1 / 22

Optimization of Source Modules

Optimization of Source Modules in ICP-Helicon Multi-Element Arrays for Large Area Plasma Processing. John D. Evans & Francis F. Chen UCLA Dept of Electrical Engineering LTPTL - Low Temperature Plasma Technology Laboratory. AVS 2002 , Denver, Co, November 4, 2002.

kapila
Download Presentation

Optimization of Source Modules

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Optimization of Source Modules in ICP-Helicon Multi-Element Arrays for Large Area Plasma Processing John D. Evans & Francis F. Chen UCLADept of Electrical Engineering LTPTL- Low Temperature Plasma Technology Laboratory AVS 2002, Denver, Co, November 4, 2002

  2. Conceptual multitube m=0 helicon source for large area processing

  3. COIL COIL UCLA One-tube configuration using large-area Bo-field coils and radially scannable Langmuir probes Single source tube with individual solenoidal Bo

  4. B m=-1 m=+1 B m=+1 m=-1 UCLA Schematic proof of low-field Helicon mode; RH-t-III antenna Helicity pitch sense B up (down) launches m=+1 up (down) Np and VL enhanced in region that m=+1 mode propagates towards

  5. Sense of helicity “LH” “RH” Experimental evidence: Half-helical antennas launch m = +1 Helicon mode from source tube when “low field peak” is present. RH 1/2-helical antenna Dependence of N(B) on thedirection of B reverses when the sense of the helicity of the antenna is reversed; thus it is m = +1 helicon mode LH 1/2-helical antenna

  6. Verification of Low-field Helicon Excitation Low-field “peak” in N vs B plot Dependence of occurrence of peak on B-field direction Dependence of N vs B on B-direction reverses with antenna helicity

  7. Low-field peak increases, broadens and shifts to higher B at higher Po.

  8. UCLA Left Hand (LH) Helical Antenna Nomenclature Defined Lant = Physical length of active antenna element lant = Antenna Wavelength - pitch ofhelical straps l Half Helix

  9. Radial Np profiles for 3 RH-helical antennas 1kW, 13.56MHz, 15mT Ar, 150G, z=3cm, next slide Same antenna length, but different “antenna wavelengths” Top: double-helix; Middle: full-helix; Bottom: half-helix Wider profiles observed in “B-down” configuration in all cases Most total downstream Np produced in full-helix case More total downstream Np produced in “B-down” case  m=1 helicon mode enhances profile width as well as Np

  10. Radial Np profiles for 3 “antenna wavelengths”

  11. Radial Np profiles for 3 RH-helical antennas 1kW, 13.56MHz, 15mT Ar, 150G, z=3cm, next slide Same antenna length, but different “antenna wavelengths” Top: double-helix; Middle: full-helix; Bottom: half-helix Wider profiles observed in “B-down” configuration in all cases Most total downstream Np produced in full-helix case More total downstream Np produced in “B-down” case  m=1 helicon mode enhances profile width as well as Np

  12. UCLA 1kW, 15mT, 150G Half-helical m = +1 antenna Lant = 10cm, lant = 20cm Langmuir Probe @ z = 3 cm below mouth of source tube

  13. l UCLA Full-helical m = +1 antenna Lant = 10cm, lant = 10cm Langmuir Probe @ z = 3 cm below mouth of source tube

  14. UCLA Double-helical m = +1 antenna Lant = 10cm, lant = 5 cm Langmuir Probe @ z = 3 cm below mouth of source tube

  15. l UCLA 1kW, 10mT Ar, 13.56MHz, Lant =10cm = lant, z=3cm, 150G

  16. M = 0 radial profiles 4 equispaced source tubes, Enough for uniform plasma? YES, for axial distance z > 10cm from source tubes

  17. Pyrex antenna Schematic of multi-turn loop “m=0” source element

  18. “1,2,4,6” 3 3 4 4 2 2 1 1 5 5 7 7 6 6 Numerical label convention: 7 tube source, aerial view “w,x,y,z” = Antennas # W, X, Y, Z “ON”, others “OFF” “1,2,4,5”

  19. “1,2,4,5” “1,2,4,6” 3 4 3 4 2 1 5 2 1 5 6 7 7 6

  20. “1,2,4,5” 3 4 2 1 5 7 6 Np radial nonuniformity vs axial distance z from source tubes Broad/flat cannot be explained by streaming of plasma along B-lines and normal diffusion

  21. N(R) vs Z for 3-turn loops, 4 symmetric (1,2,4,6)

  22. CONCLUSIONS 4 equispaced source tubes good enough, due to Helicon-enhanced uniformity Multitube concept appears to be applicable to arbitrarily large area.

More Related