Kagan1964 PDF

Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience
PROBE METHODS IN PLASMA RESEARCH
This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.
1964 Sov. Phys. Usp. 6 767
(http://iopscience.iop.org/0038-5670/6/6/R01)
View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more
Download details:
IP Address: 147.188.128.74
This content was downloaded on 14/10/2014 at 08:09
Please note that terms and conditions apply.

S O V I E T P H Y S I C S
U S P E K H I
A Translation of Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk
SOVIET PHYSICS USPEKHI ( R u s s i a n Vol. 8 1 . N o s . 3-4) MAY-JUNE 1964
PROBE METHODS IN PLASMA RESEARCH
Yu. M. KAGAN and V. I. PEREL'

Usp. Fiz. Nauk 81, 409-452 (December, 1963)
CONTENTS
I. Electron part of probe characteristic with negative probe potential 768
Π. Ion part of probe characteristic with negative probe potential 770
III. The method of two probes 777
IV. Use of the probe method under more complicated conditions 781
V. Improvement of probe measurement techniques and e r r o r s of the method 785
List of symbols 791
Cited literature 791
1. Introduction
J.HE probe method is one of the main methods of d e - FIG. 1. Probe measurement circuit.
termining plasa parameters. This review is devoted
to an exposition of the contemporary status of the
probe techniques.
In the attempt to relate the properties of a plasma
with the elementary processes that occur in it calls
F
for knowledge of such parameters as the electron con-
centration n 0 and the electron velocity distribution
f o (v) at a given point of the plasma. The probe method,
proposed by Langmuir in 1923, consists of placing an FIG. 2. General view of probe
electric probe, that is, a small spherical, cylindrical, characteristic.
or plane electrode at a given location in the discharge,
and making the probe potential lower or higher than
the plasma potential u 0 at this point. If the probe po-
tential differs from u 0 , then an electric field is p r o -
duced in its surrounding space, accelerating charges to the fast electrons that pass through the retarding
of one sign and repelling charges of the opposite sign. field at the probe is superimposed on the ion current.
In practice, probe measurements are made with the This superposition explains the rapid decrease of the
circuit shown in Fig. 1. The probe is kept at varying current and the subsequent reversal of its sign at po-
potentials relative to the cathode or the anode. The tentials that are even lower than the space potential*
total probe current i consists of the ion current ip (Section ВС). With decreasing negative probe potential,
and the electron current i e . the current increases rapidly, owing to the decrease in
The probe characteristic is the dependence of the the retarding field at the probe. Even in this region
total probe current on the probe potential. Its general (CD) the electron current greatly exceeds the ion cur-
form is shown in Fig. 2. The characteristic can be rent. When the field retarding the electrons disappears
qualitatively interpreted in the following manner: at a and turns into an accelerating field, the law governing
large negative probe potential the entire probe current
is due to the positive ions (Section AB). When the *The space potential is called the potential of that part of
negative potential is decreased an electron current due the plasma in which the probe is situated.
767
768 Yu. M. KAGAN a n d V. I . P E R E L '
the increase of the electron current changes, and this influence on the motion of the particles in the p e r -
is manifest in a more or less sharp break in the char- turbed region.
acteristic near the space potential (Section DE). At such pressures we can therefore disregard col-
In order to find the plasma parameters, it is neces- lisions completely when calculating the probe current.
sary to calculate the type of probe characteristic, using In Ch. I—HI we assume the unperturbed plasma to
some simplified theoretical scheme, and to compare it be homogeneous, isotropic, and consisting of only elec-
with the observed characteristic. The electron part is trons and positive ions of one sort. Cases when these
employed (region CE of Fig. 2) in the overwhelming conditions are violated are considered in Ch. IV.
majority of investigations. This is connected with the
simplicity of the theory E1·2^ for this part of the charac- 1. ELECTRON PART OF PROBE CHARACTERISTIC
teristic. There are many cases of practical importance, WITH NEGATIVE PROBE POTENTIAL
however, in which the use of the electron part is impos-
sible or difficult. These include: (1) discharges at 2. Theory
large current densities, when it is difficult to obtain According to the Liouville theorem, the electron
the entire region CE, because of overheating of the distribution function does not change along the particle
probe or because of the jumping of the discharge over trajectory in the space r, v. Therefore
to the probe; (2) discharges in a magnetic field, when
the electron part is greatly distorted; (3) electrodeless /(r, v) = /(r o ,v o ), (1)
discharges. In such cases it is convenient to employ where r and ν are the coordinate and velocity of the
the ion part of the characteristic AC of Fig. 2. The particle, which has at the initial instant a coordinate
advantages lie in the fact that the current flowing in r 0 and a velocity v 0 . We shall assume that the electron
the probe is not large. The magnetic field influences distribution in the unperturbed region is isotropic and
less this part of the characteristic, since both ions and homogeneous, so that the distribution function depends
fast electrons move to the probe. Finally, in the two- only on the energy
probe method, the ion part can be reproduced almost
completely. /(ro, vo) = п./, ( = £ · ) .
The theory of the ion part of the characteristic was
Then according to (1) and the energy conservation law
first presented by Langmuir and Mott-Smitht 1 ' 2 ^. The
theory was based on separating the plasma around the
probe into a quasineutral plasma and a space-charge
sheath, and assuming that there is no field at all in the
quasineutral plasma. This theory turned out to be in- we get
correct. Since the ion energy in the discharge is much
/(r.v) = i (2)
smaller than the electron energy, even a weak field
penetrating into the quasineutral region greatly dis- f(r, v) will be determined by formula (2) only for those
torts the motion of the ions. This field causes the ions values of r and ν which the electron can attain as it
to be gathered not by the surface of the probe or of the moves from the unperturbed region without crossing
sheath, but by a large-radius surface lying in the the probe surface. At values of r and ν for which this
quasineutral region. A correct theory of the ion satura- is impossible, f ( r , v ) will be distorted; in particular,
tion current with a negative probe potential was first f(r, v) = 0 for these values in the case of a completely
presented by Bohm, Burhop, and M a s s e y ^ and devel- absorbing probe. The region of these values of r and
oped further by others C*-«I1. ν will be called the region screened by the probe. To
Attempts were made to determine the plasma pa- find the limits of the screened region it is necessary,
rameters from the electron saturation region EF generally speaking, to know the variation of the poten-
(Fig. 2). However, the form of this part of the charac- tial - V ( r ) and to solve completely the problem of m e -
teristic is greatly influenced by reflections. These at- chanical motion of the electron in this field. To deter-
tempts therefore were not continued. The electron mine whether the phase-space point r, ν is situated in
saturation region will not be considered in the present the screened region or not it is necessary to trace the
review. particle trajectory before it reaches this point. If this
The properties of the plasma near the probe a r e preceding trajectory goes from the unperturbed region
modified by the presence of the probe. However, at to the point r without crossing the probe, then the
sufficiently large distances from the probe the plasma point r, ν belongs to the unscreened region. If the sur-
remains practically unperturbed. In the present r e - face of the probe is convex, the boundaries of the
view we consider the conditions under which the p r e s - screened region on the probe surface can be readily
sure of the gas is sufficiently small, so that this d i s - obtained. It is obvious that at each point of the probe
tance (an estimate of which will be presented below) surface the distribution of the electrons that have ve-
is much smaller than the mean free paths of the elec- locities directed towards the probe will not be distorted
trons and ions. Then the collisions do not exert any by the probe surface. The distribution of electrons
P R O B E M E T H O D S IN P L A S M A RESEARCH 769
with velocities directed away from the probe is dis- widely used in p l a s m a r e s e a r c h . T h e f o r m of t h e p r o b e
torted. In other words, if i? is the angle between the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c for the c a s e when the electron velocities
electron velocity vector on the probe surface and the have a Druyvestein distribution was calculated in ^i3^.
inward normal to the surface, then the distribution W e n o t e i n c o n c l u s i o n t h a t i n t h e p r e s e n c e of e l a s t i c
function on the surface f(a,v) is determined by for- r e f l e c t i o n of t h e e l e c t r o n s f r o m t h e p r o b e
mula (2) in which we must replace - V ( r ) by the probe π/2 со
potential -V for ^ < 7r/2; the distribution function is 3
/β = 2πβη0 { cos·» sin θ d* { v [I — a{v, 0)j/ 0 C Y + ') dv,
! eV
distorted when 4 > ж/2, and is in particular equal to о о

zero in the case of an absorbing probe. (If the surface where a(v,t?) —reflection coefficient. If f0 is a Max-
of the probe were not convex, then the part of the r e - wellian function, then the expression for the probe c u r -
gion with & < π/2 would also be screened.) Thus, the rent density will differ from (5) only by a factor
electron distribution function at the probe surface does (1 - ave A e ) , which does not depend on the probe
not depend on the variation of the potential between the potential (the bar denotes averaging over the Max-
probe and the unperturbed plasma, but depends on the wellian distribution), so that reflection does not influ-
probe potential. The same pertains to the electron ence the determination of the temperature T e . Data on
current density in the probe, which is determined by the electron reflection coefficient a r e given for several
the following expression (in the case of an absorbing surfaces, for example, in ^ ^ .
u
probe)
3. Simplest Method of Processing the Characteristic
π/2 oo
je = 2ne { sin θ dO ^ и cos θ/ (α, y)v*du The total probe current on section CDEF (Fig. 2)
is practically all due to the electrons, and consequently
the characteristic is described by Eq. (3). The p r e s -
= пепа \ tr/o [ g- + ev J dv, ence of a linear section in region CD on a semilog plot
Ь of i vs. u, as in Fig. 3., is evidence that the electron
or velocity distribution is Maxwellian [see (5)]. The t e m -
perature of this distribution can then be determined
2пеп0
'' rrfi
(3) from the slope of the linear section, using the relation
r,· e da e 1
We note that the density of the electron current does A dlnl ' * tgif
not depend in this case on the form of the probe, if the
probe surface is convex. Differentiating (3) twice with (ψ — angle between the linear section and the abscissa
respect to V, we obtain axis).
The location of the break in the semilog character-
dF2/e = ^2-"o/o(eV). (4) istic determines the space potential u 0 . The current
corresponding to the space potential makes it possible
This formula*, which makes it possible to determine to find the electron concentration in the unperturbed
the electron velocity distribution function in the un- plasma [ see (5) with V = 0 ]
perturbed region from the second derivative of the
electron current in the probe, was first used by Druy- no = -=r-~- . (7)
vesteint 1 2 -!. Methods of experimental determination of
the second derivative of the electron current will be In fact, t h e b r e a k in t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i s not a b r u p t .
detailed later (Sec. 27). If the electrons have in the Strictly speaking, the space potential c o r r e s p o n d s to
unperturbed region a Maxwellian distribution, that is, t h e s t a r t of t h e d e v i a t i o n of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f r o m
linearity. However, the concentration determined from
t h e c u r r e n t a t t h i s p o i n t i s o v e r e s t i m a t e d b e c a u s e of
t h e r e f l e c t i o n of t h e e l e c t r o n s f r o m t h e p r o b e . The
then m a g n i t u d e of t h i s r e f l e c t i o n c a n n o t b e r e a d i l y esti-
m a t e d , s i n c e t h e s t a t e of t h e p r o b e s u r f a c e i s u n k n o w n .
in\i\
Formula (5) was first derived by Langmuir and is
FIG. 3. Electron part of probe

*If we introduce in place of fo(e) an energy distribution
characteristic in a semilog plot. The
function ίά(ε) with the aid of the relation
deviation from linearity of the lower
part of the curve is due to the pres-
ence of the ion current.
then
-•m-tt
(4a)
*tg = tan.
Langmuir proposed a method for determining the space
FIG. 4. Motion of ion in the
potential from the point of intersection of sections CD
attracting field of the probe.
and EF (Fig. 3). One can hope that in this method a c -
count is taken, to some degree, of the influence of r e -
flection on the magnitude of the current at the space
vector and the direction of the velocity at the point r
potential, since the reflections have a smaller effect
(Fig. 4).
on section EF, corresponding to the motion of the elec-
When the ion is at the minimum distance r = r m
trons in the attracting field of the probe. On the other
from the probe, we have sin S- = 1. From (8) we obtain
hand, comparison of the electron concentrations in a
the connection between the impact parameter and the
low-pressure mercury discharge, obtained by the probe
minimum distance between the ion and the probe:
and microwave methods, shows in this case a some-
what better agreement when the space potential is de- (9)
termined from the deviation of the characteristic from
15
linearity ^ ^. In the case of repulsion, e V ( r ) < 0 and G ( r m ) is
a monotonically increasing function of r m . Therefore
4. Elimination of the Influence of the Ion Current for each value of the impact parameter there will exist
a minimum distance from the particle to the probe.
In order to eliminate the ion current in those parts The particles reaching the probe are those for which
of the characteristic where it is comparable with the 2
p < G ( a ) . In the case of attraction e V ( r ) > 0 and
electron current (section ВС of Fig. 2), it is advisable the function G ( r m ) is a product of two factors, of
to use the first derivative of the probe current with r e - which one increases with distance from the probe and
spect to the potential ^ . The electron component could the other decreases. Two possibilities exist in this
be separated from the total current by extrapolating the case:
ion part from Sec. AB of Fig. 2. However, as will be
a) G ( r m ) is a monotonic increasing function of
shown later, the law governing such extrapolation is
I'm (Fig. 5a). Then, as in the case of repulsion, the
not known accurately, and the extrapolation e r r o r s can
particles for which p 2 s G(a) will reach the probe.
greatly influence the value of the electron current in
b) G ( r m ) is a nonmonotonic function of r m . Let
the region ВС. Since the ion current changes much
the smallest value of this function be attained at the
more slowly than the electron current in region ВС
point r/, which generally speaking depends on v 0
(the ions move in an attracting field, while the elec-
(Fig. 5, curve b). Then the impact parameters which
trons move in a retarding field), we get
satisfy the condition p 2 < G(rj) will not correspond
di die to any minimum distance, that is, particles with such
du ' impact parameters will strike the probe.* If rj > a,
For a Maxwellian distribution the plot of In (die/du) then the role of the gathering surface will be assumed
against u is a straight line, the slope of which deter- not by the surface of the probe, but by a sphere of r a -
mines T e . This method of determining T e is impor- dius r j . We shall call this the case of limitation m o -
tant when the region of the characteristic CD is dis - tion. As will be shown later, this is precisely the case
torted or cannot be obtained (see Sec. 1). which is realized when an ion moves in the attracting
field of the probe.
In the case of a cylindrical probe, all the formulas
II. ION PART OF PROBE CHARACTERISTIC WITH
and derivations of this section remain valid if we de-
NEGATIVE PROBE POTENTIAL fine v 0 or ν as the projections of the velocity on a
5. Concept of Limited Motion plane perpendicular to the probe axis, and define r
and ρ as the corresponding distances in this plane.
At large negative probe potentials in region AB, the
total probe current is practically equal to the ion c u r -
rent. Therefore, to use this part of the characteristic 1 /
it is necessary to develop a theory for the ion current
in a probe that attracts ions. We shall examine the
FIG. 5. Plot of G(rm): a) in
1
1 у
the absence of limitation motion; 1
characteristic features of the motion in an attracting
field with a spherical probe as an example. In this
b) in the presence of limitation
μ -К*
motion. г
case the energy and momentum conservation laws I
apply:
I1 I
Mvl •When p2 > G(r;) the minimum distance is determined by the
(8)
root of (9) corresponding to the section on which G(r) increases.
j = rasinu, In fact, when r = rm the radial velocity component is f = 0. It is
where ρ —impact parameter, v 0 —velocity of the ion furthermore easy to show that r = (Vo/2r^) dG/dr when r = rm,
away from the probe, 4 —angle between the radius so that r > 0 on the section where the function G increases.
6. Simplified Theory of Ion Part of the Characteristic face is the probe surface and щ = a. Then
Formulas for the ion current on the surface of the
sheath can be obtained by starting from simple physical
3 6
considerations'- · -'. The presence of limited motion and for a Maxwellian d i s t r i b u t i o n
signifies that outside the sheath, in the quasineutral
region, there is a surface such that an ion reaching it (13)
strikes the probe. Consequently, the ions strike the
In v i e w of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e l i m i t i n g m o t i o n a c t u a l l y
surface of the sheath almost radially. The potential on
d o e s t a k e p l a c e ( s e e b e l o w ) , f o r m u l a (13) i s n o t c o r -
the surface of the layer V s should be of the order of
r e c t . H o w e v e r , f o r a r e a l c a l c u l a t i o n of t h e c u r r e n t b y
k T e , since the sheath begins where the electron con-
m e a n s of f o r m u l a (12) i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o k n o w t h e v a r i -
centration begins to drop noticeably. If the ion t e m -
a t i o n of t h e p o t e n t i a l i n t h e v i c i n i t y of t h e p r o b e , w h i c h
perature is smaller than the electron temperature,
s h o u l d d e t e r m i n e a l s o t h e d e p e n d e n c e of r j o n v 0 . E x -
then the velocity of the ion on the boundary of the
2 p r e s s i o n (12) c a n b e s i m p l i f i e d b y r e p l a c i n g t h e r e a l
sheath is (2eVs/M)^ . The concentration of the ions
ion distribution o v e r the velocities in the u n p e r t u r b e d
at the external boundary of the sheath is determined
p l a s m a by a d i s t r i b u t i o n in which all t h e ions have
from the condition of quasineutrality by the expression
n 0 exp ( - e V s / k T e ) . * We thus have for the ion current i d e n t i c a l e n e r g y e 0 , t h a t i s , b y p u t t i n g
in the probe Μ
(14)
ip = en0 e (10) Such a substitution i s valid b e c a u s e t h e ions a r e in a n

a c c e l e r a t i n g field. T h e r e i s a c e r t a i n v a g u e n e s s i n t h e
where S s — area of the sheath surface. Expression d e f i n i t i o n of e 0 , w h i c h s h o u l d b e e q u a l t o t h e a v e r a g e
(10) is not very sensitive to the choice of the value of ion energy in the unperturbed p l a s m a , a c c u r a t e to a
Bs, if it is of the order of kTe. We then obtain f a c t o r of t h e o r d e r of u n i t y . A s w i l l b e s h o w n b e l o w ,
the ion c u r r e n t in the p r o b e is practically independent
ip = cn0 e (H) of e 0 if T p < T e . W i t h t h e a i d of (12) a n d (14) w e g e t
where с — a coefficient of the order of unity, which enovp eV(ri) Mv-p
(15)
coincides with the formulas obtained below for the "p~ 4 Li4 ε0 J ' 2 -=ε0.
spherical (c = 0.8) and cylindrical (c = 0.4) cases. F o r m u l a (15) d i f f e r s f r o m (13) i n t h a t t h e r o l e of t h e
The foregoing instructive derivation enables us to
p r o b e r a d i u s i s a s s u m e d b y t h e r o l e of t h e l i m i t a t i o n
apply formula (11) to probes of different shapes, for
sphere.
example to a finite plane probe, the rigorous calcula-
tion for which is difficult. The surface area of the 8. C o n n e c t i o n B e t w e e n t h e Ion C o n c e n t r a t i o n i n t h e
sheath Ss can be chosen in practice equal to the area
V i c i n i t y of t h e P r o b e and t h e P o t e n t i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n
of the probe surface. In fact, S s increases somewhat
with the increasing of the potential, and therefore the L e t u s f i n d t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n of t h e i o n s i n t h e v i c i n -
ion part of the characteristic does not have a strict i t y of t h e p r o b e t h a t a t t r a c t s t h e m . T o t h i s e n d i t i s
saturation. n e c e s s a r y , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h S e c . 2, t o o b t a i n t h e
l i m i t s of t h e s c r e e n i n g r e g i o n . W e s h a l l a s s u m e t h a t
A. SPHERICAL PROBE the function G ( r ) h a s t h e f o r m shown in Fig. 5b.
The phase-space point r, ν belongs to the un-
7. General Expression for Ion Current screened region, if the ion reaches it from the unper-
We consider ions which have away from the probe turbed plasma. To this end it is first necessary to
velocities in the interval d 3 v 0 . The flux of such p a r - satisfy the condition
ticles to the probe is equal to the flux through the area
M==^2._eF(r)>o. (i6)
πρ§ = 7rG(r;) (p 0 —maximum impact parameter, at
which the ion reaches the probe), that is, equal to When r > rj, the point r , v will belong to the un-
no7rG(rz) F 0 ( v 0 ) v 0 d 3 v 0 . The total current is obtained screened region if S- > 7г/2, or else if i? < тг/2 but
by integrating this expression with respect to the ini- p 2 > G(rjr). According to the conservation laws (8),
tial velocities: the last condition can be rewritten in the form
i p = 4jt 2 en 0 ^ G (rt) Fo (vo) νζ dv0. (12)

where
I n t h e a b s e n c e of l i m i t i n g m o t i o n , t h e g a t h e r i n g s u r -
(17)
*We assume approximately that the electrons have a Boltzmann
distribution in the repelling field of the probe. The ion can a r r i v e at the point r < rj from the u n p e r -
2
turbed region if i? > тг/2 and p < G(rj), that is, if
(23)
t? > $i, where
^
v2 2
, щ > -γ .
/-I OS T o d e t e r m i n e t h e p o t e n t i a l of t h e l i m i t a t i o n s p h e r e
[its} щ, we put χ = 1 and η = щ in (23); we then get
The ion concentration at a distance r from the probe
can thus be written in the form
for small γ (the electrons are " h o t t e r " than the ions),
as is the case in low-pressure cold plasmas, we obtain
Лг = 3у. (25)
where
Thus, in this case the potential of the limitation sphere
(ϋ, r)= С r> rt is of the order of the energy of the ions in the unper-
turbed plasma. A plot of щ against γ is shown in
(19)
π
Fig. 6.
(ί), г) = \
C a l c u l a t i o n of t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n n p ( r ) by m e a n s of
(19) c a l l s f o r k n o w l e d g e of t h e v a r i a t i o n of t h e p o t e n t i a l
V(r), s i n c e it d e t e r m i n e s the function rj(v). Expres-
s i o n (19) i s s i m p l i f i e d b y u s i n g a p p r o x i m a t i o n (14). We
then obtain for the ion concentration the expression ^
ΰ,25
(20)
w h e r e t h e p l u s s i g n i s t a k e n if r > rj and the minus

r 7O у
s i g n if r < r£.
FIG. 6. i7s(y) (1) and ι ) (2) (spherical probe).
Without limitation motion, r; = a and the region
r < rj would not exist.
To find the distribution of the potential in the quasi-
neutrality region it is convenient to solve (23) with r e -
9. Distribution of the Potential in the Vicinity of the
Probe (Quasineutral Region)
spect to χ
T h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e p o t e n t i a l i n t h e v i c i n i t y of t h e (26)
probe should be obtained from the Poisson equation. At
distances from the probe where e[V(a) - V(r)] » kTe,
t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n of t h e e l e c t r o n s p r a c t i c a l l y coincide
The general character of the potential, obtained
with the Boltzmann concentration ^
from this equation, can be seen from Fig. 7.* The part
of the curve represented by the dashed line has no
ί-ί physical meaning. When χ < x s , (26) has no solution.

This shows that in this region the quasineutrality con-
Near the probe, where V(r) « V(a) when eV(a) dition is certainly not applicable. We can assume ap-
» kT e (large negative probe potentials), the concen- proximately χ = Xs on the boundary between the region
t r a t i o n of t h e e l e c t r o n s b e c o m e s n e g l i g i b l y s m a l l com- of quasineutrality and the region of the space-charge
pared with the ion concentration. Therefore we can
replace ne in the Poisson equation by the Boltzmann
*It follows from (26) that
distribution, for all r. The ion concentration is de-
t e r m i n e d by (20). We introduce dimensionless vari-
ables. Then the Poisson equation takes the form where
(21)
is a monotonic function of the potential and consequently of the

At d i s t a n c e s exceeding s e v e r a l Debye r a d i i from
distance from the probe. It is seen therefore that G(r) has one
t h e p r o b e , w e c a n n e g l e c t t h e left h a l f of (21). I n o t h e r
minimum for f = 1/2 (that is, on the limitation sphere). Thus, in
w o r d s , at such distances the p l a s m a can be regarded the quasineutrality region the assumed form of the function G(r)
as quasineutral. The quasineutrality condition is is justified.
of the probe. In the most frequently encountered case
of small condition (30) is usually satisfied.
FIG. 7. Schematic variation of
the potential in the quasineutrality
region. 10. Region of Space Charge Sheath
Inside the sheath, the potential increases rapidly on
approaching the probe and the concentration of the
sheath ^ . To find the limit of the layer x s and the electrons and the ions decreases, the electron concen-
potential η3 on the sheath layer boundary, it is nec- tration decreasing much more rapidly than the ion con-
essary to find the maximum of the right half of (26). centration. Therefore the charge density has a maxi-
We obtain for η 3 the equation mum at some distance r p from the center of the probe.
The distribution of the potential, of the concentrations
(27 n p and n e , and the charge density are shown schemat-
>
ically in Fig. 9. This type of distribution is confirmed
The dependence of η 8 and x s on γ is shown in by numerical calculation Μ . The value of rp can be
Figs. 6 and 8. For small γ estimated from the following considerations.
TI S = 0 . 5 , and а ; в = 1 (28)
The potential on the sheath for all values of γ is of
the order of the electron energy in the unperturbed
plasma. If the electrons are hotter than the ions, then
the radius of the sheath is several times smaller than
the radius of the limitation sphere.
FIG. 9. Schematic distribution of the potential, of the concen-

0.75 tration of charge particles, and the charge density in the region
of the sheath.
We use the relation

0.5
ar Ю у dq
dx
FIG. 8. Radius of sheath as a function of the parameter у for (31)
dx ' dQ/дц
a spherical probe.
In the region between r s and rp the concentration in-
In view of the fact that the point χ = x s can be only creases and dp/dx > 0. According to (22) Эр/Эх < О.
approximately assumed to be the boundary of the If the potential increases monotonically, as is con-
sheath, and in fact the boundary of the sheath lies at firmed by numerical calculations, then drj/dx > 0, and
χ > Xs, it is advantageous to check the conditions consequently in this region, which we shall call, fol-
under which quasineutrality is attained on the limita- lowing WenzlM, the reflection region, we should have
tion sphere. The quasineutrality condition is the inequality
dQ e - i > 0.
4 3η-
Υ
The concentration difference np — n e can be estimated
by substituting in a left half of the Poisson equation (21) It f o l l o w s t h e r e f o r e t h a t
the solution obtained from (23). Then the condition of
quasineutrality on the limitation sphere assumes the
form where
(29) ^
In the case when γ « 1, Eq. (29) goes over into the in- As γ — Ο we have
equality
S 1_ V О
"•«I. (30)
For estimates we can take in place of r s the radius We can expect a large drj/dx at χ = x p if the probe p o -
774 Yu. M. KAGAN and V. I. PEREL1
t e n t i a l i s sufficiently l a r g e , and t h e value of ( x s / x p ) 2 where

approaches its upper limit ψ (γ). Comparison with
numerical calculations (see Sec. 11) confirms the
correctness of this assumption. The value of η at
The maximum and minimum values of a(y) c o r r e -
which the maximum is reached in formula (32) can
sponding to the maximum and minimum values of
be regarded as the potential ηρ on the inner boundary 2
( x s /xp ) are shown in Fig. 10. The considerations
on the reflection region. As у —• 0, η ρ —• 1.5.
advanced in Sec. 10 show that at sufficiently large
For χ < Xp, there occurs an ion-layer region, in
negative probe potentials it is necessary to choose for
which we can neglect the concentration of the electrons
a(y) its maximum value. For y — 0 , a m a x ( Y ) =
compared with the concentration of the ions. In addi-
= 0.82.* To determine the current to the probe it is
tion, we can assume in this region that the ions travel
necessary to find the radius of the ion layer Гр. This
normally to the surface of the probe, that is, щ/у » 1.
can be done by using Eq. (34), which is best rewritten
Under these conditions, the Poisson equation (21) a s -
in the usual form of the " t h r e e - h a l v e s " law:
sumes the form
- f e y ι d χ*άΆ_γΊ ^"γ (36)

^rtj x"-'dx dx Αχ2 γ
(33)
Ά
The assumption that the ions move normally to the Formulas (35) and (36) enable us, after eliminating
probe is well satisfied even on the outer boundary of , to determine the form of the probe characteristic:
the ion layer (for γ « 1). For large y, the ions on
the outer boundary of the ion layer move almost iso- (37)
tropically, but if the probe potential is large compared
with the ion temperature, the condition for normal m o - where
tion is established almost immediately beyond the
boundary of the ion layer. ч' = ё.Г-^У
Equation (33) coincides with the Langmuir equation kTe Μ
for the potential distribution in a spherical capacitor T h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c c a l c u l a t e d by f o r m u l a (37) i s s h o w n

with allowance for space charge. Langmuir and in Fig. 11. The s a m e figure s h o w s for c o m p a r i s o n the
Blodgett'- 16 ^ solved this equation for the case when r e s u l t s of n u m e r i c a l c a l c u l a t i o n s Cie,ii,n]_ ^ e chose
the ions are emitted by the outer sphere, under con- for a(y) its maximum value. It i s s e e n f r o m t h e fig-
ditions wherein the potential and the field are equal ure that the a p p r o x i m a t e t h e o r y a g r e e s s p l e n d i d l y w i t h
to zero on the sphere. This solution can be used if the t h e r e s u l t s of t h e n u m e r i c a l c a l c u l a t i o n s . Some devia-
probe potential is large compared with the potential on t i o n s b e g i n t o s h o w u p o n l y at s m a l l p r o b e p o t e n t i a l s .
the layer boundary. This solution leads to the well-
known " t h r e e - h a l v e s " law, which in our notation has
the form
1+-
16 (34)
2
where p ( r p / a ) are functions tabulated in
11. Form of Probe Characteristic

Formula (15) can be written in the form
iP = inr'p ena γ -jji α (γ), (35) ro ЮО 1}
FIG. 1 1 . Ion part of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ( s p h e r i c a l probe).

Solid curve — c a l c u l a t i o n by formula (37); p o i n t s — numerical
s o l u t i o n of the P o i s s o n equation:
0.7 О - у = O.lt"], · - У = Ot10-"] (i p = i'p, η = η ').
"naxW In the region of very small potentials (not shown in the

05 figure), when the thickness of the sheath is small com-
0.3
"о ' г зу 1The value a(0) = 1 was used in [6] as an estimate. A
value <z(0) = 0.43 was obtained in [']. This value coincides with
a
FIG. 10. a m a x (y) and amia(y) (spherical probe). min(0) and is obtained when the reflecting layer is neglected.
pared with the radius of the probe, better agreement B. CYLINDRICAL PROBE
with the numerical calculations is obtained from for-
13. Ion Current and Concentration of Charge Particles
mula (37) in which the minimum value is taken for a.
If v 0 is the maximum impact parameter, at which
12. Determination of the Plasma Parameters from the an ion with initial velocity v 0 reaches the probe, then
Ion Part of the Characteristic the ion current per unit length of the probe is given by
the formula
To determine the concentration of the charged p a r -
ticles n 0 it is necessary to determine the probe cur-
\ PoFo (v0) v\ dv0. (39)
rent at a sufficiently large negative probe potential V,
when the electron current certainly does not come into 2
According to Sec. 5, p , = G(rj). We assume for sim-
play, so that i = ip. From the given values of ip and
plicity that the ions away from the probe have identical
V we determine with the aid of (36) the value of
2 2 16 energy of motion in the plane perpendicular to the
p ( r p / a ) , while the tables of the function p (x)^ ^
probe axis, that is, we assume
yield r p . Formula (35) is then used to determine the
concentration n 0 . The ion temperature is usually un- (40)
known, so that there is some uncertainty in the value
of α ( γ ) . However, under usual discharge conditions Then we get
γ < 0.1, and a m a x ( y ) , as can be seen from Fig. 10,
lies between 0.8 and 0.6. To determine the electron (41)
temperature which is contained in (35), it is necessary
to employ the usual method, provided it is possible to We proceed to determine the ion concentration. Rea-
plot the part of the electronic characteristic, on which soning as in Sec. 8 for the cylindrical case, and using
the influence of the ion current is insignificant. Other- approximation (40), we obtain
wise it becomes necessary to use the method of differ-
entiation, described in Sec. 4, in order to eliminate the for
influence of the ion current. It is possible then to em-
ploy part ВС of the characteristic (see Fig. 2) near Щ for r<r.j. j
the "floating" probe potential.
(42)
Formula (36) contains the potential of the plasma
In (42) it is necessary to take the value of the arc-
relative to the probe V. If direct determination of the
sine between zero and π/2 in both cases. If there is
plasma potential (see Sec. 3) is difficult, an estimate
no limitation motion, then rj_, = a and there exist no
is afforded by the fact that at the point of the ion part
regions r < r£. In the region r < rj the Poisson equa-
of the characteristic where the total probe current is
tion has in dimensionless variables the form
equal to zero (point N on Fig. 2) we have i e = ip,
that is, according to (5) and (35) h V 1 d dn (43)
J t i i dx
(38)
(44)
where r p t is the radius of the layer at the point N.
Assuming approximately r p t = a, we can obtain Vt
For the electron concentration we assume a Boltz-
(the potential of the plasma relative to the point N) and
mann distribution, for the same reason as in the case
by the same token the potential of the plasma relative
of the spherical probe ^ .
to the probe at any point of the characteristic. If V
» Vj, then the inaccuracy in the determination of Vj
influences little the calculated value of the concentra- 14. Distribution of Potential in Quasineutral Region
tion. It follows from (38) that eVj/kTe depends little and Current in the Probe
on the conditions in the plasma and depends essentially The quasineutrality condition for the region r < r L
on the type of gas. This circumstance, and also the has in dimensionless variables the form
predicted value of eV t / k T e have been confirmed ex-
perimentally C63. In Μ there is also a comparison of
the charged-particle concentrations obtained from the (45)
electron and ion parts of the characteristic for a d i s -
charge in mercury vapor. Putting χ = 1 and η = η^, we obtain the potential
776 Yu. M. KAGAN a n d V. I . PEREL'
for the limiting cylinder the concentration of the electrons and replace the arc-
sine in the ion concentration by the argument, putting
η, = In 2 = 0.69. (46)
η/γ » 1. This is equivalent to assuming that the ions
Let us solve Eq. (45) with respect to x: move normally to the probe inside the cylinder x p .
When γ « 1 such an assumption leads to an e r r o r of
15% in the concentration on the surface Xp.
— sin (47)
Under these assumptions, the Poisson equation in-
side the ion layer assumes the form
At some value of TJS, the function in the right half
of (47) has a maximum. This means that when χ < x s \ rιJ x dx' dx У (51)
η
the assumption of quasineutrality is known not to be
Equation (50) coincides with Langmuir's equation
valid. To find x s we have the equation
for a cylindrical capacitor. A solution of this equation
=
2πγ. (48) for the case when the ions a r e emitted by the external
cylinder was given in the paper by Langmuir and
The dependence of ?7S and x s on γ is given in Fig. [16
Blodgett 3. This solution ("three-halves" law) can
12. As γ —' 0 we have
be used also under the same assumptions as in the case
• 0.99, zs-^0,92. (49) of the spherical probe.
We note that for a cylindrical probe the limitation 16. Form of Probe Characteristic and Its Processing
surface lies closer to the surface of the layer than for
a spherical probe. The condition of quasineutrality on Formula (41) can be written in the form
the limiting cylinder can be obtained in analogy with ip = 2 r a r p n 0 | / ^ a ' ( Y ) , (52)
the spherical probe (in this case we can assume
vi 3 r s ) : where
a'(Y)=
The maximum and minimum values of α'(γ) are

given in Fig. 13. As in the case of the spherical probe,
at sufficiently large negative probe potentials it is nec-
essary to use a m a x ( y ) .
О.75 /r
FIG. 12. xs(y) and ηΒ(γ) (cylindrical probe).

/y/
1 5 . R e g i o n of S p a c e - c h a r g e S h e a t h
R e a s o n i n g a s i n t h e c a s e of a s p h e r i c a l probe
(Sec. 10) we arrive at the conclusion that 9ρ/9η > 0
г г 3у
up to the maximum of the charge density. Using for-
mula (44), we obtain the inequality which must be sat- FIG. 13. a^ (y) and tx'min(y) (cylindrical probe).
isfied by the cylinder radius corresponding to the max-
imum charge density:
When γ = 0 we have aniax(y) = 0.37. To determine
the radius of the ionic layer we use the " t h r e e - h a l v e s "
φ (γ) = max •! ———

П (50) law:
/"_£_
vV2
(53)
When y = 0
-} =A
l p(0) = After eliminating r p from (52) and (53), we obtain
the form of the probe characteristic
This value is attained when η = ηρ = 1.8.
In the ion-layer region we can neglect for χ < Xp (54)
*tg = tan. where

, __eV_ Γ ft2 I shown in Fig. 15. If the probes are identical and the
~ kTe\ a*al (γ) J plasma homogeneous, then the characteristic is sym-
кте
metrical with respect to the point where the current
vanishes. Δ is equal in magnitude to the potential dif-
The characteristic calculated by formula (54) is
ference between the portions of the plasma in which the
shown in Fig. 14. The characteristic is processed in
probes are located. Obviously, the currents flowing in
the same way as in the case of a spherical probe (see
the probes should be identical in magnitude and oppo-
Sec. 12). The roles of formulas (35) and (36) a r e now
site in sign. Therefore the potential of the more posi-
assumed by (52) and (53). When γ < 0.1 we have
2 tive probe can be only slightly higher than the potential
« т а х ( т ) ~ 0.4. Tables of the functions /3 (r p /a) are
1G 18 of the floating probe, owing to the steep increase of the
contained in t > ^. The plasma potential relative to
electron current with increasing probe potential. When
the isolated probe is obtained from the same consid-
the difference in potential between the probes is large
erations as for the spherical probe:
(regions AB and CD of Fig. 15), practically the entire
potential difference is equal to the potential of the
(55)
more negative probe (relative to the floating probe).
8 19
In C > 3 there is a detailed comparison of the con- Then practically the entire current in the negative
centrations of the charged particles, the electron t e m - probe is due to ions. Thus, if we align those points of
peratures, and the space potentials obtained by proc- the two-probe and single-probe characteristics in
essing the electronic and ionic parts of the character- which the current in the circuit is equal to zero (points
istic for discharges in mercury vapor Μ and in a r - N of Figs. 2 and 15), then these characteristics coin-
gon E19^. The agreement should be regarded as good.* cide in the far ion parts (AB).
A/I
FIG. 15. Schematic form of two-probe characteristic.

7O 7DO
The form of the characteristics in the region ВС
FIG. 14. Ion part of the characteristic. Cylindrical probe.
can be obtained by using the fact that the probe c u r -
Calculation by formula (54).
rents are equal in magnitude:
eV~
Ш. THE METHOD OF TWO PROBES = ioe hT
°-ip(V), (56)
17. Principles of the Method (57)
In those cases when there is no electrode with spe-
cified potential in the discharge gap (decaying plasma, where v' and v" a r e the potentials of the plasma r e l a -
high-frequency discharge) direct use of the single- tive to the first and second probes, and i(u) is the
probe method is impossible. One way of overcoming current in the two-probe circuit. For the electron we
this difficulty is to use the method of two probes'- 2 0 " 2 3 -', use formula (5). If we eliminate V and V" from (56)
which consists in the following: two identical probes and (57), we obtain the equation of the characteristic
a r e introduced into the discharge gap and the current i ( u ) . For this purpose it is necessary to know the de-
in the probe circuit is measured as a function of the pendence of the ion current on the probe potential. If
potential difference between the probes. The approxi- we assume the ion current to be independent of the p o -
mate form of the resultant probe characteristic is tential, then we obtain for the characteristic an equa-
tion in the form C2°]
*We note, however, that too high a coefficient of (52) was used (58)'
inW, thus reducing the concentration in the ion part by a factor
of 2.5, so that the space potential for the electron part was de- This expression agrees with the form of the charac-
termined from the deviation from linearity, and not from the cros- teristic in the region ВС. At large u it leads to satu-
sing of the asymptotes, and the electron concentration was under- ration, this being the consequence of failure to take
estimated. Int1'] the concentration in the ion part was calculated
by using (52) with the correct coefficient, but no account was
taken of the space-charge thickness. *th = tanh.
into account the dependence of the ion current on the of the probes or of the charged-particle concentrations
potential.* around the probes, (59) cannot be used. In this case
(56) is replaced by
18. Determination of the Plasma Parameters from
the Two-probe Characteristic i(u) = i"oe
kTli
— ip (60)
Several methods were proposed to determine the We obtain from this a formula in place of (59) for
21 20
electron temperature T e ^ · ^ . The simplest method the case of an asymmetrical c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ^ :
uses the slope of the two-probe characteristic at the
di di"p
point where u = Δ. We shall assume that the probes !+ l
w we v) f
and the plasma sections adjacent to them are identical.
Differentiating (56) with respect to u and putting u = Δ, All the quantities in the right half of (61) are taken
and consequently V = V = Vi, making use of the fact for the values of the potential at which the current in
that at the point u = Δ we have as a result of (57) and the two-probe circuit is equal to zero. As in the case
the equivalence of the probes the condition of identical probe, it is convenient to use (61) in p r a c -
tice when the slopes of the remote parts of the char-
dV dV" acteristics are small compared with the slope at the
du ' du 2 " point N. In this case (61) assumes the form
and recognizing that when u = Δ the electron current
is equal to the ion current, we get ip ip di\- (62)
Z
(59) Another method of finding the electron temperature
consists in the following E203.
Using (57) and (60) we get
From (59) we can determine the electron tempera-
ture by measuring the slope of the characteristic at In (63)
u = Δ. The ion current and its derivative at the poten-
tial of the isolated probe can be determined by extrapo- where
lation from the large potentials, at which the ion cur-
rent coincides with the total current in the two-probe
circuit, and ip, ip, and ie are obtained from the two-probe charac-
teristic, as shown in Fig. 16 (we note that in this
dV du method the ion current must be extrapolated). If we
plot the left half of (63) as a function of u, we obtain
The extrapolation method should be based on the form
the electron temperature from the slope of the result-
of the dependence of the probe ion current on the probe
ant line, and knowing T e we can determine the con-
potential relative to the plasma. As follows from Sees.
centration of the electrons by using the already men-
11 and 16, this dependence is complicated and has a
tioned equality of the ion parts of the two-probe and
different form for different discharge parameters.
single-probe characteristics, provided the two are
Therefore it is convenient to use (59) in practice in
aligned at the point N. The method described in Sees.
those cases when the slope of the remote parts of the
11 and 16 can be used.
two-probe characteristic is small compared with the
The method proposed in t 2 0 " 2 2 ^ for determining the
slope at the point where the current is equal to zero.
concentrations is incorrect, since it is based on the
In this case the quantity (dip/dV)yi can be neglected,
Langmuir theory for the ion current. Frequently com-
and the ip(Vj) depends little on the method of extrapo-
parisons of the two-probe method with the single-probe
lation, and can be obtained for example by linear ex-
methodE23>26«2?] ( i n the case when the latter is applica-
trapolation, t
ble) and with microwave methods C28>29] have shown
In the case when the characteristic is not symmet-
good agreement between the results.
rical, which may be the consequence of the inequality
*The form of the characteristic was obtained inM under the

assumption that the ion current in the probe depends linearly on
the probe potential.
tMore complicated extrapolation methods were proposed in
many paperst20'24]. These postulated in fact a linear dependence
of the probe ion current on the probe potential relative to the
plasma. Starting from this dependence, the authors found the
form of the two-probe characteristic and the corresponding ex-
trapolation method. The quantity (dip/dV)vi was determined in FIG. 16. Illustrating the determination of the electron tem-
this case from the slope of the remote part of the two-probe perature by the method of Malter and Johnson: ab = i'e,
characteristic. ac = ip, cd = ip.
P R O B E M E T H O D S IN P L A S M A RESEARCH 77D
19. The Counterprobe and Triple-probe Methods a r e c o n n e c t e d a s shown i n F i g . 17. In e a c h m e a s u r e -
ment, the potentiometer slide w i r e is set in a position
In this section we consider methods of obtaining the s u c h t h a t t h e c u r r e n t i n t h e c i r c u i t of p r o b e 3 i s equal
single-probe characteristic using a two-probe circuit. to zero. This m e a n s that p r o b e 3 is always at the float-
The idea of the counterprobe method consists in the ing-probe potential. T h e d e p e n d e n c e of t h e c u r r e n t i n
30
following t ] . If the dimensions of one probe greatly t h e c i r c u i t of p r o b e s 1 a n d 2 o n t h e p o t e n t i a l V 2 is the
exceed those of the other, then considerable changes single-probe c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of p r o b e 2, w h i c h , i n p r i n -
in the potential of the smaller probe a r e possible. Its ciple, can b e p r o c e s s e d by the m e t h o d s d e s c r i b e d in
potential may become higher than that of the isolated Chapters I and П. However, if probes 1 and 2 are com-
probe and even higher than the plasma potential, parable in dimensions, then only the very start of the
whereas the potential of the larger probe remains electron part of the characteristic is obtained. In order
practically unchanged at approximately the potential to obtain the entire electron part of the single-probe
of the isolated probe. This can be understood from characteristic of probe 2, probe 1 must be so much
the following considerations: since one of the probes larger than probe 2 that the ion current in probe 1 bal-
is small, the current in the two-probe circuit should ances out the electron current in probe 2 at the space
be small. Therefore the potential of the larger probe potential. This calls for a fixed ratio of the a r e a s :
cannot differ greatly from the potential of the isolated
probe. In the case of sufficiently large difference in S' . (66)
dimensions, even the electron current in the small S"
probe, which is at the plasma potential, can become 31
(The criterion given in I- ^ is incorrect, because the
offset by the current in the large probe, the potential authors used the Langmuir theory for the ion current.)
of which is somewhat lower than the floating probe po-
tential. The probe characteristic then turns into the
single-probe characteristic of the small probe and can
be processed by the usual Langmuir method. To find
a criterion by which to judge whether the larger probe FIG. 17. Diagram of the triple-probe
is sufficiently large to serve as a counterprobe, we method.
use Eq. (60), assuming the first probe to be large and
the second small.
Let us differentiate both halves, neglecting the v a r i -
ation of the ion current compared with the variation of
the corresponding electron current. We then obtain
Criterion (66) is less stringent than the criterion for
(64) the applicability of the counterprobe method (65). The
reason for it is that in the three-probe method there is
Equation (64) has been written out for the case no need to maintain the potential of probe 1 constant.
where the potential of the small probe is close to the The fact that the entire electron part of the s ingle-
space potential, and the counterprobe is at the poten- probe characteristic is obtained in the three-probe
tial of the floating probe V^. The characteristic will method makes it possible to obtain the energy d i s t r i -
be practically that of a single probe if d V « dV". If bution of the electrons with the aid of formula (4).
the probe and the counter probe are under identical A modification of the triple-probe method was used
conditions, then using (11), (64), and the fact that in E32^, where the potential difference between probes
1 and 2 was kept constant, and the area of the smaller
i0 =-ζ-enoueS, probe 2, which was at a higher potential relative to the
plasma than the larger probe 1, was varied. The de-
w e o b t a i n t h e c r i t e r i o n f o r t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y of t h e
pendence of the current in the two-probe circuit and of
counterprobe method in the form
the potential V2 on the area of probe 2 makes it pos-
(65) sible to determine the electron concentration and t e m -
perature. An inconvenience of this method is the use
where S ' a n d S " a r e t h e s u r f a c e a r e a s of t h e c o u n t e r - of a probe of variable length. In addition, at small
p r o b e and the probe. If t h e c o u n t e r p r o b e i s i n a r e g i o n probe dimensions, distortions may be produced as a
with reduced charged-particle concentration, then con- result of the influence of the insulation.
d i t i o n (65) i s i n s u f f i c i e n t . The need for introducing the
counterprobe directly in the d i s c h a r g e gap, w h e r e it
unavoidably d i s t o r t s the p l a s m a , is the m a i n s h o r t -
20. Influence of High-frequency Field on the Probe
c o m i n g of t h i s m e t h o d .
Characteristic
I n C24>313 t h e r e i s p r o p o s e d a t r i p l e - p r o b e m e t h o d , Measurement of field intensity. One of the main
which, like the c o u n t e r p r o b e m e t h o d , m a k e s it p o s s i b l e uses of the two-probe method is for a high-frequency
to obtain the single-probe c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . Three probes discharge. A typical two-probe measurement circuit
c o m p o n e n t of t h e t w o - p r o b e c u r r e n t w e a v e r a g e (58)
o v e r the t i m e . We then get
(и — Δ ο — dx (67)
ЩГ -
FIG. 18. The two-probe method used in
a high-frequency discharge. I t i s s e e n f r o m (67) t h a t t h e c u r r e n t i s e q u a l t o z e r o
at the point where u = Δ ο , that is, the high frequency
field does not cause a shift of the characteristic. How-
ever, the slope of the characteristic at the point where
the current is equal to zero depends on the high fre-
quency field. Namely,
is shown in Fig. 18. The choke and the capacitor keep
С dx (68)"
the high-frequency current component out of the m e a s -
\ chM sin ях
uring circuit. The high-frequency component may be
the result of periodic variations of the potential dif- where A = eE(jd/2kTe. F r o m (68) w e s e e t h a t t h e h i g h
ference between the sections of the plasma adjacent f r e q u e n c y f i e l d i s i n s i g n i f i c a n t o n l y if A « 1. T h e n u -
to the probes. Owing to the nonlinearity of the probe m e r i c a l v a l u e s of t h e i n t e g r a l a r e 1, 0 . 8 9 , 0 . 6 7 , 0.36
characteristic, this variable potential difference d i s - f o r A = 0, 0 . 5 , 1, a n d 2, r e s p e c t i v e l y . I n C33>343 i t w a s
torts also the dc component of the current in the probe p r o p o s e d t o u s e f o r m u l a (68) f o r t h e m e a s u r e m e n t of
circuit. t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h e h i g h f r e q u e n c y f i e l d i n t h e d i s -
The distortion can be reduced by locating the probes charge. To t h i s end, two p r o b e s on a ground-glass
in an equipotential plane. Such an arrangement is not joint a r e located first in an equipotential plane (Ed = 0)
convenient in narrow tubes, since the plasma proper- and the electron temperature Тц is measured. The
ties vary in the radial direction. Too small a distance probes are then rotated about the axis, and the value of
between probes can lead to their mutual screening. It Ε and the field intensity E(j are determined with the
is therefore advantageous sometimes to locate the aid of (68).
probes along the axis of the discharge. Let us con- A different method of measuring the field intensity
sider the influence of the high frequency field on the was proposed in C35^. The triple-probe circuit e m -
form of the probe characteristics'- 3 3 -'. Since the ion ployed consists in paralleling the identical probes 1
current depends little on the probe potential, the high and 2 and making their total a r e a equal to the area of
frequency field hardly exerts any influence on it. probe 3, which is placed between them. A two-probe
Therefore the method described above for determining characteristic is plotted for probe 3 and probes 1—2.
the concentration using the ion part of the character- The presence of a high-frequency field causes the
istic can be used also in a high frequency discharge. probe characteristic to shift and the field is d e t e r -
The electron current depends strongly on the potential, mined from this shift. However, the expression ob-
and therefore the high frequency field can influence the tained for the shift is incorrect, since it was e r r o n e -
form of the characteristic near the plane where the ously assumed that the potential difference between the
probe current is equal to zero. If the frequency is not double probe 1—2 and the plasma at the probe 3 is in-
too large, then the current in the probe at each instant dependent of the time. A correct expression for the
of time is determined by Eq. (58). (We assume for current in the probe circuit averaged over the period
simplicity that the ion current does not depend on the (under the usual assumption that ip = const) is:
potential and that the probes, as well as the concentra-
tion and temperature of the plasma electrons near the
dx,
1-е
probes, are identical.) By Δ we must mean the in- i (и) = ι. (69)
stantaneous difference of potentials between the por-
tions of the plasma adjacent to the probes:
l+e
Ю
w h e r e u i s t h e potential difference between t h e double
Δ =Eddsma>t + &o, probe 1—2 and probe 3, Δ ο is the dc component of the
difference in the plasma potentials near probes 1 and
where Ед is the maximum value of the projection of
2, and d is the distance between probes 1 and 3 or 2
the intensity of the high-frequency field on the line
and 3.
joining the probes, Δ ο is the DC component of the po-
tential difference, and d is the distance between Formula (69) shows that the presence of a high fre-
probes.* To obtain the experimentally measured dc quency field (as well as the presence of a dc component
Δο) causes a shift in the characteristic (u * 0 with i
*Such an adiabatic analysis is applicable if the time neces- = 0). This method has so far not been used with the
sary for the electron to pass through the perturbed region is much correct formula (69).
28
shorter than the period of the oscillations. At a temperature In E 3 attention was called to one feature of probe
T e ~ 1 0 4 O K and a probe radius 0.1 mm, this holds up to a fre-
quency ν ~ 10 9 cps. *ch = cosh.
measurement in a high-frequency discharge, namely 22. Probe Measurements in Electronegative Gases
that the plasma of the high-frequency discharge can This question has been treated in only a few inves-
have a large alternating potential relative to ground. tigations, and the experimental material is very scanty
The capacitance of the probe leads relative to ground [3,39-44] _ ψ β consider first the part of the character-
can be sufficiently large (particularly if account is istic adjacent to the space potential and corresponding
taken of the fact that the probe leads are usually to small negative probe potentials. If
shielded). The ac voltage applied between the plasma
and the ground is rectified because of the nonlinearity n
δ = -= «
Μ Τ
Λ/ - *
of the current-voltage characteristic of the probe. This
leads to the appearance of additional direct current in (the subscript " - " pertains to negative ions), then the
the measuring probe circuit, and to an overestimate of negative-ion current is much smaller than the electron
the concentration of the charge particles measured by current in this part of the characteristic. If we recog-
the two-probe method. The role of this effect has been nize that usually T_ ~ T p « T e then, say for oxygen,
insufficiently studied, but the data given in ^28^ show the influence of the negative ions will not be felt even a
that the distortion is not too large. at the space potential if n_/n e « 103. At negative
probe potentials, the negative-ion current will make an
IV. USE OF THE PROBE METHOD UNDER MORE even smaller relative contribution. In this case we can
COMPLICATED CONDITIONS obtain n e and T e from this part of the characteristic
by the usual method. However, even if the above-
21. Probe Measurements in Mixtures mentioned criterion is satisfied but δ » 1, then the
If the plasma contains two kinds of positive ions, presence of a large number of negative ions will be
with different masses, then the theory of the ion part manifest in the fact that the ratio of the electron sat-
of the characteristic must be modified. If the charges uration current to the saturation current of the posi-
and ion energies are identical, then the Poisson equa- tive ions will greatly decrease [from the condition of
tion (21) [and (43)] are written in the same form also quasineutrality of the plasma n p = n e + n_ = n e ( 1 + δ )].
in the case of a mixture, and the electron concentration Therefore, to process the electronic part of the char-
is n 0 = n p i + np2, where n p i and n p 2 are the ion con- acteristic by the Langmuir method it may be necessary
centrations of the components. Thus, the distribution to eliminate the positive-ion current (Sec. 4). In fact,
of the potential around the probe will be the same as when working with electronegative gases there are fre-
in the case when only one kind of ion is present. Let quently striations in the plasma and the electron dis-
us consider by way of an example the case of a cylin- tribution deviates appreciably from Maxwellian. In
drical probe E363. these cases it is advantageous to seek the electron en-
According to Sec. 16 we have the following expres- ergy distribution function by using formula (4a). An
sion for the ion current per unit probe length: example of a distribution obtained in this manner for
a discharge in oxygen'-*0-! ^ s s n o w n in Fig. 19. The
УШГ. α' (γ) ) . (70) narrow peak at low energies corresponds to the nega-
tive ions. In the presence of electrons and negative
To determine the radius r p of the ion layer, we use singly-charged ions, formula (4a) is transformed into
the "three halves" law, which in the presence of two
kinds of ions takes the form
(71)
From this we obtain for the radius of the ion layer r p

the relation
; (72) FIG. 19. Energy distribution of nega-

VkTe eno tively charged particles in a discharge
By measuring the total ion current i p at a large in oxygen in the ptesence of striationsM.
negative potential V, and by determining the electron
concentration n 0 and T e from the electron part of the
characteristic, we can find n P l and n P z from (70) and Ю
from the condition that the plasma be neutral. го
It must be borne in mind that even small errors in
the determination of n 0 from the electron part of the The concentration ratio obtained for the case cor-
characteristic can in some cases lead to large errors responding to Fig. 19 by separating the particle r e -
in determination of the concentrations of the compo- sponding to the negative ions and integrating over the
nents. This method, however, can be used to obtain energies, with allowance for the mass difference, was
qualitative results [37>383. n_/n e ~ 20.
782 Yu. M. KAGAN and V. I. PEREL'
The theory of the ion part of the characteristic in 2 3 . P r o b e M e a s u r e m e n t s i n t h e P r e s e n c e of Magnetic
the presence of negative ions was presented for a Fields
spherical probe in E39^ . We use here the method de-
T h e t h e o r y of p r o b e m e a s u r e m e n t s i n t h e p r e s e n c e
veloped in Ch. II. For simplicity we assume that
of a m a g n e t i c f i e l d h a s b e e n t r e a t e d i n s e v e r a l works
= =
[3,45,46]^ j^f. n o r e i i a b l e t h e o r y of p r o b e m e a s u r e m e n t s
ψ " ~r~p~ Υ»
1
e 1
e i n a m a g n e t i c field e x i s t s s o f a r . In ^45^ t h e r e i s c a l -
For a spherical probe this method leads to the follow- culated the e l e c t r o n c u r r e n t in a n infinite cylindrical
ing results for δ » 1: or plane probe under the assumption that at s o m e d i s -
tance d from the probe the charged particles have the
η δ =0.75γ, z s =0,96, s a m e concentration in velocity distribution as in the
unperturbed plasma. I n a l a y e r of t h i c k n e s s d, t h e
As can be seen, the boundary of the layer is in this p a r t i c l e s move without collision under the influence
case very close to the limitation sphere. For the cur- of t h e e l e c t r i c a n d m a g n e t i c f i e l d s . If t h e s u r f a c e of
rent in the probe we obtain t h e p r o b e i s p a r a l l e l t o t h e m a g n e t i c field, t h e n only
inrpenpOvp those particles whose L a r m o r radius is larger than
-κ(δ,ν). (73)
d will strike the probe. With i n c r e a s i n g m a g n e t i c
When δ » 1 we get 1.6 < к < 2.2. f i e l d , t h e n u m b e r of s u c h p a r t i c l e s d e c r e a s e s a n d t h e
The result of ^ 39 ^, obtained from qualitative con- current in the probe also decreases. At negative p r o b e
siderations, differs from (73) by a numerical factor. p o t e n t i a l s , t h e i n f l u e n c e of t h e m a g n e t i c f i e l d o n t h e
In analogous fashion we obtain for a cylindrical electron c u r r e n t d e c r e a s e s with increasing absolute
probe with δ » 1 v a l u e of t h e p o t e n t i a l . The r e a s o n for it is that at l a r g e
1nrpenpiivp negative potentials the p r o b e r e c e i v e s only the fast

1,3 < κ' < 1,6. (74) electrons, whose L a r m o r radius is large. The value
of d i t s e l f r e m a i n s u n d e t e r m i n e d , a n d i t i s p r o p o s e d
The results obtained show that when there are. much t o a s s u m e t h a t i t i s of t h e o r d e r of t h e m e a n f r e e p a t h
fewer electrons than negative ions, the potential on the λ. No account is taken here of several factors: the p a r -
boundary of the layer is of the order of kTp /e and the ticles whose Larmor radius is smaller than λ can
velocity of the positive ions on the boundary of the layer reach the probe as a result of diffusion; an important
is of the order of the thermal velocity. role may be played in the magnetic field by particle
The radius of the ion layer r p is determined from currents moving along the magnetic force lines, and
the " t h r e e halves" law.* consequently the finite size of the probe is essential;
The plasma potential relative to the isolated probe the depletion of the plasma at a distance d may also
Vj is determined for δ » 1 from the equation become essential.
In the case when the surface of the plane probe is
γ . / T W ιι -p- , - (75) perpendicular to the direction of the magnetic field,
e he e
+ the magnetic field at first glance does not affect the
W i t h i n c r e a s i n g c o n c e n t r a t i o n of t h e n e g a t i v e i o n s , Vt
probe current at all. This circumstance could yield
d e c r e a s e s a n d b e c o m e s of t h e o r d e r of k T p / e when
a good method of measuring the plasma parameters in
δ » VT e M/mT p .
a magnetic field. However, with the increasing mag-
We note that the theory developed above does not
netic field, the depletion of the plasma in the cylindri-
make it possible to determine all the plasma param-
cal region terminated by the probe may become sig-
eters of interest to us. However, if T_ and Tp can be
nificant. The reason for it is that the particles rapidly
estimated from some supplementary considerations,
leave this region and go to the probe, while the diffu-
then in the case when
sion from the neighboring regions is made difficult by
the magnetic field.
3
An approximate expression is derived in '- -' for the
it is possible to determine n e and T e from the elec electron current when the probe is at a probe potential
tron part and np from the ion part. somewhat higher than the plasma potential. In this
derivation explicit account is taken of the diffusion
character of the motion of the electrons transversely
*The use of the "three halves" law for r < rp is valid if to the magnetic field, of the depletion of the plasma in
positive ions predominate in this region. When the potentials the vicinity of the probe, and of the finite size of the
reached are approximately equal to kTe/e, the electron concen-
probe. To obtain the solution, it is necessary to use
tration changes insignificantly, whereas the ion concentration
decreases by a factor (Te/Tp)'4 Therefore the condition δ » 1 the diffusion equation also for the direction along the
i s still insufficient to permit neglect of the electron concentra- magnetic field. The problem is formulated in this
tion in the region r < r p . To this end it i s necessary to satisfy fashion. The motion is assumed to be due to diffusion
the more stringent condition δ » (T e /Tp)' / 2 . up to a distance on the order of the mean free path λ
from the probe, in the direction of the magnetic field, The motion of the particles from the boundary of
and up to a distance equal to the Larmor radius R the diffusion region to the probe is almost free (it is
from the probe in a perpendicular direction. If the assumed that γ « 1, and the weak positive potential
probe potential is sufficiently positive to prevent the which drives the ions away does not influence the m o -
ions from reaching the probe, then the ions in the vi- tion of the electrons). Consequently
cinity of the probe can be assumed to have a Boltz-
mann distribution. If, in addition, we assume the i. = ^ , (81)
plasma to be quasineutral, then
where S is the area of the probe. Eliminating n t from
hT
(80) and (81), we get
η = np = ne = noe v , (76)
1 +: veS (82)
where V, a s u s u a l , i s t h e p o t e n t i a l , of t h e u n p e r t u r b e d
p l a s m a relative to the given point, so that in the c a s e
u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n V < 0. In t h e diffusion region, the In the limiting case of strong magnetic fields
electron c u r r e n t s to the probe in the longitudinal and « S/16\C (where λ is the mean free path along the
t r a n s v e r s e d i r e c t i o n s a r e given by the f o r m u l a s
field), formula (82) assumes the form
ie= , C. (83)
/ιι= - J
(77)
It i s s e e n f r o m ( 8 3 ) t h a t t h e c u r r e n t s i n p r o b e s o f
equal s h a p e o r d i m e n s i o n s differ only a s a r e s u l t of
where γ = T p / T e , and the ζ axis coincides with the
the difference in the capacitances С It must be em-
direction of the magnetic field.
phasized that in Eqs. (80)—(83) С stands for the ca-
Neglecting the ionization in the perturbed region,
pacitance of the body whose surface is obtained by
we can write div j = 0, or
multiplying all the longitudinal dimensions of the dif-
(78) fusion region by VaT. Therefore the value of С of
the same probe depends on the probe orientation r e l a -
E q u a t i o n (78) c a n b e r e d u c e d t o t h e L a p l a c e e q u a - tive to the magnetic field. For a disc of radius a o r i -
tion by introducing t h e v a r i a b l e s = Vaz . Let us sur- ented perpendicular to the field, the boundary of the
round the p r o b e with an infinitely long cylindrical sur- diffusion region can be approximated by the surface
f a c e , t h e a x i s of w h i c h i s d i r e c t e d a l o n g t h e m a g n e t i c of an ellipsoid of revolution of radius a + R (where R
field. T h e c u r r e n t in t h e p r o b e is given by t h e f o r m u l a is the Larmor radius) and height λ. To calculate the
capacitance C, the longitudinal dimensions should be
ie = e \ j x da -•-•, das. (79) multiplied by y[~a . If the field is so large that \V~a~
« a and R « a, then С is the capacitance of a disc
Here d a s is the cylinder a r e a element in coordi- of radius a, that is, Ci = 2а/тг. Substituting this value
nates s, x, and y. For the side surface of the cylinder in (83), we find that the presence of a magnetic field
we have das = V« da. To calculate the integral (79) decreases the electron current to a plane probe o r i -
we can use the following electrostatic analogy. If the ented perpendicular to the field in a ratio R/a (if we
body has a potential V then, according to the Gauss choose for / a " its classical value R/λ). This is con-
theorem, the charge on the body is, on the one hand, nected with the aforementioned depletion of the plasma
ahead of the probe.
We now consider a disc of radius a, oriented p a r -
and on the other hand it is equal to CV, where С is allel to the magnetic field. С is in this case the ca-
the capacitance of the body. Thus, pacitance of an ellipsoid with major semiaxis a and
minor semiaxes R and (a + A)V~aT. For the case
/a « 1 and J~a « 1, its capacitance is equal to
where Vo is the potential at infinity. C,,= α fin, ; ι-1,
In our case the analog of the potential is the con-
centration n, which, like the potential itself, satisfies
the Laplace equation. Therefore where β = 4 if λ/a « I and β = 2 if λ/a » 1. For the
ratio of the electron currents in parallel and perpen-
\ Vj_re das = 4:tC (n0 — щ). dicular probes we obtain
where щ is the concentration on the boundary of the
- · (84)
diffusion region. Thus,
ie = e (1 n0 - (80) It is seen from (84) that the ratio of the currents de-
pends little on the magnetic field. The ratio of the This leads to a distortion of the probe characteristics.
electron current at space potential to the ion current There is no reliable theory of probe measurements for
at large negative probe potentials will be cases when this distortion is large. When a cylindrical
probe is used, this distortion can be avoided if the
(85) probe axis is directed along the current. If the axis
of the cylindrical probe is perpendicular to the current
It is assumed here that the radius of the probe is
direction, then the directional motion influences the
larger than the Larmor radius of the electrons and
form of the probe characteristic. A rigorous solution
smaller than the Larmor radius for ions. For the ion
of the problem is impossible, since the potential dis-
current we have used formula (11).
tribution around the probe does not have cylindrical
All the formulas presented contain a — the ratio
symmetry.
of the diffusion coefficients transverse to and along the
In И the problem was solved neglecting the asym-
magnetic field. The classical expression for a in
metry of the potential. The employed electron distribu-
strong fields is
tion relative to the velocity components perpendicular
(86) to the probe axis was
— 5 - -
However, in strong magnetic fields, there can be (87)
Шт.
anomalous diffusion connected with the different in-
3 4T with u the drift velocity. Such an analysis can, in our
stabilities in the plasma [ > H. This raises additional
opinion, give only an estimate of the influence of the
difficulties when using probes in a strong magnetic
directional motion at low drift belocities. Calculation
field. Even if the coefficient of transverse diffusion
has shown that the characteristics remain approxi-
is known, Eq. (83) still does not make it possible to
mately straight even in the presence of drift, up to
determine the concentration of electrons η 0 , for in a
mu 2 /2kT e ~ 0.5, but the temperature T e determined
magnetic field the point of inflection on a semilog char-
from the slope will be exaggerated.
acteristic can be weakly pronounced, and the space po-
tential may therefore be unknown. In addition, there In the case of a spherical probe, if we neglect the
is no method for determining the electron temperature. asymmetry of the potential, the electron current in a
At the present time probes can be used only in not too probe situated in a retarding field depends only on the
strong magnetic fields, namely when the Larmor r a - electron energy distribution. The directional motion
dius for the ions is much larger than the probe dimen- influences the probe characteristic only via the energy
sions^ 4 8 ^. In this case the magnetic field does not in- distribution. It is stated on this basis in E11^ that it is
fluence the ion part of the characteristic and it is pos- possible to employ Eq. (4) in the presence of direc-
sible to employ the theory presented in Ch. II. The tional motion. However, the unavoidable asymmetry
usual method of determining the electron temperature of the potential makes this statement doubtful. An
Те can be used only if the Larmor radius of the elec- asymmetry of the field was observed experimentally
trons that constitute the current flow at the given point in »*:.
of the characteristic is large compared with the probe The directional velocity was measured many times
dimensions. Since the current is produced by faster with a unilateral plane probe [ 5 3 " 5 6 3, that is, a probe
and faster electrons with increasing negative probe with one side covered (for example, with mica). The
initial premise is that the probe, which is at the space
potential, it is advantageous to determine Те from the
potential, receives all the particles which move in the
portion of the characteristic adjacent to the potential
direction towards the open surface. Then the differ-
of the isolated probe, using differentiation to eliminate
ence in the current densities (when the probe faces the
the ion current (see Sec. 4 ) . It is also possible to e m -
cathode and then the anode) is equal to the density of
ploy the two-probe method [ 29 , 49 > 5 °]. д spherical probe
the directional current in the discharge j 0 = n o ue. The
made of a ferromagnet was used in E51H. A jumplike
concentration n 0 can be determined from the charac-
change in the probe current was observed when the
teristic of the probe when it is turned parallel to the
probe temperature passed through the Curie point.
discharge axis.
These changes were due to a decrease in the tangential
component of the magnetic field when the probe went A compensation circuit for the determination of the
over into the ferromagnetic state. current difference, which is usually small, is proposed
in ^ 5 6 3. The idea of the method is to keep the probe in
one position and to measure the current difference
arising when the probe is rotated.
24. Probe Measurements in the Presence of Direc-
The described methods of determining the rate of
tional Motion in the Plasma
electron drift with the aid of a plane probe appear in-
In the preceding exposition we assumed an isotropic effective to us for the following reasons: The main
electron distribution function away from the probe. In assumption that when the probe is at the space poten-
real conditions the electrons always have directional tial the field surrounding it is equal to zero is not cor-
motion and current flows through the discharge gap. rect in the presence of electron drift relative to the
ions. In fact, let us assume that the field is equal to probe side, f ( v z ) is the distribution of the electrons
zero and the particles move freely. We can show that with respect to the v z component, and n 0 is the con-
this leads us to a contradiction. The concentrations centration of the beam far away from the probe. If we
of the electrons and the ions moving away from the assume for the distribution function the approximation
probe to one side are unequal. For example, the con-
1/2
centration of the electrons moving in the electron- i
drift direction exceeds the concentration of the ions 2kT.
moving in the same direction by an amount ~ n o u/v e , then
where v e is the thermal velocity of the electrons.
For the opposite direction the inverse holds true, thus W l , (88)
ensuring quasineutrality in the unperturbed region.

However, near the probe, where the screening is ap- where
preciable, quasineutrality is violated. If, for example, 2 *(•"*
dx
the probe faces the cathode, then the electron concen-
tration near the probe will exceed the ion concentra-
tion, since there are no particles to move in a d i r e c - i s the p r o b a b i l i t y i n t e g r a l , and
tion opposite that of the electron drift. A layer of 2eV\
negative space charge with density n o eu/v e will be 2кГ„ ~m ) •
produced adjacent to the probe and will have a thick- If the drift velocity is m u c h l a r g e r t h a n t h e t h e r m a l
ness on the order of the probe dimensions. Inside this velocity, we c a n neglect the f i r s t t e r m of (88), which
layer there will be a potential minimum of magnitude becomes
~ — n 0 ea 2 u/v e , where a is the probe dimension. For
a = 0.5 cm and n 0 = 10 10 , the minimum of the potential
in volts will be 300u/v e . Thus, a deep potential min-
imum is produced even in the case of a small drift, w h e r e j 0
= e n o
u i s t h e c u r r e n t d e n s i t y i n t h e b e a m .
thus contradicting the initial assumption that the p a r - T h e v a l u e of j 0

c a n b e d e t e r m i n e d f r o m s a t u r a t i o n
ticles move freely. In fact, the produced minimum will at l o w n e g a t i v e p r o b e p o t e n t i a l s . T h e q u a n t i t y
be smaller, since the particles do not move freely and *~ 1 (2j e /jo — 1) [ Φ" 1 is the inverse of Φ(χ)] should
tend to neutralize the space charge. However, the po- thus be a linear function of the square root of the probe
tential minimum remains and reflects some of the potential. From the slope of the resultant line we can
electrons from the probe. The assumption of free determine the temperature in the beam. In ^55И this
motion of particles around a probe at the space poten- method was used to investigate an electron beam from
tial is apparently incorrect. If the probe is at the an incandescent filament placed in a discharge. At
plasma potential and faces the cathode, its current large distances from the filament, good straight lines
will be smaller than that calculated assuming free were observed and the temperature obtained from them
motion. The methods described above should t h e r e - corresponded to the filament temperature.
fore yield undervalued drift velocities. Let us stop in conclusion to discuss the case when
the plasma moves as a whole relative to the probe.
It is indicated in ["] that in the main it is possible
This occurs when a probe-bearing rocket moves in the
to determine the directed part of the electron distribu-
ionosphere, or in probe measurements of a plasma jet
tion function from the dependence of the difference of
under laboratory conditions. In ^59^ there is an approx-
currents obtained for two opposite probe positions on
imate calculation of the ion current in a spherical probe
their potential relative to the plasma. This method is
which is at a negative potential and moves in the iono-
analogous to the Druyvestein method for the isotropic
sphere, with a rough account of the deformation of the
part of the distribution and calls for differentiation of
ion sheath around the probe. The calculations were
the current difference with respect to the probe poten-
used to find the dependence of the ion concentration on
tial. This method was used experimentally in E583.
the altitude from rocket measurement data.
A plane probe was also used to study an electron
beam in which the random velocity was smaller than
the directional velocity'- 5 3 ' 5 5 ^. Such conditions obtain V. IMPROVEMENT OF PROBE MEASUREMENT
in the cathode part of a discharge, where the fast elec- TECHNIQUES AND ERRORS OF THE METHOD
trons moving from the cathode have not yet acquired a
25. Determination of the Space Potential
directional velocity. The density of electron current
in a flat probe facing the cathode will be In order to determine more precisely the space po-
tential in the cases when the point of inflection on the
novzf(vx)dvz, characteristic is not sufficiently pronounced (see Sec.
3 ), several other methods were proposed.
In C 60 . 61 ] variation of the first derivative of the probe
w h e r e t h e ζ a x i s is p e r p e n d i c u l a r to t h e p r o b e on the current with respect to the potential was used, since
the derivative has a more pronounced variation on go- two probes (in the two-probe method) and is fed
ing through the space potential than the current itself. through an amplifier to the horizontal deflecting plates
The space potential is then taken to be the place where of an oscilloscope. (In the case of one probe, a dc bias
the first derivative has a maximum. The second deriv- is introduced to cancel approximately for the potential
ative of the probe current with respect to the potential difference between the plasma at the probe and the
41 62
is even more sensitive 4 » H; this derivative reverses electrode.)
sign near a probe potential equal to the space potential. A small ohmic resistance is connected in the probe
It is advantageous to use for the space potential the circuit. The voltage drop on this resistance, which is
point of the maximum of the second derivative E ]
62
proportional to the probe current, is applied through
(Fig. 20). an amplifier to the vertical plates of the oscilloscope.
The characteristic is obtained on the oscilloscope
screen in the usual scale, regardless of the wave form
FIG. 20. Variation of the first and
of the ac potential difference.
second derivatives (2 and 1, respec- This general circuit is used with various modifica-
tively) of the probe current near the tions in the following cases.
space potential. 1. Discharges in which the parameters do not change
with time. This includes a dc discharge and a high fre-
quency discharge for which the period is smaller than
the relaxation time.
In this case the purpose of using the oscillographic
63
A method proposed in ^ ^ is based on measuring
the noise amplitude in the probe circuit. The maximum procedure is to reduce the time consumed in the meas-
of the noise amplitude is observed at a probe potential urement process. Both the simplest variant of the
equal to the space potential. This, however, does not single-probe scheme'-66^ and its obvious improvement
agree with the data of E64J. consisting of making the amplifier for the vertical de-
Another method is based И on the use of a hot flecting plates logarithmic E67J were used many times
probe. The probe was made in the form of a wire for dc discharges. It is possible to display on the os-
which could be made incandescent by an external volt- cilloscope screen the entire electron part of the char-
age source and raised to a temperature corresponding acteristic in a semilog scale. A semiconductor diode,
to noticeable electron emission. The characteristics the voltage drop on which is linear with the logarithm
were plotted with the probe both cold and hot. The of the flowing current, in a wide range, can also be
parts of these characteristics corresponding to a probe used for this purpose. Such a diode is introduced into
positive relative to the plasma coincided, since the po- the circuit in place of the small ohmic resistance ^68^.
tential difference between the probe and the plasma At large current densities, to prevent heating the
blocked the emission. At negative probe potentials, probe, it is advisable to apply the voltage between the
the current in the hot probe was smaller than in the probe and the electrode from a pulse generator with
cold one, owing to the presence of emission from the
hot probe. The space potential was taken to be the po-
low duty cycle C69].
tential at which the divergence of the characteristics
2. Discharges with periodically varying parameters.
began.
These include both discharges with periods larger than
the relaxation time and discharges under pulsed con-
ditions and in the deionization mode.
26. Oscillographic Methods of Plotting Probe Charac- It is of interest in these cases to study the plasma
teristics parameters as functions of the phase of the discharge.
The general oscillographic measurement scheme There are two possible measurements in principle. In
consists in the following (Fig. 21). An alternating po- the first oscillograms are taken of the probe current
tential difference is applied between the probe and one with the probe potential fixed for all discharge phases.
of the electrodes (if one probe is used) or between the The points pertaining to the same phase are chosen
from the family of probe-current oscillograms plotted
at different potentials and the probe characteristic
plotted for this phase C20»57·65]. An analogous method
Ί< is used for the two-probe circuit in a pulsed dis-
charge с 2 9 . 5 0 ] .
j In the second case a definite discharge phase is

singled out. If the periodic potential difference in the
probe circuit is not synchronized with the period of the
Й discharge, then the probe characteristic for the given
phase is obtained on the oscilloscope screen. To single
out a definite phase of the discharge it is possible, for
example, to cut off the oscilloscope gun by means of a
FIG. 21. Simplest diagram for oscillographic measurements.
large negative potential during the entire period with o n e p a i r of o s c i l l o s c o p e p l a t e s a n d t h e d e r i v a t i v e of
the exception of short time intervals corresponding to this voltage d r o p is applied to the second p a i r , then the
10
the given phase E ^. s l o p e of t h e o b t a i n e d l i n e d e t e r m i n e s T e . The space
We note that in the case of periodic discharges p o t e n t i a l i s d e t e r m i n e d a s t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e s h a r p d e -
which we are considering it is also possible to d i s - c r e a s e in die/dt.
pense with the oscilloscope, by connecting in the probe We note in c o n c l u s i o n that t h e r e a r e m a n y factors
circuit a switching device which closes the circuit at which limit the r a t e with which the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c can
a definite discharge phase. The characteristic is then be plotted. F i r s t , i n t h e c a s e of r a p i d v a r i a t i o n of t h e
57
plotted point by point ^ 3. p r o b e potential, t h e ion l a y e r m a y not have t i m e to be
3. Discharges with aperiodically varying p a r a m - formed. T h e t i m e of f o r m a t i o n of t h e l a y e r i s o n t h e
e t e r s . These include irrgular pulsed discharges and o r d e r of t h e r a t i o of t h e t h i c k n e s s of t h e p l a s m a region
various cases when it becomes necessary to deal with p e r t u r b e d by t h e p r o b e to t h e ion velocity. This con-
a nonstationary plasma. In these cases the oscillo- d i t i o n i s n o t s t r i n g e n t , s i n c e t h i s t i m e i s u s u a l l y of t h e
graphic method is the only one possible, for otherwise o r d e r of m i c r o s e c o n d s .
one would have to plot the entire characteristic within Another m o r e serious limitation is connected with
a time interval during which the parameters of the t h e p r e s e n c e of p a r a s i t i c c a p a c i t a n c e s i n t h e m e a s u r -
plasma do not change noticeably. The method has been ing c i r c u i t (Fig. 22). T h e p r e s e n c e of s u c h c a p a c i -
employed for a powerful pulsed discharge to obtain t a n c e s c a u s e s p a r a s i t i c c u r r e n t s of t h e o r d e r of C V / T
17 50
oscillograms of the characteristic^ ' ^ and for rapid (where τ is the time necessary to plot one character-
71
plotting of the characteristics in a dc discharge ^ 3, istic ) to appear in the probe circuit. In order for this
The limitations on the rate at which the characteristic measurement to be possible, the probe current must
is plotted are considered at the end of the present s e c - exceed the parasitic current. For example, if С = 10
tion. pF, V = 100 V, and τ = 1 μββο, the parasitic current
In addition to the oscillographic method described is ~ 1 mA.
above, different modifications were proposed, in which
alternating potential differences with special wave-
forms were applied to the probe. In one of the meth-
ods tn^ the ac potential difference between the probe
and one of the electrodes has a sawtooth form so that
during one half cycle we have U = pt. The vertical
plates of the oscilloscope, as in the preceding case,
are connected to a small ohmic resistance in series
with the probe circuit. The deflection of the beam in
the vertical direction is then given by
FIG. 22. Parasitic capacitances in oscillograph circuit.
for the electron part of the characteristic in the case

of a Maxwellian distribution. The voltage applied to 27. Methods of Differentiating the Probe Characteristic
the horizontal deflection plates is from a special gen-
In many cases it is necessary to determine the first
erator synchronized with the sawtooth generator, and
or second derivative of the probe current with respect
decreases exponentially during the half cycle. Then
to the probe potential. This is necessary in order to
the horizontal deflection follows the law
exclude the ion current (see Fig. 4) and to find the
χ = Xoe-(/t. electron velocity distribution [ see (4)].
1. Methods of graphic differentiation. The simplest
By choosing τ it is possible to obtain a linear plot on
method is to divide the interval of the potentials into
the oscilloscope screen. Then k T e = ерт. By increas
small sections AV and replace the derivative by the
ing the amplitude of the sawtooth voltage it is possible
quantity Δϊ/Δν. This procedure was carried out twice
to obtain a value above which rectification becomes
by Druyvestein^ 12 ^ to find the energy distribution of the
impossible. This enables us to determine the space
electrons in the positive column in neon. A certain
potential.
modification of this procedure was used in E74^. A
Another method'-73-' is based on a relation which fol-
single differentiation was used to find the electron
lows from (5):
temperature T e by determining the start of the elec-
l 0 g l
die _ 1 die I dV tronic part of the characteristic t 8 > 7 5 ^. This method
кТ„ ~~dV
кТ„ dV " ~ i dV ~~L·
IT ~ U It i It
is generally speaking not very accurate, while in the
If the potential between the probe and the electrode case of double differentiation the e r r o r s increase
varies linearly in time and if the voltage drop across greatly and only qualitative results can be expected.
a small resistance, proportional to i e , is applied to Some modification of the graphic method of double
76
differentiation ^ ^ is to plot the characteristic in a shortcoming of this method is that it can be used only
semilogarithmic scale (in which it is smoother) and under exceedingly stable discharge conditions. The
use the relation method of obtaining the second derivative can be im-
f d .Λ2 di proved by using in place of a sinusoidal potential dif-
1 d4
ference a variable potential difference in the form
This analysis method was used to find the energy u1 = A (1 + cos cuii) sin<B2i,
distribution of the electrons in a glow discharge.
where Wj « ω 2 . Then
2. Method of superposition of an alternating poten-
tial. In addition to the constant potential difference
there is connected in the probe circuit an ac sinusoidal
potential generator щ = A cos ωί (Fig. 23). The po-
- / » + . · . ] cos ω,ί + Σ,
tential is then u + Uj, and the current
i = f(u + Acosat).
where 2 is the sum of the ω 2 components that de-
If t h e a m p l i t u d e A is sufficiently small, then crease in amplitude and of the multiple and combina-
2 2
tion frequency components. Thus, in this case f"(u)
i = / (u) + /' (и) A cos ωί + -|- /" (и) A cos ωί + . . . determines the amplitude of the ac component with
frequency ω 4 and facilitates its measurement. The
voltage-drop component of frequency Uj, produced
across a small resistance connected in the probe c i r -
cuit, is separated with the aid of a narrow band ampli-
fier and applied through a detector to the vertical
plates of the oscilloscope. The potential difference u
applied to the horizontal deflecting plates comes from
FIG. 23. Simplest circuit for
measuring the derivatives of the a generator that produces a slowly varying potential
probe current by superposition difference and is connected between the probe and the
of an alternating potential. electrode. This made it possible to produce rapidly
(within 25 seconds) the entire f" (u) curve on the
oscilloscope screen. This method was used to inves-
tigate the electron energy distribution in a mercury
discharge in the presence of striations'- 7 9 ^. A similar
method is described in ^ 41 ^, where the e r r o r s of p r o -
We see therefore that by measuring the ac compo- cedures of this type are also discussed. We note that
nent of the current at the frequency ω in the probe it is also possible to measure the amplitude of the h a r -
circuit it is possible to determine the first derivative monic ωι directly, with a vacuum tube voltmeter con-
of the probe current f'(ii). By measuring the addition nected past the narrow band amplifier. The f"(u)
to the dc component, resulting from turning on the ac curve is plotted in this case point by point.
voltage, we can determine the second derivative of the
3. Use of differentiating networks. In this method
probe current f " ( u ) . By varying the potential differ-
the potential of the probe relative to the anode is v a r -
ence u with the aid of a potentiometer, we obtain the
ied by applying a voltage from a sawtooth generator,
first or second derivative of the current in the r e -
which produces a linear dependence of the voltage on
quired portion of the characteristic.
the time. The voltage drop on a small resistance in
To measure the first derivative we can, for exam-
the probe circuit is proportional to the probe current
ple, connect in the probe circuit a small inductance'- 60 -',
and is applied to the vertical deflecting plates of the
which serves as the primary winding of a step-up
oscilloscope. The voltage applied to the horizontal
transformer. The amplitude of the ac potential differ-
plates is from a sawtooth generator. In view of the
ence produced in the secondary winding can be ob-
proportionality between the probe sawtooth voltage to
served on the oscilloscope screen or with a galvanom-
the time, the oscilloscope screen displays the depend-
eter connected in the circuit in place of the oscillo-
ence of the derivative of the probe current with respect
scope, in series with a rectifier unit. This method can
to the probe potential as a function of the probe poten-
lead to e r r o r s if considerable oscillations are present
tial. The method is used to obtain both the first^ 8 0 ] and
in the plasma. To reduce these e r r o r s , a judicious
the second derivative'- 81 -'. This method can be used in
choice of the frequency ω is necessary, as well as the
cases when the conditions in the plasma vary rapidly.
use of a filter [ 6 1 ^.
To measure the second derivative f"(u) it is nec-
28. Some Other Probe Applications
essary to measure the small addition to the dc com-
ponent of the probe current. To this end a special Let us dwell briefly on some additional possibilities
compensating circuit was used in ^ 78 ^. An essential of the use of probes.
Two probes placed in different points of the plasma form surface layers with large ohmic resistances. If
can be used to measure the potential difference be- the probe electron current is small and the probe is
tween these points. To this end it would be necessary cold, a deposit is formed on the probe. With increas-
to determine the space potential for each of the probes ing electron current in the probe, when the latter be-
and take their difference. If the probes as well as the comes heated, or in the case of large negative probe
properties of the plasma at the locations of the probes potentials when ion bombardment becomes appreciable,
are identical, then it is possible to use simply the dif- the contaminations are evaporated from the surface.
ference between the potentials of the floating probes. The probe characteristic can be made perfectly r e p r o -
The latter is determined as the potential difference ducible if it is measured sufficiently slowly, but none-
between the two probes when the current in the two- theless the characteristic will be deformed. The point
probe circuit is equal to zero. If the properties of the is that the variation of the probe potential registered
plasma at the probe locations are not the same, then by the voltmeter will differ from the variation of the
this method results in an e r r o r of the order of k T e / e . potential at the surface of the probe, if the work func-
With the aid of a wall probe it is possible to m e a s - tion or the potential drop on the surface layer changes
ure the flux of charged particles at the wall of a dis- at the same time. In addition, variations of the s u r -
charge tube. To this end we use the fact that the ion face conditions change the electron reflection coeffi-
14
current depends little on the probe potential, and ex- cient^ ^. All these factors influence essentially the
trapolate the current from large negative probe poten- part of the characteristic which corresponds to low
tials to the wall potential (usually the current at the negative probe potentials and is used to determine the
wall is zero and consequently the wall potential c o r r e - temperature of the electron gas or the velocity distri-
sponds to the floating potential of the probe. bution of the electrons. Some influence of contamina-
tion by mercury was observed in E 9I > 92 ], The charac-
Different methods for determining the gas density
teristic becomes strongly distorted if the probe be-
with the aid of probes were proposed in [82>83H. д п at-
comes contaminated with vapor of the lubricant'- 90 -' or
tempt was made in E84] to determine the plasma pa-
of barium oxide (when working with oxide cathodes ).
rameters by measuring the energy flux to the probe
To prevent this distortion it is necessary to clean the
at different probe potentials.
probe by electron or ion bombardment before the
Attempts were made frequently to determine the ion
measurements, and to perform the measurements
temperature T p from the ion part of the characteristic.
quite rapidly. A pulse circuit which combines con-
All these attempts were based on the old Langmuir
tinuous cleaning of the probe with rapid plotting of the
ion-current theory and are therefore inconsistent. As
characteristic is proposed in Е П > Ш 3.
can be seen from the results of Ch. II, the ion current
is practically independent of the ion temperature at 2. Probe dimensions and insulation. The dimensions
large negative probe potentials, so that determination of the probe in a positive column are limited by many
of Tp by the probe method is practically impossible. circumstances. Too large a probe introduces essen-
To determine T p it is possible to use the method of r e - tially geometric distortion in the discharge gap. In ad-
tarding fieldC5»85] and spectrochemical methods^ 8 6 ' 8 7 -'. dition, the electric distortion connected with the d i s t r i -
High frequency methods were recently developed for bution of the current in the discharge circuit and in the
plasma research. The probes are used here as minia- probe circuit is significant. Changes of this kind are
ture oscillating systems. The properties of such a caused by distortions in the region of the probe char-
system depend on the dielectric constant of the plasma acteristic near the space potential'- 9 4 · 9 5 -'. However,
in which it is immersed, and make it possible to de- even if the ion part of the probe characteristic is used
termine the electron concentration^ 8 8 ^. and the probe current is much smaller, the probe must
In many investigations the probe was used to study still be sufficiently small E10^.
the spectrum of plasma noise ^ 89 ^. The electron tem- The plasma region perturbed by the probe has d i -
perature can be determined from the intensity of the mensions on the order of the impact parameter p 0 at
noise in the microwave ^^ which the ion strikes the probe. The theory proposed
above for the ion part of the probe characteristic neg-
29. Sources of Errors in Probe Measurements lects ionization in this region. It can be assumed for
estimating purposes that all the ions produced in this
In order that the probe measurements yield correct
region as a result of ionization reach the probe. The
results, the conditions under which the probe operates
current due to these ions is zn0V, where ζ is the
must correspond to the theoretical scheme considered
number of ionizations per electron and V is the vol-
above. Under real conditions there are many external
ume of the perturbed region, ζ can be estimated from
factors which can distort the results of the probe
the balance condition of the positive column E96^. If the
measurements and make their interpretation difficult.
mean free path λ of the ion is much larger than the
Let us consider in succession the influence of these
tube radius R, then
factors.
1. Contamination of the probe surface. Contamina-
tions may change the work function of the probe or i s 0.8 \/'~2kTP 1
Μ
In the opposite case tral a t o m s ( c h a r g e e x c h a n g e ) the ions b e c o m e t h e r -

_ /9 A\2 ° a
~ ? -ι/ m a l . T h e r e f o r e a v e r y s m a l l f r a c t i o n of t h e c o l l i s i o n s
7
T ~T~ Ж can c a u s e an ion t o go into a c l o s e d orbit, w h e r e a s any
c o l l i s i o n c a n t a k e t h e i o n out of t h e o r b i t .
(when Те » Τ ) . The condition that the probe current
T h e n o n - w o r k i n g p a r t of t h e p r o b e i s p r o t e c t e d w i t h
due to ionization in the perturbed region be small com-
an insulator, which b e c o m e s charged negatively in the
pared with the current that goes to the probe from the
d i s c h a r g e and i s s u r r o u n d e d by a l a y e r of p o s i t i v e
unperturbed plasma [formulas (35) and (52)], leads to
space charge. The latter d e c r e a s e s the effective sur-
the following limitations of the probe dimensions (when
f a c e of t h e p r o b e , and t h i s c a n l e a d t o e r r o r s i n t h e
T e » T ) . In the case of low p r e s s u r e s (λ » R)
d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n n 0 . An attempt to
3/4 s t u d y t h i s e f f e c t w a s m a d e i n &*!. in C 8 5 ]
it i s i n d i -
R
c a t e d t h a t t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a p l a n e p r o b e b e -
c o m e s distorted near the wall, owing to the influence
for a spherical probe and
of t h e s p a c e - c h a r g e l a y e r at t h e w a l l . In t h e s a m e i n -
v e s t i g a t i o n , a s t u d y w a s m a d e of t h e p r o b e c h a r a c t e r -
i s t i c s f o r s e v e r a l c y l i n d r i c a l and s p h e r i c a l p r o b e s of
for a cylindrical probe. At high p r e s s u r e s (λ « R) d i f f e r e n t l e n g t h s and d i a m e t e r s , and w i t h different
t h i c k n e s s of t h e i n s u l a t i n g s u r f a c e . On t h e b a s i s of
5/4
s u c h a c o m p a r i s o n , the author has r e a c h e d the c o n -
c l u s i o n that the m o s t s u i t a b l e for m e a s u r e m e n t s a r e
for a spherical probe and thin cylindrical p r o b e s with long non-insulated sur-
3/2 f a c e s and t h i n i n s u l a t i o n . When a s h o r t c y l i n d r i c a l
).2-£L(.±_) R p r o b e i s u s e d , a n e r r o r m a y a r i s e a s a r e s u l t of f a i l -
u r e to t a k e into a c c o u n t the c u r r e n t in the end s e c t i o n
for a cylindrical probe. The sheath radius r s can be of t h e l a y e r . This question i s considered in ^ " 3 .
assumed to be equal to the radius of the probe in the 3 . E f f e c t of o s c i l l a t i o n s of t h e p l a s m a p o t e n t i a l o n
estimates. t h e p r o b e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . O s c i l l a t i o n s of t h e p l a s m a
Another limitation on the probe dimensions is con- p o t e n t i a l i n t h e v i c i n i t y of t h e p r o b e c a n g r e a t l y d e -
nected with neglecting the collisions in the unperturbed f o r m t h e e l e c t r o n and t h e s t a r t of t h e i o n p a r t of t h e
region. For the ion current (when Те » Τ) this is c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . If t h e f r e q u e n c y of t h e s e o s c i l l a t i o n s
legitimate if p 0 « λ, that is, i s not t o o high, s o that the e l e c t r o n c u r r e n t c a n r e a c h
1/2 steady state within one period (within approximately
t h e t i m e of p a s s a g e of t h e e l e c t r o n t h r o u g h t h e p e r -
turbed r e g i o n ) , then the instrument a v e r a g e s the c u r -
f o r a c y l i n d r i c a l p r o b e and r e n t . T h e s t r o n g n o n l i n e a r i t y of t h e p r o b e c h a r a c t e r -
1/4 i s t i c c a u s e s d i s t o r t i o n ( F i g . 24) M .
As can be seen from Fig. 24, the temperature Те
will be overestimated. The influence of the oscilla-
for a spherical probe. F o r t h e e l e c t r o n p a r t of t h e tions on the probe current was observed in [50,95,100]
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , c o l l i s i o n s c a n b e n e g l e c t e d if t h e p r o b e and methods were proposed to suppress the oscilla-
d i m e n s i o n i s m u c h s m a l l e r t h a n t h e m e a n f r e e p a t h of tions. The question of the influence of oscillations on
the electron W " 3 . the characteristic is also discussed in C1103.
It i s p o i n t e d o u t i n C11^ t h a t i o n s c a n h a v e c l o s e d 4. Effect of an electron emission from the probe.
o r b i t s i n t h e a t t r a c t i n g f i e l d of t h e p r o b e . The ion m a y The emission may be due to impact by positive ions,
g o i n t o s u c h a n o r b i t o n l y a s a r e s u l t of c o l l i s i o n s . metastable atoms, and photons. This leads to an over-
H o w e v e r , t h e p o p u l a t i o n of t h e s e o r b i t s w i l l n o t d e p e n d estimate of the ion current at negative probe potentials.
on the c o l l i s i o n frequency, s i n c e the ion can l e a v e the In order to estimate the emission due to positive ions,
o r b i t o n l y a s a r e s u l t of c o l l i s i o n s . The authors give
f o r t h e r a t i o of t h e p r o b e r a d i u s t o t h e D e b y e r a d i u s ,
a l o w e r l i m i t at w h i c h t h e r e a r e s t i l l no c l o s e d o r b i t s .
If t h e r a d i u s of t h e p r o b e i s s m a l l e r t h a n t h a t d e t e r -
m i n e d by t h i s c r i t e r i o n , t h e n t h e " c a p t u r e d " i o n s m a y
i n f l u e n c e t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e c h a r g e and o f t h e p o -
t e n t i a l . An a c c o u n t of t h i s i n f l u e n c e i s v e r y difficult,
but it s e e m s t o u s t h a t i t i s s m a l l u n d e r o r d i n a r y d i s - •u
charge conditions. In o r d e r f o r t h e i o n t o g o i n t o a
c l o s e d orbit, its centrifugal force m u s t b e c o m e equal FIG. 24. Influence of oscillations on the probe character-
to the attraction force. Yet after c o l l i s i o n with n e u - istic. The dashed line shows the distorted characteristic.
it is necessary to know the coefficient of secondary g a s e s i n t h e p r e s s u r e i n t e r v a l 1—20 m m H g . It i s d e -

emission from the probe material for ions with energy sirable to accumulate further experimental material,
corresponding to the negative potential of the probe. p a r t i c u l a r l y at high p r e s s u r e s .
For energies lower than 100 V, the emission coefficient 2 . P r o b e m e a s u r e m e n t s i n t h e p r e s e n c e of d i r e c -
1 2[5τ:]
is of the order of ΙΟ" —1Ο~ . It must be borne in tional m o t i o n in the p l a s m a . The m a t e r i a l r e p o r t e d in
mind that contamination of the probe surface may in- S e c . 24 s h o w s t h a t t h e r e i s s t i l l n o s a t i s f a c t o r y s o l u -
crease the emission coefficient. t i o n of t h i s p r o b l e m .
Emission under the influence of metastable atoms 3 . U s e of p r o b e s i n t h e p r e s e n c e of a s t r o n g m a g -
101 2 5
and photons was investigated in many studies [ >i° . 3. n e t i c f i e l d . I n s p i t e of t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h i s q u e s t i o n ,
This effect should be most strongly pronounced in inert t h e r e h a s b e e n no a p p r e c i a b l e p r o g r e s s in t h i s d i r e c -
gases, which have high excitation potentials. In ^ the tion to date.
value obtained for the ratio of the emission current for 4 . N o t s t r i c t l y M a x w e l l i a n v e l o c i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n of
3
a discharge in argon, at pressures 10" —1 mm Hg and the electrons. Deviations a r e particularly significant
currents 200—100 mA (under the influence of meta- in the energy region in which inelastic collisions a r e
stable atoms and photons), to the ion current in the 107 ш
possible С > ]_ Particular interest attaches t h e r e -
probe is from 5 to 20%. To estimate the emission it is fore to further improvement of methods for determin-
necessary to know the concentration of the excited ing the electron distribution function, particularly at
atoms in the discharge. The emission current under high energies.
the influence of the metastable atoms is given by the
expression , LIST OF SYMBOLS
en
™vS у
fo(v), F0(v) — electron and ion velocity distribution func-
tions in plasma,
w h e r e n is the concentration of the metastable atoms,
m
u0 — plasma potential relative to the anode or
ν their average velocity, S the probe surface area, cathode (space potential),
and y m the emission coefficient, which is of the order u — potential of probe relative to the anode or
of 10" 1 —1O" 2 ^ 5 T > 1 0 9 ^. The emission current under the cathode,
influence of photons can be estimated from the for- —V(r) — potential of a given point in the vicinity of
the probe relative to the unperturbed plasma,
—V(a) = —V — potential of the probe relative to the unper-
-•Yph. turbed plasma,
—Vj — potential of isolated (floating) probe relative
where na — concentration of the excited atoms, kg — to the unperturbed plasma,
absorption coefficient, τ — lifetime of the excited —ie — electron current in probe,
atom, and yph —quantum yield. Some data on γ ρ η ip — ion current in probe,
a r e contained in С 57 » 109 !. An example of such an esti- i — total current in probe,
—i0 — electron current in probe at space potential,
mate is given in C104^. At large negative probe poten- —j e — density of electron current in probe,
tials (on the order of hundreds of electron volts), in- n0 — concentration of electrons in plasma,
tense impact ionization by electrons knocked out from n
e(0» np(r) — concentration of electrons and ions in the
the probe is possible, along with avalanche formation. vicinity of the probe,
This is apparently the cause of the sharp increase of Te> Tp — temperatures of electron and ion gases,
the ion current in the probe, observed at these poten- ve, vp — average velocities of electrons and ions,
tials. This section of the characteristic can therefore е„ — quantity on the order of the average ion
not be used for the measurement of the plasma pa- energy,
a — probe radius,
rameters.
rp — radius of ion layer,
r s — radius of space charge sheath.
30. Conclusion r; — radius of limitation sphere,
S — probe area
The method of Langmuir probes is reliably based
h = (кТе/4пп0е2Ул- Debye radius,
both theoretically and experimentally for the investi-
e — absolute value of electron (ion) charge,
gation of an isotropic low-pressure plasma in suffi- m, Μ — masses of electron and ion,
ciently weak magnetic fields. Further development χ = r/th x s =. r s /r/, x p = гр/г г , у = £о/кТе,
of probe procedures must proceed, in our opinion, ту = eV(r)/kT e , η ι = eV(r,)/kT e , η5 =
along the following main lines. = e V ( r s ) / k T e , 7/p = e V ( r p ) / k T e - dimensionless
1. Use of probes at pressures when the mean free quantities.
path of the plasma particles is smaller than the probe
dimensions. Attempts to extend the probe theory to 1
J . L a n g m u i r a n d H. M o t t - S m i t h , G e n . E l e c t r . R e v .
t h i s c a s e w e r e m a d e i n С1О5,Ю6] ш [104] а m e t h o d i s 27, 449, 538, 616,762, 810 (1924).
2
given for finding t h e p l a s m a p a r a m e t e r s and for t h e J . L a n g m u i r a n d H. M o t t - S m i t h , P h y s . R e v . 2 8 , 7 2 7
m e a s u r e m e n t of t h e p a r a m e t e r s i n m e r c u r y a n d i n e r t (1926).
792 Yu. M. KAGAN a n d V. I. PEREL'
3 32
The Characteristics of Electrical Discharges in H . Fetz and H. Ochsner, Z. angew. Phys. 12, 250
Magnetic Fields, Ed. by A. Guthrie and R. Wakerling, (1960).
33
New York, 1949. Vagner, Zudov, and Khahaev, ZhTF 31, 336 (1961),
4
F . Wenzl, Z. angew. Phys. 2, 59 (1950). Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys. 6, 240 (1961).
5 34
R . Boyd, Proc. Roy. Soc. A201, 329 (1950). S. D. Vagner and Ya. F. Verolamen, Uch. Zap.
6
Yu. M. Kagan and V. I. Perel', DAN SSSR 91, 1321 (Science Notes), Karelian Pedagog. Inst. 11, No. 1, 69
(1953) and 95, 765 (1954). (1961).
7 35
Yu. M. Kagan and V. I. Perel', J E T P 29, 261 Kojima, Takayama, and Shimachi, J. Phys. Soc.
(1955), Soviet Phys. JETP 2, 326 (1956); Trudy, Kare- Japan 8(1), 55 (1953).
36
lian State University 4, 69 (1955). S. D. Vagner, Uch. zap. (Science Notes) Petroza-
8
Kagan, Perel', and Ripatti, Vestnik, Leningrad vodsk Univ. 5, No. 4, 129 (1957).
37
State University, No. 8, 129 (1955). Vavilin, Vagner, Lanenkina, and Mitrofanova, ZhTF
9
Yu. M. Kagan, ibid, No. 4, 63 (1957). 30, 1064 (1960), Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys. 5, 996 (1961).
10 38
Allen, Boyd, and Reynolds, Proc. Phys. Soc. 70, Vavilin, Vagner, and Platonov, Fiziko-teckhnicheskn
297 (1957). sbornik (Physico-technical Collection), Petrozavodsk,
11
J . Bernstein and J. Rabinowitz, Phys. Fluids 2, 112 in p r e s s .
39
(1959). R. Boyd and J. Thompson, Proc. Roy. Soc. A252,
12
M . Druyvestein, Zs. Phys. 64, 781 (1930). 102 (1959).
40
13
H. Rothman, Studii si cercetari de fizica 8, 255 J. Thompson, Proc. Phys. Soc. 73, 818 (1959).
41
(1957); DAN SSSR 120, 999 (1958). R . Boyd and N. Twiddy, Proc. Roy. Soc. A250, 53
14
1 . M. Bronshtem, Izv. AN SSSR ser. fiz. 22, 441 (1959).
42
(1958), Columbia Tech. Transl. p. 442; I. M. Bron- N. Twiddy and R. Boyd, Proc. Roy. Soc. A259, 145
shtem and V. V. Roshchin, ZhTF 28, 2200 and 2476 (1960).
43
(1958), Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys. 3, 2023 and 2271 J. Wilhelm, Ann. d. Phys. 12, 401 (1953).
44
(1959). J. Spencer-Smith, Phil. Mag. 19, 806 (1935).
45
15
G. Nicoll and J. Basu, J. Electr. and Control 12, Ε. Μ. Reikhrudel' and G. V. Spivak, J E T P 6, 816
23 (1962). (1936) and 8, 319 (1938).
46
18
J. Langmuir and Blodgett, Phys. Rev. 22, 317 B. Bertotty, Phys. Fluids 4, 1047 (1961); I. K.
(1923); 24, 49 (1924). Fetisov, J E T P 36, 1110 (1959), Soviet Phys. J E T P
17
Brunet, Geller, and Leroy, Report CEA No. 1580. 9, 789 (1959).
18 47
N. A. Kaptsov, Elektricheskie yavleniya ν gazakh L. A. Artsimovich, Upravlyaemye termoyadernye
(Electric Phenomena in Gases), Gostekhizdat, 1950. reaktsii (Controlled Thermonuclear Reactions), F i z -
19
E. Hayess and K. Rademacher, Ann. d. Phys. 8, matgiz, 1961; A. V. Zharinov, Atomnaya energiya 7,
158 (1961). 215 (1959).
48
20
E . Johnson and L. Malter, Phys. Rev. 80, 59 (1950). R. Bickerton and A. von Engle, Proc. Phys. Soc.
21
L . M. Biberman and B. Panin, ZhTF 21, 2 (1951). B69, 468 (1956).
49
22
S. Kojima and K. Takayama, J. Phys. Soc. Japan Vagner, Kagan, and Romanova, Vestnik, Leningr.
4, 346 (1949); 5, 357 (1950). State Univ. No. 10, 15 (1958).
50
23
Vagner, Kagan, and Perel', Vestnik, Leningr. V. I. Pistunovich, Fizika plazmy i problema
State Unoi. No. 22, 75 (1956). upravlyaemykh termoyadernykh reaktsii (Plasma
24
K. Jamamoto and T. Okuda, J. Phys. Soc. Japan Physics and the Problem of Controlled Thermonuclear
11, 57 (1956). Reactions), v. IV, 1948, p. 134; J. Jones and P. Sand-
25
S . D. Vagner, ZhTF 28, 2739 (1958), Soviet Phys. e r s , J. Sci. Instr. 37, 457 (1960).
51
Tech. Phys. 3, 2507 (1959). M . D. Gabovich, Trudy, Phys. Inst. Acad. Sci. No.
26
Kagan, Kal'vinova, and Raudanen, Vestnik, Leningr. 7, 44 (1956).
52
State Univ. No. 16, 41 (1957). T. Okuda and J. Jamamoto, J. Phys. Soc. Japan
27
V. V. Avramov and Kh. A. Dzherpetov, Vestnik, 13, 1212 (1958).
53
Moscow State Univ. No. 3, 55 (1960). S . D. Gvozdover, ZhTF 3, 587 (1933).
54
28
S. M. Levitskii and I. P. Shashurin, Radiotekhnika Rozhanskii, Kovalenko, and Sena, ZhTF 4, 1271
i elektronika 4, 1238 (1959); R. Knechtli and J. Wada, (1934).
55
Phys. Rev. Lett. 6, 215 (1961). V. Polin and S. D. Gvozdover, JETP 8, 436 (1938).
56
29
Demirkhanov, Leont'ev, and Kosyi, ZhTF 32, 180 Fatallev, Spivak, and Reikhrudel', J E T P 9, 167
(1962), Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys. 7, 125 (1962). (1939).
57
30
Kh. A. Dzherpetov and G. M. Pateyuk, JETP 28, V. L. Granovskii, Elektricheskii tok ν gaze (Elec-
343 (1955), Soviet Phys. JETP 1, 326 (1955). t r i c Current in Gases) v. 1, Gostekhizdat, 1952.
58
31
T . Okuda and K. Jamamoto, J. Appl. Phys. 31, 158 G. D. Lobov and V. V. Zakharov, Radiotekhnika i
(1960). elektronika 7, 652 (1962).
59
Dote, Takayama, and Jchumiya, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 23, 948 (1959), Columbia Tech. Transl. p. 938; ZhTF
17, 174 (1962). 31, 436 (1961), Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys. 6, 315 (1961).
60
Yu. M. Kulakov and A. A. Zaitsev, Vestnik, Mos- Takayama, Ikegami, Miyazaki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 5, 238
cow State Univ. No. 3, 101 (1949). (1960).
61 89
F. NSlle, Ann. d. Phys. 18, 328 (1956). G . Singh, Proc. Phys. Soc. 74, 42 (1959); A. Gal-
62
Vorob'eva, Kagan, and Melenin, ZhTF 33, 571 braith and A. van der Ziel, Proc. of the Fourth Intern.
(1963), Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys. 8, 423 (1963). Conf. on Ioniz. Phenomena in Gases, vol. I, Amster-
63
Zaitsev, Vasil'eva, and Mnev, J E T P 36, 1590 dam, 1960; K. Emeleus, Plasma Physics 2, 65 (1961).
90
(1959), Soviet Phys. JETP 9, 1130 (1959). K. Knol, Philips Res. Repts. 6, 288 (1951);
64
R . Sears and J. Brophy, Bull. Amer. Phys. S o c , M. Easley and W. Mumford, J. Appl. Phys. 22, 846
No. 6, 413 (1960). (1951).
65 91
V. L. Granovskii, Izv. AN SSSR No. 4, 449 (1938). R . Howe, J. Appl. Phys. 24, 7 (1953).
66 92
See, e.g., F. Anderson, Phil. Mag. 38, 179 (1947). M . Easley, J. Appl. Phys. 22, 590 (1951).
93
"Johnston, Brit. J. Appl. Phys. 7, 266 (1956). G . Wehner and G. Medicus, J. Appl. Phys. 23, 1035
68
S. M. Levitskii and Z. A. Plyatsok, РТЕ, No. 2, (1952).
94
150 (1961). B. N. Klyarfel'd, Trudy, All-union Electrotechnical
69
B . A. Mamyrin, ZhTF 23, 904 and 1915 (1953). Institute, No. 41, 162 (1940).
70 95
R . Ledrus, Appl. Sci. Res. B5, No. 1—4, 151 (1955). L. G. Guseva, ZhTF 21, 426 (1951).
71 96
J. Waymouth, J. Appl. Phys. 30, 1404 (1959). W. Schottky, Phys. Zs. 25, 342 (1924); J. Langmuir
72
A. M. Bonch-Bruevich, DAN SSSR 81, 371 (1951). and L. Tonks, Phys. Rev. 24, 876 (1929).
73 97
H . Tamagaw and J. Tujita, J . Phys. Soc. Japan 14, Yu. M. Kagan and V. I. P e r e P , ZhTF 24, 889
678 (1959). (1954).
74 98
G. Medicus, J. Appl. Phys. 27, 10 (1956). M. Fiebich, Acta Physica Austrica 4, 170 (1950).
75 99
V. M. Zakharova and Yu. M. Kagan, Optika i T. Okuda and K. Jamamoto, J. Phys. Soc. Japan
spektroskopiya 1, 627 (1956). 13, 411 (1958).
76
R. Sloane and K. Emeleus, Phys. Rev. 44, No. 5, 100
L . A. Sena, J E T P 16, 811 (1946).
101
(1933). W. Uyterhoven and M. Harrington, Phys. Rev. 36,
77
K. Emeleus and R. Ballantine, Phys. Rev. 50, 672 709 (1930); Kenty, Phys. Rev. 43, 181 (1933).
102
(1936). G . V. Spivak and Ε. Μ. Reikhrudel', ZhTF 3, 983
78
R. Sloane and E. McGregor, Phil. Mag. 18, 193 (1933).
103
(1934). V. A. Fabrikant, J E T P 17, 1037 (1947).
79 104
G. M. Malyshev and V. L. Fedorov, DAN SSSR 92, Zakharova, Kagan, Mustafin, and P e r e P , ZhTF 30,
259 (1953). 442 (1960), Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys. 5, 411 (1960).
80
Kagan, Malyshev, and Fedorov, ZhTF 23, 894 105
B. I. Davydov and L. I. Zmanovskaya, ZhTF 6,
(1953); B. Smithers, J. Sci. Instr. 39 (1), 21 (1962). 1244 (1936).
81
Kagan, Fedorov, Malyshev, and Gavallas, DAN 106
R. Boyd, Proc. Phys. Soc. B64, 795 (1951).
SSSR 76, 215 (1951). 107
Yu. M. Kagan and R. I. Lyagushchenko, ZhTF 31,
82
Klyarfel'd, Timofeev, Neretina, and Guseva, ZhTF 445 (1961) and 32, 192 (1962), Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys.
25, 1580 (1955). 6, 321 (1961) and 7, 134 (1962).
83 108
Rubchinskii, Kobelev, and Mantrov, Radiotekhnika Yu. M. Kagan and R. I. Lyagushchenko, ZhTF 32,
i elektronika 4, 1311 (1959). 735 (1962), Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys. 7, 535 (1962).
84 109
Μ . Μ. Gorshkov and Yu. P. Maslakovets, ZhTF 6, J. Hasted, J. Appl. Phys. 30, 22 (1959).
110
1513 (1936). K. Emeleus, Plasma Physics 2, 69 (1961).
85 111
N. I. Ionov, DAN SSSR 85, 753 (1952). B . Richelman, Rev. Sci. Instr. 30, 593 (1959).
86 112
S. E. Frish and Yu. M. Kagan, ZhTF 18, 519 (1948) D . Kamke and H. Rose, Zs. Phys. 145, 83 (1956).
87
ZaideP, Malyshev, and Shreider, ZhTF 31, 129
(1961), Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys. 6, 93 (1961).
88
S. M. Levitskii and I. P. Shashurin, Izv. AN SSSR Translated by J. G. Adashko

Kagan1964 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kagan1964 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kagan1964 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

PROBE METHODS IN PLASMA RESEARCH

1964 Sov. Phys. Usp. 6 767

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

A Translation of Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk

SOVIET PHYSICS USPEKHI ( R u s s i a n Vol. 8 1 . N o s . 3-4) MAY-JUNE 1964

PROBE METHODS IN PLASMA RESEARCH

Yu. M. KAGAN and V. I. PEREL'

distorted when 4 > ж/2, and is in particular equal to о о

FIG. 3. Electron part of probe

ip = en0 e (10) Such a substitution i s valid b e c a u s e t h e ions a r e in a n

i p = 4jt 2 en 0 ^ G (rt) Fo (vo) νζ dv0. (12)

w h e r e t h e p l u s s i g n i s t a k e n if r > rj and the minus

ί-ί physical meaning. When χ < x s , (26) has no solution.

is a monotonic function of the potential and consequently of the

FIG. 9. Schematic distribution of the potential, of the concen-

We use the relation

t e n t i a l i s sufficiently l a r g e , and t h e value of ( x s / x p ) 2 where

- f e y ι d χ*άΆ_γΊ ^"γ (36)

for the potential distribution in a spherical capacitor T h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c c a l c u l a t e d by f o r m u l a (37) i s s h o w n

11. Form of Probe Characteristic

iP = inr'p ena γ -jji α (γ), (35) ro ЮО 1}

FIG. 1 1 . Ion part of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ( s p h e r i c a l probe).

"naxW In the region of very small potentials (not shown in the

The maximum and minimum values of α'(γ) are

FIG. 12. xs(y) and ηΒ(γ) (cylindrical probe).

φ (γ) = max •! ———

*tg = tan. where

FIG. 15. Schematic form of two-probe characteristic.

*The form of the characteristic was obtained inM under the

From this we obtain for the radius of the ion layer r p

; (72) FIG. 19. Energy distribution of nega-

1nrpenpiivp negative potentials the p r o b e r e c e i v e s only the fast

ensuring quasineutrality in the unperturbed region.

thus contradicting the initial assumption that the p a r - T h e v a l u e of j 0

ticles move freely. In fact, the produced minimum will at l o w n e g a t i v e p r o b e p o t e n t i a l s . T h e q u a n t i t y

j In the second case a definite discharge phase is

for the electron part of the characteristic in the case

In the opposite case tral a t o m s ( c h a r g e e x c h a n g e ) the ions b e c o m e t h e r -

it is necessary to know the coefficient of secondary g a s e s i n t h e p r e s s u r e i n t e r v a l 1—20 m m H g . It i s d e -

You might also like