Optimization of Nanosecond Laser Ablation Process Parameters of Polycrystalline Diamond Composite Wafers Based on Response Surface Methodology

Zhongqun Li; Yu Yang; Qiang Liu; Zhenshuo Yin; Shangzhen Yang

doi:10.3788/LOP240906

Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, Volume. 62, Issue 1, 0114004(2025)

Optimization of Nanosecond Laser Ablation Process Parameters of Polycrystalline Diamond Composite Wafers Based on Response Surface Methodology

Zhongqun Li^1、*, Yu Yang¹, Qiang Liu², Zhenshuo Yin², and Shangzhen Yang¹

Author Affiliations

¹School of Mechanical Engineering, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou 412007,Hunan , China

²Jiangxi Research Institute of Beihang University, Nanchang 330096, Jiangxi , China

show less

Abstract Get PDF(in Chinese)

Figures & Tables(15)

Fig. 1. Test platform and equipment

Download full size

Fig. 2. Polycrystalline diamond composite sheet

Download full size

Fig. 3. OLYMPUS DSX1000 digital microscope

Download full size

Fig. 4. Comparison between predicted and measured values. (a) Ablation depth; (b) surface roughness

Download full size

Fig. 5. Effect of interaction between laser power and scanning speed on ablation depth. (a) Contour plot; (b) response surface plot

Download full size

Fig. 6. Laser ablation profile of PCD composite sheet

Download full size

Fig. 7. Effect of laser power and repetition rate interaction on surface roughness. (a) Contour plot; (b) response surface plot

Download full size

Fig. 8. Measurement results of laser ablation depth under optimized parameter combination

Download full size

Fig. 9. Surface roughness under optimized parameter combination

Download full size

Table 1. Horizontal coding table
View table
Table 1. Horizontal coding table
Factor -1 level 0 level 1 level
P /W 40 60 80
v /（mm/s） 100 200 300
f /kHz 750 1000 1250

Table 2. Test results

View table

Table 2. Test results

Run	P /W	v /（mm/s）	f /kHz	h /μm	λ /μm
1	80	200	750	43.750	1.699
2	60	200	1000	31.155	1.059
3	80	100	1000	59.541	1.253
4	40	200	1250	11.233	0.686
5	60	100	1250	35.866	1.090
6	60	200	1000	30.515	1.121
7	80	200	1250	43.855	0.820
8	60	100	750	30.548	1.584
9	40	300	1000	18.991	0.698
10	60	300	1250	30.625	0.756
11	60	200	1000	29.444	1.073
12	60	300	750	28.555	1.393
13	40	200	750	11.107	0.931
14	80	300	1000	40.584	1.179
15	40	100	1000	11.680	0.777

Table 3. Analysis of variance of ablation depth

View table

Table 3. Analysis of variance of ablation depth

Source	Sum of squares	Depth of field	Mean square sum	F value	P_prob>F	Significance
Model	2554.54	9	283.84	113.29	<0.0001	Extremely
P	2268.65	1	2268.65	905.50	<0.0001
v	44.56	1	44.56	17.78	0.0084
f	7.26	1	7.26	2.90	0.1495
P_v	172.50	1	172.50	68.85	0.0004
P_f	0.01	1	0.01	0.01	0.9950
v_f	2.64	1	2.64	1.05	0.3521
P²	2.32	1	2.32	0.92	0.3804
v²	35.94	1	35.94	14.35	0.0128
$f^{2}$	16.17	1	16.17	6.45	0.0519
Residual	12.53	5	2.51
Misfitting term	11.03	3	3.68	4.92	0.1735	Not significance
Pure error	1.49	2	0.75
Sum	2567.07	14
Multipler	$R^{2}$ =0.9951		$R_{a d j}^{2}$ =0.9863

Table 4. Analysis of variance for surface roughness

View table

Table 4. Analysis of variance for surface roughness

Source	Sum of squares	Depth of field	Mean squares sum	F value	P_prob>F	Significance
Model	1.350	9	0.150	37.79	0.0005	Extremely
P	0.430	1	0.430	109.46	0.0001
v	0.058	1	0.058	14.58	0.0124
f	0.630	1	0.630	160.50	<0.0001
P_v	0	1	0	0	0.9688
P_f	0.100	1	0.100	25.46	0.0039
v_f	0	1	0	1.32	0.3031
P²	0.072	1	0.072	18.20	0.0080
v²	0.010	1	0	0.95	0.3738
$f^{2}$	0.029	1	0.029	7.42	0.0416
Residual	0.020	5	0
Misfitting term	0.018	3	0	5.70	0.1528	Not significance
Pure error	0	2	0
Sum	1.37	14
Multiplier	$R^{2}$ =0.9855		$R_{a d j}^{2}$ =0.9594

Table 5. Parameter optimization combination and indicator prediction values and their error fluctuation range
View table
Table 5. Parameter optimization combination and indicator prediction values and their error fluctuation range
Optimized parameter combination Response indicator predication
P /W v /（mm/s） f /kHz Response indicator h /μm λ /μm
94 63 1490 Predictive value 78.8990 0.624
Fluctuation range ±3.9445 ±0.156

Table 6. Experimental results and errors of parameter optimization
View table
Table 6. Experimental results and errors of parameter optimization
Response indicator h /μm λ /μm
Measured value 80.171 0.758
Predicative value 78.899 0.624

Tools

Get Citation

Copy Citation Text

Zhongqun Li, Yu Yang, Qiang Liu, Zhenshuo Yin, Shangzhen Yang. Optimization of Nanosecond Laser Ablation Process Parameters of Polycrystalline Diamond Composite Wafers Based on Response Surface Methodology[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2025, 62(1): 0114004

Download Citation

EndNote(RIS)BibTex Plain Text

Set citation alerts for article

Save article for my favorites