Originally Posted by
planters
Femtoman,
I am enjoying this discussion, but I have to disagree with you on several points. The wall ablation regime does indeed begin much lower than 200J/cm^3. This is supported in the literature where evidence of wall material begins to appear in the output spectrum and by analysis of the gas drawn out of the tube when operating in a flow through mode.
More than this, it can be demonstrated. Run a typical tube at low energies (below 20J/cm^3) for several hundred pulses. Observe the walls of the lamp near each electrode, especially if high erosion electrodes machined out of aluminum are used. There will be several cm of grey/black deposit that builds as the pulse count mounts. This material cannot be cleaned chemically, but a single higher energy pulse above approximately 50J/cm^3 will completely remove this material. If the tube is now run at this higher energy, the deposits do not return. This is why I questioned the tube in your image. It should be clean unless the material is not glass and the UV flux is causing some dye or other organic to be deposited.
Energies above 200J/cm^3 will be hard to achieve in real life tubes larger than 6mm ID. Indeed, in your coaxial tube with a 7mm OD inner tube and a 8mm ID outer tube which gives an annular gap of 0.5mm, multiplied by the tube length which I would estimate at 35cm gives a volume of approximately 4cm^3. Even at 500J you would only be at 125J/cm^3. By my measure you were well within the ablating regime, by yours, you were not much above 1/2 way to the bottom of the range.
Several decades ago when Russian researchers set the world record for a single dye laser pulse at 400J, they also used a coaxial lamp, however because of the large dimensions of their dye cell it may be that their lamp was not operating in the optimal loading range. They were using approximately 50kJ in an approximately 10us pulse. Based on some discussion by Duarte, it may be that the holy grail of short duration pumping may be less important than absolute peak power no matter the duration.
Although I suspect that pulse length has some significance it is not usually factored into the ablating threshold determination. It will most likely be that the shorter the pulse, the lower the transition from line emission to thermal radiation of wall products. I say this because a more rapid pulse will diffuse less into the bulk of the glass, reserving the energy and increasing the surface temperature. Nevertheless, I am seeing ablation in my 16us pulses.