et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8327666 | Harvey et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8341976 | Dejneka et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8347651 | Abramov et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8358888 | Ramachandran | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8444906 | Lee et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8448471 | Kumatani et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8518280 | Hsu et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8549881 | Brown et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8584354 | Cornejo et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8584490 | Garner et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8592716 | Abramov et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8604380 | Howerton et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8607590 | Glaesemann et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8616024 | Cornejo et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8635887 | Black et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8680489 | Martinez et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8685838 | Fukuyo et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8697228 | Carre et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8720228 | Li | May 2014 | B2 |
8826696 | Brown et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8852698 | Fukumitsu | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8887529 | Lu et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8916798 | Plüss | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8943855 | Gomez et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
8971053 | Kariya et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9138913 | Arai et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9227868 | Matsumoto et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9290407 | Barefoot et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9296066 | Hosseini et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9324791 | Tamemoto | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9327381 | Lee et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9446590 | Chen et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
9481598 | Bergh et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
20020046997 | Nam et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020082466 | Han | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020097486 | Yamaguchi et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020110639 | Bruns | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20030006221 | Hong et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030007773 | Kondo et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20040221615 | Postupack | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050024743 | Camy-Peyret | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050098548 | Kobayashi et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050115938 | Sawaki et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050274702 | Deshi | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050277270 | Yoshikawa et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060011593 | Fukuyo et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060028728 | Li | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060109874 | Shiozaki et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060127679 | Gulati et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060151450 | You et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060227440 | Gluckstad | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060266744 | Nomura | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060289410 | Morita et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070091977 | Sohn et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070111390 | Komura et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070111480 | Maruyama et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070119831 | Kandt | May 2007 | A1 |
20070132977 | Komatsuda | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070138151 | Tanaka et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070177116 | Amako | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070202619 | Tamura et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070298529 | Maeda et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080000884 | Sugiura et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080079940 | Sezerman et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080099444 | Misawa et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20090013724 | Koyo et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090176034 | Ruuttu et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090183764 | Meyer | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090242528 | Howerton et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090250446 | Sakamoto | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090294419 | Abramov et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090294422 | Lubatschowski et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090324899 | Feinstein et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100025387 | Arai et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100029460 | Shojiya et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100032087 | Takahashi et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100086741 | Bovatsek et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100089631 | Sakaguchi et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100089882 | Tamura | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100102042 | Gamer et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100129603 | Blick et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100147813 | Lei et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100252540 | Lei et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100252959 | Lei et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100276505 | Smith | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100279067 | Sabia et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100287991 | Brown et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100326138 | Kumatani et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110049764 | Lee et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110049765 | Li et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110088324 | Wessel | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110100401 | Fiorentini | May 2011 | A1 |
20110132881 | Liu | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110139760 | Shah et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110183116 | Hung et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110210105 | Romashko et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110240476 | Wang | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110240611 | Sandström et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110277507 | Lu et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110318555 | Bookbinder et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120017642 | Teranishi et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120047951 | Dannoux et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120047957 | Dannoux et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120048604 | Cornejo et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120061440 | Roell | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120064306 | Kang et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120067858 | Kangastupa et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120103018 | Lu et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120131962 | Mitsugi et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120135195 | Glaesemann | May 2012 | A1 |
20120135607 | Shimoi et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120135608 | Shimoi et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120145331 | Gomez et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120196071 | Cornejo et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120196454 | Shah | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120214004 | Hashimoto | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120216570 | Abramov | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120234049 | Bolton | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120234807 | Sercel et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120255935 | Kakui et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120299219 | Shimoi et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120302139 | Darcangelo et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20130019637 | Sol et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130034688 | Koike et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130044371 | Rupp et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130047671 | Kohli | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130056450 | Lissotschenko et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130061636 | Imai et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130068736 | Mielke et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130075480 | Yokogi et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130091897 | Fugii et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130122264 | Fujii et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130126573 | Hosseini | May 2013 | A1 |
20130129947 | Harvey et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130133367 | Abramov et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130143416 | Norval | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130149434 | Oh et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130149494 | Koike et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130167590 | Teranishi et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130174607 | Wootton et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130174610 | Teranishi et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130180285 | Kariya | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130189806 | Hoshino | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130192305 | Black et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130209731 | Nattermann et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130220982 | Thomas et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130221053 | Zhang | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130224439 | Zhang et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130228918 | Chen et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130247615 | Boek et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130266757 | Giron et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130270240 | Kondo | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130280495 | Matsumoto | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130288010 | Akarapu et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130291598 | Saito et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130312460 | Kunishi et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130323469 | Abramov et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20130334185 | Nomaru | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20130340480 | Nattermann et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140027951 | Srinivas et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140034730 | Lee | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140042202 | Lee | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140047957 | Wu | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140102146 | Saito et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140110040 | Cok | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140113797 | Yamada et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140133119 | Kariya et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140141217 | Gulati et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140147623 | Shorey et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140147624 | Streltsov | May 2014 | A1 |
20140165652 | Saito | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140174131 | Saito et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140199519 | Schillinger et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140216108 | Weigel et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140290310 | Green | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140320947 | Egerton et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140333929 | Sung et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140361463 | DeSimone et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150034612 | Hosseini | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150038313 | Hosseini | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150044445 | Garner | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150075221 | Kawaguchi et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150075222 | Mader | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150110442 | Zimmel et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150118522 | Hosseini | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150136743 | Hosseini | May 2015 | A1 |
20150140241 | Hosseini | May 2015 | A1 |
20150140735 | Hosseini | May 2015 | A1 |
20150151380 | Hosseini | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150158120 | Courvoisier et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150165548 | Marjanovic et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150165560 | Hackert et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150165562 | Marjanovic et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150165563 | Manley et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150166391 | Marjanovic et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150166393 | Marjanovic et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150166394 | Marjanovic et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150166395 | Marjanovic et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150166396 | Marjanovic et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150166397 | Marjanovic et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150183679 | Saito | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150232369 | Marjanovic et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150299018 | Bhuyan | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150360991 | Grundmueller | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150367442 | Bovatsek et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160008927 | Grundmueller et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160009066 | Nieber et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160023922 | Addiego et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160031745 | Ortner et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160060156 | Krueger et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160279895 | Marjanovic et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160280580 | Bohme | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160290791 | Buono et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20170002601 | Bergh | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170052381 | Huang et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170169847 | Tamaki | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170368638 | Tayebati et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2388062 | Jul 2000 | CN |
1283409 | Nov 2006 | CN |
1930097 | Mar 2007 | CN |
101502914 | Aug 2009 | CN |
201357287 | Dec 2009 | CN |
101637849 | Feb 2010 | CN |
201471092 | May 2010 | CN |
102672355 | Sep 2012 | CN |
102674709 | Sep 2012 | CN |
102898014 | Jan 2013 | CN |
102923939 | Feb 2013 | CN |
103013374 | Apr 2013 | CN |
103143841 | Jun 2013 | CN |
203021443 | Jun 2013 | CN |
103273195 | Sep 2013 | CN |
103316990 | Sep 2013 | CN |
103359947 | Oct 2013 | CN |
103359948 | Oct 2013 | CN |
103531414 | Jan 2014 | CN |
103746027 | Apr 2014 | CN |
203509350 | Apr 2014 | CN |
104344202 | Feb 2015 | CN |
102672355 | May 2015 | CN |
2231330 | Jan 1974 | DE |
102006035555 | Jan 2008 | DE |
102012010635 | Nov 2013 | DE |
102012110971 | May 2014 | DE |
102013223637 | May 2015 | DE |
270897 | Feb 1992 | EP |
0609978 | Aug 1994 | EP |
656241 | Dec 1998 | EP |
938946 | Sep 1999 | EP |
949541 | Oct 1999 | EP |
1159104 | Aug 2004 | EP |
1609559 | Dec 2005 | EP |
1043110 | Aug 2006 | EP |
2133170 | Dec 2009 | EP |
2202545 | Jun 2010 | EP |
2574983 | Apr 2013 | EP |
2754524 | Jul 2014 | EP |
2781296 | Sep 2014 | EP |
2783784 | Oct 2014 | EP |
2859984 | Apr 2015 | EP |
2989294 | Oct 2013 | FR |
1242172 | Aug 1971 | GB |
1242172 | Aug 1971 | GB |
2481190 | Jan 2015 | GB |
1179770 | Jul 1989 | JP |
6318756 | Nov 1994 | JP |
9106243 | Apr 1997 | JP |
11197498 | Jul 1999 | JP |
11269683 | Oct 1999 | JP |
11330597 | Nov 1999 | JP |
11347758 | Dec 1999 | JP |
2001138083 | May 2001 | JP |
2002210730 | Jul 2002 | JP |
2002228818 | Aug 2002 | JP |
2003025085 | Jan 2003 | JP |
2003062756 | Mar 2003 | JP |
2003114400 | Apr 2003 | JP |
2003154517 | May 2003 | JP |
2003181668 | Jul 2003 | JP |
2003238178 | Aug 2003 | JP |
2004209675 | Jul 2004 | JP |
2005104819 | Apr 2005 | JP |
2005205440 | Aug 2005 | JP |
2005288503 | Oct 2005 | JP |
3775250 | May 2006 | JP |
3775410 | May 2006 | JP |
2006130691 | May 2006 | JP |
2006-248885 | Sep 2006 | JP |
2006248885 | Sep 2006 | JP |
2007021548 | Feb 2007 | JP |
2007196277 | Aug 2007 | JP |
2007253203 | Oct 2007 | JP |
2009056482 | Mar 2009 | JP |
2009172633 | Aug 2009 | JP |
2010017990 | Jan 2010 | JP |
2010046761 | Mar 2010 | JP |
4592855 | Dec 2010 | JP |
2011049398 | Mar 2011 | JP |
4672689 | Apr 2011 | JP |
2011517299 | Jun 2011 | JP |
4880820 | Feb 2012 | JP |
2012024782 | Feb 2012 | JP |
2012031018 | Feb 2012 | JP |
2012159749 | Aug 2012 | JP |
2012187618 | Oct 2012 | JP |
2013007842 | Jan 2013 | JP |
2013031879 | Feb 2013 | JP |
2013043808 | Mar 2013 | JP |
2013075802 | Apr 2013 | JP |
2013091578 | May 2013 | JP |
5274085 | Aug 2013 | JP |
5300544 | Sep 2013 | JP |
2013187247 | Sep 2013 | JP |
2013203630 | Oct 2013 | JP |
2013203631 | Oct 2013 | JP |
2013223886 | Oct 2013 | JP |
2012015366 | Feb 2002 | KR |
2009057161 | Jun 2009 | KR |
1020621 | Mar 2011 | KR |
1120471 | Mar 2012 | KR |
2012074508 | Jul 2012 | KR |
2013031380 | Mar 2013 | KR |
1269474 | May 2013 | KR |
2013124646 | Nov 2013 | KR |
1344368 | Dec 2013 | KR |
2014022980 | Feb 2014 | KR |
2014022981 | Feb 2014 | KR |
2014064220 | May 2014 | KR |
201139025 | Nov 2011 | TW |
201226345 | Jul 2012 | TW |
1999029243 | Jul 1999 | WO |
1999063900 | Dec 1999 | WO |
2004110693 | Dec 2004 | WO |
2006073098 | Jul 2006 | WO |
2007094160 | Aug 2007 | WO |
2008049389 | May 2008 | WO |
2008080182 | Jul 2008 | WO |
2008128612 | Oct 2008 | WO |
2009114375 | Sep 2009 | WO |
2010035736 | Apr 2010 | WO |
2010111609 | Sep 2010 | WO |
2010129459 | Nov 2010 | WO |
2011025908 | Mar 2011 | WO |
2011056781 | May 2011 | WO |
2012006736 | Jan 2012 | WO |
2012075072 | Jun 2012 | WO |
2012108052 | Aug 2012 | WO |
2012166753 | Dec 2012 | WO |
2013022148 | Feb 2013 | WO |
2013043173 | Mar 2013 | WO |
2013138802 | Sep 2013 | WO |
2013150990 | Oct 2013 | WO |
2013153195 | Oct 2013 | WO |
2014028022 | Feb 2014 | WO |
2014064492 | May 2014 | WO |
2014079478 | May 2014 | WO |
2014079570 | May 2014 | WO |
WO-2014079570 | May 2014 | WO |
2014085663 | Jun 2014 | WO |
2014111385 | Jul 2014 | WO |
2014111794 | Jul 2014 | WO |
2014161534 | Oct 2014 | WO |
2014161535 | Oct 2014 | WO |
2015077113 | May 2015 | WO |
2015095088 | Jun 2015 | WO |
2015095090 | Jun 2015 | WO |
2015095146 | Jun 2015 | WO |
2015127583 | Sep 2015 | WO |
2016005455 | Jan 2016 | WO |
2016010954 | Jan 2016 | WO |
20160154284 | Sep 2016 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Machine translation of Japan Patent document No. 2006-248,885-A, Feb. 2018. |
Abakians, H. et al.; Evaporative Cutting of a Semitransparent Body With a Moving CW Laser; Journal of Heat Transfer; Nov. 1988; pp. 924-930; vol. 110; ASME. |
Ahmed, F. et al.; Display glass cutting by femtosecond laser induced single shot periodic void array; Applied Physics A Material Science & Processing; Jun. 3, 2008; pp. 189-192; vol. 93; Springer-Verlag. |
Bagchi, S. et al.; Fast ion beams from intense, femtosecond laser irradiated nanostructured surfaces; Applied Physics B Lasers and Optics; Jun. 27, 2007; pp. 167-173; vol. 88; Springer-Verlag. |
Bhuyan, M.K. et al.; Femtosecond non-diffracting Bessel beams and controlled nanoscale ablation; ResearchGate Conference Paper; Sep. 2011; pp. 1-4. |
Bhuyan, M.K. et al.; Laser micro- and nanostructuring using femtosecond Bessel beams; The European Physical Journal Special Topics; Dec. 7, 2011; pp. 101-110; vol. 1999; EDP Sciences, Springer-Verlag. |
Bhuyan, M.K. et al.; Single-shot high aspect ratio bulk nanostructuring of fused silica using chirp-controlled ultrafast laser Bessel beams; Applied Physics Letters; Jan. 14, 2014; pp. 021107-1-021107-4; vol. 104; AIP Publishing LLC. |
Case Design Guidelines for Apple Devices; Sep. 13, 2013; pp. 1-58; Apple Inc. |
Chiao, R. Y. et al.; Self-Trapping of Optical Beams; Physical Review Letters; Oct. 12, 1964; pp. 479-482; vol. 13, No. 15. |
Corning EAGLE AMLCD Glass Substrates Material Information; Apr. 2005; pp. MIE 201-1-MIE 201-3; Corning Incorporated. |
Corning 1737 AMLCD Glass Substrates Material Information; Aug. 2002; pp. MIE 101-1-MIE 101-3; Corning Incorporated. |
Couairon, A. et al.; Femtosecond filamentation in transparent media; ScienceDirect Physical Reports; Feb. 6, 2007; pp. 47-189; vol. 441; Elsevier B.V. |
Courvoisier, F. et al.; Applications of femtosecond Bessel beams to laser ablation; Applied Physics A Materials Science & Processing; Sep. 6, 2012; pp. 29-34; vol. 112; Springer-Verlag. |
Courvoisier, F. et al.; Surface nanoprocessing with nondiffracting femtosecond Besse! beams; Optics Letters; Oct. 15, 2009; pp. 3163-3165; vol. 34, No. 20; Optical Society of America. |
Dong, M. et al.; On-axis irradiance distribution of axicons illuminated by spherical wave; ScienceDirect Optics & Laser Technology; Sep. 2007; pp. 1258-1261; vol. 39; Elsevier Ltd. |
Durnin, J.; Exact solutions for nondiffracting beams. I. The scalar theory; J. Opt. Soc. Am. A; Apr. 1987; pp. 551-654; vol. 4, No. 4; Optical Society of America. |
Eaton, S. et al.; Heat accumulation effects in femtosecond laser-written waveguides with variable repetition rate; Optics Express; Jun. 13, 2005; pp. 4708-4716; vol. 13, No. 12; Optical Society of America. |
Gattass, R. et al.; Micromachining of bulk glass with bursts of femtosecond laser pulses at variable repetition rates; Optics Express; Jun. 12, 2006; pp. 5279-5284; vol. 14, No. 12; Optical Society of America. |
Gori, F. et al.; Analytical derivation of the optimum triplicator; Optics Communications; Dec. 1, 1998; pp. 13-16; vol. 157; Elsevier B.V. |
Honda, M. et al.; A Novel Polymer Film that Controls Light Transmission; Progress in Pacific Polymer Science 3; 1994; pp. 159-169; Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. |
Hu, Z. et al.; 5-Axis Laser Culling Interference Detection and Correction Based on STL Model; Chinese Journal of Lasers; Dec. 2009; pp. 3313-3317; vol. 36, No. 12. |
Huang, Z. et al.; Laser etching of glass substrates by 1064 nm laser irradiation; Applied Physics A Materials Science & Processing; Jun. 6, 2008; pp. 159-163; vol. 93; Springer-Verlag. |
Juodkazis, S. et al.; Laser-Induced Microexplosion Confined in the Bulk of a Sapphire Crystal: Evidence of Multimegabar Pressures; Physical Review Letters; Apr. 28, 2006; pp. 166101-1-166101-4; vol. 96; The American Physical Society. |
Karlsson, S. et al.; The Technology of Chemical Glass Strengthening—A Review; Glass Technology—European Journal of Glass Science and Technology Part A; Apr. 2010; pp. 41-54; vol. 51, No. 2. |
Levy, U. et al.; Design, fabrication, and characterization of circular Dammann gratings based on grayscale lithography; Optics Letters; Mar. 15, 2010; pp. 880-882; vol. 35, No. 6; Optical Society of America. |
Liu, X. et al.; Laser Ablation and Micromachining with Ultrashort Laser Pulses; IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics; Oct. 1997; p. 1706-1716; vol. 33, No. 10; IEEE. |
McGloin, D. et al.; Bessel beams: diffraction in a new light; Contemporary Physics; Jan.-Feb. 2005; pp. 15-28; vol. 46; Taylor & Francis Ltd. |
Merola, F. et al.; Characterization of Bessel beams generated by polymeric microaxicons; Measurement Science and Technology; May 15, 2012; pp. 1-10; vol. 23; IOP Publishing Ltd. |
Mirkhalaf, M. et al.; Overcoming the brittleness of glass through bio-inspiration and micro-architecture; Nature Communications; Jan. 28, 2014; pp. 1-9; Macmillan Publishers Limited. |
Romero, L. et al.; Theory of optimal beam splitting by phase gratings. II. Square and hexagonal gratings; J. Opt. Soc. Am. A; Aug. 2007; pp. 2296-2312; vol. 24, No. 8; Optical Society of America. |
Salleo, A. et al.; Machining of transparent materials using an IR and UV nanosecond pulsed laser; Applied Physics A Materials Science & Processing; Sep. 20, 2000; pp. 601-608; vol. 71; Springer-Verlag. |
Shah, L. et al.; Micromachining with a High Repetition Rate Femtosecond Fiber Laser; JLMN—Journal of Laser Micro/Nanoengineering; Nov. 2008; pp. 157-162; vol. 3, No. 3. |
Shealy, D. et al.; Geometric optics-based design of laser beam shapers; Opt. Eng.; Nov. 2003; pp. 3123-3138; vol. 42, No. 11; Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers. |
Stoian, R. et al.; Spatial and temporal laser pulse design for material processing on ultrafast scales; Applied Physics A Materials Science & Processing; Jan. 1, 2014; pp. 119-127; vol. 114; Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. |
Thiele, E.; Relation between Catalytic Activity and Size of Particle; Industrial and Engineering Chemistry; Jul. 1939; pp. 916-920; vol. 31, No. 7. |
Toytman, I. et al.; Optical breakdown in transparent media with adjustable axial length and location; Optic Express; Nov. 22, 2010; pp. 24688-24698; vol. 18, No. 24; Optical Society of America. |
Wang, Z. et al.; Investigation on CO2 laser irradiation inducing glass strip peeling for microchannel formation; Biomicrofluidics; Mar. 12, 2012; pp. 012820-1-012820-12; vol. 6; American Institute of Physics. |
Wu, W. et al.; Optimal Orientation of the Cutting Head for Enhancing Smoothness Movement in Three-Dimensional Laser Cutting; Chinese Journal of Lasers; Jan. 2013; pp. 0103005-1-0103005-7, vol. 10, No. 1. |
Xu, H. et al.; Optimization of 3D laser cutting head orientation based on minimum energy consumption; Int J Adv Manuf Technol; Jun. 28, 2014; pp. 1283-1291; vol. 74; Springer-Verlag London. |
Yan, Y. et al.; Fiber structure to convert a Gaussian beam to higher-order optical orbital angular momentum modes; Optics Letters; Aug. 15, 2012; pp. 3294-3296; vol. 37, No. 16; Optical Society of America. |
PCT/US2015/013019 Search Report; International; Searching Authority; dated May 4, 2015; pp. 1-12; EPO. |
Arimoto et al., “Imaging properties of axicon in a scanning optical system”; Applied Optics, Nov. 1, 1992, vol. 31, No. 31, pp. 6653-6657. |
“TruMicro 5000” Product Manual, Trumpf Laser GmbH + Co. KG, pp. 1-4, Aug. 2011. |
Cubeddu et al., “A compact time-resolved reflectance system for dual-wavelength multichannel assessment of tissue absorption and scattering”; Part of the SPIE Conference on Optical Tomography and Spectroscopy of Tissue III, San Jose, CA (Jan. 1999), SPIE vol. 3597, 0277-786X/99, pp. 450-455. |
Cubeddu et al., “Compact tissue oximeter based on dual-wavelength multichannel time-resolved reflectance”; Applied Optics, vol. 38, No. 16, Jun. 1, 1999, pp. 3670-3680. |
Ding et al., “High-resolution optical coherence tomography over a large depth range with an axicon lens”; Optic Letters, vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 243-245, Feb. 15, 2002, Optical Society of America. |
“EagleEtch” Product Brochure, EuropeTec USA Inc., pp. 1-8, Aug. 1, 2014. |
Girkin et al., “Macroscopic multiphoton biomedical imaging using semiconductor saturable Bragg reflector modelocked Lasers”; Part of the SPIE Conference on Commercial and Biomedical Applications of Ultrafast Lasers, San Jose, CA (Jan. 1999), SPIE vol. 3616, 0277-786X/99, pp. 92-98. |
Golub, I., “Fresnel axicon”; Optic Letters, vol. 31, No. 12, Jun. 15, 2006, Optical Society of America, pp. 1890-1892. |
Herman et al., “Laser micromachining of ‘transparent’ fused silica with 1-ps pulses and pulse trains”; Part of the SPIE conference on Commercial and Biomedical Applications of Ultrafast Lasers, San Jose, CA (Jan. 1999), SPIE vol. 3616, 0277-786X/99, pp. 148-155. |
Perry et al., “Ultrashort-pulse laser machining”; UCRL-JC-132159 Rev 1., Jan. 22, 1999, pp. 1-24. |
Perry et al., “Ultrashort-pulse laser machining”; UCRL-ID-132159, Sep. 1998, pp. 1-38. |
Perry et al., “Ultrashort-pulse laser machining of dielectric materials”; Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 85, No. 9, May 1, 1999, American Institute of Physics, pp. 6803-6810. |
“Pharos High-power femtosecond laser system” product brochure; Light Conversion, Vilnius, LT; Apr. 18, 2011, pp. 1-2. |
Polynkin et al., “Extended filamentation with temporally chirped femtosecond Bessel-Gauss beams in air”; Optics Express, vol. 17, No. 2, Jan. 19, 2009, OSA, pp. 575-584. |
Sundaram et al., “Inducing and probing non-thermal transitions in semiconductors using femtosecond laser pulses”; Nature Miracles, vol. 1, Dec. 2002, Nature Publishing Group (2002), pp. 217-224. |
Vanagas et al., “Glass cutting by femtosecond pulsed irradiation”; J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 3(2), 358-363 (Apr. 1, 2004); doi: 10.1117/1.1668274. |
Zeng et al. “Characteristic analysis of a refractive axicon system for optical trepanning”; Optical Engineering 45(9), 094302 (Sep. 2006), pp. 094302-1-094302-10. |
Zhang et al., “Design of diffractive-phase axicon illuminated by a Gaussian-profile beam”; Acta Physica Sinica (overseas edition), vol. 5, No. 5 (May 1996) Chin. Phys. Soc., 1004-423X/96/05050354-11, pp. 354-364. |
Kerr. “Filamentary tracks formed in transparent optical glass by laser beam self-focusing. II. Theoretical Analysis” Physical Review A. 4(3) 1971, pp. 1196-1218. |
Bhuyan, M.K. et al.; Ultrafast Bessel beams for high aspect ratio taper free micromachining of glass; Nonlinear Optics and Applications IV; 2010; pp.77281V-1-77281V-8; vol. 7728; SPIE. |
Duocastella, M. et al.; Bessel and annular beams for materials processing; Laser & Photonics Reviews; 2012; pp. 607-621; vol. 6, No. 5. |
Maeda, K. et a.; Optical performace of angle dependent light control glass; Optical Materials Technology for Energy Efficiency and Solar Energy Conversion X; 1991; pp. 138-148; vol. 1536; SPIE. |
Mbise, G. et al.; Angular selective window coatings; theory and experiments; J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.; 1997; pp. 2103-2122; vol. 30; IOP Publishing Ltd. |
Serafetinides, A et al.; Polymer Ablation by Ultra-Short Pulsed Lasers; Proceedings of SPIE; 2000; pp. 409-415. |
Velpula, P. et al.; Ultrafast imaging of free carriers: controlled excitation with chirped ultrafast laser Bessel beams; Laser Applications in Microelectronic and Optoelectronic Manufacturing (LAMOM) XIX; Proc. of SPIE; 2014; pp. 896711-1-896711-8; vol. 8967; SPIE. |
Ra & RMS: Calculating Surface Roughness; Harrison Electropolishing; 2012. |
GT ASF Grown Sapphire Cover and Touch Screen Material; www.gtat.com; 2012; pp. 1-2; GTAT Corporation. |
Abramov et al.; “Laser separation of chemically strengthened glass”; Physics Procedia 5 (2010) 285-290; Elsevier; doi: 10.1016/j.phpro.2010.08.054. |
Bhuyan et al., “High aspect ratio nanochannel machining using single shot femtosecond Bessel beams”; Applied Physics Letters 97, 081102 (2010); doi: 10.1063/1.3479419. |
Bhuyan et al., “High aspect ratio taper-free microchannel fabrication using femtosecond Bessel beams”; Optics Express (Jan. 18, 2010) vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 566-574. |
Glezer et al., “Ultrafast-laser driven micro-explosions in transparent materials”, Applied Physics Letters, vol. 71 (1997) pp. 882-884. |
Kosareva et al., “Formation of extended plasma channels in a condenced medium upon axicon focusing of a femtosecond laser pulse”, Quantum Electronics 35 (22) 1013-1014 (2005), Kvantovaya Elektronika and Turpion Ltd., doi: 10.1070/QE2005v035n11ABEH013031. |
Kruger et al., “Femtosecond-pulse visible laser processing of transparent materials”; Applied Surface Science 96-98 (1996)430-438. |
Kruger et al., “Laser micromachining of barium aluminum borosilicate glass with pulse durations between 20 fs and 3 ps”; Applied Surface Science 127-129 (1998) 892-898. |
Kruger et al., “Structuring of dielectric and metallic materials with ultrashort laser pulses between 20 fs and 3 ps”; SPIE vol. 2991 (1997), 0277-786X/97, pp. 40-47. |
Lapczyna et al., “Ultra high repetition rate (133 MHz) laser ablation of aluminum with 1.2-ps. pulses”; Applied Physics A 69 [Suppl.], S883-S886, Springer-Verlag (Dec. 28, 1999); doi: 10.1007/s003399900300. |
Serafetinides et al., “Ultra-short pulsed laser ablation of polymers”; Applied Surface Science 180 (2001) 42-56. |
Varel et al., “Micromachining of quartz with ultrashort laser pulses”; Applied Physics A 65, 367-373, Springer-Verlag (1997). |
Yoshino et al., “Micromachining with a high repetition rate femtosecond fiber laser”; JLMN-Journal of Laser Micro/ Nanoengineering vol. 3, No. 3 (2008), pp. 157-162. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20170001900 A1 | Jan 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61931881 | Jan 2014 | US | |
62022885 | Jul 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14530410 | Oct 2014 | US |
Child | 15114236 | US |