4.6 Article

Nonlinear pulse compression to 51-W average power GW-class 35-fs pulses at 2-μm wavelength in a gas-filled multi-pass cell

期刊

OPTICS LETTERS
卷 47, 期 14, 页码 3511-3514

出版社

Optica Publishing Group
DOI: 10.1364/OL.462647

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Fraunhofer Cluster of Excellence Advanced Photon Sources (CAPS)
  2. H2020 European Research Council (SALT) [835306]
  3. Innovation Pool of the Research Field Matter of the Helmholtz Association of German Research Centers (project FISCOV)
  4. Thuringer Ministerium fur Bildung, Wissenschaft und Kultur [2017 FGR 0076, 501100004404]
  5. Thuringer Aufbaubank [2015FGR0094]
  6. Helmholtz Association [HGF ExNet-0019-Phase 2-3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article reports the generation of GW-class peak power 35-fs pulses at 2-μm wavelength. A compact, krypton-filled Herriott-type cavity with metallic mirrors is used for spectral broadening, enabling efficient post-compression. The results demonstrate excellent preservation of input beam quality and power transmission as high as 80%.
We report on the generation of GW-class peak power, 35-fs pulses at 2-mu m wavelength with an average power of 51 W at 300-kHz repetition rate. A compact, krypton-filled Herriott-type cavity employing metallic mirrors is used for spectral broadening. This multi-pass compression stage enables the efficient post compression of the pulses emitted by an ultrafast coherently combined thulium-doped fiber laser system. The presented results demonstrate an excellent preservation of the input beam quality in combination with a power transmission as high as 80%. These results show that multi-pass cell based post-compression is an attractive alternative to nonlinear spectral broadening in fibers, which is commonly employed for thulium-doped and other mid-infrared ultra-fast laser systems. Particularly, the average power scalability and the potential to achieve few-cycle pulse durations make this scheme highly attractive. (C) 2022 Optica Publishing Group

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据