
Citation: | Domen PAUL, Miran MOZETIČ, Rok ZAPLOTNIK, Alenka VESEL, Gregor PRIMC, Denis ÐONLAGIČ. The penetration depth of atomic radicals in tubes with catalytic surface properties[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2024, 26(7): 075510. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ad3952 |
Catalysis of molecular radicals is often performed in interesting experimental configurations. One possible configuration is tubular geometry. The radicals are introduced into the tubes on one side, and stable molecules are exhausted on the other side. The penetration depth of radicals depends on numerous parameters, so it is not always feasible to calculate it. This article presents systematic measurements of the penetration depth of oxygen atoms along tubes made from nickel, cobalt, and copper. The source of O atoms was a surfatron-type microwave plasma. The initial density of O atoms depended on the gas flow and was 0.7×1021 m−3, 2.4×1021 m−3, and 4.2×1021 m−3 at the flow rates of 50, 300, and 600 sccm, and pressures of 10, 35, and 60 Pa, respectively. The gas temperature remained at room temperature throughout the experiments. The dissociation fraction decreased exponentially along the length of the tubes in all cases. The penetration depths for well-oxidized nickel were 1.2, 1.7, and 2.4 cm, respectively. For cobalt, they were slightly lower at 1.0, 1.3, and 1.6 cm, respectively, while for copper, they were 1.1, 1.3, and 1.7 cm, respectively. The results were explained by gas dynamics and heterogeneous surface association. These data are useful in any attempt to estimate the loss of molecular fragments along tubes, which serve as catalysts for the association of various radicals to stable molecules.
Particle transport is a critical issue in the pursuit of magnetic confinement fusion [1]. For fusion reactors, injecting fuel from the edge is a conventional approach. Since fusion reactions primarily occur in the core, maintaining steady-state discharge requires efficient inward particle transport to the core. Therefore, the active control of particle transport is especial critical for the realization of controlled nuclear fusion. There are many experimental observations and studies of inward particle flux in various devices, such as stellarators [2–4], tokamaks [5–8] and linear devices [9, 10]. For example, the {\boldsymbol{E}}_r\times{{\boldsymbol{B}}} shear flow induced by the radial electric field {E}_{r} can enhance the thermal confinement of plasma, thereby inducing the H-mode [8]. It reveals that shear flow influences the production of inward particle flux [3, 9, 10]. Experimental results also indicate that plasma rotation is closely linked to the inward transport of particles [11–14]. Many experimental measurements reported that biased electrode-driven shear flow suppresses the edge turbulence and transport on J-TEXT, TCABR and other devices [15–17]. The direct cause of inward particle transport is the crossphase between density fluctuations \tilde{n} and radial velocity fluctuations \widetilde{{V}_{r}} [10]. However, the mechanism of inward particle transport is still not studied thoroughly in the experiment
Compared to large toroidal fusion devices, linear devices are simpler in terms of parameter control and have lower plasma density and temperature, which makes it easier to be diagnosed. Moreover, radial electric fields can be more easily introduced into linear devices using biased endplate without breaking polar symmetry [18, 19]. In order to explore the formation of inward particles flux, we set up a biased endplate in the PPT device to control radial electric field. It is found that the inward particle flux increases with the bias voltage and the profile of radial electric field ( {\mathit{E}}_{r} ) shear is flattened by the increased bias voltage at the location where the inward particle flux increases. Compared with the density fluctuation, radial velocity fluctuations ({\widetilde{V}_{r}}) has a greater influence on the inward particle. It is also found that the frequency of the dominant mode driving inward particle flux increases with the voltage of biased electrode. The experimental results in PPT device provide a feasible way to regulate the inward particle flux by using a biased endplate and improve the understanding of inward particle flux formation.
This paper reports the active control of inward particle flux in the PPT device. In section 2, the experiment setup and the probe diagnosis are presented. Some preliminary results of the active control of inward particle flux are shown in section 3. In section 4, The low frequency modes driving inward particle flux is discussed. Finally, the conclusions and discussion of this study are given in section 5.
The experiment is performed in the Peking University Plasma Test (PPT) device, which is a linear device for the study of fundamental plasma problems as shown in figure 1. The device has a cylindrical vacuum chamber with about 1 m in length and 0.25 m in radius. A set of Helmholtz coils generates a uniform magnetic field of up to 2000 G in the vacuum cavity. The plasma is generated using a 13.56 MHz helicon plasma source. The power of the helicon source is set at 1500 W and it produces plasma with argon gas. Throughout the discharge of this experiment, a constant neutral pressure of 0.3 Pa was maintained and the density is up to 1\times10^{-13}\mathrm{\ c}\mathrm{m}^{-3} . The typical ionization fraction of PPT plasma is about 5%–10%. The typical electron temperature is 3 eV, and the typical ion and neutral temperatures are 0.5 eV. With the density profile and ionization fraction, taking the typical ion-neutral collision frequency \nu_{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}}\ =\ 6\times10^{3\ }\mathrm{s}^{-1} , and the typical electron-neutral collision frequency \nu_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}}\ =\ 4\times10^6\mathrm{\ s}^{-1} . These parameters are similar to other helicon plasma devices in similar plasma conditions [20]. The ion cyclotron frequency f_{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{i}}=7.7\times10^4\mathrm{\ H}\mathrm{z} , and the electron cyclotron frequency f_{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{e}}=5.6\times10^9\mathrm{\ H}\mathrm{z} . The electron Hall parameter calculated by {\beta }_{\mathrm{e}}={\omega }_{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{e}}/{\nu }_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}}=8.8\times {10}^{3} , and the ion Hall parameter calculated by {\beta }_{\mathrm{i}}={\omega }_{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{i}}/{\nu }_{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}}=80 . Because of {\beta }_{\mathrm{e}}\gg 1 and {\beta }_{\mathrm{i}}\gg 1 , the average motion of the ions (electrons) is dominated by {\boldsymbol{E}}_r\times{{\boldsymbol{B}}} drift rather than by collisions. More details of this device can be found in the previous work [21].
A variety of plasma parameters can be diagnosed using probe diagnostic and high-speed cameras. In this experiment, a 5-tip probe array is used. The probe scanning velocity is 10 mm s−1, and sampling frequency is 600 kHz. The probe array consists of four probes measuring floating potential ( {U}_{\mathrm{f}} ) and one probe measuring ion saturation current ( {I}_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{t}} ) arrange in a cross shape. Detailed information regarding the layout of the 5-tip probe array is referred in the previous work. From the relation {E}_{r}=-\nabla {\varphi }_{\mathrm{p}}\cong -\nabla \varphi -3k\nabla {T}_{\mathrm{e}}/e , where {\varphi }_{\mathrm{p}} is plasma potential, \varphi is floating potential, and {T}_{\mathrm{e}} is electron temperature. Under our experimental conditions, \nabla \varphi is of order 1000 V m−1, the temperature gradient effect of electrons has a small effect on the plasma potential, which is typically less than 10 eV m−1. Under the assumption of negligible electron temperature fluctuation as described in reference [22], the 5-tip probe array can measure floating potential ( {U}_{\mathrm{f}} ) and plasma density ( {n}_{\mathrm{i}} ), which mean that we can calculate the fluctuation of floating potential and plasma density ( {{\widetilde U}_{\mathrm{f}}} and {\tilde{n}}_{\mathrm{i}} ). The adjacent tips in both the θ direction and z direction are spaced 4 mm apart. The 5-tip probe array is structured with three stages in the radial direction, with a height difference of 1 mm between each pair of stages. The {\boldsymbol{E}}_r\times{{\boldsymbol{B}}} drift speed can be estimated by analyzing the floating potential gradients between two adjacent {U}_{\mathrm{f}} tips, i.e., {V}_{r}=-{\nabla }_{\theta }{U}_{\mathrm{f}}/B . Various plasma parameters can be calculated, such as fluctuation-induced particle flux ( \varGamma ). Fluctuation-induced radial particle flux ( {\varGamma }_{r} ) is calculated as \left\langle{\tilde{n}{{\widetilde V}_{r}}}\right\rangle=\left\langle{\tilde{n}\nabla {{\widetilde U}_{\mathrm{f}}}}\right\rangle/B , where \left\langle{\cdot }\right\rangle means ensemble average. The sample size is 1\times {10}^{4} and the time duration of samples is 1.7\times {10}^{-2} s.
The bias endplate consists of three concentric rings of mutually insulated conductors. Alumina ceramic tubes are used for supporting surface insulation, and boron nitride ceramic rods are used for fixation between concentric rings. Each segmented electrode can be biased with independent voltage settings. PTFE (Polytetrafluoroethylene) is used to insulate the end of the vacuum chamber to ensure more effective regulation of the plasma potential by the bias electrode.
The three concentric rings (each 5 mm width, r=42.3,\;\;\;87.0,\;\;\;133.1\;\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} , z=530.5\;\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} , as shown in figure 1) insulated from each other are biased to influence the profile of floating potential at the probe position ( z=0\ \mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} ). The positions of the three rings correspond to the inner, barrier and outer of the plasma at the probe position on the same magnetic line. The three concentric rings are made of stainless steel. The adjustable DC constant-voltage power supply is used to provide the bias voltage between endplate and vacuum vessel. It has a maximum capability of ±300 V for the bias voltage and ±20 A for the bias current. In the experiments of this work, the bias voltages and bias currents are only applied to the outer ring, whose radius is 133.1\;\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} . It is found the {U}_{\mathrm{f}} profile is more changeable when the outer ring is biased, and the bias voltage cannot be applied to more than one ring simultaneously for spark discharge between two biased rings. The maximum of bias voltage applied is 90 V and the corresponding bias currents is below 0.8 A in this experiment.
The active control of inward particle flux is realized by changing the profile of floating potential. By controlling the bias voltages applied to the segmented endplate, different radial profiles of the plasma potential can be obtained. The voltage on the outer ring is adjusted from 0 to 90 V in the case of insulated edge conditions, changing the current from 0 to 0.8 A. The position of the bias ring (the shaded area as shown in the figure 2) along the magnetic line corresponds to the edge of plasma at z=0\;\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} .
It can be observed in the figure 2(b) that the profile of floating potential can be influenced by adding bias voltages on the electrode. With the increase of bias voltages, the particle flux appears and increases gradually. As shown in the figure 2, the increase in bias voltage causes a change in the potential profile, which in turn causes an inward particle flux, and the particle flux increases with the current of bias electrode. The increase of the electric field in the edge ( r=40-48\; \mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} ) elevates the inward particle flux in the plasma core ( r=25-34\;\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} ). It provides a possible method of influencing inward particle transport by applying an electric field.
As shown in figure 2, although the density gradient is always positive, the accompanying inward particle flux ( {\varGamma }_{n} ) is up-gradient if -{\nabla }_{r}{E}_{r} > 0 . The inward particle flux could be driven by {E}_{r} shear. Figure 2 illustrates the {E}_{r} shear flattening accompanied by an inward particle flux as the bias pressure increases. As the bias increases, both internal ( r=27-32\;\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} ) and external ( r=37-50\;\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} ) {E}_{r} shear decreases, suggesting that the externally applied bias could affect the plasma particle transport in the core.
Figure 3 shows that the contributions of velocity fluctuations and density fluctuation amplitudes to transport have different trends of change in the outward and inward transport components. At r = 30 mm, where the inward particle flux peaks are likewise where the velocity fluctuations \widetilde{{V}_{r}} peaks, and the size of the inward flux is positively correlated with the size of the velocity fluctuations. In contrast, the peak point of the outward flux is close to the valley of the velocity fluctuations \widetilde{{V}_{r}} at r = 35 mm. When bias voltage is applied, there are two peaks of velocity fluctuations as shown in figure 3(b). One corresponds to the peak of the inward flux and their amplitudes are positively correlated. The other peak is on the outside of the outward flux area and their amplitudes are negatively correlated. As for the density fluctuations \tilde{n} , there is only one single peak, which is positioned close to the peak of the outward flux and their amplitudes are positively correlated. It suggests that velocity fluctuations have a greater contribution to the inward particle transport.
Comparing figures 2(d) and 3, it can be seen that {E}_{r} shear is negatively correlated with velocity fluctuations in the region where inward flux occurs, suggesting that {E}_{r} shear effectively suppresses amplitudes of velocity fluctuations. This may be one of the factors that bias voltages can induce the appearance of inward flux by changing the {E}_{r} shear in the core.
For convenience, the following section takes the case where the inward particle flux is the largest as an example. The bias voltage is 90 V and the bias current is 0.8 A.
By filtering the particle flux, as shown in figure 4(c), it can be found that the particle fluxes are mainly driven by the modes between 1 and 2 kHz in general, while the inward particle flux is mainly dominated by the modes of 1.2–1.4 kHz.
By performing Fourier decomposition, the particle flux is written as:
{\varGamma }_{\mathrm{t}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{b}}=\frac{2}{{B}_{0}}{\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left|n\left(\omega \right)\right|\left|{E}_{\theta }\left(\omega \right)\right|{\gamma }_{n,{E}_{\theta }}\left(\omega \right)\mathrm{cos}\left[{\theta }_{n,{E}_{\theta }}\left(\omega \right)\right]{\mathrm{d}}\omega . | (1) |
In order to distinguish the dominant factor influencing the direction of particle flux, the trends of the root mean squares of amplitudes, cross phase, and cross coherence from the positive peak to the negative peak are examined in figure 5. From figure 5, we can find that there is a high correlation between \tilde{n} and \widetilde{{V}_{r}} and the crossphase \mathrm{cos}\left[{\theta }_{n,{V}_{r}}\left(\omega \right)\right] is about -120{\text{°}} where the inward particle flux occurs. The change in the direction of the particle flux, from outward to inward, is predominantly governed by the crossphase evolution between \tilde{n} and \widetilde{{V}_{r}} . In this context, \widetilde{{V}_{r}} is more significant than \tilde{n} in determining the amplitude of the inward particle flux.
In order to show the mode structure, the two-point cross-correlation technique [23] has been used at r=26.5\;\mathrm{ }\mathrm{ }\mathrm{ }\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} and r=29.5\;\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m} . Figure 6 shows the k-spectra at different positions of the inward particle flux area. The spectrum has a typical radial wave number of 1.4 kHz modes (k ~ 3\;{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}}^{-1} ) at the bias voltage of 90 V and the bias current of 0.8 A. As shown in figure 7, the frequency of the dominant mode driving inward particle flux increases with the biased current. However, the radial wave number (k ~ 3\;{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}}^{-1} ) of the mode remains unchanged. The frequency of the perturbation mode driving inward particle flux increases from below 1 kHz to 1.2–1.4 kHz. Considering that the turbulent transport in the low frequency is more easily suppressed by {E}_{r} shear. This may partially explain why the inward particle flux increases with the bias current.
In this paper, we report the experiment results of active control of the inward particle flux in the linear plasma device PPT. The formation of inward particle is investigated preliminarily.
Inward particle flux is observed in the PPT device. Additionally, it is found that the particle flux increases with the bias voltages. The bias voltages applied on the outer side change the inward particle flux in the core. It is also found that the profile of radial electric field ( {E}_{r} ) shear is flattened by the increased bias voltage. The amplitudes of {V}_{r} fluctuation are effectively suppressed by {E}_{r} shear. Therefore, the increased bias voltages drive an increased inward particle flow. Moreover, it is observed that the {V}_{r} fluctuation has a greater effect than {n}_{\mathrm{e}} fluctuation on the inward flux.
There is a high correlation between \stackrel{~}{n} and \widetilde{{V}_{r}} and the crossphase \mathrm{cos}\left[{\theta }_{n,{V}_{r}}\left(\omega \right)\right] is about -120 {\text{°}} where the inward particle flux occurs. In frequency domain, the inward flux is driven by the modes below 1.4 kHz. The frequency f of the mode driving inward particle flux increases with the current. The typical wave number (k ~ 3\;{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}}^{-1} ) of these modes remains constant.
The mechanism of the inward particle flux generation needs further studies. It is possible to achieve larger and more controllable inward particle flux if the sparks between two biased electrodes are avoided, and a more stable discharge is possibly available by changing the electrode material as well as the electrode relative position. Besides, the effect of different boundary conditions of the insulation or conductor on the potential distribution can be investigated.
This research was funded by the Slovenian Research Agency, Core Funding (No. P2-0082) and Project (No. L2-4487).
Conceptualization, M. Mozetič, R. Zazplotnik and D. Paul; methodology, D. Paul and R. Zaplotnik; validation, A. Vesel and G. Primc; formal analysis, A. Vesel and D. Ðonlagič; investigation, M. Mozetič and G. Primc; resources, A. Vesel, data curation, M. Mozetič and D. Paul; writing-original draft preparation, M. Mozetič and D. Paul; writing-review and editing, R. Zaplotnik, A. Vesel and G. Primc; visualization, R. Zaplotnik and D. Ðonlagič; supervision, R. Zaplotnik and M. Mozetič; project administration, A. Vesel and G. Primc; funding acquisition, M. Mozetič and D. Ðonlagič. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
[1] |
Xu Z C et al 2023 Energy Convers. Manage. 288 117159 doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2023.117159
|
[2] |
Marinov D 2012 Reactive adsorption of molecules and radicals on surfaces under plasma exposure PhD Thesis Ecole Polytechnique, Paris, France
|
[3] |
Zhang J Y et al 2023 J. Fuel Chem. Technol. 51 673 doi: 10.1016/S1872-5813(23)60343-3
|
[4] |
Navascués P et al 2022 Chem. Eng. J. 430 133066 doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2021.133066
|
[5] |
Shah Y T, Verma J and Katti S S 2021 J. Indian Chem. Soc. 98 100152 doi: 10.1016/j.jics.2021.100152
|
[6] |
Kolbadinejad S and Ghaemi A 2023 Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 7 100327 doi: 10.1016/j.cscee.2023.100327
|
[7] |
Bui H M et al 2023 Catal. Commun. 182 106738 doi: 10.1016/j.catcom.2023.106738
|
[8] |
Tohidi M M et al 2023 Tetrahedron 136 133352 doi: 10.1016/j.tet.2023.133352
|
[9] |
Tang Y et al 2023 Fuel Process. Technol. 244 107722 doi: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2023.107722
|
[10] |
Wang D W 2022 Environ. Funct. Mater. 1 182
|
[11] |
Asif M 2013 Int. J. Chem. Reactor Eng. 11 159 doi: 10.1515/ijcre-2012-0038
|
[12] |
Cho Y S et al 2024 Catal. Today 425 114345 doi: 10.1016/j.cattod.2023.114345
|
[13] |
Hubble R, York A P E and Dennis J S 2019 Chem. Eng. Sci. 207 958 doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2019.06.051
|
[14] |
Shi Y C et al 2023 Fuel 334 126811 doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2022.126811
|
[15] |
Michliček M et al 2021 Appl. Surf. Sci. 540 147979 doi: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2020.147979
|
[16] |
Booth J P and Sadeghi N 1991 J. Appl. Phys. 70 611 doi: 10.1063/1.349662
|
[17] |
Bousquet A, Cartry G and Granier A 2007 Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. 16 597 doi: 10.1088/0963-0252/16/3/020
|
[18] |
Vesel A et al 2011 Chem. Phys. 382 127 doi: 10.1016/j.chemphys.2011.03.015
|
[19] |
Cacciatore M, Rutigliano M and Billing G D 1999 J. Thermophys. Heat Trans. 13 195 doi: 10.2514/2.6436
|
[20] |
Greaves J C and Linnett J W 1958 Trans. Faraday Soc. 54 1323 doi: 10.1039/tf9585401323
|
[21] |
Šorli I and Ročak R 2000 J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 18 338 doi: 10.1116/1.582189
|
[22] |
Myerson A L 1969 J. Chem. Phys. 50 1228 doi: 10.1063/1.1671182
|
[23] |
Melin G E and Madix R J 1971 Trans. Faraday Soc. 67 198 doi: 10.1039/tf9716700198
|
[24] |
Cvelbar U, Mozetič M and Ricard A 2005 IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 33 834 doi: 10.1109/TPS.2005.845286
|
[25] |
Mozetič M and Cvelbar U 2007 Int. J. Nanosci. 6 121 doi: 10.1142/S0219581X07004365
|
[26] |
Drenik A 2009 The probability of heterogeneous recombination of hydrogen and oxygen atoms on the surfaces of fusion-relevant materials PhD Thesis Jožef Stefan International Postgraduate School, Ljubljana, Slovenia
|
[27] |
Hartunian R A, Thompson W P and Safron S 1965 J. Chem. Phys. 43 4003 doi: 10.1063/1.1696633
|
[28] |
Dickens P G and Sutcliffe M B 1964 Trans. Faraday Soc. 60 1272 doi: 10.1039/TF9646001272
|
[29] |
Breen J et al 1973 Catalysis study for space shuttle vehicle thermal protection systems Houston: NASA
|
[30] |
Greaves J C and Linnett J W 1959 Trans. Faraday Soc. 55 1346 doi: 10.1039/TF9595501346
|
[31] |
Guyon C, Cavadias S and Amouroux J 2001 Surf. Coat. Technol. 142‒144 959 doi: 10.1016/S0257-8972(01)01125-2
|
[32] |
Donnelly V M, Guha J and Stafford L 2011 J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 29 010801
|
[33] |
Herdrich G et al 2012 Prog. Aeros. Sci. 48‒49 27 doi: 10.1016/j.paerosci.2011.06.007
|
[34] |
Park G 2013 J. Spacecr. Rockets 50 540 doi: 10.2514/1.A32312
|
[35] |
Goulard R 1958 J. Jet Propul. 28 737 doi: 10.2514/8.7444
|
[36] |
May J W and Linnett J W 1967 J. Catal. 7 324 doi: 10.1016/0021-9517(67)90161-3
|
[37] |
Cauquot P, Cavadias S and Amouroux J 1998 J. Thermophys. Heat Transfer 12 206 doi: 10.2514/2.6323
|
[38] |
Wickramanayaka S et al 1991 J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 9 2999 doi: 10.1116/1.577163
|
[39] |
Kutasi K et al 2008 Plasma Process. Polym. 5 840 doi: 10.1002/ppap.200800085
|
[40] |
Czerwiec T et al 1998 Surf. Coat. Technol. 98 1411 doi: 10.1016/S0257-8972(97)00256-9
|
[41] |
Belmonte T, Jaoul C and Borges J N 2004 Surf. Coat. Technol. 188‒189 201 doi: 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2004.08.024
|
[42] |
Moisan M and Wertheimer M R 1993 Surf. Coat. Technol. 59 1 doi: 10.1016/0257-8972(93)90047-R
|
[43] |
Lebedev Y A and Mokeev M V 2003 Plasma Phys. Rep. 29 983 doi: 10.1134/1.1625995
|
[44] |
Kortshagen U et al 1994 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 27 301 doi: 10.1088/0022-3727/27/2/019
|
[45] |
Cartry G, Magne L and Cernogora G 2000 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 33 1303 doi: 10.1088/0022-3727/33/11/309
|
[46] |
Kim Y C and Boudart M 1991 Langmuir 7 2999. doi: 10.1021/la00060a016
|
[47] |
Bang S, Snoeckx R and Cha M S 2023 Plasma Chem. Plasma Process. 43 1453 doi: 10.1007/s11090-023-10370-7
|
[48] |
Mozetic M 2007 Surf. Coat. Technol. 201 4837 doi: 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2006.07.031
|
[49] |
Booth J P et al 2019 Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. 28 055005 doi: 10.1088/1361-6595/ab13e8
|
[50] |
Arts K et al 2021 J. Phys. Chem. C 125 8244 doi: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.1c01505
|
[51] |
Gudmundsson J T and Thorsteinsson E G 2007 Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. 16 399 doi: 10.1088/0963-0252/16/2/025
|
[52] |
Paul D et al 2023 Materials 16 5806 doi: 10.3390/ma16175806
|
[53] |
Paul D et al 2023 Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. 32 075001 doi: 10.1088/1361-6595/ace129
|
[54] |
Vialetto L et al 2022 Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. 31 055005 doi: 10.1088/1361-6595/ac56c5
|
[55] |
Kelly S and Bogaerts A 2021 Joule 5 3006 doi: 10.1016/j.joule.2021.09.009
|
[56] |
Levaton J et al 2006 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 39 3285 doi: 10.1088/0022-3727/39/15/010
|
[57] |
Ooi C and Goh G K L 2010 Thin Solid Films 518 e98 doi: 10.1016/j.tsf.2010.03.102
|
[58] |
Xia Y T and Sautet P 2022 ACS Nano 16 20680 doi: 10.1021/acsnano.2c07712
|
[59] |
Kuo Y and Su J Q 2022 Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 61 030902 doi: 10.35848/1347-4065/ac4f95
|
[60] |
Tompkins H G and Augis J A 1981 Oxid. Met. 16 355 doi: 10.1007/BF00611349
|
[61] |
Gulbransen E A and Andrew K F 1951 J. Electrochem. Soc. 98 241 doi: 10.1149/1.2778139
|
[62] |
Saric I, Peter R and Petravic M 2016 J. Phys. Chem. C 120 22421 doi: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b07139
|
[63] |
Unutulmazsoy Y et al 2017 Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 19 9045 doi: 10.1039/C7CP00476A
|
[64] |
Mrowec S and Grzesik Z 2004 J. Phys. Chem. Solids 65 1651 doi: 10.1016/j.jpcs.2004.03.011
|
[65] |
Cai X 2023 Mater. Today Sustainability 23 100438 doi: 10.1016/j.mtsust.2023.100438
|
[66] |
Qin L et al 2014 J. Mater. Chem. A 2 17511 doi: 10.1039/C4TA04338C
|
[67] |
Nyong A E et al 2022 Mater. Res. 25 e20210173 doi: 10.1590/1980-5373-mr-2021-0173
|
[68] |
Serafin D, Nowak W J and Wierzba B 2020 Surf. Coat. Technol. 385 125421 doi: 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2020.125421
|
[1] | Zhongtian WANG (王中天), Huidong LI (李会东), Xueke WU (吴雪科). Loss-cone instabilities for compact fusion reactor and field-reversed configuration[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2019, 21(2): 25101-025101. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aaead9 |
[2] | Haiying WEI (魏海英), Hongge GUO (郭红革), Meili ZHOU (周美丽), Lei YUE (岳蕾), Qiang CHEN (陈强). DBD plasma assisted atomic layer deposition alumina barrier layer on self-degradation polylactic acid film surface[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2019, 21(1): 15503-015503. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aae0ee |
[3] | A BOUCHIKHI. Modeling of a DC glow discharge in a neon– xenon gas mixture at low pressure and with metastable atom densities[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2017, 19(9): 95403-095403. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aa74ad |
[4] | HU Chundong (胡纯栋), CHEN Yu (陈宇), XU Yongjian (许永建), YU Ling (于玲), LI Xiang (栗翔), ZHANG Weitang (张为堂), NBI Group. Analysis of the Pipe Heat Loss of the Water Flow Calorimetry System in EAST Neutral Beam Injector[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2016, 18(11): 1139-1142. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/18/11/13 |
[5] | WANG Jingting (王婧婷), CAO Xu (曹栩), ZHANG Renxi (张仁熙), GONG Ting (龚挺), HOU Huiqi (侯惠奇), CHEN Shanping (陈善平), ZHANG Ruina (张瑞娜). Effect of Water Vapor on Toluene Removal in Catalysis-DBD Plasma Reactors[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2016, 18(4): 370-375. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/18/4/07 |
[6] | F. MARCHAL, M. YOUSFI, N. MERBAHI, G. WATTIEAUX, A. PIQUEMAL. Quantitative Determination of Density of Ground State Atomic Oxygen from Both TALIF and Emission Spectroscopy in Hot Air Plasma Generated by Microwave Resonant Cavity[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2016, 18(3): 259-265. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/18/3/08 |
[7] | WU Hanyu(吴撼宇), ZENG Zhengzhong(曾正中), WANG Liangping(王亮平), GUO Ning(郭宁). Experimental Study of Current Loss of Stainless Steel Magnetically Insulated Transmission Line with Current Density at MA/cm Level[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2014, 16(6): 625-628. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/16/6/16 |
[8] | WU Guojiang (吴国将), ZHANG Xiaodong (张晓东). Calculations of the Ion Orbit Loss Region at the Edge of EAST[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2012, 14(9): 789-793. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/14/9/03 |
[9] | K. T. A. L. BURM. The Isentropic Exponent of Single-Ionized Mono-Atomic Plasmas[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2012, 14(8): 699-701. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/14/8/03 |
[10] | LI Jibo(李吉波), DING Siye(丁斯晔), WU Bin(吴斌), HU Chundong(胡纯栋). Simulations of Neutral Beam Ion Ripple Loss on EAST[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2012, 14(1): 78-82. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/14/1/17 |