1887
banner image
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.
Improved volume-averaged model for steady and pulsed-power electronegative discharges
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1116/1.2345645
/content/avs/journal/jvsta/24/6/10.1116/1.2345645
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/avs/journal/jvsta/24/6/10.1116/1.2345645

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Edge-to-center positive ion density ratio vs at for , , and : (a) from Eq. (2), (b) from Eq. (3), (c) from Eq. (4), and circles from Eq. (7).

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Edge-to-center positive ion density ratio vs at for , , and : (a) from Eq. (2), (b) from Eq. (3), (c) from Eq. (4), and circles from Eq. (7).

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Edge-to-center positive ion density ratio vs at for , 25, and : (a) from Eq. (2), (b) from Eq. (3), (c) from Eq. (4), and circles from Eq. (7).

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Size of EN region vs central electronegativity .

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Electron temperature vs pressure at 500, 1000, and of absorbed power.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Core electron density vs pressure at 500, 1000, and of absorbed power.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Average negative ion density vs pressure at 500, 1000, and of absorbed power.

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Average electronegativity vs pressure at 500, 1000, and of absorbed power.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

Flux ratio of O neutrals to positive ions vs pressure for , 3, and 6 in low power range. Here and the absorbed power at each was adjusted to yield similar values of on the wall.

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Ratios of average densities vs pressure at 500, 1000, and of absorbed power. (a) density ratio and (b) density ratio; and for both.

Image of FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

Comparisons between the three models: old model, old model with , and new model. (a) Electron temperature vs pressure and (b) core electron density vs pressure; and for both.

Image of FIG. 12.
FIG. 12.

Comparisons between models and experiment; , ; ; and . (a) Electron temperature vs pressure. (b) Core electron density vs pressure.

Image of FIG. 13.
FIG. 13.

Time-averaged electron temperature vs pulse period at for 50% and 25% duty ratios and for a cw plasma; .

Image of FIG. 14.
FIG. 14.

Time-averaged electron density vs pulse period for 50% and 25% duty ratios and for a cw plasma. (a) and (b) ; for both.

Image of FIG. 15.
FIG. 15.

Time-averaged flux ratio of O neutrals to positive ions vs pulse period for 50% and 25% duty ratios and for a cw plasma. (a) and (b) ; for both.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Basic reaction set for oxygen discharge. (Note: in the range , in kelvins, is state, and is state.)

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Rate coefficients for excitation of atomic oxygen. (Note: in the range of .)

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

Rate coefficients for excitation of molecular oxygen. (Notes: in the range of .)

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/avs/journal/jvsta/24/6/10.1116/1.2345645
2006-10-10
2014-04-23
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Improved volume-averaged model for steady and pulsed-power electronegative discharges
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/avs/journal/jvsta/24/6/10.1116/1.2345645
10.1116/1.2345645
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM