(1)Title

Physics of High Pressure Helicon Plasma and Effect of Wavenumber Spectrum
Interdisciplinary Graduate School of Engineering Sciences, Kyushu Univeristy, Japan Shunjiro SHINOHARA Scientific Center Institute for Nuclear Research, Kiev, Ukraine Konstantin SHAMRAI

1. Introduction
High Density Plasma Source cf. Plasma Application Studies Study on Helicon Source (Physics) Critical Issues: Plasma Generation Mechanism & Application Comparison: Experiment & Computation Future Plan: Large & Small Volume Plasmas

2. Experimental Setup + Theory
Large Diameter Plasma Device Antenna Structure Theoretical Model (TG Wave: Mode Conversion)

3. Results
Good Agreement between Experimental Results and Computed Ones Based on H-TG Model Antenna Loading , Power Absorption, Wave Structures TE-H Model: Poor Agreement Future Plan Small & Large Plasmas

3. Summary

(2)Intro

Introduction
Importance of High Density Plasma Source Plasma Processing, Accelerator, Laser, Confinement Devices …. Study on Helicon Source (Physics) e.g., Diameter 5 - 45 cm [1-5], Change of Antenna Spectra [6-9] Critical Issues Plasma Generation Mechanism, Density Jump, Control of Discharge and Optimization ..... Application Control of Discharge Regime and Wave Structures Comparison: Experiment & Computation
1) Antenna Spectra (2 Loops, Current Direction) 2) Magnetic Field (0 - 1000 G) 3) RF Input Power ( 3 kW) 4) Pressure (Ar : 6, 51 mTorr)

Antenna Loading & Density Jump, Wave Structures Power Absorption (Bulk & Edge) cf. TG Wave (Mode Conversion) Future Plan (Large & Small Volume)
References [1] S. Shinohara, Y. Miyauchi and Y. Kawai, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 37 (1995) 1015. [2] S. Shinohara, Y. Miyauchi and Y. Kawai, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 35 (1996) L731. [3] S. Shinohara, S. Takechi and Y. Kawai, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 35 (1996) 4503. [4] S. Shinohara, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 36 (1997) 4695. [5] S. Shinohara, S. Takechi, N. Kaneda and Y. Kawai, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 39 (1997) 1479. [6] S. Shinohara, N. Kaneda and Y. Kawai, Thin Solid Films 316 (1998) 139. [7] S. Shinohara and K. Yonekura, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 42 (2000) 41. [8] S. Shinohara and K. P. Shamrai, ibid. 42 (2000) 865. [9] K. P. Shamrai and S. Shinohara, Phys. Plasmas 8 (2001) 4659.

Chamber(Yoko)M

Microwave Interferometer Loop Antenna 0 z

To Pump

Ar Gas

B

Magnetic Probe

Magnetic Probe Langmuir Probe 80 cm

20 cm

Axial Magnetic Field Coils 170 cm

Schematic View of Experimental Device

AntennaMM

d = 1 cm

L = 2 cm

(a) Parallel Current

(b) Anti-Parallel Current

Schematic View of Antenna Structures

1.0 Parallel 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 Anti-Parallel

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

kz (cm-1 )

Power Spectra of Antenna Wavenumber j (k z )
(d = 1 cm, L = 2 cm)

2

(5)thmodelM.doc

THEORETICAL MODEL
H-TG Model cf. Ez = 0 (TE-H Model)
CF Double CF Vacuum m =0 antenna Plasma ra r0 d za L R z Ia1 b
Maxwell Equations Boundary and Joining Conditions c∇×E = iωB c∇×B = − iωD + 4πiaδ(r − r0) Et(z = R, L) = 0 {Et}r = r0 = 0, {Bt }r = r0 = 4πia/c ia = Σ i k z sinkzz E = Σ (E⊥sinkzz + z Ezcoskzz) ˆ B = Σ (B⊥coskzz + z Bzsinkzz) ˆ K1 = 1 − , K3 = 1 + ω2 γ e pe
2 ω 2γ e − ω 2 ce

Ia2

Antenna Current and Fields kz = lzπ/(R−L), lz = 1,2 … lzmax

Permittivity Tensor K2 = ω 2 ω ce pe ω (ω 2 γ 2 − ω 2 ) ce e

ω2 pi ω
2γ i

,

1 − w (ξ ) k 2 r 2 1 − i(ν e / ω γ e) w(ξ ) z De 1

Collisions and Landau Damping γe,i= 1+i(νe,i/ω), νe= νen+νei , ξ = ωγe/kzvTe Plasma Load Impedance Plasma Density Profile Zp = − [4π2r0(R−L)/c] Σ |ikz/Ia|2„θ(r = r0) n (r) = n0 – (n0 – nedge) ( r / r0)2

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Ref.: K. P. Shamrai, V. P. Pavlenko and V. B. Taranov: Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 39 (1997) 505. K. P. Shamrai and S. Shinohara: Phys. Plasmas 8 (2001) 4659.

Fig.1(a,b)(51mT,para/anti,H)M

[ Electron Density as a Function of Input Power ]
P = 51 mTorr (Experiment)

1014

(a)
1013 1012 1011 1010 109 1014

Parallel
100 G

1000 G

30 G 50 G 300 G 500 G 650 G

(b)
1013 1012 1011 1010 109 10

Anti-Parallel
650 G 30 G 50 G 100 G 500 G 300 G 1000 G

100

1000
in

P

(W)

Lower Wave Number Spectrum Part and/or Lower Magnetic Field is Necessary for Obtaining High Density Plasma with Low RF Power

2Loop(AP).G4M3m

[ Plasma Density n e as a Function of Pressure P ]
Lower Wavenumber Spectrum Part is Necessary for Plasma Initiation in Lower Pressure Range 10 14

15.5 cm 10 13 4 cm 7.5 cm 10 12 2 cm

10 11 L = 1.5 cm Oscillation
O (10 12 cm -3 )

10 10 0.001 0.01 0.1

P (Torr)

L: Distance between Two Loop Antennae with Opposite Current Directions

(8)PoP_colorM(13,18,20) 13

[ Fractions of Total Power Absorbed ]
(Calculation)
(a) Under Antenna Region (4 cml ), (b) Edge Layer (∆ r =2 mm), ∆ (c) Edge Layer of Under Antenna Region

Role of TG Wave, Mode Converted from Helicon Wave (Edge, Downstream, High B0)

(9)PoP_colorM(13,18,20) 18

[ Comparison: Measured and Computed Resistances ]
H-TG Model: Good Agreement
(ICP)
nedge = 0.5 (PC) 1.0 (AC)

-----------------------------

nedge = 0.5 (PC) 1.0 (AC)

nedge = 0.2 (PC)

(10)PoP_colorM(13,18,20) 20

[ Comparison: Measured and Computed Bz Profiles ]
H-TG Model: Good Agreement
PAr = 51 mTorr, B0 = 300 G

Before Density Jump

After Density Jump

(11)PoP_f11M.doc

[ Power Absorption Profiles (mW/cm3) in log Scale ]
PAr = 6 mTorr, ne = 2 × 1012 cm-3 , B0 = 100 G, Parallel Currents (1 A each)

(Calculation) (a) H-TG Model Uniform Plasma
1 0 2.5

2 1.5 r cm

H L
1

-

20 z cm

30

H L
0
-

10

0.5
-

40

(b)
1 0 2.5 0

H-TG Model Non-Uniform Plasma (nedge = 0)

2 1.5 r cm

H L
1

-

20 z cm

30

H L
-

10

0.5
-

40

----------------(c)
0

TE-H Model Uniform Plasma
-

1
-

2

2.5

2 1.5 r cm

H L
1

-

20 z cm

30

H L
0
-

10

0.5
-

40

(12)Large Diameter

[ Large Volume Plasma Production by Helicons ]

3 - 15 MHz, 5 kW, Spiral Antenna (4 Turns, 18 cmφ) Cusp, Divergent & Convergent Fields (Uniformity, Wave Studies)

Sh [ Kyushu Univ. ] Large Diameter Plasma: 45 cmφ, 170 cml, 2 kG

(Present: BaO Discharge)

[ Institute of Space & Astronautical Science ] Device for High Density Plasma Production: 75 cmφ, 490 cml, 2 kG Plan: 1.8 - 30 MHz, 1 kW (or more), Spiral Antenna (5 Turns, 22 cmφ)
Production of Target Plasma (Space and Basic Fields), Profile Control Plasma Propulsion (cf. Muses C (Asteroid): 2002~), Wave Studies -----------------------------cf. UCLA (Wave Studies) ‘LAPD’ by Gekelman (80 cmφ 1,800 cml ) Large Linear Plasma Device by Stenzel (150 cmφ 250 cml )

(13)SMALL _M0.doc

[ Small Source ]

Initial Data

Single-Loop m = 0 Antenna in the Midplane Calculation: L = 4 cm; r0 = 2 cm; ra = 2.2 cm; Te = 4 eV; f = 100 MHz (f / fce = 0.36 for B0 = 100 G)
(a) (ICP)

---------------------------------------

(b)

(c)

[ Plasma Loading Resistance vs. Plasma Density ]

(14)Concl

Summary
Comparison between Experiment and Computation Future Plan: Large and Small Sources
High Pressure (6, 51 mTorr) Antenna Spectra (2 Loops Same & Opposite Directions) f = 7 MHz, B = 0 - 1000 G cf. 4 Loops

Mode Conversion (Helicon & TG Waves) Bulk & Edge

(Results
Good Agreements were found Between Experiment and Computation Results (H-TG Model) on Antenna Loading, Density Jump and Wave Structures under Various Parameters. High Pressure, High Field, Opposite Current Directions High Threshold Power for Density Jump With the Increase in the Magnetic Field, Density and Edge Density Ratio, Larger Antenna Loading and Enhanced Edge Absorption (TG Wave, z Direction), and Absorption Spectra with Higher kz Component were Found (Computation). Absorption near Antenna Region Increased with Density, but Decreased with the Magnetic Field (Computation). Effects of Pressure and Antenna Spectra were also Investigated (Computation). The H-TG Model is Better to Explain Obtained Results than the TE-H Model. Future Plan Studies on Large & Small Diameter Plasmas for Basic and Plasma Propulsion Studies were Discussed Shortly.