4.6 Article

Ion energy distributions in bipolar pulsed-dc discharges of methane measured at the biased cathode

期刊

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0963-0252/20/1/015006

关键词

-

资金

  1. Generalitat de Catalunya [2005SGR00666, 2009SGR00185]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Education and Science [DPI2007-61349]
  3. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation
  4. Spanish Research Council [UAC-2005-0021]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ion fluxes and ion energy distributions (IED) corresponding to discharges in methane (CH4) were measured in time-averaged mode with a compact retarding field energy analyser (RFEA). The RFEA was placed on a biased electrode at room temperature, which was powered by either radiofrequency (13.56 MHz) or asymmetric bipolar pulsed-dc (250 kHz) signals. The shape of the resulting IED showed the relevant populations of ions bombarding the cathode at discharge parameters typical in the material processing technology: working pressures ranging from 1 to 10 Pa and cathode bias voltages between 100 and 200 V. High-energy peaks in the IED were detected at low pressures, whereas low-energy populations became progressively dominant at higher pressures. This effect is attributed to the transition from collisionless to collisional regimes of the cathode sheath as the pressure increases. On the other hand, pulsed-dc plasmas showed broader IED than RF discharges. This fact is connected to the different working frequencies and the intense peak voltages (up to 450 V) driven by the pulsed power supply. This work improves our understanding in plasma processes at the cathode level, which are of crucial importance for the growth and processing of materials requiring controlled ion bombardment. Examples of industrial applications with these requirements are plasma cleaning, ion etching processes during fabrication of microelectronic devices and plasma-enhanced chemical vapour deposition of hard coatings (diamond-like carbon, carbides and nitrides).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据