4.7 Article

Niobium thin film thickness profile tailoring on complex shape substrates using unbalanced biased High Power Impulse Magnetron Sputtering

期刊

SURFACE & COATINGS TECHNOLOGY
卷 436, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2022.128306

关键词

HiPIMS; Superconducting radiofrequency cavity; Niobium thin film; Particle in cell Monte Carlo simulation; Unbalanced magnet; Thickness profile distribution

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BEST/150601/2020]
  2. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BEST/150601/2020] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper reports the possibility to control the thickness profile of a thin film using HiPIMS and its application in coating complex shapes. The authors show that by manipulating the magnetic configuration and applying a negative bias, the coating thickness profile can be tailored according to demand.
The authors report in this paper the possibility to control the thickness profile of a thin film deposited by High Power Impulse Magnetron Sputtering (HiPIMS). It is shown that the combination between a HiPIMS discharge, an unbalanced magnetic configuration and the application of a negative bias onto the surface to coat enables tailoring on demand the coating thickness profile. This effect is hereafter used to coat complex shapes such as low-beta accelerating cavities with a niobium layer. The authors first present the magnetic design proposed to obtain an unbalanced cylindrical sputtering source. Numerical simulations are then used to predict the electron density and energy spatial distributions that can subsequently be correlated to the ionization region shape. Finally, the authors present the effect of such technique comparing Direct Current Magnetron Sputtering (DCMS), HiPIMS and biased HiPIMS using, respectively, a balanced and an unbalanced magnetic configuration, as well as detailing the effect of modifying either the magnetic field lines distribution or the magnetic strength.

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

4.7
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