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.
A model for the plasma‐activated chemical vapor deposition process
1.P. Geittner, D. Küppers, and H. Lydtin, Appl. Phys. Lett. 28, 11 (1976).
2.D. Küppers, J. Koenings, and H. Wilson, J. Electrochem. Soc. 123, 1079 (1976).
3.D. Küppers, Seventh International Conference on Chemical Vapor Deposition 1979, The Electrochemical Society, Princeton, NJ, p. 159.
4.D. Küppers, and H. Lydtin, Topics in Current Chemistry (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1980), Vol. 89, p. 107.
5.P. Geittner, CVD IX Conference Cincinatti Ohio, May 1984:
5.J. Electrochem Soc. 84, 479 (1984), Conf. Proc.
6.H. Brauer and D. Mewes, Stoffaustausch (Verlag Sauerländer Aarau and Frankfurt am Main, 1972), p. 108.
7.V. G. Levich, Physicochemical Hydrodynamics (Prentice‐Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1962), p. 51.
8.A simple sum rule expressing particle conservation has been used to check Eq. (36). The total number of molecules that have been dissociated inside the plasma zone is equal to the total number of molecules that have been deposited on the surface of the tube, i.e.,
9.S. Veprek, J. Crystal Growth 17, 101 (1972).
10.I. M. Gelfand and G. E. Shilov, Generalized Functions (Academic, New York, 1964), p. 34.
11.The delta function defined here is not an even function. Representations of this type are also used when the Laplace tranform fo the delta function is determined. E. Butkov. Mathematical Physics (Addison‐Wesley, Reading, MA, 1968), p. 232.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month
Most cited this month