Skip to main content
Copper surface undergoing laser cleaning showing precise contamination removal
Ikmanda Roswati
Ikmanda RoswatiPh.D.Indonesia
Ultrafast photonics and laser-matter interaction
Published
Jan 6, 2026

Copper Laser Cleaning

Nanosecond 1064nm fiber laser cleaning removes copper oxide at @{0.22 J/cm²} to @{0.31 J/cm²} through thermomechanical delamination of the underlying copper substrate, not direct oxide absorption [1]. Copper oxide (Cu₂O, CuO) is nearly transparent at 1064nm with an extinction coefficient of only 0.005 to 0.03, so the laser cannot ablate it directly [2]. Surface melting begins below @{0.50 J/cm²}, making copper's effective cleaning window roughly 0.09 J/cm² wide — the narrowest among common industrial metals. For comparison, steel tolerates a window roughly 30× wider at the same wavelength, while even aluminum operates with more margin. This narrowness drives the parameter discipline required across every copper cleaning application, from EV busbars to semiconductor tooling. (Sciancalepore et al. (2015); Kantor et al. (1997); LACONA / Cooper et al. (2007))

Remove Copper Oxide for Wire Bonding and Electronics in Three Steps

1Confirm oxide type, safety controls, and whether the surface qualifies
  • DISQUALIFIER: Laser cleaning is not suitable for bare bright copper with no oxide layer present. If the surface reflectance exceeds 80% at 1064 nm, the copper is unoxidized and the thermomechanical delamination mechanism cannot operate — clean, bright copper must have an oxide or tarnish layer for laser cleaning to work.
  • Copper's high 1064 nm surface reflectance (95%) creates a back-reflection hazard per ANSI Z136.1 [7]. A controlled access area, OD-rated eye protection, and beam barriers must be confirmed before any copper surface is cleaned or tested. Systems must use an optical isolator to protect the laser amplifier from back-reflected energy.
  • Identify the oxide type: cuprous oxide (Cu₂O) forms in oxygen-limited, lower-temperature environments; cupric oxide (CuO) forms at higher temperatures. Each phase responds differently to 1064 nm within the 0.22 to 0.31 J/cm² cleaning range [1].
2Verify copper's cleaning window through test patches
  • Copper's 0.09 J/cm² process window between oxide removal completion at @{0.31 J/cm²} and surface melting onset below @{0.50 J/cm²} is the narrowest among non-ferrous metals [1]. Surface oxidation from beam overlap (cuprite and tenorite formation) is the specific failure mode above the damage onset.
  • Higher repetition rates with shorter pulse settings improve oxide removal efficiency while maintaining surface roughness near Ra 0.3 µm [3]. Test patches must confirm the cleaning window is hit consistently before production surfaces are committed.
  • For electronics applications requiring IPC-A-610 cleanliness, validate on witness coupons: bare metal copper should be uniform copper-pink. Any iridescence (blue, purple, gold, green tints) indicates re-oxidation and the part must be re-processed before assembly.
3Contact Z-Beam for parameter validation and on-site service
  • Z-Beam confirms ANSI Z136.1 Class 4 laser controls and back-reflection mitigation before any copper cleaning mobilization, serving Bay Area electrical equipment shops, EV busbar fabricators, electronics assembly facilities, and plumbing contractors on-site.
  • Each copper scope produces a compliance log with back-reflection mitigation confirmation, oxide characterization record, and before/after surface condition documentation, with parameters validated for Cu₂O and CuO removal at the target surface condition.
Sources(2 references)
  1. Laser Cleaning Tests on Archaeological Copper Alloys Using an ND:YAG Laser, Laser Chemistry, 2006 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²
  2. LACONA VI: Lasers in the Conservation of Artworks, Springer, 2007 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²

Regulatory Standards

Contractors already set up for steel laser cleaning meet all copper fume requirements without additional investment — Cal/OSHA CCR T8 §5155 Table AC-1 sets the copper fume PEL at 0.1 mg/m³ (8-hour TWA), a threshold that HEPA extraction and P100 respirators standard for steel work satisfy [4]. (ANSI Z136.1; Laser Cleaning Tests on Archaeological Copper; LACONA VI: Lasers in the Conservation of; FDA; IEC)

Sources(7 references)
  1. California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 5155. Airborne Contaminants. California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Occupational Safety and Health. — Copper fume (as Cu) Permissible exposure limit (PEL) is 0.1 mg/m³ (8-hour Time-weighted average (TWA)); Cal/OSHA §5155 Table AC-1 matches federal standard.
  2. American National Standards Institute. ANSI Z136.1-2022, Safe Use of Lasers. Laser Institute of America. — Standard for safe use of lasers, including Class 4 laser controls and back-reflection mitigation requirements.
  3. Laser Cleaning Tests on Archaeological Copper Alloys Using an ND:YAG Laser, Laser Chemistry, 2006 — Copper: 0.22–0.31 J/cm²
  4. LACONA VI: Lasers in the Conservation of Artworks, Springer, 2007 — Copper: 0.22–0.31 J/cm²
  5. 21 CFR 1040.10 — Performance Standards for Light-Emitting Products (Laser Products)
  6. IEC 60825 — Safety of Laser Products
  7. 29 CFR 1926.102 — Eye and Face Protection

FAQ

  • Why does cleaning copper require tighter parameter control than cleaning steel?

    Copper's usable energy level window at 1064 nm is only 0.09 J/cm² wide — from oxide removal onset at @{0.22 J/cm²} to surface melt onset below @{0.50 J/cm²} [1]. Steel's window is roughly 3 J/cm² wide at the same wavelength. That 30× narrower window means any energy level drift on copper crosses into surface damage territory, while steel tolerates the same drift safely. The narrow window requires conservative operation at 0.25 to 0.30 J/cm² with. (Sciancalepore et al. (2015); Kantor et al. (1997); LACONA / Cooper et al. (2007))

  • Can a steel-cleaning laser also clean copper PCB pads and wire bonds?

    A steel-cleaning laser can clean copper PCB pads and wire bonds, but only if it can dial down to the 0.22 to 0.31 J/cm² copper oxide removal range [1]. Many high-power industrial units optimized for steel at 1.5 to 4.5 J/cm² cannot reach copper's energy level reliably. The critical cleanliness standard for wire-bond surfaces is IPC-A-610 [8], which requires tarnish-free, oxide-free bond pad surfaces. Gross et al. (2016) demonstrated that copper oxide smears under ultrasonic. (Kantor et al. (1997))

  • What causes rainbow discoloration on copper after laser cleaning?

    Copper's rainbow iridescence after laser cleaning is thin-film re-oxidation [2]. When energy level exceeds @{0.31 J/cm²}, the bare copper surface heats enough to oxidize in air before cooling, producing 20 to 200 nm interference film layers that create visible structural color. At the correct operating range (@{0.22 to 0.31 J/cm²}), re-oxidation is minimal and the surface retains copper-pink bare-metal color. Iridescence visible immediately after cleaning resolves within minutes in still air or immediately with a. (Kantor et al. (1997))

  • Does BAAQMD regulate copper fume from on-site laser cleaning in the Bay Area?

    No Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) permit beyond standard particulate rules is required for on-site copper laser cleaning. BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 15, which covers toxic metals emissions, applies to non-ferrous metal melting furnaces only — it does not regulate laser surface cleaning of copper sheet, pipe, busbars, or circuit boards. The applicable rule for outdoor copper laser cleaning is BAAQMD Regulation 6 (Particulate Matter), which does not require an individual permit below.

Process Window

Safe operating fluence window relative to ablation and damage thresholds for Copper Laser Cleaning.

Cited sources: 1007-lacona-2007, 1016-mechanism-2020, 1155-tests-2006, matweb-material-propertiesFluence (J/cm²)Copper1.5 J/cm²4.0 J/cm²Bronze1.5 J/cm²4.0 J/cm²Brass1.5 J/cm²4.0 J/cm²Aluminum2.0 J/cm²5.0 J/cm²0 J/cm²2 J/cm²4 J/cm²6 J/cm²
  • This material (highlighted)
  • Other materials in this group
Safe operating fluence window relative to ablation and damage thresholds for Copper Laser Cleaning.
Sources(2 references)
  1. Laser Cleaning Tests on Archaeological Copper Alloys Using an ND:YAG Laser, Laser Chemistry, 2006 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²
  2. LACONA VI: Lasers in the Conservation of Artworks, Springer, 2007 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²

Laser-Material Interaction

Copper oxide is nearly transparent at 1064nm (extinction coefficient 0.005 to 0.03), so nanosecond fiber laser cleaning works through indirect surface heating, not direct oxide cleaning [2]. The laser heats the copper surface through the transparent oxide layer; thermomechanical expansion from below delaminates the oxide off the surface. Kantor et al. (1997) established that oxide removal begins at @{0.22 J/cm²} and reaches completion at @{0.31 J/cm²} [1]. Surface melting onset occurs below @{0.50 J/cm²} — the effective cleaning window between complete oxide removal and surface damage is roughly 0.09 J/cm² wide, the narrowest among non-ferrous metals [1]. Re-oxidation after nanosecond cleaning produces a ~100 nm Cu₂O film in ambient air; nitrogen atmosphere during cleaning eliminates this discoloration [2]. The mechanism is the same substrate-driven thermomechanical delamination documented in Nd:YAG museum conservation of copper-alloy artifacts since the 1990s (LACONA / Cooper et al. (2007)) [6].

Copper oxide is nearly transparent at 1064nm (extinction coefficient 0.005 to 0.03), so nanosecond fiber laser cleaning works through indirect surface heating, not direct oxide cleaning [2]. The laser heats the copper surface through the transparent oxide layer; thermomechanical expansion from below delaminates the oxide off the surface. Kantor et al. (1997) established that oxide removal begins at @{0.22 J/cm²} and reaches completion at @{0.31 J/cm²} [1]. Surface melting onset occurs below @{0.50 J/cm²} — the effective cleaning window between complete oxide removal and surface damage is roughly 0.09 J/cm² wide, the narrowest among non-ferrous metals [1]. Re-oxidation after nanosecond cleaning produces a ~100 nm Cu₂O film in ambient air; nitrogen atmosphere during cleaning eliminates this discoloration [2]. The mechanism is the same substrate-driven thermomechanical delamination documented in Nd:YAG museum conservation of [copper-alloy](/materials/bronze-laser-cleaning) artifacts since the 1990s (LACONA / Cooper et al. (2007)) [6].

Thermal Destruction

1,358
K
0
1,358
2,716

Laser Absorption

0.035
0
0.035
0.07

Thermal Diffusivity

0
m²/s
0
0
0

Specific Heat

385
J/(kg·K)
0
385
770

Laser Reflectivity

0.95
0
0.95
1.9
Sources(7 references)
  1. Sciancalepore, C. et al. (2015) Laser cleaning of copper: influence of laser parameters on the process. Applied Surface Science, 331, 490-496. — Cu₂O and CuO have extinction coefficient 0.005-0.03 at 1064 nm; re-oxidation after ns cleaning produces ~100 nm Cu₂O film.
  2. Gross, T. et al. (2016) Effect of Different Oxide Layers on the Ultrasonic Copper Wire Bond Process. IMAPS 2016, 49th International Symposium on Microelectronics. — Copper oxide smears rather than cracks under ultrasonic bonding force; aluminum oxide self-clears during bonding, copper oxide does not.
  3. IPC (2021) IPC-A-610H, Acceptability of Electronic Assemblies. IPC International. — Defines Class 1/2/3 surface cleanliness acceptance criteria for PCB copper pads and traces; copper bond pads must be oxide-free before soldering.
  4. Kantor, Z. et al. (1997) Q-switched Nd:YAG laser cleaning of copper and its alloys. Applied Surface Science, 109-110, 431-436. — Oxide removal begins at 0.22 J/cm² and completes at 0.31 J/cm²; surface melting onset below 0.5 J/cm² for copper alloys at 1064 nm.
  5. Cooper, M. et al. (2007) Laser cleaning of copper and its alloys: Nd:YAG 1064nm Q-switched nanosecond regime. LACONA VII, Proceedings of the International Conference on Lasers in the Conservation of Artworks, Madrid. — Same Nd:YAG 1064nm Q-switched nanosecond laser technique used for industrial copper cleaning has been validated in museum conservation of bronze sculptures since LACONA I (Florence, 1994).
  6. Laser Cleaning Tests on Archaeological Copper Alloys Using an ND:YAG Laser, Laser Chemistry, 2006 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²
  7. LACONA VI: Lasers in the Conservation of Artworks, Springer, 2007 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²

Quick Facts

Key parameters and properties for Copper Laser Cleaning.

ParameterValue
Equipment operating range0.5–1.5 J/cm² (Light contamination)
Operating point (20% below ceiling)1.2 J/cm²
Cal/OSHA TWA0.1 mg/m³
Sources(3 references)
  1. MatWeb Material Property Data — Online Materials Information Resource — Copper: 210 MPa
  2. Laser Cleaning Tests on Archaeological Copper Alloys Using an ND:YAG Laser, Laser Chemistry, 2006 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²
  3. LACONA VI: Lasers in the Conservation of Artworks, Springer, 2007 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²

Failure Modes

What can go wrong and how to avoid it when laser cleaning Copper Laser Cleaning.

ConditionConsequence
High reflectivity of polished copper causing beam reflection hazard[1],[2]Reflected beam directed into unintended area; operator eye hazard and adjacent workpiece damage
Copper surface oxidation (cuprite/tenorite) discoloration from beam overlap at elevated fluence[1],[2]Visible discoloration on bare copper surface; cosmetic and preparation failure requiring re-cleaning
Sources(2 references)
  1. Laser Cleaning Tests on Archaeological Copper Alloys Using an ND:YAG Laser, Laser Chemistry, 2006 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²
  2. LACONA VI: Lasers in the Conservation of Artworks, Springer, 2007 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²

Laser-Material Interaction

Copper oxide is nearly transparent at 1064nm (extinction coefficient 0.005 to 0.03), so nanosecond fiber laser cleaning works through indirect surface heating, not direct oxide cleaning [2]. The laser heats the copper surface through the transparent oxide layer; thermomechanical expansion from below delaminates the oxide off the surface. Kantor et al. (1997) established that oxide removal begins at @{0.22 J/cm²} and reaches completion at @{0.31 J/cm²} [1]. Surface melting onset occurs below @{0.50 J/cm²} — the effective cleaning window between complete oxide removal and surface damage is roughly 0.09 J/cm² wide, the narrowest among non-ferrous metals [1]. Re-oxidation after nanosecond cleaning produces a ~100 nm Cu₂O film in ambient air; nitrogen atmosphere during cleaning eliminates this discoloration [2]. The mechanism is the same substrate-driven thermomechanical delamination documented in Nd:YAG museum conservation of copper-alloy artifacts since the 1990s (LACONA / Cooper et al. (2007)) [6].

Bar chart: J/cm²Ablation ThresholdAluminum3.34 J/cm²Bronze1.80 J/cm²Brass0.45 J/cm²Copper0.22 J/cm²0.001.002.003.00This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: J/cm²Damage ThresholdAluminum5.00 J/cm²Brass4.00 J/cm²Bronze4.00 J/cm²Copper4.00 J/cm²0.001.002.003.004.005.00This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: ratio (0–1)Laser AbsorptionBrass0.12 ratio (0–1)Bronze0.10 ratio (0–1)Aluminum0.09 ratio (0–1)Copper0.04 ratio (0–1)0.000.050.100.150.20This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: ratio (0–1)Laser ReflectivityCopper0.95 ratio (0–1)Brass0.94 ratio (0–1)Bronze0.01 ratio (0–1)Aluminum—0.000.200.400.600.801.00This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: ratio (0–1)AbsorptivityBrass0.38 ratio (0–1)Bronze0.35 ratio (0–1)Aluminum—Copper—0.000.100.200.300.40This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: ratio (0–1)ReflectivityBronze0.65 ratio (0–1)Brass0.62 ratio (0–1)Aluminum—Copper—0.000.200.400.60This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: m⁻¹Absorption CoefficientBrass6700.0k m⁻¹Bronze5.50 m⁻¹Aluminum—Copper—0.002000.0k4000.0k6000.0kThis materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: W/m·KThermal ConductivityCopper400 W/m·KBrass109 W/m·KBronze60.0 W/m·KAluminum—0.00100200300400This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: m²/sThermal DiffusivityBronze22.0 m²/sCopper0.00 m²/sBrass0.00 m²/sAluminum—0.0010.020.030.0This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: J/(kg·K)Specific HeatBrass385 J/(kg·K)Copper385 J/(kg·K)Bronze380 J/(kg·K)Aluminum—0.00100200300400This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: 10^{-6}/KThermal ExpansionBronze18.0 10^{-6}/KBrass0.00 10^{-6}/KAluminum—Copper—0.005.0010.015.0This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: KThermal DestructionCopper1.4k KBronze1.2k KBrass1.2k KAluminum933 K0.005001.0kThis materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: °CDestruction PointBronze950 °CBrass920 °CAluminum—Copper—0.00200400600800This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: °CThermal Shock ResistanceBrass180 °CBronze150 °CAluminum—Copper—0.0050.0100150200This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: PaVapor PressureBrass1.33 PaBronze0.14 PaAluminum—Copper—0.000.501.001.50This materialOther materials in subcategory
Sources(7 references)
  1. Sciancalepore, C. et al. (2015) Laser cleaning of copper: influence of laser parameters on the process. Applied Surface Science, 331, 490-496. — Cu₂O and CuO have extinction coefficient 0.005-0.03 at 1064 nm; re-oxidation after ns cleaning produces ~100 nm Cu₂O film.
  2. Gross, T. et al. (2016) Effect of Different Oxide Layers on the Ultrasonic Copper Wire Bond Process. IMAPS 2016, 49th International Symposium on Microelectronics. — Copper oxide smears rather than cracks under ultrasonic bonding force; aluminum oxide self-clears during bonding, copper oxide does not.
  3. IPC (2021) IPC-A-610H, Acceptability of Electronic Assemblies. IPC International. — Defines Class 1/2/3 surface cleanliness acceptance criteria for PCB copper pads and traces; copper bond pads must be oxide-free before soldering.
  4. Kantor, Z. et al. (1997) Q-switched Nd:YAG laser cleaning of copper and its alloys. Applied Surface Science, 109-110, 431-436. — Oxide removal begins at 0.22 J/cm² and completes at 0.31 J/cm²; surface melting onset below 0.5 J/cm² for copper alloys at 1064 nm.
  5. Cooper, M. et al. (2007) Laser cleaning of copper and its alloys: Nd:YAG 1064nm Q-switched nanosecond regime. LACONA VII, Proceedings of the International Conference on Lasers in the Conservation of Artworks, Madrid. — Same Nd:YAG 1064nm Q-switched nanosecond laser technique used for industrial copper cleaning has been validated in museum conservation of bronze sculptures since LACONA I (Florence, 1994).
  6. Laser Cleaning Tests on Archaeological Copper Alloys Using an ND:YAG Laser, Laser Chemistry, 2006 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²
  7. LACONA VI: Lasers in the Conservation of Artworks, Springer, 2007 — Copper: 1.5–4 J/cm²

Material Characteristics

Copper's pulsed laser cleaning window at 1064nm is roughly 0.09 J/cm² wide — narrower than any other common industrial metal. The physics compress that window from both sides simultaneously: Sciancalepore et al. (2015) documented that the oxide layers being removed (Cu₂O and CuO) are nearly transparent to 1064nm light with an extinction coefficient of only 0.005 to 0.03 [2], and the base metal is highly reflective (@{95%} at 1064nm) and thermally conductive (@{400 W/m·K}), conducting heat away from the surface before it can contribute to delamination [1]. Copper's high surface reflectance also creates a back-reflection hazard: reflected energy can fault the laser source itself, which is why systems built for copper and brass, such as the Maxphotonics MFPT-500W, add a high-performance optical isolator to protect the amplifier on reflective non-ferrous metals.

Bar chart: kg/m³DensityCopper9.0k kg/m³Bronze8.8k kg/m³Brass8.5k kg/m³Aluminum2.7k kg/m³0.002.0k4.0k6.0k8.0kThis materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: GPaHardnessBronze100 GPaBrass65.0 GPaCopper40.0 GPaAluminum0.95 GPa0.0020.040.060.080.0100This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: MPaTensile StrengthBronze400 MPaBrass315 MPaAluminum276 MPaCopper210 MPa0.00100200300400This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: GPaYoung's ModulusBrass110 GPaBronze110 GPaAluminum—Copper—0.0025.050.075.0100125This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: MPa√mFracture ToughnessBrass52.0 MPa√mBronze52.0 MPa√mAluminum—Copper—0.0020.040.060.0This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: MPaFlexural StrengthBronze450 MPaBrass379 MPaAluminum—Copper—0.00100200300400This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: MPaCompressive StrengthBrass345 MPaBronze345 MPaAluminum—Copper—0.00100200300This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: index (0–1)Oxidation ResistanceBrass478 index (0–1)Bronze8.00 index (0–1)Aluminum—Copper—0.00100200300400500This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: index (0–1)Corrosion ResistanceBronze7.00 index (0–1)Brass0.75 index (0–1)Aluminum—Copper—0.002.004.006.00This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: J/cm²Laser Damage ThresholdAluminum5.00 J/cm²Brass4.00 J/cm²Bronze4.00 J/cm²Copper4.00 J/cm²0.001.002.003.004.005.00This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: fraction (0–1)PorosityBronze0.01 fraction (0–1)Brass0.00 fraction (0–1)Aluminum—Copper—0.000.020.040.060.080.10This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: Ω·mElectrical ResistivityBrass0.00 Ω·mBronze0.00 Ω·mAluminum—Copper—0.000.020.040.060.080.10This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: S/mElectrical ConductivityCopper59600.0k S/mBrass15900.0k S/mBronze6960.0k S/mAluminum—0.0020000.0k40000.0kThis materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: °CMelting PointCopper1.1k °CBronze950 °CBrass930 °CAluminum660 °C0.002505007501.0kThis materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: KBoiling PointBronze2.8k KBrass2.0k KAluminum—Copper—0.001.0k2.0kThis materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: μmSurface RoughnessBrass1.60 μmAluminum0.80 μmBronze0.80 μmCopper—0.000.501.001.502.00This materialOther materials in subcategory
Sources(1 reference)
  1. MatWeb Material Property Data — Online Materials Information Resource — Copper: 210 MPa

Machine Settings

Copper demands tighter parameter control than any other common industrial metal. The gap between first oxide removal at @{0.22 J/cm²} and surface melting onset below @{0.50 J/cm²} is roughly 0.09 J/cm² wide, leaving no margin for energy level drift [1]. Operate conservatively at @{0.25 J/cm²} to @{0.30 J/cm²} with multiple passes rather than a single high-energy pass. For electronics applications where iridescence is unacceptable, validate parameters on witness coupons to confirm copper-pink bare metal color before production runs. Jach et al. (2025) confirmed that higher repetition rates at correct energy level maintained surface roughness near Ra (surface roughness) 0.3 µm and avoided visible discoloration on Cu-ETP copper [3].

Bar chart: nmWavelengthAluminum1.1k nmBrass1.1k nmBronze1.1k nmCopper1.1k nm0.002505007501.0kThis materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: μmSpot SizeAluminum300 μmBrass200 μmBronze200 μmCopper200 μm0.00100200300This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: nsPulse WidthAluminum50.0 nsCopper50.0 nsBronze20.0 nsBrass10.0 ns0.0010.020.030.040.050.0This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: kHzFrequencyAluminum50.0 kHzCopper50.0 kHzBrass30.0 kHzBronze30.0 kHz0.0010.020.030.040.050.0This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: mm/sScan SpeedBronze2.0k mm/sCopper2.0k mm/sAluminum—Brass—0.005001.0k1.5k2.0kThis materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: %Overlap RatioCopper60.0 %Bronze50.0 %Aluminum30.0 %Brass15.0 %0.0020.040.060.0This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: passesPass CountAluminum2.00 passesBrass2.00 passesBronze2.00 passesCopper2.00 passes0.000.501.001.502.00This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: WLaser PowerAluminum100 WBrass100 WBronze100 WCopper100 W0.0020.040.060.080.0100This materialOther materials in subcategory
Bar chart: WPower (Alt.)Bronze200 WCopper200 WAluminum100 WBrass100 W0.0050.0100150200This materialOther materials in subcategory
Sources(3 references)
  1. Jach, K. et al. (2025) Effect of Nanosecond Laser Cleaning and Oxidation on the Surface Properties of Cu-ETP Copper. MDPI Coatings, 15(4), 383. — Higher repetition rates at correct energy level maintained Ra ~0.3 µm and avoided visible discoloration on Cu-ETP copper.
  2. The theory and application of nanosecond Laser surface treatment technology: A review — Source data for Netalux Kamino 300 — maxPower
  3. Research Progress and Challenges in Laser-Controlled Coating Removal — Source data for Netalux Kamino 300 — maxPower
Professional Laser Cleaning
See pricing and how it works
Equipment Rental
State of the Art equipment for your projects
(650) 590-5040
Z-Beam service van
Let's Talk