No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Modeling the KrF laser discharge
1.J. J. Ewing and C. A. Brau, Appl. Phys. Lett. 27, 350 (1975).
2.G. C. Tisone, A. K. Hays, and J. M. Hoffman, Opt. Commun. 15, 188 (1975).
3.M. L. Bhaumik, R. S. Bradford, and E. R. Ault, Appl. Phys. Lett. 28, 23 (1976).
4.J. A. Mangano and J. H. Jacob, Appl. Phys. Lett. 27, 495 (1975).
5.C. A. Brau and J. J. Ewing (unpublished).
6.At fractional metastable populations of metastable ionization begins to dominate. The metastable production efficiency, however, is not affected until the fractional population reaches
7.The possibility of the excited species having a strong effect on the discharge physics was brought to our attention by P. W. Hoff.
8.In our code we have assumed that excitation of to higher‐lying levels will result in an electron energy loss of 1.6 eV. This assumption is valid if the higher‐lying levels are rapidly quenched (by three‐body processes) back to
9.By a perturbation analysis of the nonlinear rate equations, it can be shown that the discharge will be stable if the attachment rate is greater than or equal to twice the equilibrium metastable ionization rate. See J. D. Daugherty, J. Mangano, and J. H. Jacob, Appl. Phys. Lett. 28, 581 (1976).
10.C. A. Brau and J. J. Ewing, J. Chem. Phys. 63, 4640 (1975).
11.H. Hyman (private communication).
12.R. H. McFarland and J. D. Kinney, Phys. Rev. 137, 1058 (1965).
13.The shape of the total excitation cross section was obtained from H. S. W. Massey and E. H. S. Burhop, in Electric and Ionic Impact Phenomena (Oxford U.P., London, 1969), Vol. I, p. 259.
13.To obtain the amplitude of the cross section we used the Boltzmann code. The amplitude shown in Fig. 1 gave the best fit to the first Townsend coefficient that was measured by D. E. Golden and L. H. Fisher, Phys. Rev. 123, 1079 (1961).
14.D. Rapp and P. Englander‐Golden, J. Chem. Phys. 43, 1464 (1965).
15.L. S. Frost and A. V. Phelps, Phys. Rev. 127, 1621 (1962).
16.The effects of fluorine on the secondary electron distribution have not been included since the electron impact excitation cross section is not known. The electron impact cross sections of could be large enough to change the predictions of Figs. 2–4 by as much as 20%. When we ran mixtures of 99.7% Ar and the Boltzmann code predicted that 20% of the discharge energy was absorbed by —mainly by the electronic levels.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month
Most cited this month