Microparticleinitiated vacuum breakdown—Some possible mechanisms

M. M. Menon and K. D. Srivastava

Citation: J. Appl. Phys. 45, 3832 (1974); doi: 10.1063/1.1663870

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.1663870
View Table of Contents: http://jap.aip.org/resource/1/JAPIAU/v45/i9
Published by the American Institute of Physics.

Additional information on J. Appl. Phys.

Journal Homepage: http://jap.aip.org/
Journal Information: http://jap.aip.org/about/about_the_journal
Top downloads: http://jap.aip.org/features/most_downloaded
Information for Authors: http://jap.aip.org/authors

Downloaded 20 May 2013 to 128.197.27.9. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
Microparticle-initiated vacuum breakdown-Some possible
mechanisms
M. M. Menon and K. D. Srivastava
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
(Received 16 April 1974)

It is known that micron- and submicron-sized metallic particles are released from the electrode
surfaces when a vacuum gap is subjected to a high dc stress. It is also well known that larger
particles (> 10 f-tm) are generated within the interelectrode gap when a vacuum gap is subjected to
conditioning or severe prebreakdown current flow. This paper examines the role of such particles in
inducing the breakdown of a vacuum gap. While the larger particles induce breakdown by way of a
trigger discharge, it is shown that the smaller particles can initiate breakdown because of effects
associated with impact. The various effects associated with the high-speed impact of a metallic
microparticle on a target electrode, viz., cratering, production of metal vapor, and production of
thermally generated plasma and their relative significance on vacuum breakdown, are examined.

I. INTRODUCTION less than 100 ms-\ evaporation upon impact, as pro-

It was reported in a recent paper~ that micron- and
submicron-sized particles are released in abundance
(- 10 3 cm -2) at voltages well below the breakdown voltage
of the gap (when a vacuum gap is subjected to a high dc
stress). Furthermore, it was shown that these particles
are predominantly made of the electrode materials.
While large microparticles (> 10 J..Lm) are not generated
prior to breakdown, 1 it is well known that such particles
are created as a result of breakdown or severe pre-
breakdown current flow. Thus, in explaining micro-
particle initiated breakdown a whole range of particle
sizes, from 10-2 J..Lm up to about 100 J..Lm, should be con-
Sidered. Thus, the object of this paper is to elucidate
the role of microparticles of various dimensions in
initiating the breakdown of a vacuum gap.
The charge Q of a microparticle of radius R, resting
on an electrode surface, assuming a plane-parallel
electrode geometry, is given by2
(1 )
where Eo is the permitivity of free space and E is the
macroscopic field defined as the ratio of the applied
voltage V to the gap spacing d. The terminal velocity v
that the microparticle can attain in a single transit is
(2)
where M is the mass of the microparticle. This termi-
nal velOcity is a major parameter in deciding the nature
of the breakdown. It is therefore convenient to classify
the microparticles in terms of their velocities into three
regimes. For any given vacuum gap this automatically
implies that a Similar classification could also be made
based on the microparticle radii. The three regimes
are as follows: (i) Microparticles of low velocities
(v <100ms- 1 ); (ii) microparticles of intermediate veloci-
ties (100 ms- 1 < v < lis)' where Vs is the velocity of sound
in the electrode material; (iii) microparticles of ultra-
high velocities (v> vs)' In Sec. II, the various break-
down initiating mechanisms associated with each of the
three regimes are treated.
II. BREAKDOWN INITIATING MECHANISMS
A. Low-velocity microparticles
When the velocity of the impinging microparticle is
posed by the Slivkov model, 3 is normally not possible.
It is known4 that a complete evaporation upon impact is
possible only if the velocity of the microparticle is
greater than the velocity of sound in the target material
(- km s -1). Velocities high enough for serious impact
damage are normally greater than 100 ms-1 for com-
monly used electrode materials. It has been proposed 5
that higher velocities sufficient to cause impact damage
can be attained by a series of elastic reflections. Such
reflections should, however, be important only with
broad-area electrodes where the probability of the
particle bouncing out of the vacuum gap is considerably
reduced.
An important process that can occur when low-velocity
microparticles are present in a vacuum gap is a trigger
discharge between the particle and the electrode. 6
According to this mechanism, when the microparticle
approaches within a few micrometers from a cathode
irregularity, the electric field at the tip of the irregu-
1arity is considerably enhanced. The increase in field
is partly due to the perturbation introduced by the pres-
ence of a charged conducting microparticle and partly
due to the enhancement due to the cathode irregularity
itself. The total increase in field is such that appre-
ciable field-emission current, directed towards the
microparticle, is drawn from the cathode irregularity.
The field-emiSSion bombarded area can undergo ther-
mal instability creating sufficient metal vapor between
the particle and. the cathode to produce a discharge be-
tween the microparticle and the cathode. Such a dis-
charge is believed to trigger the main discharge of the
vacuum gap. Trigger discharges have been experimen-
tally observed 7 by introducing large microparticles
(> 10 /lm) into a vacuum gap.
B. Microparticles of intermediate velocities
The vast majority of the microparticles that are gen-
erated during the prebreakdown phase are those whose
velocities, near the breakdown voltages, fall in this
range. Typically, an aluminum particle of 1 J..Lm radius
will attain a velocity of 360 ms-1 when 200 kV is applied
across a 1-cm vacuum gap. Velocities attained in elec-
trostatic separators where voltages and gaps are much
higher are very nearly the same. For example, the
same aluminum particle will attain 340 ms- 1 in a system

3832 Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 45, No.9, September 1974 Copyright © 1974 American Institute of Physics 3832

Downloaded 20 May 2013 to 128.197.27.9. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
 3833
3833 M.M. Menon and K.D. Srivastava: Microparticle-initiated vacuum breakdown

The values obtained for the critical radius for particles

"i of different materials are also incorporated in Table I.
'"E - - 200 kV; I em GAP Microparticles of radii less than Rc are capable of
>- --- 100 kV ; I em GAP creating impact damage on the electrode surface. It can
t::
u be seen from Table I that the critical radii for titanium
9 .... .... and stainless steel are much smaller than that for
UJ
> .... '.
.... aluminum or copper. This may explain the higher in-
UJ
-' 3 sulation strength exhibited by vacuum gaps with titanium
10
u
I- and stainless-steel electrodes. By combining Eqs. (3)
0::
«
a.
and (4), it can also be pOinted out that the critical radius
0
0::
depends only on the yield strength of the material.
U
2
~ 10 The mechanism of crater formation may now be con-
-3 10-2 10-' 1.0 10
10 sidered. This is a very complex phenomenon. 8 The
MICROPARTICLE RADIUS R (}J m)
dimensions of the crater increase with the velocity of
TIG. 1. Terminal velocities for microparticles of different the impinging microparticle; the exact nature of increase
radii. is decided by the velocity of the microparticle with
respect to the acoustic velocity in the target material.
In the velocity range under conSideration, the density
where 600 kV is insulated across a 10-cm gap. Smaller and geometry of the projectile and the target strength
particles attain progressively higher velocities as shown have a profound influence on the crater size. Observa-
in Fig. 1. When the particle velocity is above the plastic tions show that typically a crater is hemispherical in
velocity, defined as the threshold velocity of the target shape surrounded by a "lip" which gives the appearance
material for plastic deformation, two events that could of having been splashed out of the crater. At velocities
be of particular importance to vacuum breakdown can lower than the acoustiC velocity of the target material,
occur: (i) The formation of impact craters which are most of the ejected matter is that of the target mate-
normally associated with ejection of metal in the form rial. The disturbance starts below the point of impact,
of solid, liquid, and vapor; and (ii) production of plasma and the material near the surface having the lowest
upon impact. shear stress when forced out by the ejecta becomes the
lip of the crater. A typical crater formed during
1. Crater formation and associated effects hypervelocity impact studies on an aluminum target is
reproduced from the works of Pond and Glass 8 and is
The plastic velocity of the target is decided by the shown in Fig. 2. It is obvious from the figure that such
yield strength and the density of both the target and the crater lips can act as strong-field-emission sites.
projectile. If the projectile and the target are assumed There is no information available on the formation of
to be of the same material, the plastic velocity vp is craters when electrostatic forces are also acting on the
given by4 target electrode. Intuitively it is suggested that the
vp = (8<7/1i)1/2, (3) edges of the crater will be more nearly vertical and part
of the lip could even be pulled out. There are reports 9
where <7 is the yield strength of the material and Ii is that protruSions are generated on the electrode surface
its density. Estimated values of the plastic velocities after the application of the voltage. These protruSions
for the most commonly used electrode materials are could very well be the result of micropartic1e impact.
shown in Table I. Since the plastic velocity is fixed by The impact could also generate some metal vapor in the
the choice of the electrode material, for a given vacuum
neighborhood of the crater. The presence of this vapor
gap, the critical radius of the microparlicle .below which
in the viCinity of a field-emitting tip can further aggra-
impact will be accompanied by plastic deformation of
vate the situation.
the target may be calculated. By using Eqs. (1) and (2)
and expressing the mass of the microparlicle in terms A microparticle 1 /.Lm in diameter will have about
of its radius and density, the critical radius Rc for 10 12 atoms in it. Even if a partial evaporation of 1% is
plastiC deformation upon impact is assumed, the number of atoms that are thrown into the
vacuum gap is about 1010. The buildup of pressure due
(4)
to these atoms in the microvolumes around the region

TABLE I. Phlstic velocity and critical radius for different electrode materials.

Material Yield strength, u Density, {j Plastic velocity Critical radius Rc (/.I m)

(Nm-~ (x 10 3 kg m- 3) (kms- i ) 200 kV, 1 cm 600 kV, 10 cm
system system
Aluminum 3.4x107 2.7 0.32 1. 15 1. 27
Stainless steel 2.8x10 8 8.0 0.53 0.14 0.15
Copper 5.5x10 7 8.96 0.22 0.70 0.80
Titanium 8.3x10 8 4.65 1.19 0.05 0.05

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 45, No.9, September 1974

Downloaded 20 May 2013 to 128.197.27.9. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
3834 M.M. Menon and K.D. Srivastava: Microparticle-initiated vacuum breakdown 3834

FIG. 2. An impact crater on an aluminum target showing the
crater lip (after Pond and Glass, reproduced from Ref. 8).
1
of impact can initiate a local discharge. It was reported
that about 103 microparticles are generated on every
square cm of the electrode surface. Moreover, the
dimensions of the particles that are encountered are
such that a vast majority of them are capable of attain-
ing plastic velocities. It is thus proposed that the com-
bined effect of crater formation and partial evaporation
can initiate the breakdown of a vacuum gap.
2. Plasma production accompanied by microparticle
impact
Investigations on the phenomena of high-velocity im-
pact by micron-sized particles on metallic targets have
revealed that impact is followed by the production of
plasma. 10 The amount of charge carriers produced is,
in general, given by
(5)
where K p , 01, and 'Yare constants. Smith and Adams 10
found by experimenting with spherical iron particles, in
the mass range 10-16 _10- 12 kg and in the impact velocity
range 0.05-10 km s-\ that
(6)
and
(7)
where M is the mass of the projectile and v is the pro-
jectile's velOCity at impact. For v > 1 km s -1, they found
experimentally that
K =(4±1)XlO-S Ckg-o.B5 (kms-1)"s.2.
p (8)
In these experiments the kinetic energy of the projec-
tiles varied from 10-11 to 10-7 J. The kinetic energy of
an aluminum microparticle of 1 11m radius, accelerated
through a vacuum gap of 1 cm, holding 200 kV across,
will be about 10-10 J. The kinetic energy will approach
10-11 J when the particle radius approaches 0.1 11m. It
follows that during typical vacuum breakdown conditions,
plasma prodliction should be expected out of micro-
particle impact. The plasma is believed to be the result
of thermal ionization due to the sudden dissipation of
kinetic energy, during the impact, in an extremely
small target interaction area. The energy that is dis-
Sipated in the case of the 1-l1m-radius microparticle
under conditions mentioned above will be about 103
J m -2. The contact time or the interaction time required
for the microparticle to be brought to rest within the
target electrode is given byu
ti = 6(15M/16rrYR l / 2 )2/ 5 (1/V1 / 5 ), (9)
where Y is Young's modulus of the target material. This
time ti decides the rate of release of the energy asso-
ciated with the impact. Table II shows the kinetic ener-
gy, energy denSity, and contact time for aluminum
particles of different radii. It can be seen that for
microparticles of radius 1 11m and belOW, operating
near breakdown voltages, the contact time is less than
10-s s. When the contact time is of this magnitude most
of the energy is dissipated in a very small volume
localized about the point of contact and very little energy
is lost by conduction. 10 This in turn results in a highly
shocked high-temperature material at the particle elec-
trode interface. Thermally gene'rated ions and electrons
are emitted from this area producing a plasma in the
neighborhood of impact. The works of Smith and
Adamslo show that only a small fraction of the total
energy is utilized in the ionization process. It is be-
Heved that the rest of the energy goes into localized
melting, vaporization, and fragmentation of the micro-
particle projectile. An estimate is made of the of ion
pairs that are generated using Eq. (6) and the values
obtained are shown in Table III. In doing so any varia-
tion in the constants due to varying electrode materials

TABLE II. Impact energy and contact time for aluminum

TABLE III. Impact generated charge for aluminum particles of
particles of different radii.
different radii.
Radius Mass Kinetic Energy Contact time Microparticle Mass, M Velocity, v Impact generated
(p.m) (kg! energy density (s) radius,_ R (kg) (kms- 1) charge, Q
(J) (x10 2 Jm·~ (f./,m) (C)
1O 2.18xl0· 9
1.0 1. 13xlO·14 7.32xIO· 7.32 2.0 9.05x10· 14 0.254 6.18 x 10. 16
0.5 1.41x1o- Hi 1. 83xl0· 1O 7.32 1. 02 xlO· 9 1.0 1. 13 X10- 14 0.360 1. 18x10· 16
0.1 1. 13 x 10- 17
7.32x10- 12 7.32 1. 73x10- 1O 0.5 1.41 x10- 15 0.509 2.25 x 10- 17
0.05 1. 41 X10· 18 1. 83 X10.12 7.32 8.07 x 10- 11 0.1 1.13 X10. 17 1.137 2.38 X10.17

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 45, No.9, September 1974

Downloaded 20 May 2013 to 128.197.27.9. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

3835 M.M. Menon and K.D. Srivastava: Microparticle-initiated vacuum breakdown
is neglected because Eq. (6) is an empirical relation
obtained for iron particles impinging on molybdenum
targets. Also, the values of the constant Kp for veloci-
ties less than 1 km S-1 was estimated by assuming that
the transition from Eq. (6) to Eq. (7) is smooth at the
boundary ve locity of 1 km s -1. The calculations are done
for a 1-cm vacuum gap insulating 200 kV. The calculated
results will be very nearly the same for a 10-cm gap
holding 600 kV across it. Microparticles of radii up to
2 11m were included to correlate with the experimental
observations reported in a previOUS paper. 1 It can be
seen from the results of Table III that the number of
ion pairs generated are only about 103 for a particle
radius of 111m. At this stage it is not clear whether this
is a significant number. While it is well known that a
vacuum gap can be triggered by producing a localized
plasma, the exact mechanism of such a triggered break-
down and the minimum number of charged particles re-
quired in the trigger are not yet known. It may be men-
tioned at this point that 103 ions from a l-/-Lm-radius
particle correspond to a fractional ionization of 10-9
times the available matter. Intuitively it may be argued
that the number of neutral molecules produced by the
impact should be much higher.
C. Microparticles of ultrahigh velocities.
During impact at ultrahigh velocities more or less the
same phenomena as in the case of intermediate ~velocity
impact occur. However, apart from cratering and ejec-
tion of metal vapor, impact at ultrahigh velocities is
always accompanied by target ·explosion. 4 The crater
volume is thus higher. Nevertheless, in a vacuum gap
of 1 cm, insulating 200 kV, only microparticle's of radii
less than 0.01 11m can be categorized as ultrahigh
velocity particles. Evaporation of such particles can
lead to only an inSignificant amount of metal vapor
(-10 3 atoms). ALSO, when the microparticle velocity is
not much greater than the acoustic velocity of the target
( < 10 km s -1) the heat generated by the impact will be
proportioned only between the microparticle projectile
and an almost comparable mass of the target. 4 For such
particles impact evaporation effects may not contribute
to the production of sufficient metal vapor for breakdown
to develop. Thus the presence of ultrahigh velocity
microparticles «0.01 11m) Should not affect the insula-
tion strength of a vacuum gap.
III. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
From what has been mentioned in Secs. I and II, it
fOllows that the presence of microparticles of radii
greater than about 0.1 /-Lm can be detrimental to the in-
sulation strength of a vacuum gap. While large particles
(> 10 /-Lm) induce breakdown by way of a trigger dis-
charge, small particles «311m) initiate breakdown
because of effects associated with impact. Furthermore,
it was shown that the major effects associated with im-
pact, at velocities the smaller particles can normally
attain, are crate ring and production of metal vapor. It
was also pointed out that thermally generated plasma can
J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 45, No.9, September 1974
Downloaded 20 May 2013 to 128.197.27.9. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
3835
also result as a consequence of impact hut the signifi-
cance of this effect is open to question.
The relative importance of microparticle-initiated
breakdown over field-emission initiation, in the case of
large gaps (> 1 cm), is clear from the above treatment.
It was shown that the energy acquired by a 1- /-Lm particle
in a 1-cm vacuum gap insulating 200 kV is very nearly
the same as that acquired in a 10-cm gap insulating only
600 kV. Thus, for higher gaps a given particle will
attain a given energy at smaller fields. The nature of
impact is decided only by the energy and hence the
velocity. For small gaps « 1 mm) it will be impossible
to attain the threshold velocity for plastiC deformation
without exceeding the critical fields at which field-
emission-initiated breakdown takes place.
It is known1 that in the case of vacuum gaps greater
than about 6 mm, the microparticles that are produced
prior to breakdown, if the prebreakdown current is kept
low «nA), are of dimensions 3 11m and less. Thus,
impact-associated effects must be the most significant
factor that have to be considered in the case of break-
down of such gaps. Although the electrostatic force
acting on the electrode surfaces is normally at least
four orders of magnitude less than the yield strength for
most commonly used electrode materials (assuming no
field-enhancement effects on the electrode surfaces),
there are indications l that the microparticles are torn
off from the electrode surfaces. This suggests that elec-
trode surfaces have many loosely adhering microparti-
cles. The fact that conditioning can only provide limited
improvement in the gap performance suggests that there
could be microparticles attached to the electrode sur-
face with a wide. range of binding ene rgies, and hence
it may be impossible to avoid them being produced as
the gap voltage is increased. Also, the conventional
conditioning process will create permanent surface
damage of the electrodes, creating sites of field emis-
sion and microparticles. Any attempt at improving the
performance of a vacuum gap should thus be directed at
reducing the detrimental effects of the impact phenome-
na described in Sec. lIB 2.
1M. M. Menon and K. D. Srivastava, J. Appl. Phys. 45, 2094
(1974) .
2N. N. Lebedev and I. P. Skal'skaya, Sov. Phys. -Tech. Phys.
7, 268 (1962).
31.N. Slivkov, Sov. Phys.-Tech. Phys. 2, 1928 (1957).
4M.A. Cook, The Science oj High Explosives (Reinhold, New
York, 1958).
·P. A. Chatterton, Addenda to Proceedings of the IV interna-
tional Symposium on Discharges and Electrical Insulation in
Vacuum, Waterloo, Canada, 1970 (unpublished).
6p. A. Chatterton, M. M. Menon, and K. D. Srivastava, J.
Appl. Phys. 43, 4536 (1972).
7E.P. MartynovandV.A. Ivanov, Radio Eng. Electron. Phys.
14, 1732 (1969).
8High Velocity Impact Phenomena, edited by R. Kinslow
(Academic, New York, 1970).
9R. P. Little and S. T. Smith, J. Appl. Phys. 36, 1502 (1965).
IOD. Smith and N. G. Adams, J. Phys. D 6, 700 (1973).
lIR.V. LathamandE.J. Braun, J. Phys. D3, 1663(1970).