激光入射角对高频激光诱导击穿光谱信号强度及重复性的影响研究

doi:10.3964/j.issn.1000-0593(2025)07-1999-09

摘要
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (21457 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要：原位、实时的在线监测技术有助于提升飞机蒙皮激光除漆过程的可控性。激光诱导击穿光谱（LIBS）是一种高效且快速的元素分析技术，通过激光材料作用过程中产生的等离子体光谱信息快速分析漆层元素变化，实现智能化激光可控除漆。LIBS技术在地质探测、成分检测、过程监测等领域也展现了广泛的应用潜力。而受监测对象外轮廓或表面形态限制，采用LIBS技术进行探测、检测、监测时，不可避免出现激光以非垂直入射方式与材料表面作用，促使诱发的等离子体光谱强度及稳定性出现波动，影响基于LIBS技术的地质探测、成分检测、过程监测结果。因此，为提高LIBS分析的准确性，需要考虑激光入射角对LIBS光谱强度及重复性的影响。论文针对飞机蒙皮自由曲面或几何突变区域的激光除漆LIBS在线监测，采集了不同激光入射角下的LIBS光谱，采用基线校正对原始光谱进行数据预处理，并选取6条特征谱线作为分析光谱，研究了激光入射角对LIBS光谱特征信号强度及其重复性的变化规律与成因。结果表明，在激光入射角从90°下降至60°（间隔5°）范围，特征峰强度随激光入射角的减小总体呈“先增大后减小”的规律，其中特征谱线Ti Ⅰ 429.926 nm对激光入射角有较好的敏感程度和响应特性。当激光入射角为75°时，特征谱线Ti Ⅰ 429.926 nm的特征峰强度相比于激光入射角为90°的特征峰强度增加了近145%，该结果说明激光入射角的选取有利于提升光谱信号质量、增强信号强度。此外，特征谱线Ti Ⅰ 429.926 nm的特征峰强度在激光入射角75°~65°范围内重复性较好，而其余元素特征峰强度在激光入射角为85°时重复性较好。本研究阐述了激光以垂直、非垂直入射方式时LIBS特征光谱的联系和差异，揭示了激光入射角对LIBS特征信号多维度特性的影响机制，可为激光非垂直入射时的LIBS探测、检测、监测提供借鉴和参考。

关键词：激光入射角；激光诱导击穿光谱；监测；激光非垂直入射

Abstract：In-situ, real-time online monitoring technology helps improve the controllability of the aircraft skin removal process. Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) is a highly efficient and fast elemental analysis technique, which realizes intelligent laser-controlled paint removal by quickly analyzing the elemental changes in the paint layer through the plasma spectral information generated during the laser's interaction with the material. LIBS technology has also demonstrated various potential applications in geologic exploration, compositional detection, process monitoring, etc. However, due to the limitation of the outer contour or surface morphology of the monitoring object, it is inevitable to use LIBS technology for exploration, detection, and monitoring. However, due to the limitations of the monitoring object's outer contour or surface morphology, when LIBS technology is used for detection, testing and monitoring, it is inevitable that the laser will act on the material surface in a non-perpendicular incidence mode, which will lead to fluctuations in the intensity and stability of the induced plasma spectra and affect the results of the geological detection, compositional testing and process monitoring based on LIBS technology. Therefore, in order to improve the accuracy of LIBS analysis, it is necessary to consider the effect of laser incidence angle on the intensity and repeatability of LIBS spectra. For the online monitoring of laser paint removal LIBS on free-form surfaces or geometrically mutated regions of aircraft skin, the paper collected LIBS spectra under different laser incidence angles, used baseline correction to preprocess the data of the original spectra, and selected six characteristic spectral lines as the analysis spectra, and studied the changing rules and causes of the laser incidence angle on the intensity of the characteristic signals of the LIBS spectra and their repeatability. The results show that in the range of laser incidence angle from 90° to 60° (5° interval), the intensity of the characteristic peaks decreases with the decrease of the laser incidence angle in a general pattern of “increasing first and then decreasing”, in which the characteristic spectral line Ti Ⅰ 429.926 nm has a better sensitivity and response to the laser incidence angle. When the laser incidence angle is 75°, the characteristic peak intensity of the characteristic spectral line Ti Ⅰ 429.926 nm increases by nearly 145% compared with that of the laser incidence angle of 90°，which indicates that the selection of the laser incidence angle is conducive to the enhancement of the spectral signal quality and signal intensity. In addition, the characteristic peak intensity of the characteristic spectral line Ti Ⅰ 429.926 nm has a better repeatability in the range of 75°～65° laser incidence angle, while the characteristic peak intensities of the rest of the elements have a better repeatability at the laser incidence angle of 85°. This study illustrates the connection and difference of the LIBS feature spectra when the laser is incident in vertical and non-vertical ways, and reveals the mechanism of the laser incidence angle on the multi-dimensional characteristics of the LIBS feature signals, which can be used as a reference for the detection, testing, and monitoring of LIBS when the laser is not incident vertically.

Key words：Laser incidence angle; Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS); Monitoring; Non-vertical laser incidence

收稿日期: 2024-10-30 修订日期: 2025-01-23

中图分类号:

TN249

基金资助: 国家自然科学基金项目（52305170），浙江省“尖兵”“领雁”研发攻关计划项目（2024SJCZX0037)，中央高校基本科研业务费基金项目（24CAFUC01004）资助

作者简介: 杨文锋，1979年生，中国民用航空飞行学院民机复合材料研究中心教授 e-mail: ywfcyy@163.com

引用本文:

杨文锋，谢旻玥，钱自然，李绍龙，曹宇，林德惠，吕双祺，杨晓强，华海杰. 激光入射角对高频激光诱导击穿光谱信号强度及重复性的影响研究[J]. 光谱学与光谱分析, 2025, 45(07): 1999-2007.
YANG Wen-feng, XIE Min-yue, QIAN Zi-ran, LI Shao-long, CAO Yu, LIN De-hui, LÜ Shuang-qi, YANG Xiao-qiang, HUA Hai-jie. The Effect of Laser Incidence Angle on the Signal Intensity and Repeatability of High-Frequency Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectra. SPECTROSCOPY AND SPECTRAL ANALYSIS, 2025, 45(07): 1999-2007.

链接本文:

https://www.gpxygpfx.com/CN/10.3964/j.issn.1000-0593(2025)07-1999-09 或 https://www.gpxygpfx.com/CN/Y2025/V45/I07/1999

[1] Üner Ü, Orak S, Sofuoğlu M A. Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 2016, 30: 4559.
[2] Razab M K A A, Jaafar M S, Abdullah N H, et al. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences, 2018, 11(4): 393.
[3] Papanikolaou A, Tserevelakis G J, Melessanaki K, et al. Opto-Electronic Advances, 2020, 3(2): 190037.
[4] Striova J, Fontana R, Barucci M, et al. Microchemical Journal, 2016, 124: 331.
[5] Wang Wenju, Sun Lanxiang, Lu Ying, et al. Optics & Laser Technology, 2022, 145: 107481.
[6] Guo Lianbo, Zhang Deng, Sun Lanxiang, et al. Frontiers of Physics, 2021, 16: 22500.
[7] Zhang Yuqing, Sun Chen, Gao Liang, et al. Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, 2020, 166: 105802.
[8] Li Jing, Lei Bingying, Wang Jing, et al. Communications Physics, 2021, 4(1): 64.
[9] Müller S, Meima J A. Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, 2022, 189: 106370.
[10] Zhang Ying, Zhang Tianlong, Li Hua. Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, 2021, 181: 106218.
[11] Colao F, Almaviva S, Caneve L, et al. Nuclear Materials and Energy, 2017, 12: 133.
[12] Yumoto K, Cho Y, Ogura J A, et al. Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, 2024, 221: 107049.
[13] Wiens R C, Maurice S, Lasue J, et al. Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, 2013, 82: 1.
[14] Wu Huace, Li Cong, Wu Ding, et al. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry, 2021, 36(10): 2074.
[15] Multari R A, Foster L E, Cremers D A, et al. Applied Spectroscopy, 1996, 50(12): 1483.
[16] Breves E A, Lepore K, Dyar M D, et al. Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, 2017, 137: 46.
[17] Képeš E, Gornushkin I, Po( rˇ )ízka P, et al. Analyst, 2021, 146(3): 920.
[18] Zhang Zhimin, Chen Shan, Liang Yizeng. Analyst, 2010, 135(5): 1138.
[19] Bhatt Chet R, Alfarraj Bader, Ghany Chares T, et al. Applied Spectroscopy, 2017, 71(4): 686.
[20] Yang Wenfeng, Fu Chanyuan, Qian Ziran, et al. Lasers in Engineering (Old City Publishing), 2022, (1/2): 53.
[21] Chen Jianbo, Chen Xiaoxiao, Zhang Xuanhua, et al. Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 2024, 172: 107849.
[22] Wang Zhe, Afgan Muhammad-Sher, Gu Weilun, et al. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 2021, 143: 116385.
[23] Mal E, Junjuri R, Gundawar M K, et al. Fusion Engineering and Design, 2021, 173: 112839.
[24] Ni Zhibo, Chen Xinglong, Fu Hongbo, et al. Frontiers of Physics, 2014, 9(4): 439.
[25] Lian C W, Ji Y, Yan R, et al. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 2022, 64(8): 085009.