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.
Low Energy Electron Attachment to Ozone using Swarm Techniques
1.R. K. Curran, J. Chem. Phys. 35, 1849 (1961).
2.P. J. Chantry (private communication).
3.F. C. Fehsenfeld, A. L. Schmeltekopf, H. I. Schiff, and E. E. Ferguson, Planetary Space Sci. 15, 373 (1967);
3.F. C. Fehsenfeld and E. E. Ferguson, Planetary Space Sci. 16, 701 (1968)., Planet. Space Sci.
4.W. S. Knapp and P. G. Fisher (private communication).
5.R. E. Lelevier and L. M. Branscomb, J. Geophys. Res. 73, 27 (1968).
6.P. Harteck, S. Dondes, and B. Thompson, Science 147, 393 (1965).
7.J. L. Moruzzi and A. V. Phelps, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 13, 209 (1968).
8.R. D. Hake, Jr. and A. V. Phelps, Phys. Rev. 158, 70 (1967).
8.This reference contains a summary of experimental values of the characteristic energy and the drift velocity of electrons in Note that the cross sections for vibrational excitation used in the present calculation of the electron energy distribution functions are considerably revised from those of this reference in order to take into account the work of D. Andrick, D. Danner, and H. Ehrhardt (private communication)
8.M. J. W. Boness and G. J. Schulz, Phys. Rev. Letters 21, 1031 (1968),
8.and D. Spence and G. J. Schulz (private communication). The calculated electron transport coefficients are unchanged and the differences in the electron energy distribution functions are small.
9.Pen Ray Model 11‐SC‐2, Ultra Violet Products, Inc., San Gabriel, Calif. Reproducible pulsing was obtained using a pulse lasting
10.L. M. Chanin, A. V. Phelps, and M. A. Biondi, Phys. Rev. 128, 219 (1962).
11.Two Model 122 Amplifiers, Tektronics, Inc.
12.J. L. Moruzzi and A. V. Phelps, Rev. Sci. Instr. 40, 461 (1969).
12.The last two sentences of the caption to Fig. 2 of this reference should read: The conditions for these waveforms were a total pressure of 24.2 torr and a partial pressure of of with an electric field E to total pressure value of The amplifier gain used for curve (b) is significantly lower than for curves (c) and (d).
13.The term “rapid evaporation” here refers to the simple technique of placing a known weight of aluminum on a filament at the proper distance from the target to give the desired film thickness and raising the temperature sufficiently high to completely evaporate the aluminum. This kind of evaporation takes place in a fraction of a second and produces a poor photocathode. The slow evaporations were performed by S. Scuro and B. Blankenship using a piezeoelectric microbalance to determine when the desired thickness had been obtained. Other cathode materials, such as gold, were less stable and less efficient than aluminum.
14.F. Kaufman (private communication).
15.Attempts to passivate the collector flange and feedthroughs of the original drift tube using Teflon coatings were only partially successful.
16.Different samples of Kovar vary greatly in their destruction rates. Some samples exhibit virtually no destruction while others cause very rapid destruction of It was found that most Kovar could be passivated by boiling it in 5%–10% hydrogen peroxide followed by several hours exposure to ozone. After an accidental electrical breakdown in an mixture, the destruction rate became very large. It was possible to restore the original low ozone destruction rate by etching the glass parts with HF, etching the major stainless‐steel parts with a mixture of HF and and boiling the entire system in Kovar should not be treated with since Kovar treated with bright dips containing could not be passivated by
17.MKS Baratron Type 77, MKS Instruments Inc., Burlington, Mass. The standard Baratron has evaporated nickel electrodes with silver‐paint connections to the feedthroughs. The Baratron used here had evaporated gold electrodes with gold‐paint connections.
18.E. C. Y. Inn and Y. Tanaka, Advan. Chem. Ser. 21, 263 (1959).
19.A. G. Hearn, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London) 78, 932 (1961).
20.W. B. DeMore and O. Raper, J. Phys. Chem. 68, 412 (1964).
21.M. Griggs, J. Chem. Phys. 49, 857 (1968).
22.E. Vigroux, Ann. Geophys. 25, 169 (1969).
23.J. L. Pack, R. E. Voshall, and A. V. Phelps, Phys. Rev. 127, 2084 (1962).
24.M. T. Elford, Australian J. Phys. 19, 629 (1966).
25.L. S. Frost and A. V. Phelps, Phys. Rev. 127, 1621 (1962).
26.R. W. Warren and J. H. Parker, Jr., Phys. Rev. 128, 2661 (1962).
27.J. L. Pack and A. V. Phelps, J. Chem. Phys. 44, 1870 (1966).
28.W. H. Kasner and A. V. Phelps (unpublished).
28.The technique used is that described by J. L. Moruzzi and A. V. Phelps, J. Chem. Phys. 45, 4617 (1966).
29.The calculations for thermal electrons were made by assuming the attachment cross section to be given by so that the rate coefficient in cubic centimeters/second is where ε and are in electron volts and a is in square centimeters
30.The discontinuous form of the solid curve in Fig. 9 at energies below 0.01 eV is introduced in order to satisfy the requirements of our computer program for a finite threshold for an inelastic process. Since the calculated rate coefficients at above 0.02 eV are not very sensitive to this structure, our results are equally consistent with a smoothly varying attachment cross section passing through the origin and having approximately the same average value as the curve of Fig. 9 for energies below 0.02 eV, e.g., as given by Eq. (3) or as in Ref. 31.
31.Almost as good a fit is obtained with and
32.L. H. Weeks and L. G. Smith, J. Geophys. Res. 73, 4835 (1968).
33.COSPAR International Reference Atmosphere 1965 (North‐Holland, Amsterdam, 1965).
34.G. P. Anderson, C. A. Barth, F. Cayla, and J. London, Ann. Geophys. 25, 341 (1969);
34.L. H. Weeks and L. G. Smith, Planetary Space Sci. 16, 1189 (1968).
35.E. I. Reed, J. Geophys. Res. 73, 2951 (1968).
36.A. V. Phelps, Can. J. Chem. 47, 1783 (1969).
37.An elevated electron “temperature” has been postulated to explain the increased radio‐frequency absorption observed during auroral events. See G. C. Beid, J. Geophys. Res. 69, 3296 (1964).
37.However, recently analyzed measurements suggest that the ozone density decreases significantly during a PCA event. See L. H. Weeks, COSPAR Symposium on, November 1969 Solar Particle Event, Boston, June 1971.
38.R. S. Narcisi, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 15, 518 (1970) and private communication.
39.E. E. Ferguson, Can. J. Chem. 47, 1815 (1969)
39.and F. C. Fehsenfeld, E. E. Ferguson and D. K. Bohme, Planetary Space Sci. 17, 1759 (1969).
39.For a recent review see E. W. McDaniel et al., Ion‐Molecule Reactions (Wiley, New York, 1970), Chap. 6.
40.K. Takayanagi, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 21, 507 (1966).
41.D. J. McCaa and J. H. Shaw, J. Mol. Spectry. 25, 374 (1968).
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month
Most cited this month