IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 29, NO.

5, OCTOBER 2001 657

State of the Theory of Vacuum Arcs

Isak I. Beilis, Senior Member, IEEE

Invited Paper

Abstract—A review of vacuum arc phenomena including the

cathode and anode processes with cold and hot electrodes as well as
the processes in the interelectrode plasma is presented. In the case
of cold electrodes, the current continuity mechanism, the nature
of mass loss, spot motion, plasma jet generation in the spots, and
the cathode potential drop are reviewed. The explosive and gas-dy-
namical models of cathode spot operation are described. In the case
of hot electrodes, the diffuse current continuity mechanism is ana-
lyzed and a model for electron-current fraction calculation in dis-
charge with cathode-anomalous electron emission is proposed. The
present state of electrical and plasma characteristics of high-cur-
rent arcs in magnetic fields are discussed.
Index Terms—Anode spot, arc voltage, bulk cathode, cathode
potential drop, cathode spot, crater, emission center, erosion
rate, film cathode, gas-dynamical model, hot electrode vacuum Fig. 1. Schematic presentation of a cathode spot crater on the bulk cathode
arc, magnetic field, plasma expansion, plasma jet, sheath, spot and a track on the film cathode.
luminous region, spot motion, track, vacuum arc.

general review of the state of the theory of vacuum arc processes

I. INTRODUCTION
V ACUUM arcs are used in many plasma processes
including high-current vacuum switching, vacuum
arc deposition of hard coatings, vacuum arc degassing, and
re-melting of metals. There are two general types of the vacuum
arcs—those with cold and hot electrodes. In the case of cold
electrodes, an intense interaction between the solid electrode
and the arc plasma occurs at the cathode spots, regions of
extremely small size and high current density. The cathode
material emission in the spot’s area supports the arc. Thus,
the cathode spots are responsible for current continuity and
cathode erosion. The anode is a collector of arc current. A
fundamental issue in the study of the vacuum arc anode spot is
the relationship between the arc current, the plasma parameters
(density, temperature), and the anode erosion rate. Two types
of hot electrode vacuum arcs exist. 1) In the hot cathode arc,
the main problem is the contradiction between the measured
current density and known mechanisms of cathodic electron
emission. 2) In the hot anode arc, the energy balance is very
important for understanding self-sustained arc operation.
The study of cathode and anode spot processes as well as
the interelectrode plasma parameters holds the key for under-
standing vacuum arc plasma device operation. In this paper, a
Manuscript received September 18, 2000; revised May 24, 2001. This work
was supported by a grant from INTAS and the Israel Science Foundation.
The author is with the Electrical Discharge and Plasma Laboratory, Depart-
ment of Interdisciplinary Studies, Fleischman Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv
University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.
Publisher Item Identifier S 0093-3813(01)09270-0.
0093–3813/01$10.00 © 2001 IEEE
will be presented. The following questions will be discussed.
What is the mechanism of current continuity at the electrode-
plasma interface? How does the cathode spot operate on mate-
rials with strongly differing thermal properties?
Why do different spot types exist? What causes the group
spot? Does the existence mechanism of nonstationary cathode
spots differ from that of stationary spots?
What is the cause of the plasma acceleration in the cathode
plasma jet?
What is the mechanism of anode spot plasma electron
heating?
What is the role of ion current in the effect of cathodic
“anomalous electron emission”?
How does the arc voltage in an axial magnetic field depend
on the cathode plasma jet parameters?
II. CATHODE SPOT PROCESSES
The Subject—Definition: In the observation, the cathode
spots are very small luminous plasma regions that move on the
cathode surface. In the theory, the spot is an arc-constricted
region that includes the cathode body and dense plasma
generation area where the current continuity is supported.
Brief Description : The experimental investigation [1], [2]
indicates that the cathode spot can disappear and again appear
with a typical spot lifetime on bulk or film cathodes (see
Fig. 1). We consider the cathode spot parameters with values for
copper, as that the most studied case. In the case of bulk cathode,
these are: cathode potential drop [2], [3] 15 V, threshold
arc current [2] 1.6 A, arc voltage [4]–[6] 20–23 V, jet
658
velocity [4]–[7] 10 cm/s, ion energy/unit charge [4]–[6]
30–37 eV, ion current fraction in the plasma jet [8], [9]
0.1, and erosion coefficient [10]–[12] 0.05-0.1 mg/C.
At low arc currents ( 10 A), the arc voltage oscillates at a
high-frequency [2] and, thus, peaks above the cathode potential
drop. The minimum arc voltage is considered to be equal to the
cathode potential drop. The oscillation amplitude of the single
spot decreases with its arc current.
The luminous regions on the spots were observed mainly by
high-speed optical photography earlier [10], [13]–[15] and more
recently [16]–[23]. Spot types were classified according to the
spot velocity , the spot lifetime , and the spot current .
High-speed motion (10–100 m/s) and short lifetime ( 10 s)
are associated with type 1 spots. The type 1 spot current is rel-
atively small, e.g., 10 A. The spot velocity is lower when the
cathode surface is cleaner. Slow, ( 0.1 m/s) spots with life-
times of about 100 s and spot currents of about 10 A are defined
as type 2 spots that preferably appear when a small gas pres-
sure is present. Sometimes, several spots can appear together
on the cathode surface with distances between them equal or
smaller than the overall spot size [10], [13], [14], [16]–[18],
[24]. This collection of spots is called a “group spot,” For arc
currents 1000 A, the group spot current for copper is in the
range of 100–200 A [10], [13], [14]. Recently [19]–[23], sepa-
rate fragments were observed also in fast moving (type 1) spots.
The cathode surface luminosity in vacuum arcs up to 150 A,
was investigated with high spatial ( m) and temporal ( ns)
resolution using laser-absorption photography and a high-speed
image converter and streak camera. The periodic fluctuations of
the spot brightness, on a nanosecond time scale, are associated
with the lifetime of the spot fragments. A fragment size of about
10 m and current/fragment of about 10–20 A were found.
The crater sizes on bulk cathodes and tracks on thin-film cath-
odes after arc extinction were also studied. Craters with sizes of
about 5–30 m were observed on copper cathode surfaces by
Daalder [25] and Juttner [19], [20]. Kesaev [2] experimented
with vacuum arcs on copper thin films with thickness in the
range of 0.01–0.1 m deposited on glass. The spot moved
and left a clear erosion track in which all the metal thin film was
removed. From observation of the tracks, the following parame-
ters were determined: spot velocity 10 –10 cm/s, erosion
rate 50–500 g/s, spot current 0.1–0.9 A, and track
width 1 10 m.
The spot current density was estimated from measurements of
the optical images of the arc and the crater size to be 10 –10
A/cm on bulk cathodes and about 10 –10 A/cm on thin-film
cathodes.
A. Current Continuity Mechanism
The electrical current at the cathode-plasma interface can be
supplied by the electrons emitted from the cathode as well as by
ions from the near-electrode plasma. Two cathode spot models
have been proposed, depending on the cathode material emis-
sion process: i) explosive generation of the material and ii) ca-
thodic evaporation.
Explosive Generation of the Plasma: In the near-cathode
region [26]–[29], explosive generation of the plasma is based
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 29, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2001
Fig. 2. Emission center model.
on intensive local heating of a micro-area [named emission
center (EC), Fig. 2] at the cathode surface in a short time. It was
assumed that the EC initiated at cathode microprotrusions (or
microcraters) heated by Joule energy dissipation and that the
cathode material emission is in the form of plasma generated
by the microprotrusion explosion. This model [30]–[34] was
proposed in connection with studies of the explosive electron
emission processes in electrical breakdown and nanosecond
discharges [33]–[38] and then was developed in recent years
[35], [38]–[42]. An emission center model (ECM) was consid-
ered for conical microprotrusions and spherical craters on plane
cathode surfaces, which are created by a previous adjacent
microprotrusion explosion. In both cases, the initial radius of
the EC is given sufficiently small ( 0.1 m) so that the Joule
heating is very large. The time dependencies of the temperature
and radius of the EC were calculated. In the case of a copper
EC, the temperature was about 50 000 K in the beginning and
10 000 K at the end of EC operation. The higher temperature
was obtained due to larger current density in the beginning of
the EC operation. According to the ECM, the EC on smooth
cathode surfaces is dead when the calculation indicates that
the temperature sufficiently decreases with time and electron
emission cannot support the EC current. The ECM indicates
that the current density is 10 –10 A/cm and the rate of
current rise is relatively high ( 10 –10 A/s) during the
EC lifetime of about 1–10 ns. Good agreement of calculated
results with measured parameters (erosion rate, crater size, spot
current, etc, [35], [39]) is obtained.
Cathodic Evaporation: The first systematical analysis of the
cathode processes was based on evaporation of the cathode ma-
terial [43]–[46]. Lee and Greenwood [43] formulated a system
of equations describing the cathode heating and the current den-
sity of the cathode electron emission, where the ion (or electron)
current fraction is a free parameter. Ecker [44]–[46] proposed an
“existence diagram” determining the spot temperature and
current density using only the conservation laws for the men-
tioned cathode processes (electron emission, cathode heating,
etc.). Other later models [47]–[51] also used input-free parame-
ters and arbitrary conditions, similar to Lee and Greenwood [43]
and the plasma processes were not always analyzed. The models
[43]–[46] calculated the dependence between the spot current
density and cathode spot temperature as well the minimal
current (where the Ecker’s diagram is available) for a mathemat-
ical solution. Harris and Lau [52] considered the plasma pro-
cesses taking into account different zones of the near-cathode
plasma. An approximation for ion multiplicity, based on a sep-
arate calculation, which does not depend on the neutral density,
is used in the system of equations. It was also assumed that each
ion flux on the cathode and anode side of the ionization zone is
BEILIS: STATE OF THE THEORY OF VACUUM ARCS
Fig. 3. Schematic presentation of the different plasma regions in the cathode
region in a vacuum arc.
equal to half of the cathode-evaporated atom flux. The ion ve-
locity at the anode and cathode side of the ionization zone is
assumed to be equal to the sound velocity.
It should be noted that in all the above-mentioned works
the mechanism of ions moving in the ionization zone toward
the cathode was not studied and, therefore, the main spot
characteristic, ion current fraction, remained unclear. Beilis
et al. [53]–[56] calculate the ion current fraction, taking into
account resonance charge-exchange ion-atom collisions of
the ions moving toward the cathode. The model is based on
a gas-dynamic description of the mass and energy flux in the
near-cathode plasma and the problem was formulated in a
self-consistent manner and will be described below. Later, in
order to calculate the cathode potential drop, Nemchinsky [57]
supplemented the gas-dynamic spot model [54], [55] with an
additional “minimal principle” condition (see below).
Gas-Dynamic Model (GDM): The cathode heated and
evaporated by interaction with near-cathode plasma in the spot
region. The electron beam is emitted from the cathode and
accelerated in the cathode sheath (space charge or ballistic
zone). The kinetic energy of the beam electrons is sufficiently
high that their relaxation length in the plasma, where plasma
heating and atom ionization take place, is much greater than the
mean-free path of the ions (Knudsen layer, Fig. 3). Therefore,
the ion flux toward the cathode could be calculated based on
the hydrodynamic equations for a three-component plasma.
This permitted calculation of the electron current fraction at the
surface, thus closing mathematically the system of equations,
which had not been closed in the previous models. In the
first approach [53]–[55], the values for the cathode potential
drop , current/spot and erosion rate were taken from
experiments. The use of these values relates the results of the
calculation to a certain spot type. In the next approach, the
parameters and will be obtained from consideration of
the processes in the kinetic layer (see below).
A wide range of parameters was evaluated by the GDM de-
scription at the bulk cathode and in the near-electrode plasma,
one of them being the spot current density (i.e., radius of the heat
source) on the cathode. The calculated results were summarized
in detail in [56]. The calculations showed that the mechanism of
electron emission basically is thermoionic with correction of the
659
work function by the Schottky effect. The spot current density
does not strongly depend on the cathode electric field when
is changed to twice the calculated value. The spot size reaches
sufficiently large values (10–100 m) that cathode heating by
ion energy flux is much larger than by Joule energy when the
spot lifetime is 1 S [55], [56]. This result is relevant to
the observed fast spots (type 1) as well as to the slowly moving
group spots [10], [13]. In the case when 1 S and rate of
spot current rise is large ( 10 A/s), the spot current density
significantly increases and cathode heating by ion and returned
plasma electron energy fluxes can be comparable with the Joule
heating. In this case, the calculated (without consideration of the
explosion phenomena) spot size and spot lifetime by GDM may
correspond to the nanosecond spot experiments [18]–[23].
Spot Operation on Different Cathode Materials
(GDM): Analysis showed that a mathematical solution to
the system of equations in the GDM does not exist for all
cathode materials. The cathode surface conditions can be
characterized by a surface temperature and electric field ,
resulting in an atomic flux from evaporation of and
an electron emission flux of . Their ratio defines the
parameter
where
;
cathode material dependent constant;
energy of evaporation in electronvolts;
work function with the Schottky factor.
The materials having intermediate thermophysical properties
(eg. Cu, Ag, and Ni) have values of slightly greater than unity
and solutions are readily found. However, when 1, i.e., for
refractory metals (e.g., W), increasing the surface temperature
results in . Under these circumstances, be there is high
electron emission, causing plentiful electron emission cooling,
but there is no ion current and, hence, insufficient ion bom-
bardment heating and, thus, a solution cannot be found for the
cathode energy balance [55], [56].
Likewise, the GDM has no solution if , e.g., for Hg.
There is insufficient electron emission and too much vapor den-
sity. Thus, also for the volatile materials, the plasma energy bal-
ance cannot be established with the present model, due to insuf-
ficient electron beam heating.
The near-cathode sheath structure determines the mechanism
of spot operation. For cathode material with intermediate ther-
mophysical properties, the GDM was corrected by adding a
sheath at the cathode surface with large electric field. For the
refractory materials, the effect of the electron space charge near
the cathode produces an electric field in the direction that re-
duces the large thermoionic electron emission, thus acting as
a virtual cathode [58]. The potential distribution for different
cathode materials is presented in Fig. 4. In the case of the volatile
materials, an additional plasma layer adjacent to the cathode
layer is hypothesized, which serves as a “plasma cathode” (see
Fig. 5), supplying electrons to the remainder of the discharge
660
E>
Fig. 4. Potential distribution in the cathode sheath in the cases of Cu (
Mo ( E 0), and W ( E< 0). U is the minimal potential at the distance of
Z from the cathode surface in the case of W material (virtual cathode).
Fig. 5. Schematic presentation of the current continuity in the case of a
mercury cathode: plasma cathode and double sheath model.
[59]. The arc current at the cathode surface is closed by ion flux
from the adjacent cathode plasma.
Film Cathode: In order to understand the spot mechanism
on thin-film cathodes, the modified GDM was solved [60] using
the experimental dependence between the film erosion rate and
track size in the form . It is assumed that the spot
moves when the underlying film is evaporated [2]. The equation
of heat conduction for thin films in the cathode energy balance
was taken in account. The calculation for different film thick-
ness is presented in [56] and [60]. The calculations show that
the spot diameter is approximately equal to the observed track
width and that energy loss by film heat conduction (with an ef-
fective voltage for heating of 1 V–2 V) is smaller than in bulk
cathodes (6 V–7 V [56], [61]). This result and the small spot
size for thin-film cathodes ( m), indicates that the spot
operation on the thin-film cathode is different than on the bulk
cathode, due to different heat loss and spot motion mechanisms
(see below).
Comparison of the Explosive and Evaporating Models: The
last formulation of the ECM uses the equations of electron emis-
sion, cathode heating and electric field at the cathode-sheath
boundary that were used in the GDM and in previous models of
cathode evaporation processes [2], [43], [45], [55]. The finite
lifetime of the EC could explain the nonstationary spot function
during the arc operation. However, the assumption about the
relatively small size of the EC only allows a solution for high
values of spot current density ( 10 A/cm ). According to the
experiments [34]–[36], [38] the explosion of the microprotru-
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 29, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2001
sion could be initiated by a very strong electric field (about
100 MV/cm) that can occur in high-voltage discharges and
for relatively large rates of arc current rise. In low-voltage arc
spots, the size of the microprotrusions is larger than the electric
sheath width and, therefore, reaching the necessary electric
field is problematic [56]. According one of versions of ECM
the new explosive center can be initiated at the narrow part of
droplets flying from the cathode during the arc discharge [39].
This mechanism should be additionally investigated.
Three cases that could be explained by GDM and difficult
understand by ECM. In the first, when the initial plasma covers
a relatively large area (high-current arc) around the micropro-
0), trusion, the Joule heat is small (low-current density, group spot,
where the fragment could also large and 10 A/cm ) and
further spot operation can be supported only by the energy flux
of ions arriving at the cathode surface from the plasma [56]. An-
other case is the measured difference between minimal spot cur-
rents on bulk (2–10 A) and film (0.1 A) copper cathodes and es-
tablished difference between motion mechanisms (discrete and
continuous). This result may be explained in the frame of GDM
by taking into account the difference between the cathode heat
losses in the bulk and in the film electrode. Finally, the self-sus-
tained operation of different spot types on the different cathode
materials could be understand by consideration the sheath struc-
ture in GDM while in ECM the characteristic explosion param-
eter is mainly constant.
B. Mass Flow and Cathode Erosion Rate
Usually, the erosion rate was obtained by calculating the
volume of the cathode in the liquid state and assuming that
all of this material is removed [2], [62], or by calculating the
evaporation rate [33], [47], [51] when the spot temperature
is known by the Dushman formula [63]. In both cases, the
calculated values depend on the type of heat source (Joule or
ion bombardment), which is a given parameter. However, the
Dushman evaporation rates [63] are correct only in vacuum,
while in the arc cathode spot region the pressure is very large
[40], [43]–[46], [54]–[56]. Presenting this case, the calculation
of cathode mass flow should be based on a kinetic treatment of
atomic evaporation, as considered by Moizhes et al. [64] and
Beilis [65]–[67].
Moizhes et al. considered the near-cathode Knudsen layer,
taking into account the electron momentum while neglecting the
electric field force in the plasma-flow momentum equation. The
cathode mass loss was calculated by assuming a sonic plasma
velocity on the external boundary of the Knudsen layer, similar
to the same assumption made by using the Dushman formula
[63].
Beilis [65] considered a kinetic model (KM) with two atomic
fluxes near the cathode surface in the Knudsen layer (see Fig. 6),
consisting of evaporated atoms flowing from the electrode and
a return flux of electrons, ions, and atoms that is formed in the
sheath and nonequilibrium plasma layers. The difference be-
tween these fluxes determines the plasma density and velocity
and, therefore, the cathode mass erosion in the vapor phase. This
analysis used a bimodal velocity distribution function [68]. The
calculation according to the KM shows that the evaporated atom
flux is comparable with the return heavy particle (atom and ion)
BEILIS: STATE OF THE THEORY OF VACUUM ARCS
Fig. 6. Model of the kinetic region in the cathode plasma.
Fig. 7. Condition for nonfree plasma expansion: external plasma cloud.
flux. It was obtained that during the spot operation the plasma
velocity must be smaller than the sound velocity and, therefore,
the plasma flow in the Knudsen layer is not free. The nonfree
plasma flow in the near-cathode region is one of the conditions
for the self-consistent cathode spot mechanism.
The calculation of plasma parameters according to the KM is
presented in [56], [66], and [67] The heavy particle density
does not strongly deviate from the saturation value
[66], while the nonequilibrium plasma velocity at the
external boundary of the Knudsen layer is one or two orders of
magnitude smaller than the sound velocity . The analysis of
the kinetic layer indicates that the spot can appear only in the
case when the condition is fulfilled, i.e., the plasma
flow in the electron beam relaxation zone is not free. The last
condition could occur in the case when a plasma cloud is present
before spot initiation as shown in the Fig. 7. Therefore, deter-
mines the cathode mass loss. The results of the cathode erosion
rate calculation are presented in the Fig. 8, as an illustration.
It may be seen that the calculated and measured [9], [10], [12]
values agree well. The calculation also shows [65], [66] that the
electric field force in the cathode sheath compensates the mo-
mentum of plasma electron pressure and they do not affect the
near-cathode plasma flow in Knudsen layer.
C. Cathode Arc Characteristics
Cathode Potential Drop: The theoretical calculation of the
cathode potential drop (CPD) always was problematic in
spite of its relatively exact measurement for both bulk and
thin-film cathodes [2], [3]. The calculation is difficult because
of the CPD multiparametric dependence. Therefore, arbitrary
661
Fig. 8. Dependence of the cathode erosion rate versus the spot current. The
calculated values is marked by Gt, The measured values, marked by Ge, are
taken from [5] for an Al cathode and from [10] for Cu a cathode.
Fig. 9. Dependence of the calculated CPD versus spot current for Al and Cu
when the cathode is at room temperature (300 K) and heated (1500 K).
parameters and different condition were used in the various
theories. Kesaev [2] tried to estimate CPD from the plasma
particle balance and Khvesuk et al. [69] tried by solving
the Poisson equation, assuming that the atoms are ionized
by cathode-emitted electrons accelerated in the CPD zone.
However, this approach is weak because the electron beam
contribution in the ionization process is small and the ion
generation depends on ionization by thermal electrons in the
plasma [55]. In other calculations [46], [57] of the CPD, the
“minimal principle” was used. The weak point of this method
is that the minimal value of the CPD depends on many spot
parameters, including the current density, temperature, size,
lifetime, etc and it difficult to obtain by complicated spot
processes [56].
In general, the CPD depends on the electron momentum and
energy balances in the sheath. Taking into account the processes
in the sheath, the CPD was calculated from a KM (Fig. 4) [70].
The electron fluxes from and to the cathode surface were ob-
tained by assuming that the kinetics of emission electron flow
is similar to kinetics of atom evaporation. The equation for the
electric sheath together with the equations for the mass flow in
the nonequilibrium Knudsen layer and in the electron relaxation
zone form a closed system of equations for calculating as a
function on the spot current I (see Fig. 9). It may be seen that
662
Fig. 10. Calculated thin Cu film CPD U as a function of film thickness.
for the bulk cathode, the CPD weakly depends on the current
for 100 A and sharply increases when the spot current de-
creases for 30 A. The CPD decreases when the cathode is
heated (see Fig. 9, 1500 K). The CPD for film cathodes
is smaller than that for bulk cathodes, even for small spot
and weakly depends on the film thickness (see Fig. 10, calcu-
lated spot current is 0.1–0.9A depending on the film thick-
ness [2]). The calculated value of 10 V is close to the measured
value of 11 V [3]. Low CPD values occur when the cathode
heat losses can be balanced by a current-dependant heat source.
Therefore, both the film cathode and rough bulk cathodes (with
protrusions, or preliminary heating) have spot currents, which
are much smaller than the spot current for the flat bulk cathode.
Thus, the relatively small cathode heat loss is the second con-
dition for operation of the vacuum arc when it is characterized
as an electrical discharge with relatively small interelectrode
voltage. This means that the cathode effective voltage should be
smaller than the measured CPD.
In order to understand the contribution of different spot
parameters, the equation for SPD calculation, obtained from
the plasma and cathode energy balances, was investigated
[56] using the solution of full system of equation by GDM.
It was shown that the quantity is determined by the work
function, electron energy, cathode erosion rate, cathode heat
loss and energy carried to the cathode by returned electrons.
For copper cathode ( 200 A) the main contribution is due
to expenditure of energy to electron emission and the heating
of the plasma electrons ( 6 eV). Similar is the contribution
due to cathode heat loss (cathode effective voltage is 7–8 eV,
i.e., about half of the 15 V). The contribution of the atom
ionization term in CPD is small ( 0.1 eV) and significantly
less than atom potential ionization. A combination of processes
characterized by the cathode emission capacity, its thermal
conductivity and material losses influences the magnitude of
the CPD in different cathode materials and spot types. Thus,
for more refractory cathode materials the SPD is higher [56].
Cathode Spot Motion and Voltage Oscillation: High tem-
poral resolution photography and postarcing observation of
craters indicate that the spot motion on bulk cathodes consisted
of discrete hops [10], [15]. In contrast, track studies indicate
that the motion was continuous on thin-film cathodes [2].
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 29, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2001
Fig. 11. Model of the dynamics of spot motion on a rough cold clean cathode.
Presently it is understood that spot motion is caused by the
exhaustion of the material under the spot, i.e., the metallic film
on thin-film cathodes, or the protrusion [56] on bulk cathodes.
The discrete motion on bulk cathodes is, thus, related to the
spot lifetime. When a spot “dies,” a new spot is “born” at an
adjacent location and, thus, the spot appears to have a random
hopping motion.
According to the ECM, the spot is dead after the explosion of
the microprotrusion or when the electron emission in an emis-
sion center has stopped. According to the GDM, the type of
cathode heat losses and type of near-cathode plasma flow deter-
mine lifetime of the spot and its motion mechanism [56], [70].
The type of heat losses depends on the cathode geometry (i.e.,
bulk, thin-film, micro-area) and determines the dependence of
the CPD on the spot current. In the case when the spot current is
relatively small ( 10 A), the spot could operate on the cathode
micro-area with low cathode heat losses balanced by the low
heat source of the spot. The motion of low-current ( 10 A)
spots depends on the rate of cathode voltage growth (Fig. 9)
during evaporation of a microprotrusion or film on the cathode
surface. A model of the dynamics of spot motion is presented in
Fig. 11. When a protrusion is completely evaporated, the spot
continues to operate on the bulk cathode. The heat loss in the
bulk increases and the voltage reaches such high values that the
old spot dies and a new spot easily appears at the nearest neigh-
boring protrusion, where the voltage will be smaller. The char-
acteristic time of the protrusion evaporation is small ( 1–10 s)
[56] equal to the spot lifetime and, therefore, the spot velocity
is relatively high (10 cm/s). During the spot motion the CPD
oscillates as the spot hops from one protrusion to another. The
spot motion resembles a random walk, as observed by Juttner
[19], [20].
In the case of higher spot currents (several hundreds of am-
peres) under vacuum conditions with a bulk cathode, the high
current heats the cathode surface so that the energy loss from
the individual spots is compensated by the spot energy flux and
the cathode spots have a low CPD. When the arc current ex-
ceeds a critical value, which depends on the cathode material,
several spots operate simultaneously. When the spots are close
to each other, they form a common plasma cloud, which im-
pedes the plasma flow, increasing the near cathode plasma den-
sity. This concentration of spots is favorable and new spots can
BEILIS: STATE OF THE THEORY OF VACUUM ARCS
Fig. 12. Schematic presentation of the model of the group spot creation.
Fig. 13. Single cathode spot appearance in the case of an arc burning in an
external gas. The distance between the spots L is much larger than the spot
size.
be ignited under the same plasma cloud by the nonfree plasma
flow condition. The spot existence conditions are met with a
low cathode drop when the plasma flow is impeded; the spots
tend to be stationary or to have a low velocity. Thus, the “group
spot” is formed (see Fig. 12), as observed experimentally [10],
[13], [14]–[17]. Similarly, if a background gas is present again
at relatively high currents, the plasma flow is likewise impeded
(without the need of a common plasma cloud as in vacuum) and,
thus, the spot velocity is slower than in vacuum. As the arc cur-
rent heats the cathode bulk, the CPD is not large (Fig. 9) and the
spot can operate on the bulk cathode without cathode voltage
oscillation, as observed [2], [10]. Under these conditions the
low-velocity spots exist separately with distance Lg between the
spots as it is shown in the Fig. 13. Thus, the spot velocity de-
pends on the physical state of the cathode surface (temperature,
geometry-film or bulk and roughness) and on the plasma cloud
or background gas present in the electrode gap.
One of interesting phenomena of the vacuum arc is the
cathode spot retrograde motion [2]. The phenomena indicate
that in the transverse magnetic field the cathode spots do not
move in Amperian direction. Recently, the short review of the
existing explanation is presented in [23]. Still the problem of
retrograde spot motion is very complicate and today it is an
opened question. We think that the effect of retrograde cathode
spot movement in a magnetic field could be understood also by
taken into account that the plasma flow in near-cathode region
can be impeded. Under this idea, the direction of spot motion
is determined by the distribution of different condition of
impeded plasma flow in the spot region. The detail description
of this mechanism is subject in an original work and not for
this review.
Cathodic Plasma Jet and Plasma Acceleration: The near-
cathode plasma flow is strongly collision dominated and the
663
ions in the expanding plasma capture a considerable fraction of
the electron momentum and energy. Tonks [71] first proposed
taking into account the momentum of the plasma electrons in
order to explain the force on the cathode and the plasma acceler-
ation mechanism by an estimation of the plasma electron pres-
sure. But he used arbitrary values of the plasma electron tem-
perature and ion current fraction. Later the gas-dynamic mech-
anism for the plasma jet expansion zone (Fig. 3) was developed
for conical [56], [72], [73] and spherical [64], [74]–[76] plasma
expansion geometries. In the ECM, it was assumed that the ve-
locity of the expanding plasma after the thermal EC explosion
is equal to the velocity of the expanded plasma in the cathode
jet [35], [38]. The plasma velocity in this case was determined
by the adiabatic model [77] and determined by the energy
accumulated in the cathode protrusion. According to the ECM
assumption, the value of is several times of the sublimation
energy of the cathode material atoms [35].
The boundary conditions on the cathode side should be used
to correctly determine the plasma jet expansion and plasma pa-
rameter distribution. In the case of conical jet expansion, the
plasma parameters in the Knudsen layer [65]–[67] were used as
the boundary conditions on the cathode surface for the gas-dy-
namical plasma jet expansion (see Fig. 3). In contrast to the
conical case, in the spherical case the boundary conditions were
used as arbitrary parameters on a hemisphere with a radius equal
to the spot radius and were not determined by the conditions on
the cathode surface. Afanasjev et al. [78] and Krinberg et al. [79]
also considered the shape of the expanding plasma, but only in
the supersonic region (i.e., from the critical point).
According to the GDM, solved together with the KM, the
plasma acceleration characteristic distance is 2–3 times the spot
radius to sound speed and about 10 to supersonic velocity
10 cm/s [56], [73]. The potential distribution along the jet has
only a small maximum [56], [73] ( ) and, thus, the “po-
tential hump” [5] cannot be the cause of the plasma acceleration,
but rather is only the result of a plasma expansion in which the
electron pressure is larger than the heavy particle pressure. The
supersonic plasma velocity in the cathode plasma jet is due to
momentum transfer from the electrons to the ions by friction
and an ambipolar electric field. In both (conical and spherical)
approaches, it was obtained that the final jet velocity is about
10 cm/s, which agrees with experiments [4]–[7].
The experimentally observed multicharged ions [4]–[6] are
due to thermal ionization occurring during the plasma expan-
sion [55], [56]. Recently, the influence of the thermal ionization
process on the jet charge state was calculated by Anders et al.
[80]. In the cathode spot region ( ) where the plasma
is dense ( 10 cm ), the plasma contains mainly singly
charged ions [55]. With increasing distance from the cathode,
the plasma density significantly decreases while slightly
changes, causing multiple ionization [56]. The typical distance
in which the multicharged ion fraction becomes significant is
about 3–5 , i.e., in the plasma acceleration region.
Nonstationary Cathode Spot Operation: According to
observation the cathode spot is a nonstationary subject. In the
present theories (ECM and GDM), nonstationary heat conduc-
tion processes in the cathode body determine the nonsteady
cathode spot operation or its cyclic operation. The spot lifetime
664 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 29, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2001

(or cycle) is associated with some characteristic thermal transi-

tion time. In the explosive ECM, the time of cathodic thermal
instability due to Joule energy dissipation in the cathode
micro-area determines the EC lifetime. In the GDM, the time
of spot operation is determined by the time-dependence of
the CPD on cathode heat losses as well as by the plasma
flow regime in the Knudsen layer. In the case of fast (type 1)
spots, the spot lifetime is determined by the transition time
from protrusion heating to bulk cathode heating, which occurs
after the protrusion on the bulk cathode surface is completely
evaporated [56]. In the case of slow-moving spots on bulk
Fig. 14. Anode spot model and plasma expansion.
cathodes with relatively large spot lifetimes and relatively large
heat flux to the cathode surface, the time-dependence of the
spot parameters could be described by a model of nonstationary
heat conductance in the cathode bulk [56]. Thus, in the GDM
the relatively short or long cathode heat transition time deter-
mines the existence mechanism of short-living (nonstationary)
or long-living cathode spots, respectively, and the different
character of arc voltage oscillation in low- and high-current
vacuum arcs. Both in the nonstationary and in steady-state spot
operation the main processes supporting the self-sustained spot
mechanism are the cathode material and electron emission.

III. ANODE SPOT VACUUM ARC PHENOMEA

Kimblin [81] and Miller [82] discussed the transition into
the anode spot mode. In vacuum arcs, this transition depends
on the electrode geometry, inter-electrode gap and arc current.
Four stages of anode phenomena (diffuse arc, footpoint, anode
spot and intense arc) are distinguished as dependence of the
inter-electrode gap and arc current [82]. In the diffuse mode,
the anode is a passive collector of the cathode plasma jet. In the
footpoint mode, the anode begin to play an active role in the
vacuum arc. A small bright spots appear on the anode and spot
appearance associated with anode melting and with anode ma-
terial emitting into the arc gap. The anode spot appears when
the threshold current reaches from 400 A to a few kiloamps in
the case of a high-current vacuum arc with planar copper elec-
trodes [1], [81], [82]. However, the anode spot threshold current
can decrease in the case of a planar anode and rod cathode in
a low-pressure ambient gas [13], [83]. Experiments [13], [83]
showed that when the ambient gas pressure was in the range of
0.1 to 100 m torr an anode spot was formed on different anode
materials at currents that could be low as 5–50 A. The Cu anode
erosion rate ( 0.5–3 kA) can reach relatively large values
of 25–120 g/C [81] in spite of the fact that electrons sup-
port the anode current. As the vacuum arc current is increased
above a few kiloamps, the anode spot activity develops from
small “footpoints” to an intensely active anode spot and also the
vacuum arc reaches an intense mode for relatively small gaps.
In intense mode, a very bright luminosity appears to cover the
anode and the cathode and fill the interelectrode gap. The impor-
tant vacuum arc characteristics are the strong anode and cathode
erosion and the parameters (temperature, density, etc) of inter-
electrode plasma (see below).
Anode spot existence theories have been presented [44], [47],
[84]–[86]. The mathematical description includes a system of
equations based on the anode energy balance and equation for
Fig. 15. Copper anode spots current density versus anode erosion rate.
the total current [44]. Because the system of equations is not
closed, different authors assumed some free parameters such as
anode radius [84], electron temperature [47], [85]), or arbitrary
conditions such as Steenbeck’s minimum principle [85], or that
the self-magnetic pressure is equal the vapor pressure in the spot
[44], [86]. These theories did not consider the plasma energy
balance and, therefore, the main questions about the mechanism
of the plasma electron heating and the degree of the anode vapor
ionization remained unsolved. The erosion rate was calculated
using the Dushman relationship [47], [86].
A model based on a kinetic treatment of atom evaporation
[56], [66] as well as on plasma production and plasma en-
ergy-dissipation processes was developed by Beilis [87], [88].
It considered the near anode space sheath, nonequilibrium
plasma layer and a plasma acceleration region (Fig. 14). The
plasma energy balance include the Joule energy in the anode
plasma jet the energy dissipation caused by ionization of
atoms, energy convection by the electric current and the energy,
required for plasma acceleration in the plasma anode jet. The
Cu anode spot parameters as functions of the anode erosion
rate are presented below. The calculation for a spot current
of 200 A shows that the anode surface temperature
3200–3900, heavy particle density 10 –10 cm and
electron temperature 0.4–0.5 eV, for 3–40 mg/s,
respectively. The spot current density increases with is
shown in Fig. 15. The degree of ionization in the anode
plasma is small (8.10 –2.10 , Fig. 16) in comparison with
the cathode spot plasma (0.1–0.5 [56]). In the case of a graphite
cathode 10 –5.10 , when the spot current increases
from 10 to 400 A, respectively [88]. It should be noted that
increase and the heavy particle density decreases with spot
BEILIS: STATE OF THE THEORY OF VACUUM ARCS
Fig. 16. Degree of ionization of the Cu anode vapor versus anode erosion rate.
current. For a current of about 1 kA can exceed 0.1. The
electron density and the degree of ionization in the anode spot
plasma are considerably smaller than in the cathode plasma (in
the case when the current density is the same in the anode and
cathode spots), due to the larger electron velocity in comparison
with the ion velocity at the plasma-electrode interface.
The measured Cu anode spot temperature, 2970 K–3770 K,
[89] is mostly within the calculated range quoted above. The
calculated electron density is (0.7–2) 10 cm and
in order of magnitude agrees with the measured values in an
Al anode spot [84] ( 10 cm ) and in the near anode spot
region for Cu [90] ( 10 cm ). These results illustrate that
the anode plasma density is much lower than the plasma den-
sity in the cathode spots ( 10 cm [56]). Furthermore, both
the measured electron temperature (0.67–0.47 eV for Al [84])
and the calculated value are also lower than in the cathode spot
plasma (1–2 eV [56]).
IV. HOT ELECTRODE VACUUM ARC
The “spotless” arc, i.e., with a “diffuse attachment” of the
plasma to the electrodes has been observed for many years in
low-pressure arcs on refractory cathodes [91]. The transition
from an arc with cathode spots to the “spotless” arc is due to
electrode heating. Hot cathode and hot anode vacuum arcs rep-
resent the technological applications of diffuse attachment arcs.
A. Hot Cathode Vacuum Arc (HCVA)
Two types of the HCVA were observed experimentally: those
1) with a hot refractory (nonconsumable) cathode in a noble
gas atmosphere [92] and 2) those with a hot volatile cathode in
vacuum [93]. In the first case, the arc is stable and there is no
significant electrode erosion. In the second case, diffuse attach-
ment to the cathode is obtained with current density in range of
10–100 A/cm . For a Cr cathode, the arc voltage was 12–14 V,
the cathode temperature was 1900–2200 K, the electron tem-
perature was 2–4 eV and the electron density was 10
cm [93].
In both cases, the main theoretical problem is “anomalous
electron emission” —the contradiction between present ex-
periments at arc current and calculations of the current based
on known mechanisms of cathodic electron emission, i.e.,
explaining current continuity at the plasma-cathode interface.
The calculated thermionic emission in the HCVA is between
factors of 10 to 10 lower than the arc current. This means
665
Fig. 17. Electron current fraction versus plasma jet velocity in a hot-cathode
vacuum arc (Cr-cathode).
that the electron current fraction is 10 –10 . Dorodnov
[92], [93] suggests that the discrepancy could be explained if
the work function of the cathode material were lowered by
approximately 1.5 eV, but offers no explanation about what
might cause this.
Nemchinsky [94] and Zektser [95] suggest that current conti-
nuity can be maintained at the cathode surface by ion flux. Their
approach is analogous to the GDM used in explaining cathode
spots on cold cathodes [55], [56] but without consideration of
the cathode energy balance. In addition, they neglected Joule
heating [94] and nonelastic losses in the electron energy bal-
ance [95].
Let us consider the GDM approach [55] in order to study
the role of the ion current. We take in account the equation of
heat conduction for a disk Cr cathode [93], the equation for the
cathode sheath [59], where the plasma electrons are repelled
and the equation for plasma expansion in the cathode jet [72],
[73]. A calculation with A shows that the electron cur-
rent fraction decreases from 0.2 to 10 (see Fig. 17), the arc
voltage increases from 11 V to 18 V and the cathode tempera-
ture decreases from 2800 K to 2000 K when the jet velocity in-
creases from to 2 10 cm/s. The calculated values are
in good agreement with the experimental data mentioned above
and indicate that cathode current continuity in the HCVA can be
supported by ion flux. However the predicted values of the ion
density (about 10 –10 cm ) necessary to account for cur-
rent continuity at the cathode surface are below measured the
value of 10 cm [92]. Thus, further investigation, in partic-
ular of the plasma density distribution, is necessary for a full
understanding of the current continuity problem at the HCVA
cathode surface.
Hot Anode Vacuum Arc (HAVA): Two HAVA modes are ob-
served when the anode is thermally insulated and heated by the
arc current.
The first mode is observed with anode materials that are more
volatile than the cathode [82], [96]–[99]. The electron tempera-
ture and density were measured using Langmuir probes at dis-
tances of up to 24 cm from the anode and found to be in the range
of 0.2–1 eV and 10 –10 cm , respectively. The sign of the
anode voltage sheath is important in understanding the anode
energy balance. Merinov and Petrosov [100], using a combi-
nation of calorimetric and probe methods, measured a positive
anode potential at a current of 30 A. The potential crosses zero at
666
about 40 A and becomes negative for larger currents. Both the
anode drop and the effective anode heating potential are rela-
tively constant for currents between 50 and 140 A, having values
of 4 V and 6 V, respectively.
A theoretical description of the HAVA parameters with opera-
tion between disk electrodes was present by Boxman and Gold-
smith [101]. The one-dimensional (1-D) model takes into ac-
count the energy balance at the anode surface between plasma
heating and radiative and evaporative cooling, as well as con-
servation of particles and momentum within the plasma. The
discharge parameters were calculated as a function of the cur-
rent density from 1 to 10 A/cm . The Cu anode temperature
increases from 1350 K to 2500 K and the electron density in-
creases from 10 to 10 cm , while the electron temperature
decreases from 1.5 to 0.8 eV. The decrease in electron temper-
ature causes the effective heating potential to drop from 7.3 to
6.3 eV, in agreement with measured values mentioned in the
above experimental works. The 1-D model however ignores the
radial plasma flows and radiation, which are present in labora-
tory arcs.
The second mode is encountered when a refractory anode
(e.g., graphite or molybdenum) is used. This hot refractory
anode vacuum arc (HRAVA) [102], [103] initially operates as
a conventional cathode spot vacuum arc and deposits cathodic
material on the anode while it is cool. As the anode heats,
however, an anodic plasma plume is formed that expands
radially outside the inter-electrode gap. A steady-state model
was developed for the plasma in the gap [104], as well as for
the radial two-dimensional (2-D) plasma flow outside the gap
[105]. The latter model considered the influence of the self
magnetic field. The calculation showed that the anode effective
voltage in the discharge beginning (multispot mode) is about
12 V and in the steady-state (HRAVA mode) is about 6 V. This
result indicates the large ion energy in the cathode plasma jet
that latter dissipated by radial plasma expansion in the HRAVA
and, therefore, not collected by the anode. Good agreement
between the calculated anode temperature distribution, anode
effective voltage, and electron temperature was found with their
measured values. The HRAVA is currently being investigated as
a plasma source for producing coatings with a high deposition
rate and strongly reduced macroparticle contamination.
V. INTERELECTRODE PLASMA
Experimental studies of the interelectrode plasma are dis-
cussed by Goldsmith [1]. We consider here the inter-electrode
plasma in an external axial magnetic field. A few aspects are ob-
served with arc current increasing and when the axial magnetic
field (AMF) is applied: 1) the AMF enhances the ion flux along
the arc axis and reduces significantly the radial component of
the ion flux [106], [107]; 2) constriction of the arc column is re-
duced relative to the case with no AMF and the arc becomes
diffuse when the arc current is more than a few kA and the
AMF is sufficiently large [108]; 3) the arc voltage dependence
on the magnetic field strength changes from monotonic for rel-
atively small arc current ( kA) to nonmonotonic for high
current arc ( 1 kA) [109]–[111]. In the last case, the voltage
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 29, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2001
first decreases as the magnetic field increases from zero, then
pass through a minimum value that depends on the arc current
and then increases slowly (V-shape).
A fundamental issue in the theoretical study of the interelec-
trode plasma is the variation of the plasma parameters (e.g., den-
sity, temperature) during the plasma expansion and their influ-
ence on electrode phenomena. The character of the plasma ex-
pansion depends on the gap configuration. The free-boundary
cathode jet expansion was analyzed using a 2-D model for a disk
cathode and different anode geometries: ring anode [112], disk
anode [113], and small anode [114]. The influence of the radial
plasma density gradient on the plasma and electrical current ex-
pansion in the jet was investigated. The calculation shows that
in the case of relatively small jet current ( A) the plasma
contracts and the voltage monotonically increases with the axial
magnetic field strength (as observed experimentally [109]), due
to the plasma density and electrical current density increasing
near the jet axis.
The transition region in the V-shaped voltage-magnetic
field characteristic is first explained in [109]–[111] by a
transition between a diffuse arc with one column and an arc
with many parallel cathode-spot columns. The influence of
a small magnetic field is connected with voltage decreasing
in the diffuse broad column [111]. When a strong magnetic
field is applied, the arc voltage increase is determined by
the current density growth within the individual arc columns
[111]. Later, the V-shape characteristic was calculated using
a semiquantitative model [115]. However the formulas in
[115] were obtained by arbitrary assumption and contain error.
In particular, the expression for the jet radius was obtained
from a simple equation of motion where the momentum of
plasma motion is balanced only by magnetic field force. In
addition, the condition was used that the radial plasma velocity
is equal to the axial velocity. The calculation according to a
2-D model [113] shows that the plasma focusing is opposed by
the plasma pressure gradient force and the jet radius depends
on the plasma expansion distance. Schellekens and Schulman
[116] indicate that the simple model [115] cannot predict the
transition processes in high-current arc. A calculation of the
high-current arc voltage characteristic in an axial magnetic
field using the 2-D model [112], [113] and the interaction of
individual plasma jets is presented in [117].
It should be noted that the interaction of the individual plasma
jets in high-current arcs determines not only the arc voltage but
also can affect the ion temperature [113] and the radial plasma
expansion. The measurements show that the ion velocity in ra-
dial expanding plasma [110] and the ion energy [118] in high
current arcs are considerably smaller than in low-current single
jets [4]–[6]. Some theoretical analysis of the arc voltage depen-
dence versus the axial jet velocity and electron temperature in
the magnetic field is presented in [119]. The calculation shows
that the electron temperature in the plasma jet slightly increases
due to magnetic compression in case of cathode current distri-
bution observed for arc current < 2 kA [18]. The experimental
investigation of the ion energy distribution in radially expanding
plasma [120] indicates that the plasma velocity could decrease
due to cathode jet interaction with heavy particles emitted from
the anode and filled the gap. The result of ion energy decrease
BEILIS: STATE OF THE THEORY OF VACUUM ARCS
is similar to that obtained in the high-current vacuum arc with
arc current increasing in [118].
The interelectrode plasma affects the anode spot initiation.
Different models (anode vaporization by the cathode jet inter-
action with the anode [121], cathode jet constriction in an axial
magnetic field before anode vaporization [122], anode voltage
sign change [123], etc.) are present in the literature that is well
reviewed by Miller [82]. In the last decade, the theory of cathode
jet interaction with the anode was improved by taking into ac-
count the current distribution in the anode sheath [113], [124]
and the interaction [125] with the low-energy secondary anode
plasma particles [126].
Still the quantitative theory of anode spot initiation in high-
current vacuum arc is in progress. One of the questions is how
the threshold current of anode spot initiation depends on the arc
current, anode material, anode geometry and gas pressure [83].
VI. SUMMARY
The vacuum arc operates by high current density and low-
level arc voltage. The existence of such discharge operation is
due to cathode and near-cathode plasma regions with mutual
high-intensity and local heating in the cathode spot. There are
different approaches for explaining the existence of cathode
spots.
The EC theory, in which an electron emission micro area ap-
pears after the explosion of a microprotrusion at the cathode sur-
face, was developed in the last decade. It is based on the calcu-
lation of electron emission and heat conduction. The system of
equations describes the processes at relatively small areas, com-
parable with electrode surface features and, therefore, results
in a solution with relative large spot current density. The ECM
theory is well applicable to transient discharge phenomena with
relatively high rates of current rise.
In the gas-dynamic theory, the arc spot characteristics are ob-
tained by study of the mutual processes in the cathode and in
the plasma flow. GDM operates with a mathematically closed
system of equations and, therefore, the spot radius could be ob-
tained with dependence on the arc condition. The following can
be concluded from the gas-dynamic theory of the cathode spot.
In contrast to glow discharge in the arc cathode region, the
plasma is highly dense and, therefore, very intense electron
emission energy dissipation occurs. The sheath created at
the plasma cathode interface plays an important role in the
cathode and plasma energy-transfer processes by accelerating
the charged particles. The sheath also controls the current
continuity at the cathode. It has extremely different physical
properties, depending on the cathode material. It acts as a
plasma cathode for Hg and a virtual cathode for W.
Nonequilibrium layers take place near the cathode surface
where the cathode emission particles change their energy, mo-
mentum, and mass flux. The kinetic processes of heavy particle
evaporation and electron emission from the cathode surface de-
termine the cathode erosion rate and the CPD. The spot motion
depends on the cathode heat losses, which determine how the
CPD grows and on the character (impeded or not impeded) of
the cathode plasma flow. The spot moves because the micro-
protrusion or film is completely evaporated at the bulk cathode,
667
by displacement to a new site where the cathode heat losses and
cathode voltage are relatively small. This condition occurs at rel-
atively small arc currents ( A). As a result the arc voltage
fluctuates during spot birth and death. With larger arc currents,
when the cathode bulk can be sufficiently heated, the slow group
spot appears. Here the plasma flow is impeded by the pressure of
plasma emitted from adjacent cells of the group spot. The high
jet velocity is a result of nonequilibrium heating of the plasma
electrons, which pass their energy to the ions and atoms during
the plasma jet expansion into vacuum. The strong difference in
the spot current for film cathodes ( A) and for bulk cath-
odes (2–10 A) for Cu is explained in the framework of GDM
by taking in account the difference of the heat losses in these
cathodes.
Two principle conditions for current continuity supporting are
established: 1) The nonfree plasma flow in the near-cathode re-
gion; 2) The relatively low cathode heat loss with respect to the
input energy flux.
In spite of the progress in spot theory, still there is no con-
sensus about the explanation of the cathode spot mechanism.
New high-speed, high-resolution experiments are required
to elucidate the spot dynamics. The latest experimental data
[20]–[23] indicate that the spot fragments can change within
50 ns and, therefore, these results are different from obtained
previous [16]. The reason for the difference is discussed in
[22]. Another question is comparison of the calculated results
with experimental data. The different models (EC and GDM)
obtain a good agreement between calculated and measured
parameters (jet velocity, erosion rate, etc). This fact bring
to conclusion that such comparison is not always could be a
criterion for correctly calculated model in case of cathode spot
theory. In first, the model should not consist the contradicting
assumption and results. In second, it should be noted that the
spot type is very sensitive to the experimental conditions (e.g.,
electrode gap geometry, pressure, applied voltage, electrode
surface state, arc current, and arc duration). Therefore, in order
to correctly compare with the theory full information about
the experimental conditions and complete experimental data
(plasma and cathode parameters and arc electrical character-
istic) should be used. Not only the order of magnitude of a
measured parameter should be compared with the calculation,
but its dependence must be also investigated.
The anode spot theory is sufficiently developed using the
GDM [87], [88]. The calculation for copper and graphite an-
odes leads to an important conclusion about the relatively small
ionization fraction (i.e., it indicates the high level of neutral den-
sity) in comparison with the cathode spot plasma in the case of
small anode spot current ( A). This result could explain
the relatively large anode erosion rate. In the case of large anode
spot current ( A), the anode plasma ionization fraction
approaches to the value in the cathode spot plasma. In the fu-
ture, the anode spot theory should be extended to volatile anode
materials and the sheath structure in different cases should be
investigated, as was accomplished for the cathode spot.
The hot electrode vacuum arc is an excellent plasma source
for different plasma technology applications. However, the
mechanism of operation of this arc discharge is not completely
understood. The main theoretical problem is connected with
668
an explanation of the current continuity near the hot cathode.
The contradiction between the calculated and measured plasma
density should be resolved. The other question that remains
unclear is the electrode energy balance in the various hot-elec-
trode vacuum arc modes.
In the interelectrode gap of a high current vacuum arc,
the plasma theory should be developed by investigating the
radial plasma expansion and the relationship between the radial
plasma flux and the vacuum arc electrical characteristics.
The threshold plasma conditions, which cause the observed
transitions between high-current arc modes, also need to be
identified and explained.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author would like to thank R. L. Boxman for useful com-
ments and discussion.
REFERENCES
[1] R. L. Boxman, P. J. Martin, and D. M. Sanders, Eds., Handbook of
Vacuum Arc Science and Technology. Park Ridge, NJ: Noyes, 1995.
[2] I. G. Kesaev, Cathode Processes in Electric Arcs (in Rus-
sian). Moscow, U.S.S.R.: Nauka, 1968.
[3] V. Grakov, “Cathode fall in vacuum arcs with deposited cathodes,” Sov.
Phys.-Tech. Phys., vol. 12, pp. 1248–1250, 1967.
[4] W. D. Davis and H. C. Miller, “Analysis of the electrode products
emitted by DC arcs in a vacuum ambient,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 40, pp.
2212–2221, 1969.
[5] A. Plyutto, V. Ryzhkov, and A. Kapin, “High speed plasma streams in
vacuum arcs,” Sov. Phys. JETP, vol. 20, pp. 328–337, 1965.
[6] J. Kutzner and H. C. Miller, “Integrated ion flux emitted from the
cathode spot region of diffuse vacuum arc,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.,
vol. 25, pp. 686–693, 1992.
[7] R. Tanberg, “On the cathode of an arc draw in vacuum,” Phys. Rev., vol.
35, pp. 1080–1089, 1930.
[8] C. W. Kimblin, “Vacuum arc ion currents and electrode phenomena,”
Proc. IEEE, vol. 59, pp. 546–555, 1971.
[9] , “Erosion and ionization in the cathode spot regions of vacuum
arc,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. .44, pp. 3074–3081, 1973.
[10] V. I. Rakhovsky, “Experimental study of the dynamics of cathode spots
development,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 4, pp. 87–102, 1976.
[11] T. D. Tuma, C. L. Chen, and D. K. Davies, “Erosion products from the
cathode spot region of a cooper vacuum arc,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 49, pp.
3821–3831, 1978.
[12] J. E. Daalder, “Erosion and the origin of charged and neutral species in
vacuum arcs,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 8, pp. 1647–1659, 1975.
[13] N. M. Zykova, V. V. Kantsel, V. I. Rakhovsky, I. F. Seliverstova, and A.
P. Ustimets, “The dynamics of the development of cathode and anode
regions of electric arcs I,” Sov. Phys.-Tech. Phys., vol. 15, no. N11, pp.
1844–1849, 1970.
[14] B. E. Djakov and R. Holmes, “Cathode spot structure and dynamics in
low current vacuum arcs,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 7, pp. 569–580,
1974.
[15] R. Holm, Electric Contacts. Theory and Applications. Berlin, Ger-
many: Springer-Verlag, 2000.
[16] P. Siemroth, T. Schuke, and T. Witke, “Microscopic high-speed investi-
gations of vacuum arc cathode spots,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 23,
pp. 919–925, Dec. 1995.
[17] , “Investigation of cathode spots and plasma formation of vacuum
arcs by high-speed microscopy and spectroscopy,” IEEE Trans. Plasma
Sci., vol. 25, pp. 571–579, Aug. 1997.
[18] I. I. Beilis, B. E. Djakov, B. Juttner, and H. Pursch, “Structure and dy-
namics of high-current arc cathode spots in vacuum,” J. Phys. D: Appl.
Phys., vol. 30, pp. 119–130, 1997.
[19] A. Anders, S. Anders, B. Juttner, W. Botticher, H. Luck, and G. Schroder,
“Pulsed dye laser diagnostics of vacuum arc cathode spots,” IEEE Trans.
Plasma Sci., vol. 20, pp. 466–72, Aug. 1992.
[20] B. Juttner, “The dynamics of arc cathode spots in vacuum,” J. Phys. D:
Appl. Phys., vol. 28, pp. 516–522, 1995.
[21] , “The dynamics of arc cathode spots in vacuum: New measure-
ments,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 30, pp. 221–229, 1997.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 29, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2001
[22] , “Nanosecond displacement times of arc cathode spots in vacuum,”
IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 27, pp. 836–844, Aug. 1999.
[23] B. Jüttner and I. Kleberg, “The retrograde motion of arc cathode spots
in vacuum,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 33, pp. 2025–2036, 2000.
[24] A. I. Bushik, V. A. Shilov, B. Juttner, and H. Pursh, “Spot behavior and
cathode surface local heating,” High Temp., vol. 24, pp. 445–452, 1986.
[25] J. Daalder, “Diameter and current density of single and multiple cathode
discharges in vacuum,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. PAS-93, no. 6, pp.
1747–1758, 1974.
[26] J. Rothstein, “On the mechanism of electron emission at the cathode spot
of an arc,” Phys. Rev., vol. 74, p. 1214, 1948.
[27] I. G. Nekrashevich and I. A. Bakuto, Bull. Byelorussian Acad. Sci. Phys.
Tech. Inst., 1955.
[28] E. Hantzsche, “Die maximale stremstarke eines bogen-brennflecks,”
Beitr. Plasma Phys., vol. 12, pp. 245–266, 1972.
[29] , “On the heat sources of the arc cathode spot,” Beitr. Plasma Phys.,
vol. 19, pp. 59–79, 1979.
[30] G. N. Fursey and P. N. Vorontsov-Vel’yaminov, “Qualitative model of
initiation of vacuum arc onset,” Sov. Phys.-Tech. Phys., vol. 12, no. 10,
p. 1382, 1967.
[31] I. I. Beilis, V. V. Kantsel, and V. I. Rakhovsky, “On explosive
model of fast moving cathode spot” (in Russian), in Electrical Con-
tacts. Moscow, U.S.S.R.: Nauka, 1973, pp. 14–17.
[32] J. Mitterauer, “Dynamishe feldemission. Eine neue modellvorstellung
des kathodenflecks an kalten kathoden,” Acta Phys. Austriaca, vol. 37,
pp. 175–192, 1973.
[33] J. Mitterauer and P. Till, “Computer simulation of the dynamics of
plasma-surface interactions in vacuum arc cathode spot,” IEEE Trans.
Plasma Sci., vol. PS-15, pp. 488–501, Oct. 1987.
[34] E. A. Litvinov, G. A. Mesyats, and D. I. Proskurovskii, “Field emission
and explosive electron emission processes in vacuum discharges,” Sov.
Phys. Usp., vol. 26, pp. 138–159, 1983.
[35] G. A. Mesyats and D. I. Proskurovskii, Pulsed Electrical Discharge in
Vacuum. Berlin: Springer, 1989.
[36] G. N. Fursey, “Field emission and vacuum breakdown,” IEEE Trans.
Elect. Insul., vol. EI-20, pp. 659–670, Aug. 1985.
[37] D. V. Glazanov, L. M. Baskin, and G. N. Fursey, “The kinetics of pulsed
heating of the tipped field emission cathode of real geometry by the high
density field emission,” Zn. Tech. Piz., vol. 59, no. N5, pp. 60–68, 1989.
[38] G. A. Mesyats, Ectons. Ekaterinburg, Russia: Nauka, 1993.
[39] , “Ecton mechanism of the vacuum arc cathode spot,” IEEE Trans.
Plasma Sci., vol. 25, pp. 879–883, Aug. 1995.
[40] , Cathode Phenomena in Vacuum Discharge. Moscow, Russia:
Nauka, 2000.
[41] D. L. Shmelev and E. A. Litvinov, “A computer simulation of the
vacuum arc emission center,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 25, pp.
533–537, Aug. 1997.
[42] S. A. Barengolts, G. A. Mesyats, and A. G. Chentsov, “Spontaneous
extinguishing of a vacuum arc in terms of the ecton model,” IEEE Trans.
Plasma Sci., vol. 27, pp. 817–820, Aug. 1999.
[43] T. H. Lee and A. Greenwood, “Theory for the cathode mechanism in
metal vapor arcs,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 32, pp. 916–923, 1961.
[44] G. Ecker, “Electrode components of the arc discharge,” Ergeb. Exakten
Naturwiss, vol. 33, pp. 1–104, 1961.
[45] , “The existance diagram-a useful theoretical tool in applied
physics,” Z. f. Naturforschg., vol. 26a, pp. 935–939, 1971.
[46] , “Unified analysis of the metal vapor arc,” Z. f. Naturforschg., vol.
28a, pp. 417–428, 1973.
[47] A. Lefort, M. J. Parizet, S. E. El-Fassi, and M. Abbaoui, “Erosion
of graphite cathodes,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 26, no. N8, pp.
1239–1243, 1993.
[48] T. Klean, J. Paulini, and G. Simon, “Time-resolved description of
cathode spot development in vacuum arc,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol.
27, pp. 1914–1921, 1994.
[49] H. Z-Jun and R. Haug, “Cathode spot initiation in different external con-
ditions,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 30, pp. 603–613, 1996.
[50] S. Coulombe and J.-L. Meunier, “Importance of high local cathode spot
pressure on the attachment of thermal arcs on cold cathodes,” IEEE
Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 25, pp. 913–918, Oct. 1997.
[51] R. Schmoll, “Analysis of the interaction of cathode microprotrusions
with low-temperature plasmas,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 31, pp.
1841–1851, 1998.
[52] L. P. Harris and Y. Y. Lau, “Longitudinal Flows Near Arc Cathode
Spots,” General electric Co, Schenectady, N.Y, Rep. 74, CRD 154,
1974.
[53] I. I. Beilis and V. I. Rakhovsky, “Theory of the cathode mechanism of
an arc discharge,” High Temp., vol. 7, pp. 568–573, 1969.
BEILIS: STATE OF THE THEORY OF VACUUM ARCS
[54] I. I. Beilis, G. A. Lyubimov, and V. I. Rakhovskii, “Diffusion model of
the near cathode region a high-current arc discharge,” Sov. Phys. Dok-
lady, vol. 17, pp. 225–228, 1972.
[55] I. I. Beilis, “Analysis of the cathode spot in a vacuum arc,” Sov. Phys.
Tech. Phys., vol. 19, pp. 251–256, 1974.
[56] R. L. Boxman, P. J. Martin, and D. M. Sanders, Eds., Handbook of
Vacuum Arc Science and Technology. Park Ridge, NJ: Noyes, 1995,
pp. 208–256.
[57] V. A. Nemchinsky, “Theory of the vacuum arc,” Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys.,
vol. 24, pp. 764–767, 1974.
[58] I. I. Beilis, “Model of steady-state arc spot on a refractory cathode in
vacuum,” Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett., vol. 14, pp. 494–495, 1988.
[59] , “Current continuity and instability of the mercury vacuum arc
cathode spot,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 15, pp. 488–501, 1996.
[60] I. I. Beilis and G. A. Lyubimov, “Theory of the arc spot on a film
cathode,” Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys., vol. 21, no. N6, pp. 698–703, 1976.
[61] J. E. Daalder, “Energy dissipation in the cathode of a vacuum arc,” J.
Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 10, pp. 2225–2234, 1977.
[62] V. M. Kulyapin, “Quantitative theory of cathode processes in an arc,”
Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys., vol. 16, pp. 287–291, 1971.
[63] S. Dushman, Scientific Foundation of Vacuum Technique, J. M. Lafferty,
Ed. New York: Wiley, 1962.
[64] B. Moizhes and V. Nemchinsky, “Erosion and cathode jets in a vacuum
arc,” Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys., vol. 25, pp. 43–48, 1980.
[65] I. I. Beilis, “On the theory of the erosion processes in the cathode region
of an arc discharge,” Sov. Phys. Doklady, vol. 27, pp. 150–152, 1982.
[66] , “Parameters of kinetic layer of arc discharge cathode region,”
IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 13, pp. 288–290, Oct. 1985.
[67] , “Cathode arc plasma flow in a Knudsen layer,” High Temp., vol.
24, pp. 319–325, 1986.
[68] S. I. Anisimov, Y. A. Imas, G. S. Romanov, and Y. V. Khodyko, Action
of High-Power Radiation on Metals. Springfield, VA: Nat. Tech. Infor.
Serv, 1971.
[69] N. P. Kozlov and V. Khvesuk, “Cathode processes in electrical arcs,”
Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys., vol. 16, pp. 1691–1703, 1971.
[70] I. I. Beilis, “Cathode potential drop of an arc discharge in vapor of the
electrode,” Sov. Phys. Dokl., vol. 33, pp. 125–127, 1988.
[71] I. Tonks, “The pressure of plasma electrons and the forces on the cathode
of an arc,” Phys. Rev., vol. 46, pp. 278–79, 1934.
[72] G. A. Lyubimov, “Dynamics of vapor jets,” Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys., vol.
22, pp. 173–177, 1977.
[73] I. I. Beilis, G. Lyubimov, and M. Zektser, “Analysis of the formulation
and solution of the problem of the cathode jets of a vacuum arc,” Sov.
Phys. Tech. Phys., vol. 33, pp. 1132–37, 1988.
[74] C. Wieckert, “Expansion of the cathode spot plasma in vacuum arc dis-
charges,” Phys. Fluids., vol. 30, no. N6, pp. 1810–1813, 1987.
[75] E. Hantzsche, “Theory of the expanding plasma of vacuum arcs,” J.
Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 24, pp. 1339–1353, 1991.
[76] , “A hydrodynamic model of vacuum arc plasmas,” IEEE Trans.
Plasma Sci., vol. 20, pp. 34–41, Feb. 1992.
[77] Y. B. Zeldovich and Raizer, “Physics of Shock Waves and High Tem-
perature Hydrodynamic Phenomena,” in Nauka Moscow, 1966.
[78] V. Afanasjev, G. Djuzhev, and S. Shkolnik, Hydrodynamic Model of the
Plasma Jet of the Cathode Spot in Vacuum Arc. Leningrad, U.S.S.R.:
Fiz.-Tekh. Inst., 1989, pt. N1.
[79] I. A. Krinberg, M. P. Lukovnikova, and V. L. Paperny, “Steady-state ex-
pansion of current-carrying plasma into vacuum,” Sov. Phys.-JETP, vol.
70, pp. 451–459, 1990.
[80] T. Schulke and A. Anders, “Ion charge state distribution of ally-cathode
vacuum arc plasmas,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 27, pp. 911–914,
Aug. 1999.
[81] C. W. Kimblin, “Anode voltage drop and anode spot formation in DC
vacuum arc,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 40, pp. 1744–1752, 1969.
[82] R. L. Boxman, P. J. Martin, and D. M. Sanders, Eds., Handbook of
Vacuum Arc Science and Technology. Park Ridge, NJ: Noyes, 1995,
pp. 308–64.
[83] I. I. Beilis and N. M. Zykova, “Dynamics of the anode spot in low current
arc,” Sov. Phys.-Tech. Phys., vol. 38, no. N2, pp. 323–325, 1968.
[84] G. A. Lyubimov, V. I. Rakhovsky, I. F. Seliverstova, and Zektser, “A
study of parameters of the anode spot on aluminum,” J. Phys. D: Appl.
Phys., vol. 13, pp. 1655–1664, 1980.
[85] V. A. Nemchinskii, “Anode spot in a high-current vacuum arc,” Sov.
Phys.-Tech. Phys., vol. 27, no. N1, pp. 20–25, 1982.
[86] A. Lefort and P. Andanson, “Characteristic parameters of anode spot,”
IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 13, pp. 296–299, Oct. 1985.
669
[87] I. I. Beilis, “The anode region of electrical arc in the electrode material
vapor” (in Russian), in Izvestiya Siberian Akad. Nauk: Ser. Tekhn. Nauk,
1985, pt. N3, vol. 16, pp. 77–82.
[88] , “Anode spot vacuum arc model: Graphite anode,” IEEE Trans
Comp. Packag. Technol., vol. 23, no. N2, pp. 334–340, 2000.
[89] J. T. Grissom and J. C. Newton, “Anode surface radiance from mi-
crosecond vacuum arcs,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 45, pp. 2885–2894, 1974.
[90] R. L. Boxman, “Interferometric measurement of electron and vapor den-
sities in high-current vacuum arc,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 45, no. N11, pp.
4835–4846, 1974.
[91] W. Finkelnburg and H. Maecker, “Electrische bogen und thermisches
plasma,” Haundbuch der Physik, Bd. XXII, pp. S. 254–444, 1956.
[92] A. M. Dorodnov, H. P. Kozlov, and Y. A. Pomelov, “On the anomalous
high emission ability of a thermo-cathode in an inert-gas arc discharge,”
Teplofiz. Vys. Temp., vol. 9, no. N3, pp. 483–487, 1971.
[93] A. I. Vasin, A. M. Dorodnov, and V. A. Petrsov, “Vacuum arc with dis-
tributed discharge on an expendable cathode,” Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett., vol.
5, pp. 634–636, 1979.
[94] V. Nemchinsky, “On the problem of anomalous high emission ability of
a nonvaporizing cathode in an arc discharge,” Zh. Tekh. Fiz, vol. 44, no.
N12, pp. 2548–50, 1974.
[95] M. P. Zektser, “On the problem of anomalous high emission ability of a
thermo-cathode in an inert-gas arc discharge,” Teplofiz. Vys. Temp., vol.
13, no. N3, pp. 491–494, 1975.
[96] A. M. Dorodnov, A. N. Kuznetsov, and V. A. Petrosov, “New anode
vapor vacuum arc with a permanent hollow cathode,” Sov. Tech. Phys.
Lett., vol. 5, no. N8, pp. 418–419, 1979.
[97] H. Ehrich, B. Hasse, K. G. Muller, and R. Schimidt, “The anodic vacuum
arc.II. Experimental study of arc plasma,” J. Vac. Technol., vol. A. 6, no.
4, pp. 2499–2503, Jan./Feb. 1988.
[98] H. Ehrich, B. Hasse, M. Mausbach, and K. G. Muller, “The anodic
vacuum arc and its application to coating,” J. Vac. Technol., vol. A. 8,
no. 3, pp. 2160–2164, May/June 1990.
[99] R. L. Boxman and S. Goldsmith, “Momentum interchange between
cathode spot plasma jets and background gases in vacuum arc anode
spot development,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 18, pp. 231–236,
Apr. 1990.
[100] N. Merinov and V. A. Petrosov, “Calorimetric measurement of the anode
potential drop,” Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys., vol. 21, no. N6, pp. 724–726,
1976.
[101] R. L. Boxman and S. Goldsmith, “A model for a uniform steady-state
vacuum arc with a hot anode,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 17, pp.
661–665, Oct. 1989.
[102] H. Rosenthal, I. Beilis, S. Goldsmith, and R. L. Boxman, “Heat fluxes
during the development of a HAVA,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 28,
no. N1, pp. 353–363, 1995.
[103] , “A spectroscopic investigation of the development of HAVA,” J.
Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 29, no. N3, pp. 1245–1259, 1996.
[104] I. I. Beilis, R. L. Boxman, and S. Goldsmith, “Steady-state model of
HRAVA,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 32, pp. 128–133, 1999.
[105] I. I. Beilis, M. Keidar, R. L. Boxman, and S. Goldsmith, “Radial plasma
flow in a hot anode vacuum arc,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 40, no. N1, pp.
114–119, 1999.
[106] J. Heberlein and D. Porto, “The interaction of vacuum arc ion currents
with axial magnetic field,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 11, pp.
152–159, 1983.
[107] Y. Cohen, R. L. Boxman, and S. Goldsmith, “Angular distribution of ion
current emerging from a aperture in a vacuum arc,” IEEE Trans. Plasma
Sci., vol. 17, p. 713, Oct. 1989.
[108] J. Heberlein and J. Gorman, “The high current metal vapor arc column
between separating electrodes,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 8, pp.
283–288, Dec. 1980.
[109] C. W. Kimblin and R. E. Woshall, “Interruption ability of vacuum inter-
rupters subjected to axial magnetic fields,” Proc. Inst. Elec. Eng., vol.
119, no. N12, pp. 1754–1758, 1972.
[110] H. Schellekens, “Modeling of the diffuse arc in vacuum circuit-breaker,”
masters thesis, Eindhoven Univ. Technol., 1983.
[111] T. Kaneda, E. Kaneko, S. Yanabu, and H. Ikeda, “The characteristics
of vacuum arcs with magnetic fields parallel to its columns,” Physica
104C, pp. 124–129, 1981.
[112] M. Keidar, I. I. Beilis, R. L. Boxman, and S. Goldsmith, “Voltage of the
vacuum arc with a ring anode in an axial magnetic field,” IEEE Trans.
Plasma Sci., vol. 25, pp. 580–585, Aug. 1997.
[113] , “Theoretical study of plasma expansion in a magnetic field in a
disk anode vacuum arc,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 83, no. N2, pp. 709–717,
1998.
670
[114] , “Plasma expansion and current flow in vacuum arc with small
anode,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 27, pp. 872–876, Aug. 1999.
[115] V. A. Nemchinsky, “Vacuum arc in axial magnetic field,” in Proc. XIV
ISDEIV, Santa Fe, USA, 1990, pp. 260–262.
[116] H. Schellekens and M. B. Schulman, “Visualization and characterization
of high-current diffuse vacuum arcs on axial magnetic field contacts,”
IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 28, pp. 443–452, Apr. 2000.
[117] M. Keidar and M. B. Schulman, “Model of the effect of an axial mag-
netic field on the high-current vacuum arc,” in Proc. XIX ISDEIV, Xi’an,
China, 2000, pp. 210–213.
[118] C. Rustenberg, M. Lindmayer, B. Juttner, and H. Pursch, “On the ion
energy distribution of high current arcs in vacuum,” IEEE Trans. Plasma
Sci., vol. 23, pp. 909–914, Dec. 1995.
[119] I. I. Beilis and M. Keidar, “Theoretical study of plasma expansion and
electrical characteristics in the high-current vacuum arc,” in XIXth IS-
DEIV Xi’an, China, 2000, pp. 18–22.
[120] I. I. Beilis, R. L. Boxman, S. Goldsmith, and V. L. Paperny, “Radially
expanding plasma parameters in a hot refractory anode arc,” J. Appl.
Phys., vol. 88, no. N11, pp. 6224–6231, 2000.
[121] J. M. Lafferty, “Triggered vacuum gaps,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 54, pp. 23–32,
1966.
[122] R. L. Boxman, “Magnetic constriction effects in high-current vacuum
arcs prior to the release anode vapor,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 48, no. N1,
pp. 2338–2345, 1977.
[123] G. A. Djuzhev, S. M. Shkol’nik, and V. G. Yur’ev, “Anode phenomena
in the high-current arc,” Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys., pt. I-II, vol. 23, pp.
667–677, 1978.
[124] C. Wieckert and W. Egli, “Theoretical analysis of the current and energy
flow to the anode in diffuse vacuum arc,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol.
17, pp. 649–652, Oct. 1989.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 29, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2001
[125] J. I. Londer and K. N. Ulyanov, “Peculiarities of interaction of the
cathode stream with anode vapors in a vacuum arc,” IEEE Trans.
Plasma Sci., vol. 27, pp. 901–905, Aug. 1999.
[126] V. P. Afanas’ev, A. A. Logachev, N. K. Mitrofanov, and S. M. Shkol’nik,
“Spectroscopic measurements of high resolution in high-current vacuum
arc,” in Proc. XIV ISDEIV, Santa Fe, NM, 1990, Sandia National Labo-
ratories, pp. 187–191.
Isak I. Beilis (M’97–SM’00) received the M.Sc. de-
gree from Moscow Institute for Steel and Alloys, and
the Ph.D. and Doctor of Science in Physics and Math-
ematics degrees from the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sci-
ences in 1966, 1973, and 1990, respectively.
From 1969 to 1991, he worked in the Institute
for High Temperatures (IVTAN), Moscow, U.S.S.R.
(now Russia), while also holding a position of
Visiting Scientist in the Institute of Mechanics of
the Moscow Lomonosov University. Since January
1992, he has been with the Faculty of Engineering at Tel Aviv University.
His research interests include electrical discharges in vacuum interrupters,
MHD-generators, plasma accelerators, arc cathode and anode spots, vacuum
arc plasma jet expansion in magnetic fields, plasma-wall transition (sheath and
presheath), dusty plasma transport in ducts, macroparticle charging phenomena,
and processes in hot electrode arcs. He is co-author of the books “MHD Energy
Conversion—Physical and Technical Aspects” (Moscow, U.S.S.R.: Nauka,
1982) and “Handbook of Vacuum Arc Science and Technology” (Park Ridge,
NJ: Noyes, 1995).