Thin Solid Films, 123 (1985) 27-44

ELECTRONICS AND OPTICS 27

OPTICAL SCATTERING AND ABSORPTION LOSSES AT

INTERFACES AND IN THIN FILMS*

J. M. BENNETT
Michelson Laboratory, Naval Weapons Center, China Lake, CA 93555 (U.S.A.)
(Received August 13, 1984; accepted November 2, 1984)

A key to improving the performance of optical thin films is to reduce scattering

and absorption losses, both in the films and at the interfaces. Scattering from thin
films can be measured by collecting the light scattered into a hemisphere (total
integrated scattering (TIS)) or as a function ofangle. For opaque films the TIS can be
simply related to the r.m.s, roughness using a scalar scattering theory. Angular
scattering from thin films can be predicted using a vector theory which has as inputs
the optical constants of the film(s), angles of incidence and scattering, wavelength,
polarization of the incident and scattered light, and surface roughness parameters. A
refinement of this theory allows the optical constants of the film to depend on the
position along the surface. For multilayer films, the scattering depends on whether
the roughnesses at the film interfaces are uncorrelated, partially correlated or fully
correlated. Calorimetric techniques have been developed to measure film and
interface absorption as well as absorption in the substrate. These techniques make
use of wedged films and/or wedged substrates. Other useful thin film characteriza-
tion techniques include measurements of reflection, transmission, optical constants
and film thickness. Special techniques are also available; these include total internal
reflection microscopy, photoacoustic spectroscopy, nuclear resonance for hydrogen
detection, laser polishing, Mireau heterodyne profilometry and laser desorption of
surface contaminants. By using the appropriate characterization techniques it is
possible to measure the performance of thin films and then to improve their
properties.

1. INTRODUCTION

As performance specifications on optical systems become tighter, the tolerances

on the optical components become more stringent. Frequently the optics have to be
designed and fabricated to diffraction-limited performance. Surface finish also
becomes very important because scattered light levels must be kept as low as

* Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference on Thin Films, Stockholm, Sweden, August
13-17, 1984.

0040-6090/85/$3.30 © Elsevier Sequoia/Printed in The Netherlands

28 J.M. BENNETT

possible. Absorption in films should be minimized to increase the throughput of the

system and to minimize damage to optical components if they are exposed to intense
laser radiation. In this paper we shall discuss ways of measuring scattering and
absorption in thin films and substrates and we shall also briefly mention theories
relating scattering to surface roughness and other surface statistics.

2. SCATTERING

Scattering in thin films can be caused by film inhomogeneities and granularity

or thickness non-uniformities. However, the major part of the scattering arises from
roughness of the film surfaces, as shown schematically in Fig. 1. There can be
interference effects in the scattered light if there are multiple interfaces, and the
resultant scattering depends on whether the roughnesses of the film surfaces are
correlated or uncorrelated. Scattering from high quality optical surfaces primarily
arises from microirregularities remaining from the polishing process, although it can
also be caused by particulates such as dust on the surface, scratches, digs and other
features whose sizes are larger than the wavelength of light. Geometrical optics must
be used to calculate scattering from these large defects 1 while Mie scattering
theory 2-4 is appropriate for scattering from particulates and other isolated surface
features whose dimensions are comparable with the wavelength of light. Very-near-
angle scattering merges with Airy diffraction of the incident beam.

UNCOATED ~ iNCIDENT BEAM

1
CATTEREOL,O,,

DIELECTRIC COATED THICKNESS NONUNIFORMITY

(GRANULARITY) IN AI FILM
INCIDENT BEAM

SCATTE R ED LIGHT

~ MgF2
AI
LONG RANGE (mm) EFFECT
COLUMNAR STRUCTURE,
INHOMOGENEITY IN FILM tI ~ t2 ~ t3
INTERFERENCE EFFECTS CAN CONTRIBUTE STRONGLY TO
CROSS CORRELATION EFFECTS NEAR-ANGLE SCATTERING
BETWEEN ROUGH SURFACES
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of microirregularity-induced scattering from transparent and opaque films.

Scattering may be measured either as total integrated scattering (TIS) into a

hemisphere or as angle-resolved scattering into one or many small solid angles.
Either of these types can be measured as a function of position on the surface to
make a scattering map or as a function of wavelength. Angular scattering, usually
measured in the plane of incidence5, is useful for determining scattering at specific
angles and/or polarizations and also for checking theoretical predictions. Scattering
SCATTERING AND ABSORPTION LOSSES AT INTERFACES AND IN FILMS 29

very close to the specular beam can sometimes be determined from a modulation
transfer function measurement of the blur circle of the specular beam.

2.1. Total integrated scattering

Total integrated scattering can be measured most conveniently using a
Coblentz sphere-type instrument, as shown schematically in Fig. 2 6-s. Light from an
He-Ne laser, or other appropriate source, is spatially filtered and chopped, and the
beam then strikes the surface of the test sample. The sample and a small-area
detector, whose size is slightly larger than that of the incident laser beam, are at
conjugate foci of the aluminized collecting hemisphere (Coblentz sphere). Light that
is not specularly reflected strikes the aluminized surface and is focused onto the
scattered light detector. If most of the light is collected by the hemisphere, i.e. not too
much is lost by very-near-angle or very-large-angle scattering, scalar scattering
theory 7'9 can be used to relate the TIS to the r.m.s, roughness 6 of the surface:
(_~)2
TIS ~ (la)

or
2
6 ~ - T I S 1/2 (lb)

where 2 is the wavelength. The TIS is the ratio of the total light scattered by the
surface (total hemispherical scattering) divided by the sum of the specularly reflected
plus scattered light. Since for smooth surfaces the scattered light is a small fraction of
the specularly reflected light, the ratio becomes as shown in Fig. 2 and is thus
independent of the sample reflectance. For measurements in the visible spectral
region, the instrument can be conveniently calibrated using a white lambertian
scatterer such as polytetrafluoroethylene1°, BaSO~, Kodak white giowder, Kodak
white reflecting paint or other material. The TIS method for obtaining an effective
surface roughness forms the basis for an ASTM draft roughness standard 6, and

HEMISPHERICAL
COLLECTING MIRROR DETECTOR
//"~ f (SCATTERED
DETECTOR ¢/ f //RADIATION)
(REFLECTED BEAM)I / / J'~

DETECTOR
(INCIDENT BEAM)
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of an instrument for measuring TIS (from ref. 6):
V sample, scattered = /4~rms/ 2
TIS V sample, specular
where 6,~, is the effective r.m.s, roughness. Hence
2
6rm, = - - TISI/2
4n
30 J.M. BENNETT

roughness values for polished surfaces obtained from TIS measurements have been
shown to correlate with roughnesses measured interferometrically ~~
The TIS can be measured as a function of wavelength for checking the validity
of the scalar scattering theory in the visible and UV spectral regions 7 or plotted at a
single wavelength as a function of position on the sample surface (Fig. 3). The
advantage of the three-dimensional plot is that a low scatter portion of the surface
may be selected if the illuminated area on the mirror is small compared with the total
mirror area.

SCATTERING
(xlO-4)

Fig. 3. Scattering from an aluminized superpolished fused quartz mirror plotted as a function of position
on the mirror surface (wavelength, 6471 A; r.m.s, roughness, 5/~): average scattering, 1 x 10-4; maximum
scattering, 8.5 x 10 -4.

TIS can also be used to measure the effect of scratches, digs, dust and other
particulates, particularly in the IR where scattering from small isolated surface
defects dominates because of the 1/22 dependence of microirregularity scattering 7.
Scratches have irregular cross-sectional profiles 12 and widths in the micrometer
range, but their effects can easily be measured by a laser beam whose diameter is of
the order of 1 ram, as shown in Fig. 4, even on an uncoated surface 12. Surface
plasmon effects can also give rise to scattering from silver-and aluminum-coated
surfaces ~'4. Evanescent surface waves can couple into the surface roughness to
produce absorption and subsequent re-radiation of light that looks like scattered
light.

2.2. Angle-resolved scattering

Angle-resolved scattering requires polarizers and apertures to define the solid
angles of the incident and scattered light and sophisticated vector theory to predict
the scattering properties of a surface. One form of a vector scattering theory t'13
SCATTERING AND ABSORPTION LOSSES AT INTERFACES AND IN FILMS 31

~"='e..o._
e'°f./~
8,0 ~

6.0
4.0 4.0

2.0
0
2.0 i
-I,0 1.0
0
X (mm) ,0 -' 0
Y (mm)
~'-~.0
(a) (b)
Fig. 4. Scattering from uncoated scratch standards plotted as a function of position on the surface
(wavelength, 6471 A) (from ref. 12): (a) number 60 scratch width, 5.4 Ixm (31r, scratch; A , background); (b)
number 20 scratch width, 2.6 ~ n .

which gives the scattering per unit solid angle as a function Of wavelength, angles of
incidence and scattering, optical constants of the surface, polarization of the incident
and scattered light and surface roughness parameters is summarized in Appendix A.
The surface parameters enter as the r.m.s, roughness and the Fourier transform of
the surface autocovariance function 14. The angle-resolved scattering equations can
be integrated to yield the correct TIS expression under most conditions. This subject
has been discussed by Elson e t al. ~5 There can be excellent agreement between
theoretically predicted and experimentally measured angle-resolved scattering, as
shown in Figs. 5(a) and 5(b) for scattering from a multilayer dielectric-coated
surface ~. However, there are still unexplained differences between theory and
experiment for retroscattering at large angles of incidence and scaling of near-angle
scattering to IR wavelengths 13'16. A refinement of the vector theory allows the
optical constants to depend on the position in the plane of the surface 17. This helps
to explain large'-angle retroscattering discrepancies, but still does not predict cross-
polarized scattering (s-(p-) polarized incident light produces small amounts of
p- (s-) polarized scattered light, while all first-order theories predict none).
Since the scattering per unit solid angle is greatest for angles close to the
specular direction, it is reasonable to assume that most of the accumulated scattered
light also occurs at very small scattering angles. This is not true for conventionally
polished surfaces, as is shown in Fig. 6. Even though the scattering per unit solid
angle is less at angles in the middle range (10°-60°), the increase in the total solid
angle dominates, so that the total cumulative scattering is more than that at smaller
angles. In the particular case shown in Fig. 6, 72% of the total scattered light occurs
in this middle range. Diamond-turned surfaces and polished molybdenum surfaces,
which have a well-defined surface texture caused by the polycrystalline nature of the
material, have long surface spatial wavelength components on the surface that give
rise to large amounts of near-angle scattering. In some cases, as much as 85% of the
total scattered light can occur at angles between 0.3 ° and 3 ° from, the specular
direction ~8. ~9.
 32 J.M. BENNETT

l l l | l l l l l l l l l l l l l

-3 #t

/I
%

~-E
q

-6
f
i i l l l l l l i l l l l i i l l
-80 -~ 40 -20 0 20 ~ 60 80
(a) 6, DEGREES
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

-3

~---4
II ~!
II ~
eL

%
~..... ~
ff
q

-6
t'

-7 t I I t I I I I I 1 I I I I I I !
-80 -60 --40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
(b) e, DEGREES
Fig. 5. Calculated (- - -) (uncorrelated roughness between layers) and experimental ( ) carves for the
angle-resolved scattering from a multilayer dielectric stack (angle of incidence, 30 °) (from ref. 5): (a)
p-polarized incident and scattered light; (b) s-polarized incident and scattered light'.

3. SURFACE MICROSTRUCTURE

Since scattering from high quality surfaces is to a large extent produced by the
microroughness of the substrate and/or films, it is necessary to characterize this
roughness statistically.The important parameters are the r,m.s, heights of the
SCATTERING AND ABSORPTION LOSSES AT INTERFACES AND IN FILMS 33

2.0 I I ; ; t I '; ,I i

.I -__
2

z_

i - _

71 _8 %
_ ~ , II "10-60°" " "-
(J
_,- , .+-, , , ,

00" 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
SCATTERING ANGLE (DEGREES FROM SPECULAR)
Fig. 6. Cumulative scattering from aluminized fused quartz (normal incidence) (from ref. 12).

surface microirregularities and their correlation lengths. Both these parameters are
incorporated into the autocovariance function t 1.2o. For both the scalar and vector
scattering theories, the r.m.s, heights of the microirregularities are assumed to be
small compared with the wavelength, and their correlation or autocovariance
lengths are assumed to be equal to or longer than the wavelength is. Three different
types of technique are available for different correlation lengths.
For predicting extreme-UV and UV scattering, the lateral resolution obtain-
able in electron micrographs is appropriate. Recently, a technique has been
developed 16 for obtaining micrographs of silver films without the need for a surface
replica, using a new versatile electron microscope at the University of Southern
California. Figure 7 shows scanning electron micrographs of the surfaces of several
sputtered silver films taken with this instrument. The internal structure of parts of
these same films non-destructively removed from the substrates is shown in Fig. 8.
Using a technique developed by Rasigni e t al. 21 at the Universit~ Aix-Marseille III,
Marseille, France, it is now possible to obtain autocovariance functions for film and
substrate surfaces from electron micrographs using microdensitometer scans of the
micrographs. One such autocovariance function is shown in Fig. 9.
For predicting scattering in the visible region, the lateral resolution should be
equal to the wavelength of the light used for the measurements, or approximately
0.5 lam. This resolution can be obtained using a profiling instrument with a diamond
stylus of radius 4 ttm or less. A computer-controlled surface profiling instrument
based on the Talystep is one possibility, and autocovariance functions measured
with this instrument are shown in ref. 20. Interferometric profiling instruments
generally have lateral resolutions of 1-2 ~tm or greater and, thus, cannot give
information about angular scattering for angles larger than about 18° (wavelength,
6328 A; normal incidence; lateral resolution, 2 ttm) 2°.
Near-angle scattering in the visible and IR regions at all angles can be
calculated from autocovariance functions measured with interferometric profiling
instruments such as the Mireau heterodyne interferometer (manufactured by Wyko
Optical Inc., 655 North Alvernon Way, Suite 123, Tucson, AZ 85711, U.S.A.), an
 4~

(a) (b)'- (c) (d) (e)

Fig.7. Highres••uti•nscanninge•ectr•nmicr•graphs•ftheactua•su•aces(n•trep•icas)•fsi|ver•lms lO00/~thicksputteredontoroomtemperaturesubstratesand
mbsequently baked in vacuum at the following temperatures (from ref. 16): (a) unbaked; (b) 50 °C; (c) I00 °C; (d) 200 °C; (e) 250 °C.

Z
Z
 Z

©
CJo

,...]

>
Z

! !
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) 0.5
Fig. 8. Transmission electronmicrographs showing the internalmicrostructureof the same sputteredfilmsas in Fig. 7:(a)unbaked;(b)50°C;(c)100°C;(d) 200°C;
(e)250 °C. The filmshave been removed non-destructivelyfrom the substrates(from ref.16).

L~
 36 J. M. BENNETT

(a)

(b) I I
s00o

0.5

(¢) ~ ~Ios

Fig. 9. (b) Surface topography and (c) autocovariance function (r.m.s. roughness, 37 ~; autocovarianc¢
length, 317 A) for an evaporated silver film obtained from microdensitometerscans of (a) a transmission
electron micrograph single-stagereplica of the surface(fromref. 16).

optical heterodyne interferometer 22 or a fringes of equal chromatic order (FECO)

scanning interferometer 11. The first two instruments can be used with any surface
coating; however, the surface must be coated with a highly reflecting silver or
aluminum film and placed nearly in contact with a silvered reference surface when
the F E C O scanning interferometer is used. Autocovariance functions are calculated
rapidly from surface profile data with the Mireau heterodyne interferometer and the
optical heterodyne profilometer.
SCATTERING AND ABSORPTION LOSSES AT INTERFACES AND IN FILMS 37

Figure 10 summarizes the lateral resolutionsand profile lengths that can be

obtained using different types of surface profiling instruments and techniques. It
should be noted that surface statistics obtained with the different instruments
depend on the lateral and height resolution of the measuring instrument as well as
the character of the surface. An example is shown in Table I. Five graded roughness
standards that were initially ground and then polished to progressively smoother
finishes have been measured using TIS, interferometric profiling instruments and a
diamond stylus profiling instrument 23. The values of the r.m.s, roughnesses clearly
depend on the lateral resolution of the measuring instrument or technique, and thus

ELECTRON ' (2o-1"oo

)oA ° ' ' ' '
MICROSCOPE I
(STEREO)

STYLUS (4~-10~m)
PROFILOMETER
* DEPENDS ON TYPE
OF INSTRUMENT
INTERFERO - | (10- 2500~1
METER

OPTICAL (4 -- 1000~)
HETERODYNE I
PROFILOMETER

MIREAU (4-3ooo
HETERODYNE I
INTERFEROMETER
( 5 - 350~ rms)
TOTAL I (100~-- HEIGHTS
INTEGRATED L 0.6tJm rms) ". ,I UNRESOLVED
SCATTERING
I I I I I I
10 100 I000~ 1 10ran
0.1 1 10 100 1000pro
SPATIAL WAVELENGTHS
Fig. 10. Surface spatial wavelength ranges of instruments and techniques for measuring surlacc
microroughness. Values in parentheses are the range of heights that can be measured with each
instrument or technique.

TABLE I
SUMMARYOF ROUGHNESSMEASUREMENTSON BALZERSROUGHNESSSTANDARDS(FROM REF. 23)

Sample R.m.s. roughness (A) measured by the following techniques or instruments

TIS TIS OHP Mireau HI Talystep

(NWC) (Balzers) (Livermore) (NWC) (NWC)

R1 140 146 74 45 447

R2 61 63 34 24 62.5
R3 22.1 19.5 6.8 7.0 11.3
R4 12.3 11.0 3.3 3.8 7.4
R5 12.7 13.5 2.3 -- 6.1

N W C , Naval Weapons Center.

O H P , optical heterodyne profilometer.
HI, heterodyne interferometer.
38 j. M. BENNETT

there is no one "r.m.s. roughness" (or autocovariance length) for each surface. In ref.
23 the reasons for the differences in roughness values are discussed.

4. ABSORPTION

Absorption in films and substrates can be measured by a variety of techniques.

These include spectrophotometric methods for obtaining film optical constants,
calorimetry, reflectance of opaque materials, emittance of transparent materials,
internal reflection spectroscopy, photoacoustic spectroscopy, nuclear resonance for
hydrogen detection, profiling Auger electron spectroscopy, electron spectroscopy
for chemical analysis (ESCA) or secondary ion mass spectroscopy (SIMS), and laser
desorption of adsorbed layers.
Any of the methods that will give the optical constants of a film24 will of course
also yield the film absorptance, since the absorption coefficient ot = 4~k/2, where k is
the extinction coefficient (imaginary part of the complex index of refraction) and 2
the wavelength. Perhaps the simplest method to obtain the absorption of a thin film
on a substrate is to measure the transmittance of the film-covered substrate as a
function of wavelength. The real part of the refractive index can be obtained from the
wavelengths of the interference maxima or minima. The transmittance can then be
calculated at these wavelengths. Any decrease in the transmittance from the
calculated value is caused by absorption in the film and/or substrate or by scattering.
If the substrate is known to be smooth and non-absorbing, the decrease in
transmittance can be attributed to film absorption. For opaque films, unity minus
the normal incidence reflectance will give the total film absorptance A. A second
independent measurement (reflectance from the back surface of the substrate,
reflectance at non-normal incidence etc.) is needed to yield the complex refractive
index and then the absorption coefficient ~ for the film.
Calorimetry is perhaps the best method not only for obtaining absorption
within a thin film, but also absorption at the film-substrate and air-film
interfaces25. The adiabatic calorimeter described by Decker and Temple 26 is a
sensitive instrument for measuring small amounts of absorption in films and
substrates. By making the film in the form of a wedge, absorption within a film can be
separated from interface absorption 25, as shown in Fig. 11. In this figure the
absorption measurements were made at integral multiples of the half-wave optical
thickness of the film. The slopes of the curves give the film absorption coefficients otat
the two wavelengths. When the curves are extrapolated to zero film thickness, the
difference between these values and the measured absorption of a bare substrate
gives the interface absorption. Additional measurements are needed to determine
whether the absorption is at the air-film or film-substrate interface. (In the above
example, the added absorption was at the film-substrate interface.) The same
principle can be used to measure absorption in the substrate by making it in the form
of a wedge and measuring the total absorption at several thicknesses 27, as shown in
Fig. 12.
Internal reflection spectroscopy as developed by Hansen 28 is a method of
determining what chemical species are present in thin films and at the interface
between the film and the coupling prism in which the light beam undergoes many
SCATTERING AND ABSORPTION LOSSES AT INTERFACES AND IN FILMS 39

20

18

16

~o 14

X 12

z lO

O
0 I I I I I I I
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
THICKNESS, /am
Fig. 11. Absorptance of a sodium fluoride film on calcium fluoride (AC-107, S-19) measured by the
wedged-film calorimetric technique (from ref. 25): ~7, 2.87 pro, 14 crn- t; ©, 2.72 ~ a , 3.5 c m - t.

eoI
5.5
5.0

4.5 I

4"0 I
X 3.5

Z 3.0
~2.5
~2.0
<
1.5
1.0 ~
0.5

0.0 I I I I I
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4
SAMPLE THICKNESS (cm)
Fig. 12. Absorptanceofprism-shaped samplesoffusion-cast calcium fluoride measured byacalorimetdc
technique (from ref. 27): I-q, 2.87 pm, ct = 1.93 x 1 0 - , crn - 1; C), 2.705 p.m, ~t = 1.41 x 10-4 era- z.

internal reflections (Fig. 13). The sensitivity of the method depends on the state of
polarization (s or p), the angle of incidence, the refractive indices of the film and
prism, and the number of reflectiojns 2s. If a contamination layer is present in a
multilayer stack, it can usually be detected by profiling Auger, ESCA or SIMS
measurements. A peak in the carbon spectrum will occur in the profiling sequence to
show the presence of the contamination layer.
Photoacoustic spectroscopy is a specialized technique for detecting small
40 J. M. BENNETT

amounts of absorption in thin films as a function of position on the film 29. It has
been used to pinpoint locations on a film which are likely to be damaged when the
sample is irradiated with an intense laser beam, as shown in Fig. 14. Many of the
locations show no visible defects before exposure to the laser beam.

i i 1 i i i i i i i
100
I-
z
uJ
80
cc
u.I
n.
6O -OH?
U
Z ' -OH
<
E 40 -OH
' ~ "

Z
< 2O : /
n,,

I ! I
2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 15 20
WAVELENGTH (MICRONS)

" ~-~ Y so,ooh

J ~|:3 I1~ ~ ThF 4
30° ~c.24 o

(S-POk)
Y
Fig. 13. I n t e r n a l reflection spectroscopy m e a s u r e m e n t s of the a b s o r p t i o n in a silicon m o n o x i d e film
(angle of incidence, 30 °) (from ref. 28): , s p o l a r i z e d ; - - -, p polarized.

A nuclear resonance method has been used by Donovan et al. a° to detect water
vapor in the form of hydrogen in a film or at the film-substrate interface. A nuclear
reaction between 19F and hydrogen yields 4He and ~ rays which can be detected
with a scintillation counter. The energy of the incoming fluorine atoms is uniformly
varied to change the penetration depth into the material so that the location of the
hydrogen atoms can be determined.
Allen et al. 31 have developed a new technique for detecting adsorbed gases or
liquids on a surface by exposing it to increasingly intense pulses of laser radiation.
The laser beam heats the surface, allowing materials to desorb and be detected in a
mass analyzer. Figure 15 shows data from such a desorption experiment.
One of the most important factors in obtaining high quality, low absorption,
defect-free films is a clean surface. It is very difficult to see particulate matter on the
surface of transparent substrates before they are coated, and it is also difficult to see
defects in transparent films. Temple 32 has developed a sensitive method for
observing the surfaces of transparent materials by total internal reflection micros-
copy (TIRM). Figure 16 shows how defects in a transparent SiO~ film are made
visible by this technique when they do not show under Nomarski illumination.
SCATTERING AND ABSORPTION LOSSES AT INTERFACES AND IN FILMS 41

~"UNDAMAGED SCRATCH

SUBSEQUENT LASER
DAMAGE
Z
t/)
_u $ Se •

8,<
O o| •
I-
O FILM
[ ABSORPTION
o.o13 _t_
l-
UNIDENTIFIED
ANt)

~T
uJ UNDAMAGED
GC

THIN FILM _, S U B S T R A T E
i-- -j - mI
o 7.5 13.0
POSITION (mm)
Fig.14. Photoacoustic spectroscopy measurements of thin film absorbing defects that were subsequently
damaged in a C O t laser beam (from ref. 29). The conclusions were as follows: all sites which were later
damaged were detected by photoacoustic spectroscopy; not all photoacoustic spectroscopy sites were
damaged, there was a poor correlation between the peak height and the damage level; not all
photoacoustic spectroscopy sites were identifiable using a microscope.

I ! i
l/1 MINIMUM
D A M A G E L E V E L "-D"

~6
I ¢qM
i
i
.J
¢.1
m
I 111 D A M A G E ~
~4 r THRESHOLD~ uu
Z
es
LU 2OO •
Z t~
gl
Z

O0
~2 DATA AVERAGED
OVER 4 SITES 10o
:S

0 i I I I I J I I 0
o ; 2 4 5 e
SHOT NUMBER

Fig. 15. Laser-stimulated desorption of water from calcium fluoride at 2.7 p m (data averaged over four
sites) (from ref. 31): - - -, energy density (each shot); - - , cumulative water signal.
42 J.M. BENNETT

Film Bare Film Bare

(a) ~ (b) I 100 ~tm |

Fig. 16. (a) TIRM and (b) Nomarski micrographs of an SiO2 film 0.35 Izm thick on fused silica (from
ref. 32).

5. CONCLUSIONS

I n c o n c l u s i o n , we h a v e d i s c u s s e d s c a t t e r i n g a n d a b s o r p t i o n in t h i n films a n d
s u b s t r a t e s a n d h a v e also d e s c r i b e d t e c h n i q u e s for m e a s u r i n g statistical p r o p e r t i e s o f
s u r f a c e s in o r d e r to p r e d i c t scattering.

REFERENCES

1 J.M. Elson and J. M. Bennett, Opt. Eng., 18 (1979) 116.

2 H.C. van de Hulst, Light Scattering by Small Particles, Wiley, New York, 1957, p. 270.
3 C. Orr, Jr., and J. M. Dallavalle, Fine Particle Measurement, Macmillan, New York, 1959, p. l 19.
4 H.E. Bennett and J. L. Stanford, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand., Sect. A, 80 (1976) 643.
5 J.M. Elson, J. P. Rahn and J. M. Bennett, Appl. Opt., 19 0980) 669.
6 J.M. Bennett and J. A. Detrio, Standard test method for measuring the effective surface roughness
of optical components by total integrated scattering, A STM Document 2A44, Draft 5, March 1984
(available from J. A. Detrio, University of Dayton Research Institute, 300 College Park Avenue,
Dayton, OH 45469, U.S.A.).
7 H.E. Bennett, Opt. Eng., 17 (1978) 480.
8 P.C. ArchibaldandH. E. Bennett, Opt. Eng.,17(1978)647.
9 P. Beckmann and A. Spizzichino, The Scattering of Electromagnetic Waves from Rough Surfaces,
Pergamon, Oxford, Sect. 12.2, 1963.
10 V.R. Weidner and J. J. Hsia, J. Opt. Soc. Am., 71 (1981) 856.
I1 J.M. Bennett, Appl. Opt., 15 (1976) 2705.
12 J.M. Bennett, D. K. Burge, J. P. Rahn and H. E. Bennett, Standards for opticalsurface quality using
total integrated scattering. In R. E. Fischer (ed.), Contemporary Optical Systems and Components
Specifications, Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng., 181 (1979) 124.
13 J.M. Bennett, J. M. Elson, and J. P. Rahn, Angle-resolved scattering: comparison of theory and
experiment. In J. R. Jacobsson (ed.), Thin Film Technologies, Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.,
401 (1983) 234.
14 J.M. Elson and J. M. Bennett, J. Opt. Soc. Am., 69 (1979) 31.
15 J.M. Elson, J. P. Rahn and J. M. Bennett, Appl. Opt., 22 (1983) 3207.
16 J.M. Bennett, H. H. Hurt, K. H. Guenther, M. Rasigni, G. Rasigni, F. Varnier, A. Llebaria and J. P.
Palmari, How is optical scattering related to the microstructure and topography of thin films?,
Optical Society of America Topical Meet. on Optical Interference Coatings, Monterey, CA, April
17-19. 1984.
SCATTERING AND ABSORPTION LOSSES AT INTERFACES AND IN FILMS 43

17 J. M. Elson, Theory of light scattering from a r o u g h ~ 0 ~ . w i t h an inhomogeneous dielectric

permittivity, Phys. Rev. B, 30 (1984) 5460.
18 J.M. Bennett, P. C. Archibald, J. P. Rahn and A. Klugman, Appl. Opt., 22 (1983) 4048.
19 J. M. Bennett, J. P. Rahn, P. C. Archibald and D. L. Decker, Specifying the surface finish of
diamond-turned optics--a study of the relation between surface profiles and scattering, Dig. Tech.
Papers of the Workshop on Optical Fabrication and Testing, Anaheim, CA, December 9-11, 1981.
20 J.M. Bennett and J. H. Dancy, Appl. Opt., 20 (1981) 1785.
21 M. Rasigni, G. Rasigni, J. P. Palmari and A. Llebaria, J. Opt. Soc. Am., 71 (1981) 1124, 1230.
22 G.E. Sommargren, Appl. 0pt.,20(1981)610.
23 K.H. Guenther, P, G. Wierer and J. M. Bennett, Surface roughness measurements of low scatter
mirrors and roughness standards, Appl. Opt., 23 (1984) 3820.
24 O.S. Heavens, Optical Properties of Thin Solid Films, Butterworths, London, 1955.
F. Abel6s, Optics of thin films. In A. C. S. Van Heel (ed.), Advanced Opiical Techniques, North-
Holland, Amsterdam, 1967, pp. 145-188.
25 P.A. Temple, Appl. Phys. Left., 34 (1979) 677.
26 D.L. Decker and P. A. Temple, The design and operation of a precise, high sensitivityadiabatic
laser calorimeter for window and mirror material evaluation. In A. J. Glass and A. H. Guenther
(eds.), Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials: 1977, NBS Spec. Publ. 509, December 1977,
pp. 281-285 (National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce).
27 P.A. Temple and D. P. Arndt, Bulk absorption measurements using prism-shaped samples for laser
calorimetry, 15th Annu. Symp. on Optical Materials for High Power Lasers, Boulder, CO, November
1983.
28 W.N. Hansen, J. Opt. Soc. Am., 69 (1979) 264.
29 R.P. Freese and K. J. Teegarden, Pre-pulse identification of localized laser damage sites in thin films
using photoacoustic spectroscopy. In H. E. Bennett, A. J. Glass, A. H. Guenther and B. E. Newnam
(eds.), Laser lnduced Damage in Optical Materials." 1979, NBS Spec. Publ. 568, July 1980,
pp. 313-332 (National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce).
30 T. M. Donovan, P. A. Temple, Shiu-Chin Wu and T. Tombrello, The relative importance of
interface and volume absorption by water in evaporated films. In H. E. Bennett, A. J. Glass, A. H.
Guenther and B. E. Newnam (eds.), Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials." 1979, NBS Spec.
Publ. 568, July 1980, pp. 237-246 (National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce).
31 S.D. Allen, J. O. Porteus, W. N. Faith and J. B. Franck, Contaminant and defect analysis of optical
surfaces by infrared laser-stimulated desorption. In H. E. Bennett, A. H. Guenther, D. Milam and
B. E. Newnam (eds.), Laser Induced Damage in Optical Materials." 1982, NBS Spec. Publ. 669,
January 1984, pp. 65-74 (National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce).
32 P.A. Temple, Appl. Opt., 20 (1981) 2656.

APPENDIX A

The equation for the differential power scattered per unit solid angle as a
function of optical and surface parameters is as follows AI.
ldP 16re2 | /32/ Zo 2 ,~ )
/~ ~ = - ~ c ° s 0 ° c ° s 2 0 - ~iq'--~qel2 ~ Iq 12 g(k-k°)
where P0 is the incident power, dP/df2 is the power scattered per solid angle, 00 is the
angle of incidence, 0 is the scattering angle, 8 is the dielectric constant of the surface
(~ --- N 2 where N = n - i k is the complex refractive index), g ( k - ko) is the surface
power spectral density function, k o and k are the incident and scattered wave vectors
given by
2~
ko = -~- sin 0o
44 J.M. BENNETT

2~
k = - f sin 0

and
2n
qo =-~-cOS0o

2~
q =-~--COS0

q' = e - k2~

qo' = e - ko2~

The general equations for X0and x* are

(q'qo' cos ~b- kkoe ) cos ~b' (2n/2)q' sin ~bsin ~b'
Xo = qo' + qoe -~ qo' + qo

2n ~
~qo' sin tp cos 4' (2n/2) cos ~bsin ~b']
Z* =--2-(" -qo'
- ' - +qo
'--~ qo' +qo
For scattering in the plane of incidence the general equations become
(q' qo'-- kko) cos 4'
Zo = qo' + qo e

2rr sin ~b'

X* = 2 qo' +qo
which give p-polarized incident and scattered light when ~b' = 0 and s-polarized
incident and scattered light when ~b' = n/2. These equations predict no s-polarized
scattered light for p-polarized incident light and vice versa.

Reference for Appendix A

Al J. M. Bennett,J. M. Elsonand J. P. Rahn, Angle-resolvedscattering:comparisonof theory and

experiment. In J. R. Jacobsson(ed.), Thin Film Technologies, Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.,
401 (1983) 234.