Low-cost Engineering of Laser Rods and Slabs with 

Liquid Phase Epitaxy

by Jeffrey O. White and Carl E. Mungan

ARL-TR-5741 September 2011

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 
NOTICES

Disclaimers

The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position 

unless so designated by other authorized documents.

Citation of manufacturer’s or trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or 

approval of the use thereof.

Destroy this report when it is no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator.
Army Research Laboratory

Adelphi, MD 20783-1197

ARL-TR-5741 September 2011

Low-cost Engineering of Laser Rods and Slabs with 

Liquid Phase Epitaxy

Jeffrey O. White

Sensors and Electron Devices Directorate, ARL

Carl E. Mungan

Physics Department, U.S. Naval Academy

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 
ii

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the 

burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. 

Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently 

valid OMB control number.

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

September 2011

2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

March 2009 to March 2011

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Low-cost Engineering of Laser Rods and Slabs with Liquid Phase Epitaxy

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

Jeffrey O. White and Carl E. Mungan

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

U.S. Army Research Laboratory

ATTN: RDRL-SEE-O

2800 Powder Mill Road

Adelphi, MD 20783-1197

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

ARL-TR-5741

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

HEL-JTO

801 University Bldg. SE, Suite 209

Albuquerque, NM 87106

10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT

 NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

We investigated the use of a liquid phase epitaxial (LPE) coating to improve the performance of a rod or slab laser. A single 

crystal erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) rod coated with undoped YAG, and an uncoated sample were 

procured, then compared on the basis of threshold and slope efficiency measurements. The goal of the testing was to 

determine the minimum epitaxial thickness necessary to suppress the whispering gallery modes, which otherwise would 

deplete the gain in ~50% of the rod volume. We also investigated LPE growth on a ceramic sample, because state-of-the-art 

high power slab lasers are now ceramic. As expected, the sample turned out to be of poor optical quality; no lasing or even 

transmission measurements could be made.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Rod laser, parasitic, liquid phase epitaxy, whispering gallery modes

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:

17. LIMITATION

OF ABSTRACT

UU

18. NUMBER

OF PAGES

24

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

Jeffrey O. White

a. REPORT

Unclassified

b. ABSTRACT

Unclassified

c. THIS PAGE

Unclassified

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

(301) 394-0069

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18
iii

Contents

List of Figures iv

1. Introduction 1

2. Description 2

3. Task 1–LPE on Single Crystal Er:YAG 3

4. Task 2–Simulation 8

5. Task 3–LPE on Ceramic 13

6. Conclusion 14

7. References 15

Distribution List 16
iv

List of Figures

Figure 1. (a) An end-pumped clad rod in a laser cavity. The laser oscillation is a mode of the 

cavity, the pump beam is wave guided by TIR at the outer surfaces of the rod. (b) Rod 

cross section showing the whispering gallery modes that occupy ~50% of the volume for 

the case of an unclad YAG rod immersed in water. (c) In a rod clad with undoped 

material, the WGM will be suppressed because the gain is zero...............................................2

Figure 2. Er:YAG rod, 3 mm diameter, clad with ~2 mm of undoped YAG. (left) as-grown. 

(right) cut and polished. .............................................................................................................3

Figure 3. Drawing of laser head designed to accommodate rods of diameter 3–6 mm..................4

Figure 4. Laser cavity formed by high reflector, laser head, and output coupler. .........................4

Figure 5. Side view of rod with WGM, upconversion disk, imaging optics, and digital 

camera........................................................................................................................................5

Figure 6. Images of the LPE rod face. (a) Fluorescence emitted from the rod when it is 

pumped at 1532 nm. The emission is transmitted through a long-wave pass filter. 

(b) Image taken with room light, showing the core (central darker region), cladding (with 

small chips), and laser head. ......................................................................................................5

Figure 7. Geometry for measuring transmitted pump power during lasing....................................6

Figure 8. Laser output power vs absorbed pump power at R=0.98, for clad and unclad rods. .....6

Figure 9. Threshold absorbed pump power vs. output coupler reflectivity for clad and unclad 

rods. Data recorded on 8 Feb. ...................................................................................................7

Figure 10. Same as figure 8, except experiment repeated on 10 Feb. ............................................7

Figure 11. Images of the rod taken with a digital camera and electronic flash. .............................8

Figure 12. Projection image of the LPE rod taken with collimated 1532 nm light passing 

through the rod and then incident on the camera, with no focusing lens. The central hot 

spot is an interference effect. .....................................................................................................8

Figure 13. Graph showing which EHlm modes are supported by an 0.2 mm YAG rod in H2O 

(V = 471)....................................................................................................................................9

Figure 14. Fields Er, E, Hr, H, and Sz associated with the HE1,1 (fundamental) mode of a 

200μ diameter YAG rod in water. The 2D integral of the Poynting vector is shown in the 

lower right hand graph. The diagram shows the cladding thickness required to reduce the 

gain by half. .............................................................................................................................10

Figure 15. Fields associated with the EH1,1 mode of the same rod, the 2D integral of the 

Poynting vector, and the cladding thickness required to reduce the gain by half....................10

Figure 16. Fields associated with the HE 1,15 mode, the 2D integral of the Poynting vector, 

and the cladding thickness required to reduce the gain by half. ..............................................11

Figure 17. Fields associated with the EH 10,1 mode, the 2D integral of the Poynting vector, 

and the cladding thickness required to reduce the gain by half. ..............................................11
v

Figure 18. Fields associated with the HE 20,1 mode, the 2D integral of the Poynting vector, 

and the cladding thickness required to reduce the gain by half. ..............................................12

Figure 19. Fields associated with the HE 30,1 mode, the 2D integral of the Poynting vector, 

and the cladding thickness required to reduce the gain by half. ..............................................12

Figure 20. Photo of a ceramic rod from Konoshima after an attempt at liquid phase epitaxy. ...14
vi

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
1

1. Introduction

Ruby rods were originally polished on the barrel surface in order to more efficiently transmit the 

light from the flash lamp. Parasitic whispering gallery modes (WGM) at the laser wavelength 

arose due to total internal reflection (1). For the last 40 years, WGM in rod and slab lasers have 

been suppressed by grinding the barrel surface (2). 

With the advent of diode laser pumping, end-pumped rods and multi-kilowatt slabs were again 

polished on the lateral surface to waveguide the pump (3, 4). This inevitably leads to WGM, for 

any dopant and host, unless the coolant happens to absorb the evanescent part of the WGM, 

which is the case for Tm at 2 μm (5). 

For yttrium aluminum garnet (YAG) immersed in cooling water, the index difference is so high 

that the WGM occupy 50% of the rod volume, severely depleting the gain. Coating the rod with 

a layer of undoped host material would presumably remove the gain for the WGM, thereby 

potentially doubling the output power. Early attempts to use index matching liquid failed 

because of degradation, and attempts to use solder glass cladding failed because of thermomechanical mismatch (6).

In the current generation of slabs for the joint high-power solid-state laser program (JHPSSL3), 

optical path distortion due to temperature non-uniformities lowers the extractable volume by 

~10% (7). We proposed that an epitaxial layer of undoped YAG could alleviate the problem, 

potentially raising the slope efficiency by 10%. Adhesive-free bonding, or diffusion bonding, is 

not practical in this situation. In larger slabs, the gain for parasitic modes may become so high 

that grinding the surfaces will not be sufficient (8). An epitaxial layer may be useful for parasitic 

suppression in this case, as shown in previous work with slabs and disks (10). A core-doped

hexagonal rod has also been fabricated by bonding (9) undoped layers to each lateral surface, and 

has shown improved performance in the Q-switched regime (10), but the size limitations to this 

technique pose a severe constraint.

We believe that in the past, epitaxial coatings have only been grown on crystalline samples. 

Both Textron and Northrop-Grumman Aerospace Systems are now using ceramic YAG slabs. 

Engineering of ceramics to include doped and undoped regions has been attempted, but is not 

widely used (11). It was unlikely that an epitaxial film could be grown on a ceramic YAG 

sample, but we thought it important to verify. Unfortunately, the first attempt failed, and no 

further attempts were made, there being no reasonable parameter to vary. 

Hybrid Yb:YAG edge-pumped microchip lasers with a doped core and an undoped cladding 

have also been fabricated in the past. A 300 W continuous wave (cw) laser output has been 

obtained from a 5-mm diameter, 300-μm thick disk with a crystalline core and a ceramic 
2

cladding (12). 414 W cw was later obtained from a 3.7-mm diameter, 200-μm thick disk with a 

doped ceramic core and an undoped ceramic cladding (13). 

2. Description

The power in the fundamental transverse electromagnetic mode (TEM00) mode of a cavity is 

concentrated on axis, whereas the power in a WGM is highest at the periphery of the rod (figure

1). It is certain that an undoped cladding will suppress the WGM. It is not known how thick the 

cladding has to be or whether the interface quality will be sufficient to avoid loss for the pump 

beam. We planned to test an Er:YAG rod coated with undoped YAG to determine if the 

parasitic modes are suppressed, and compare the threshold and slope efficiency with an identical 

rod, without the cladding. Part of the cladding will then be ground away, the rod repolished, and 

the measurements repeated until the minimum thickness is determined.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 1. (a) An end-pumped clad rod in a laser cavity. The laser oscillation is a mode of the cavity, the pump beam 

is wave guided by TIR at the outer surfaces of the rod. (b) Rod cross section showing the whispering 

gallery modes that occupy ~50% of the volume for the case of an unclad YAG rod immersed in water. 

(c) In a rod clad with undoped material, the WGM will be suppressed because the gain is zero.

Liquid phase epitaxy (LPE) was successfully performed on a 3-mm diameter Er:YAG rod (figure

2) via flux growth over a period of seven days (14). The as-grown cladding is 1.5–2 mm thick. 

The interface between the ―seed‖ rod and the cladding is practically invisible. A multi-faceted

cross-section developed because of the anisotropic growth rates. The facets were of high quality, 

and we expected high efficiency wave-guiding of the pump beam without any further polishing. 

An anti-reflection coating was deposited on each end of the sample cut to a length of 26 mm. 

Lasing measurements were carried out on the sample at this stage, but were superseded by more 

accurate measurements made after the rod was ground and polished to a 6-mm diameter cylinder.
3

 

Figure 2. Er:YAG rod, 3 mm diameter, clad with ~2 mm of undoped YAG. (left) as-grown. (right) cut and 

polished.

3. Task 1–LPE on Single Crystal Er:YAG

The goals of this task were to:

a. Image the whispering gallery modes that build up inside an unclad Er:YAG rod. 

b. Measure the transmission loss in a clad rod, due to scattering from the buried interface. 

c. Characterize the lasing threshold and slope efficiency of a clad rod, and compare with an 

unclad control rod of the same diameter for a series of different cladding thicknesses.

The first step was to design and fabricate two laser heads: one for the clad rod and one for the 

unclad rod. The outside diameter located the head inside a Thorlabs 30-mm cage in such a way 

that the heads could be easily interchanged. The cage also held the output coupler and 

sometimes the rear reflector. Several spacers, endcaps, and O-rings allowed the head to 

accommodate rods of different diameter (figure 3). During lasing experiments, the head was 

placed in a cavity formed by a high reflector and an output coupler (figure 4). The cavity was 

later extended to accommodate a diffuse reflector for measuring the transmitted pump power.
4

B A

groove

0.10 wide

× 0.17 deep

.63 in

1.378 in

#2-56 ( 8)

on 1.00” circle

×

1/4-28

0.4” deep

0.3” tapped

2 places

1.250"

1.250"

1/4-20

0.4” deep

0.3” tapped

2 places

1/4-20

1/4-28

Figure 3. Drawing of laser head designed to accommodate rods of diameter 3–6 mm.

Figure 4. Laser cavity formed by high reflector, laser head, 

and output coupler.

Normally the WGM are confined to the rod by total internal reflection at the barrel surface. 

Some of the WGM light, however, will scatter from defects in the rod and exit, perhaps revealing

the mode profile inside the rod. Following this idea, we pumped one end of the clad and unclad 

rods, without putting them in a cavity, and imaged the other end with a charge coupled device

(CCD) camera sensitive at 1.6 μ (15). Long-wave-pass filters were used to block the 1532 nm 
5

pump. Various patterns were observed, but they were qualitatively different from the WGMs we 

anticipated (figure 5). 

0.5% Er:YAG

LPE rod

50% Er:YAG

disk

relay lens CCD

Figure 5. Side view of rod with WGM, upconversion disk, imaging 

optics, and digital camera.

At the end faces, the WGM typically undergo total internal reflection, unless the rod end is 

flared. Rods have also been tapered along their entire length to force the WGM to quickly exit 

the rod (5). We made several attempts to image the WGM by frustrating the total internal 

reflection (TIR) at the rod ends. Fifty percent-doped Er:YAG disks were placed against the exit 

face, with index oil in the gap, but nothing that evoked WGM was seen under pumping 

conditions (figure 6).

Figure 6. Images of the LPE rod face. (a) Fluorescence emitted from the rod when 

it is pumped at 1532 nm. The emission is transmitted through a long-wave 

pass filter. (b) Image taken with room light, showing the core (central darker 

region), cladding (with small chips), and laser head.

It was preferable to take data under conditions that approximate the steady-state in order to 

compare with theory at a later time. Rather than risk the damage that could occur when pumping 

cw with 300 W of average power, we used ―quasi-cw‖ pumping with 10–50 ms pulses at a 

repetition rate low enough to keep the average power at ~30 W. To optimize the overlap of the 

1532 nm pump (16) spectrum threshold and the Er absorption line, we used an external 1-mmthick volume Bragg grating (VBG) (17) with a reflectivity of 20% to narrow the pump spectrum. 

To achieve steady-state conditions, it is necessary to avoid chirping of the pump diode during the 

20–50 ms current pulse. This was accomplished by carefully adjusting the angle of the VBG 

while looking at a spectrum of the output, in order to optimize feedback into the laser. Under 
6

these conditions, Pout rapidly reached a steady-state value, and we were able to acquire reliable

Pout vs. Pin data. Pin was varied by rotating a /2 plate at a uniform rate with a computercontrolled stepper motor. The current pulses were maintained at 100 A so that the pump 

spectrum and spatial intensity distribution remained constant. 

A meaningful comparison between the two rods has to be made on the basis of absorbed rather 

than incident pump power. The absorbed pump power was determined by measuring the 

incident and transmitted pump during lasing (figure 7), and taking the difference. Several 

different experimental configurations were tried. The best data was taken when the transmitted 

pump was measured by collecting some of the diffuse reflection from a 2-mm-thick sheet of 

sintered teflon (18) placed in the cavity, with a hole to pass the intracavity beam. 

0.5% Er:YAG

LPE rod

1532nm

pump

diffuse

reflector

output

coupler

dichroic

mirror

Figure 7. Geometry for measuring transmitted pump power during lasing.

A plot of Pout vs. Pin for an output coupler reflectivity of 0.98 shows that the unclad rod has both 

a lower threshold and a higher slope efficiency (figure 8), contrary to expectations. The same is 

true for all other output couplers, as well (figure 9). To check repeatability, the experiment was 

re-aligned from the beginning two days later, and the agreement was reasonable (figure 10).

50 100 150 200

0

5

10

15 clad

unclad

Laser output power (W)

Absorbed pump power (W)

Figure 8. Laser output power vs absorbed pump power at 

R=0.98, for clad and unclad rods.
7

0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

0

50

100

150

200

clad

unclad

Threshold (W)

Output coupler reflectivity

 

0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

clad

unclad

Slope

Output coupler reflectivity

Figure 9. (left) Threshold absorbed pump power vs. output coupler reflectivity for clad and unclad rods. (right) 

Slope efficiency vs. output coupler reflectivity. Data recorded on 8 Feb.

0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

0

50

100

150

200

clad

unclad

Threshold (W)

Output coupler reflectivity

 

0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

 clad

unclad

Slope

Output coupler reflectivity

Figure 10. Same as figure 9, except experiment repeated on 10 Feb.

In the face of this negative result, we did not pursue the original plan of grinding the rod to 

explore thinner cladding layers. If the thickest cladding does not show any improvement over 

the unclad rod, there is no reason to believe that an intermediate thickness would. 

Subsequent to the lasing experiments, to diagnose the problem, we imaged the rod cross-section 

in visible light using an electronic flash (figure 11). The images reveal an unexpected hexagonal 

pattern of yellow spokes emanating from the core, not readily visible to the naked eye, and 

probably due to the incorporation of lead oxide (PbO) flux during the epitaxy. We believe this 

explains the poor performance of the clad rod. A series of ~24 inclusions at the interface, 

running the length of the rod, which we had already observed by eye, also contribute to the poor 

performance.
8

 

Figure 11. Images of the rod taken with a digital camera and electronic flash.

To determine if the yellow regions absorb pump light, photographs were taken using the 

collimated output of a 1532 nm laser diode, and the infrared (IR)-sensitive CCD. The images do 

not reveal the six-fold spoke structure (figure 12), so the reason for the poor performance is still 

unclear.

Figure 12. Projection image of the LPE rod taken with 

collimated 1532 nm light passing through the rod 

and then incident on the camera, with no focusing 

lens. The central hot spot is an interference effect.

4. Task 2–Simulation

The goal of this task was to model the propagation of light inside a multilayer rod, normal to the 

rod axis, to determine the minimum cladding thickness necessary to suppress the WGM.
9

Matlab software was written to determine how much the gain of the various transverse modes, 

including the WGM, would be affected by an undoped cladding on the outside of the gain region. 

First, the modes had to be calculated for a circular dielectric waveguide, e.g., an Er:YAG rod 

( ) in water ( ). The numerical aperture (NA) is given by 

  

, and 

is equal to . For a rod of even very modest radius , the normalized 

frequency of the highest confined given by . Thus, the number of 

confined modes is 

 . A plot of V for each allowed HElm mode has the HE1,1

mode at the vertex and the WGM running up the right hand side (figure 13). To illustrate the 

effect of a cladding on the gain, the following figures show the relevant fields for the 

fundamental mode (EH1,1), the HE1,1 mode, one mode along the left hand edge (HE 1,15), and 

several WGM along the right hand edge.

The four relevant field components for the HE1,1 (fundamental) mode are shown in figure 14, as 

well as the z component of the Poynting vector. The overlap integral of the HE1,1 mode with 

gain regions of different diameters can be ready by eye from a graph of the spatial integral of the 

z component of the Poynting vector. One can see that to halve the gain of the HE1,1 mode , the 

outer 58% of the rod has to be undoped (figure 14). To halve the gain of the EH1,1 mode, the 

outer 37% has to be undoped (figure 15). To halve the gain of the HE1,15 mode, the outer 50% 

has to be undoped (figure 16). To halve the gain of the HE10,1 mode, the outer 30% has to be 

undoped (figure 17). To halve the gain of the EH20,1 mode, the outer 30% has to be undoped 

(figure 18). To halve the gain of the HE30,1 mode by half, only the outer 4.6% has to be undoped

(figure 19). This is the basis for believing that a thin undoped cladding would be sufficient to 

suppress the WGM.

Figure 13. Graph showing which EHlm modes are supported by an 0.2 mm 

diameter YAG rod in H2O (V = 471).
10

Figure 14. Fields Er, E, Hr, H, and Sz associated with the HE1,1 (fundamental) mode of a 200μ diameter YAG 

rod in water. The 2D integral of the Poynting vector is shown in the lower right hand graph. The 

diagram shows the 58% cladding thickness required to halve the gain.

Figure 15. Fields associated with the EH1,1 mode of the same rod, the 2D integral of the Poynting vector, and

the 37% cladding thickness required to halve the gain.

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-4

-3.5

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

x 105

r (mm) E_r

lambda 1.645 a 100

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

x 105

r (mm)

E_phi

A 1

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

r (mm) H_r

 n1 1.8132 n2 1.33

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

r (mm)

H_phi

l 1 beta 6.9256e+006

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

x 108

r (mm) S_z

09-Nov-2009 09:19:57

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

r (mm)

integral of rS_z

plotEHSz_lbAf 

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

x 105

r (mm) E_r

lambda 1.645 a 100

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

x 105

r (mm)

E_phi

A 1

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

r (mm) H_r

 n1 1.8132 n2 1.33

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

r (mm)

H_phi

l 1 beta 6.9254e+006

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

1

2

3

4

5

x 108

r (mm) S_z

09-Nov-2009 09:19:56

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

r (mm)

integral of rS_z

plotEHSz_lbAf 
11

Figure 16. Fields associated with the HE 1,15 mode, the 2D integral of the Poynting vector, and the 50% 

cladding thickness required to halve the gain.

Figure 17. Fields associated with the HE 10,1 mode, the 2D integral of the Poynting vector, and the 28% 

cladding thickness required to halve the gain.

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

x 105

r (mm) E_r

lambda 1.645 a 100

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

x 106

r (mm)

E_phi

A 1

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-6000

-4000

-2000

0

2000

4000

r (mm) H_r

 n1 1.8132 n2 1.33

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

r (mm)

H_phi

l 1 beta 6.9080e+006

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

x 109

r (mm) S_z

09-Nov-2009 10:03:05

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

r (mm)

integral of rS_z

plotEHSz_lbAf 

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

x 105

r (mm) E_r

lambda 1.645 a 100

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

x 105

r (mm)

E_phi

A 1

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

r (mm) H_r

 n1 1.8132 n2 1.33

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-2500

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

r (mm)

H_phi

l 10 beta 6.9237e+006

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

1

2

3

4

5

x 108

r (mm) S_z

08-Nov-2009 23:23:11

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

r (mm)

integral of rS_z

plotEHSz_lbAf 
12

Figure 18. Fields associated with the EH 20,1 mode, the 2D integral of the Poynting vector, and the 29% 

cladding thickness required to halve the gain.

Figure 19. Fields associated with the HE 30,1 mode, the 2D integral of the Poynting vector, and the 4.6% 

cladding thickness required to halve the gain.

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

x 105

r (mm) E_r

lambda 1.645 a 100

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

x 105

r (mm)

E_phi

A 1

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-2500

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

r (mm) H_r

 n1 1.8132 n2 1.33

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

r (mm)

H_phi

l 20 beta 6.9169e+006

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

x 108

r (mm) S_z

08-Nov-2009 23:22:12

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

r (mm)

integral of rS_z

plotEHSz_lbAf 

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-7

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

x 105

r (mm) E_r

lambda 1.645 a 100

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

x 105

r (mm)

E_phi

A 1

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-1000

-800

-600

-400

-200

0

r (mm) H_r

 n1 1.8132 n2 1.33

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

-3500

-3000

-2500

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

r (mm)

H_phi

l 30 beta 6.9181e+006

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

x 108

r (mm) S_z

08-Nov-2009 23:20:35

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

r (mm)

integral of rS_z

plotEHSz_lbAf 
13

The High Energy Laser Joint Technology Office (HEL-JTO) committee asked that we look into 

the possibility of using LPE to grow doped YAG single crystal slabs of the size used in the

JHPSSL program. The following is a summary of what Mark Randles at Northrup-Grumman 

Synoptics said.

The current setup at Synoptics—i.e. a 5-in. diameter crucible, 60–70 mm deep—is not 

adequate for growing volumes of more than 0.5–1.0 cm3, e.g. a 1 mm thickness on a 1-in. 

diameter substrate. The volume is limited because the melt is 90% PbO, and the YAG 

simply runs out. One could start with a higher concentration of YAG, but then the melting 

point would be higher, and the vapor pressure of Pb would become too high. The growth 

starts from a supersaturated solution of PbO and YAG. The addition of boron oxide 

stabilizes the melt against crystallization, by making it more viscous, until it comes in 

contact with a seed. As the YAG is depleted during growth, the melt temperature is 

lowered to remain supersaturated. The growth rate slows as the YAG is depleted. If the 

sample were to be removed and the melt replenished, the sudden change in growth rate 

when the sample is re-immersed would create a visible interface. 

The upshot is that growth of single-crystal slabs of the size used in the JHPSSL program is not 

feasible with crucibles of the present size. Even growing a cladding layer on a full-sized slab 

would require a larger crucible. No fundamental obstacles are foreseen, however.

Concerning the loss measurements that Synoptics may have made on their epitaxial material, 

they have not made any. The microchip lasers made by Leica and Concepts Research are only 

about 1 mm thick, so current levels of loss are not a factor. Synoptics is mainly concerned with 

using the height of the Nd and Cr absorption peaks to control the level of doping. They 

obviously try to avoid inclusions of flux, and have not done any spectroscopy of them.

One advantage of LPE vs. Czochralski is the higher doping—2.5–3.0% vs. 1.1–1.2%. The thin 

disk laser manufacturers do not use LPE-grown material, although it might seem like a 

reasonable thing to do. Arguing against epitaxy is the need to evaporate a multi-layer reflective 

coating onto the back side of the thin disk, which would interrupt the epitaxy. Another reason 

not to use epitaxy is that they prefer to bond (or glue) the YAG to a more thermally conductive 

material, e.g. sapphire, for heat removal.

5. Task 3–LPE on Ceramic

The goals of this task were to:

a. Obtain test samples of ceramic YAG, and coat one face of each via LPE. 

b. Measure the scattering loss at the buried interface. 
14

In the past, epitaxial coatings have generally been grown on crystalline samples. We also 

investigated LPE growth on a ceramic sample, because high power slab lasers are now typically 

ceramic. Engineering of ceramics to include doped and undoped regions has been attempted, but 

is not widely used (19). It was unlikely that an epitaxial film could be grown on a ceramic YAG 

sample, but we thought it important to verify. Unfortunately, the first attempt failed (figure 20), 

and no further attempts were made, there being no reasonable parameter to vary. The optical 

quality was so poor that no lasing or even transmission measurements were attempted. 

Figure 20. Photo of a ceramic rod from Konoshima after an

attempt at liquid phase epitaxy.

6. Conclusion

The concept of growing an undoped epitaxial layer onto the outside of a single-crystal YAG rod 

was a reasonable approach to suppressing the parasitic WGM that can occupy 50% of the 

volume of the rod. Liquid phase epitaxy was used to grow a ~2-mm-thick undoped layer on a 

3-mm Er-doped rod. The clad rod failed to show improved performance compared to an unclad 

rod. Photographic evidence leads us to believe that the failure was due to the incorporation of 

PbO flux into the epitaxial layer, which then absorbed pump light. The concept of growing an 

epitaxial layer onto a ceramic substrate had less chance of success, but was considered prudent to 

try, given the importance of ceramic slabs to 100 kW class solid-state lasers. A single attempt 

was made; it failed.
15

7. References

1. Linn, J.; Free, J. Effect of Trapped Light on the Output of a Ruby Laser. Appl. Opt. 1965, 4, 

1099–1101.

2. Galoyan, K. V.; Kahchatryan, K. U. Sov. J. Quantum Electron. 1974, 4, 260.

3. Bibeau, C., et al. High-average-power 1-μm Performance and Frequency Conversion of a 

Diode-end-pumped Yb:YAG Laser. IEEE J. Quantum Electronics 1998, 34, 2010.

4. Honea, E. C., et al. High-power Dual-rod Yb:YAG Laser. Optics Lett. 2000, 25, 805.

5. Beach, R. J., et al. High-average-power Diode-pumped Yb:YAG Lasers. LLNL preprint 

UCRL-JC-133848, submitted to the Int’l Forum on Advanced High-Power Lasers and 

Applications, Suita, Japan, Nov. 1-5, 1999.

6. Glaze, J. A.; Guch, S.; Trenholme, J. B. Parasitic Suppression in Large Area Nd:glass Disk 

Laser Amplifiers. Appl. Opt. 1974, 13, 2808–2811.

7. Injeyan, H. Northrop Grumman Space Technologies, private communication.

8. Trainor, D. Textron, private communication.

9. Adhesive Free Bonding®, Onyx Optics, 6545 Sierra Lane, Dublin, Calif. 94568.

10. Lucianetti, A., et al. Beam-quality Improvement of a Passively Q-switched Nd:YAG Laser 

with a Core-doped Rod. Appl. Opt. 1999, 38, 1777–1783.

11. Kracht, D.; Freiburg, D.; Wilhelm, R.; Frede, M.; Fallnich, C. Core-doped Ceramic 

Nd:YAG Laser. Optics Express 2006, 14, 2690.

12. Tsunekane, M.; Taira, T. 300 W Continuous-wave Operation of a Diode Edge-pumped, 

Hybrid Composite Yb:YAG Microchip Laser. Opt. Lett. 2006, 31, 2003–2005.

13. Tsunekane, M.; Taira, T. High-power Operation of Diode Edge-pumped, Composite Allceramic Yb:YAG Microchip Laser. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2007, 90, 121101.

14. Randles, Mark. Northrop-Grumman Synoptics, 1201 Continental Blvd., Charlotte, NC 

28273.

15. Spiricon model SCOR-1550.

16. Stack of ten InGaAs diode bars from Princeton Lightwave, Inc., 2555 Route 130 South, 

Cranbury, NJ 08512.

17. PD-LD, 30-B Pennington-Hopewell Rd., Pennington, NJ 08534.

18. Spheroptics, now Labsphere, 231 Shaker Street, North Sutton, NH 03260.

19. Kracht, D.; Freiburg, D.; Wilhelm, R.; Frede, M.; Fallnich, C. Core-doped Ceramic 

Nd:YAG Laser. Optics Express 2006, 14, 2690.
16

NO. OF

COPIES ORGANIZATION

1 ADMNSTR

ELEC DEFNS TECHL INFO CTR

ATTN DTIC OCP

8725 JOHN J KINGMAN RD STE 0944

FT BELVOIR VA 22060-6218

1 CD OFC OF THE SECY OF DEFNS

ATTN ODDRE (R&AT) 

THE PENTAGON

WASHINGTON DC 20301-3080

1 US ARMY RSRCH DEV AND ENGRG CMND

ARMAMENT RSRCH DEV & ENGRG CTR

ARMAMENT ENGRG & TECHNLGY CTR

ATTN AMSRD AAR AEF T J MATTS

BLDG 305

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD 21005-5001

1 US ARMY INFO SYS ENGRG CMND

ATTN AMSEL IE TD A RIVERA

FT HUACHUCA AZ 85613-5300

1 COMMANDER

US ARMY RDECOM

ATTN AMSRD AMR W C MCCORKLE

5400 FOWLER RD

REDSTONE ARSENAL AL 35898-5000

1 US GOVERNMENT PRINT OFF

DEPOSITORY RECEIVING SECTION

ATTN MAIL STOP IDAD J TATE

732 NORTH CAPITOL ST NW

WASHINGTON DC 20402

1 U.S. NAVAL ACADEMY

PHYSICS DEPARTMENT

ATTN CARL E. MUNGAN

ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND 21402-1363

16 US ARMY RSRCH LAB

ATTN IMNE ALC HRR MAIL & RECORDS MGMT

ATTN RDRL CIO LL TECHL LIB 

ATTN RDRL CIO MT TECHL PUB

ATTN RDRL SEE O J WHITE (10 HCS)

ATTN RDRL SEE O N FELL

ATTN RDRL SEE O D SMITH

ATTN RDRL SEE G WOOD

ADELPHI MD 20783-1197