4.6 Article

Electron density measurements in an atmospheric pressure air plasma by means of infrared heterodyne interferometry

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICS D-APPLIED PHYSICS
卷 33, 期 18, 页码 2268-2273

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0022-3727/33/18/310

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An infrared heterodyne interferometer has been used to measure the spatial distribution of the electron density in direct current, atmospheric pressure discharges in air. Spatial resolution of the electron density in the high-pressure glow discharge with characteristic dimensions on the order of 100 mu m required the use of a CO2 laser at a wavelength of 10.6 mu m For this wavelength and electron densities greater than 10(11) cm(-3) the index of refraction of the atmospheric air plasma is mainly determined by heavy particles rather than electrons. The electron contribution to the refractive index was separated from that of the heavy particles by taking the different relaxation times of the two particle species into account. With the discharge operated in a repetitive pulsed mode, the initial rapid change of the refractive index was assumed to be due to the increase in electron density, whereas the following slower rise is due to the decrease in gas density caused by gas heating. By reducing the time between pulses, direct current conditions were approached, and the electron density as well as the gas density, and gas temperature, respectively, were obtained through extrapolation. A computation inversion method was used to determine the radial distribution of the plasma parameters in the cylindrical discharge. For a direct-current filamentary discharge in air, at a current of 10 mA, the electron density was found to be 10(13) cm(-3) in the centre, decreasing to half of this value at a radial distance of 0.21 mm. Gaussian temperature profiles with sigma = 1.1 mm and maximum values of 1000-2000 K in the centre were also obtained with, however, larger error margins than for electron densities.

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