DOE OSTI2023
We present a hybrid frequency- and time-domain solution, applicable to the case of picosecond coherent anti-Stokes Raman scattering (CARS), for gas-phase diagnostics. A solution has been derived based on both physical arguments and four-wave mixing equations for picosecond CARS, with pulse durations that are comparable to the dephasing time scale for gas-phase Raman coherence—a regime where commonly employed solutions for impulsive (femtosecond) or cw (nanosecond) pump/Stokes forcing are not strictly valid. We present the ps-CARS spectrum in the form of incoherent sums of CARS intensity spectra, calculated from the fundamental solution for impulsive pump/Stokes Raman preparation. The solution was examined for temperatures from 1000–3000 K, for four plausible experimental configurations, with laser pulse durations of 50–150 ps, and probe pulse delays from −20 to 240 ps. Approximations based on cw and impulsive pump/Stokes preparation to fit picosecond CARS spectra at atmospheric pressure were examined and the relative thermometric accuracy and computational cost of these approximations were quantified for the case of a zero nonresonant CARS contribution, and a nonresonant susceptibility equal to 10% of the Raman-resonant value at the N 2 bandhead. The nanosecond CARS approximation can result in large fitting errors when the probe pulse time delay is less than the probe pulse duration. Errors as large as 10–20% are observed in the fit temperatures for a zero picosecond probe pulse delay, when the nonresonant background is neglected, largely due to an inability of the time-independent cw model to capture transient frequency spread dephasing effects at the Q -branch bandhead. The inclusion of a nonresonant background results in 40–60% thermometry errors with a nanosecond model at a zero-probe delay. Time-dependent impulsive calculations used for femtosecond CARS better approximate the structure of the N 2 bandhead, reducing temperature fitting errors to 5–10% at a short probe pulse delay. The impulsive approximation results in errors up to 10% at intermediate probe pulse delays, where the coherence of the pump and probe pulses leads to multiple terms in the picosecond CARS solution. Both approximations improve as the probe pulse delay exceeds the probe duration. The nanosecond approximation results in a 2–3% error, while the impulsive model results in differences of less than 1% in some cases. Fits to experimental data obtained using short, ∼60ps pulses at a zero probe time delay and longer 100 ps pulses at a substantial 200 ps delay are presented with accuracies of 1–3% in the fit temperature.