4.4 Article

Self-consistent electron energy distribution functions, vibrational distributions, electronic excited state kinetics in reacting microwave CO2 plasma: An advanced model

期刊

PHYSICS OF PLASMAS
卷 27, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/1.5139625

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An advanced model for the calculation of electron energy distribution functions (eedfs), vibrational distributions, and electronic excited state densities of reacting CO2 in microwave (MW) discharges has been developed for clarifying: (1) the role of electronic states of the relevant neutral species in affecting the eedf and (2) the contribution to the CO2 dissociation of the electron impact and heavy particle dissociation mechanisms. To model the discharge, the power density typical of MW discharges is used as a parameter. Different case studies including optically thick and thin plasmas and the dependence of the CO2 dissociation rates on the gas temperature are investigated. The results show that at a low gas temperature, i.e., 300 K, the heavy-particle dissociation mechanism, also called the pure vibrational mechanism, prevails on the electron impact dissociation one, while at a high gas temperature, i.e., 2000 K, the two mechanisms become competitive and the global behavior strongly depends on the choice of electron impact dissociation cross sections. Large differences appear in the eedf, especially in the post-discharge regime, when considering thick and thin plasmas. In the thick case, a well-structured eedf appears as a result of superelastic collisions mainly involving the electronic states of the relevant neutral species. In the thin plasma, many peaks disappear because the concentration of the excited states strongly decreases. Finally, our model gives the results of conversion and energy efficiency as well as vibrational distributions in satisfactory agreement with the corresponding results calculated by the Antwerp group. Published under license by AIP Publishing.

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

4.4
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