Surface effects in a capacitive argon discharge in the intermediate pressure regime

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Tomas Gudmundsson ◽  
Janez Krek ◽  
De-Qi Wen ◽  
Emi Kawamura ◽  
Michael A Lieberman
Keyword(s):  
Excited States ◽  
Electron Emission ◽  
Secondary Electron ◽  
Secondary Electron Emission ◽  
Plasma Sheath ◽  
Secondary Electrons ◽  
Particle In Cell ◽  
Argon Discharge ◽  
Discharge Operation ◽  
Ion Impact

Abstract One-dimensional particle-in-cell/Monte Carlo collisional (PIC/MCC) simulations are performed on a capacitive 2.54 cm gap, 1.6 Torr argon discharge driven by a sinusoidal rf current density amplitude of 50 A/m2 at 13.56 MHz. The excited argon states (metastable levels, resonance levels, and the 4p manifold) are modeled self-consistently with the particle dynamics as space- and time-varying fluids. Four cases are examined, including and neglecting excited states, and using either a fixed or energy-dependent secondary electron emission yield due to ion and/or neutral impact on the electrodes. The results for all cases show that most of the ionization occurs near the plasma-sheath interfaces, with little ionization within the plasma bulk region. Without excited states, secondary electrons emitted from the electrodes are found to play a strong role in the ionization process. When the excited states, secondary electron emission due to neutral and ion impact on the electrodes are included in the discharge model, the discharge operation transitions from α-mode to γ-mode, in which nearly all the ionization is due to secondary electrons. Excited states are very effective in producing secondary electrons, with approximately 14.7 times the contribution of ion bombardment. Electron impact of ground state argon atoms by secondary electrons contributes about 76 % of the total ionization; primary electrons, about 11 %; metastable Penning ionization, about 13 %; and multi-step ionization, about 0.3 %.

MAXIMUM SECONDARY ELECTRON YIELDS FROM SEMICONDUCTORS AND INSULATORS

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (04) ◽  
pp. 1750045 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. G. XIE ◽  
Z. H. LIU ◽  
Y. Q. XIA ◽  
M. M. ZHU
Keyword(s):  
Electron Emission ◽  
Secondary Electron ◽  
Maximum Yield ◽  
Secondary Electron Emission ◽  
High Energy ◽  
Secondary Electrons ◽  
Backscattered Electrons ◽  
Universal Formula ◽  
Yield Formula ◽  
Primary Electrons

Based on the processes and characteristics of secondary electron emission and the formula for the yield due to primary electrons hitting on semiconductors and insulators, the universal formula for maximum yield [Formula: see text] due to primary electrons hitting on semiconductors and insulators was deduced, where [Formula: see text] is the maximum ratio of the number of secondary electrons produced by primary electrons to the number of primary electrons. On the basis of the formulae for primary range in different energy ranges of [Formula: see text], characteristics of secondary electron emission and the deduced universal formula for [Formula: see text], the formulae for [Formula: see text] in different energy ranges of [Formula: see text] were deduced, where [Formula: see text] is the primary incident energy at which secondary electron yields from semiconductors and insulators, [Formula: see text], are maximized to maximum secondary electron yields from semiconductors and insulators, [Formula: see text]; and [Formula: see text] is the maximum ratio of the number of total secondary electrons produced by primary electrons and backscattered electrons to the number of primary electrons. According to the deduced formulae for [Formula: see text], the relationship among [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] and high-energy back-scattering coefficient [Formula: see text], the formulae for parameters of [Formula: see text] and the experimental data as well as the formulae for [Formula: see text] in different energy ranges of [Formula: see text] as a function of [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] were deduced, where [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] are the original electron affinity and the width of forbidden band, respectively. The scattering of [Formula: see text] was analyzed, and calculated [Formula: see text] values were compared with the values measured experimentally. It was concluded that the deduced formulae for [Formula: see text] were found to be universal for [Formula: see text].

Stability of different plasma sheaths near a dielectric wall with secondary electron emission

2019 ◽  
Vol 85 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaowei Qing ◽  
Jianguo Wei ◽  
Wen Chen ◽  
Shengli Tang ◽  
Xiaogang Wang
Keyword(s):  
Electron Emission ◽  
Secondary Electron ◽  
Collisionless Plasma ◽  
Secondary Electron Emission ◽  
Plasma Sheath ◽  
Dielectric Wall ◽  
Maxwellian Plasma ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Plasma Sheaths ◽  
Sheath Structure

The linear theory stability of different collisionless plasma sheath structures, including the classic sheath, inverse sheath and space-charge limited (SCL) sheath, is investigated as a typical eigenvalue problem. The three background plasma sheaths formed between a Maxwellian plasma source and a dielectric wall with a fully self-consistent secondary electron emission condition are solved by recent developed 1D3V (one-dimensional space and three-dimensional velocities), steady-state, collisionless kinetic sheath model, within a wide range of Maxwellian plasma electron temperature $T_{e}$ . Then, the eigenvalue equations of sheath plasma fluctuations through the three sheaths are numerically solved, and the corresponding damping and growth rates $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}$ are found: (i) under the classic sheath structure (i.e. $T_{e}<T_{ec}$ (the first threshold)), there are three damping solutions (i.e. $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}_{1}$ , $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}_{2}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}_{3}$ , $0>\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}_{1}>\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}_{2}>\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}_{3}$ ) for most cases, but there is only one growth-rate solution $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}$ when $T_{e}\rightarrow T_{ec}$ due to the inhomogeneity of sheath being very weak; (ii) under the inverse sheath structure, which arises when $T_{e}>T_{ec}$ , there are no background ions in the sheath so that the fluctuations are stable; (iii) under the SCL sheath conditions (i.e. $T_{e}\geqslant T_{e\text{SCL}}$ , the second threshold), the obvious ion streaming through the sheath region again emerges and the three damping solutions are again found.

scholarly journals The efficiency of secondary electron emission

1933 ◽  
Vol 139 (838) ◽  
pp. 436-447 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Velocity Distribution ◽  
Electron Emission ◽  
Secondary Electron ◽  
Secondary Electron Emission ◽  
Inelastic Collisions ◽  
Secondary Beam ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Secondary Electrons ◽  
The Third ◽  
Primary Electrons

The velocity distribution of the secondary electrons produced by bombarding a metallic face with a stream of primary electrons has been a matter of interest ever since the beginning of the study of secondary electron emission. As early as in 1908, Richardson and von Baeyer independently showed that slow moving electrons were copiously reflected from conducting faces. Farnsworth showed that for primary electrons having velocities less than 9 volts, most of the secondary electrons had velocities equal to the primary. As the primary potential was increased, the percentage of the reflected electrons decreased gradually but was appreciable at 110 volts. Davisson and Kunsman obtained reflected electrons even at primary potentials of 1000 and 1500 volts in the cases of some metal faces. At higher potentials we have also the electrons that undergo the Davisson and Germer scattering from the many crystal facets on the bombarded targets. As the potential is increased, the number of electrons with low velocities increases steadily and at large applied potentials, we have a large percentage of these in the secondary beam. These conclusions followed as a result of the work of Farnsworth who studied the distribution of velocities of the secondary electrons by the retarding potential method. He did not actually calculate the energy distribution from his curves but has drawn attention to the above conclusions. A careful investigation of the velocity distribution of the secondary electrons from various conducting faces was made by Rudberg at primary potentials ranging up to about 1000 volts. He adopted a magnetic deflection method similar to the one used in the analysis of the β rays and of the electrons excited by X-rays. The method had indeed been used by previous workers for the study of secondary emission, but Rudberg improved the technique considerably and obtained better focussing conditions. His results suggest that there are three groups of electrons in the secondary beam. The first group contains electrons returning with the same velocity as the primary. In the second group of electrons, we have those which undergo inelastic collisions with the orbital and structure electrons and hence are returned with some loss of energy. Richardson has drawn attention to the well-marked minimum between the two groups in Rudberg’s curves and infers that free electrons are not involved in the collisions. Finally there is the third group which contains the slow secondary electrons. The second and the third groups appear to be definitely connected with each other since they are both predominant at high primary potentials and become negligible at low primary potentials. Richardson suggests that the third group is the result of the excitation accompanying the inelastic collisions.

scholarly journals Total secondary electron emission from polycrystalline Nickel

1930 ◽  
Vol 128 (807) ◽  
pp. 41-56 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Electron Emission ◽  
Secondary Electron ◽  
Secondary Electron Emission ◽  
Considerable Proportion ◽  
Secondary Beam ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Applied Potential ◽  
Polycrystalline Nickel ◽  
Low Velocity ◽  
Secondary Electrons

The importance of secondary electron emission in its relation to the excitation of soft X-rays has been pointed out in a recent paper by Prof. O. W. Richardson. He has shown that at every potential where there is an increased excitation of soft X-rays, there is correspondingly an increase in the emission of secondary electrons, and has discussed at some length the mechanism of the generation of secondary electrons. It was therefore felt that a much clearer idea of the phenomenon of soft X-ray excitation from metallic surfaces could be had by studying the secondary electron emission from polycrystalline and single crystal faces. As early as in 1908 Richardson showed that slowly moving electrons are reflected in considerable proportion from metallic plates. Davisson and Kunsman, in a series of papers commencing from 1921, showed that at low voltages up to about 9 volts most of the secondary electrons were purely reflected electrons with velocities the same as the incident electrons. The percentage of the reflected electrons fell rapidly as the applied potential was increased above 9 volts, while that of low velocity electrons increased steadily. Farnsworth, with improved apparatus, added much valuable information regarding the generation of secondary electrons and the conditions operating in such cases. These observers showed that the total emission of secondary electrons from a metal surface depended on the applied potential, the nature of the surface and the previous heat treatment of the metal. They also found that the ratio of the secondary beam to the primary increases with applied potential and becomes greater than 1 after a certain potential, depending on the nature of the bombarded metal, is reached.

Thickness Dependence in Secondary Electron Emission from Carbon

1975 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 100-101
Author(s):  
D. Voreades
Keyword(s):  
Electron Emission ◽  
Secondary Electron ◽  
Secondary Electron Emission ◽  
Secondary Emission ◽  
Secondary Electrons ◽  
Emission Process ◽  
Backscattered Electrons ◽  
Escape Depth ◽  
Mode Of Operation ◽  
Scanning Electron

Secondary electrons are used in making topographical pictures of specimens in the scanning electron microscope. A better understanding of the secondary emission process will contribute in improving the resolution in this mode of operation.Recent experiments have indicated first that the escape depth of secondary electrons is a few atomic layers at the surface of the solid and second that the backscattered electrons are much more efficient in producing secondaries than the incoming ones. The results vary considerably. However, any model that one makes, for example similar to that of Jonker, consistent with these recent experimental results, will have the thickness as an important parameter.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document