Instruments and Experimental Techniques

, Volume 61, Issue 2, pp 317–322 | Cite as

A Discharge Cell that Combines a Magnetron and a Hollow Cathode for Cleaning Substrates and Subsequent Deposition of Coatings

  • A. V. Rogov
  • Yu. V. Kapustin
Laboratory Techniques


A discharge cell that is electrically insulated from a vacuum chamber is described. The cell consists of a cylindrical mesh hollow cathode and a planar magnetron with a disk cathode, an unbalanced magnetic system, and an embedded insulated annular anode. The cell provides both cleaning of a substrate before the deposition and subsequent magnetron deposition of a coating. The magnetron is located on the side of the open end of the hollow cathode and the substrate is fixed in place inside the hollow cathode on the wall opposite to its open end. In the cleaning mode, the power supply is inverted, and the magnetron is used as the anode for the hollow cathode discharge. A discharge cell of this type provides high uniformity of cleaning, an increase in the cleaning rate, and a decrease in the minimum operating Ar pressure to ≈0.1 Pa in the substrate-sputtering mode. The operating pressure for the magnetron in the deposition mode is in the range of 0.3–1.0 Pa. The ability to rapidly transfer from the cleaning mode to the magnetron deposition by switching the power source without changing the pressure in the vacuum chamber positively affects the adhesion properties of the deposited coating.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Rogov, A.V. and Lozovan, A.A., J. Surf. Invest.: X-ray, Synchrotron Neutron Tech., 2008, no. 3, p.409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rogov, A.V., Nagel’, M.Yu., and Martynenko, Yu.V., Vopr. At. Nauki Tekh., Ser.: Termoyad. Sint., 2013, vol. 36, no. 2, p.19.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ranjan, M., Kalathiparambil, K.K., Vaghela, N.P., and Mukherjee, S., Plasma Process. Polym., 2007, no. S1, p. S1030. doi 10.1002/ppap.200732323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hindmarch, A.T., Parkes, D.E., and Rushforth, A.W., Vacuum, 2012, vol. 86, no. 10, p. 1600. doi 10.1016/j.vacuum.2012.02.019ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Meeker, D.C., Finite Element Method Magnetics. Version 4.2. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sputtering by Particle Bombardment: Experiments and Computer Calculations from Threshold to MeV Energies, Behrisch, R. and Eckstein, W., Eds., Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2007.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rogov, A.V., Kapustin, Yu.V., and Martynenko, Yu.V., Tech. Phys., 2015, vol. 85, no. 2, p. 283. doi 10.1134/S1063784215020206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rogov, A.V., Kapustin, Yu.V., and Martynenko, Yu.V., J. Surf. Invest.: X-ray, Synchrotron Neutron Tech., 2017, no. 4, p. 865. doi 10.1134/S1027451017040279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Golosov, D., Melnikov, S., Zavadski, S., Kolos, V., and Okojie, J., Plasma Phys. Technol., 2016, vol. 3, no. 3, p. 100.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Research Center “Kurchatov Institute”MoscowRussia
  2. 2.International Fusion Projects Coordinating CentreMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations