ABSTRACT
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
One reason stems from the fact that aer the polishing process of optical components, even good-quality polishing process, there are residual scratches, defects, and imperfections on the surface. In both cases, there are dierent ways of dening the damage phenomenon. One might dene damage as the physical appearance of a defect in the material or by a degradation in the output performance of the laser system. From the point of view of the user, the performance deterioration and the lifetime of the optics are of more importance than the physical appearance of a defect in the material. e occurrence of a small defect does not systematically alter the laser performance. It is then crucial to determine whether the damage site remains constant or increases with time.
