Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
shown by Martynyuk [2] to have particular importance ductivity (units as in Table I) and S(x, t) is the heat
for phase explosion. source term given by Eq. (1) multiplied by p. The quan-
While recognizing the complicated effects which may tities c, p, and K will be subsequently assumed to be
occur in laser-surface interactions, we have decided to de- temperature and space independent.
scribe a kind of ideal sample in which p and R may be The heat Bow equation derived from Fourier's law
considered temperature independent (see Table I). More-
over, due to the very low density of the emitted gas par- J = —KVT (4)
ticles with respect to the solid or liquid density, we also
is subject to some restrictions when applied to heat tran-
neglect any form of laser-gas interaction. (This simplifi-
sients where temperature gradients may be very large
cation is quite reasonable as far as target temperature is
concerned, but less so for gas-dynamic effects. ) (10 —10 K/cm). In particular, according to Harring-
ton [8], Eq. (3) holds only if the temperature gradient
When dealing with a laser pulse in the nanosecond
may be considered constant over at least ten mean &ee
regime it is possible to consider as instantaneous the
paths of the heat carriers (one mean free path is about
electron-lattice coupling even if, at first, the energy ab-
20nm in Al at room temperature), with higher temper-
sorbed from the pulse increases only the kinetic energy
ature derivatives otherwise being needed to describe the
of the free carriers (metals) or the number of electron-
heat Bow. We have checked this condition during our
hole pairs (materials with a band gap). In fact, charge
simulations and it is indeed satisfied in the nanosecond
carriers may reach thermal equilibrium in about 10 s,
regime with an energy density of the order of 3.0— 4.0
but, due to electron-phonon interactions which seem to J/cm2.
have a positive feedback, there is also a very fast energy
Neglecting radiative loss from the surface (x = 0) and
transfer to the lattice which is complete in about 10
considering the x axis as directed toward the sample in-
s [1]. The form of the laser-pulse intensity Ip adopted in
terior, then the following boundary conditions may be
our simulation will be taken as "triangular" [6]:
assumed:
0 & t & 7.i/2
r)/2&t &7) T(x, t)l~=o =T. b
(2)
t &7), and
A. Underlying assumptions
=0, (6)
To describe heat Bow we make use of the heat Bow
equation in one-dimensional form, as is appropriate to where J~ is the total Bux.
many experimental conditions [7]: To consider squid-liquid or liquid-solid transitions, two
boundary conditions are required at the interface where
c(T) p(T)
BT = 0 f K(x, T) BT) + S(x, t), the phase transition occurs. The first of these is an energy
balance:
Bt Bx ql
Bx) l
where T, c(T), p(T), and K(x, T) are, respectively, tem- c»H~(&~r) &inst
= ~sr BT —K&;q OT
(7)
perature, specific heat, mass density, and thermal con- Ox
int int
ANDREA PETERLONGO, ANTONKO EEOTlH. LO, AND ROOER KELLY
At the surface the total Bux is where Cb, p, the backstreaming cocci eat, will be deduced
in Appendix A [Eq. (AS)]. Equation (14) applies for 0
v„& v' if v hc8 not already reached v"; otherwise, for
(
JT~ =p~ = —& T
opt
v„& v" and if v„has already reached v" or else for v
—[c(T —T b) + EH (T )]pv„ v", we have the equality Cb, —Cb, (}.
What about boiling'7 When the surface temperature
b, H, (T) pv„, — (10) reaches Tg, then the vapor pressure equals the external
pressure pp. As a consequence, bubble nucleation may
with — ~(BT/»)~~=p, = 0. The first term on the right
& occur in the bulk, bubbles themselves may move toward
is zero because there is no heat conduction through the the surface, and the vaporization rate may be enhanced.
surface. The second term describes the total energy of At the same time the temperature of the sample will tend
the escaping particles and is already taken into account to assume a constant value.
with Eq. (9). EH„(T) is the heat of vaporization that But is the above mentioned process what actually hap-
we ass»TTTe, as a first approximation, equal to the value pens when using laser pulses in the nanosecond regime?
at Tg, the boiling temperature at 1 atm. As a matter of fact, if the time in which heat is deposited
A simple way to compute v„as a function of temper- on the sample by a laser pulse is too short for bubbles
ature is to consider what happens when a liquid is in to nucleate, then a signi6cant superheating above Tg will
thermal equilibri»m with its saturated vapor. In this occur, with the temperature 6aaQy reaching T~, Alter-
case the number N„of particles vaporizing per»nit time natively, if the velocity at which the surface recedes is
and area is high enough, then nucleation cannot in. any case occur
p and again superheating will occur. Since the transition
(1la) &om simple vaporization to boiling needs a characteristic
(2~k~ T m)'~2
time vg of about 10 —10 s for a liquid dielectric and
where p is the gas pressure, k~ is the Boltzmann con- 10 i —10 ii s for metals [13], then we do not expect
stant, m is the particle mass, and Cg is the sticking coef- boiling in the picosecond regime while in the nanosecond
ficient (Cs 1) [11,12]. One may assume that Eq. (lla) regime the question is still open to a de6nitive answer.
also holds in a nonequilibri»m situation as when particles This is why we will present in Sec. IIB results for both
are emitted into vacuum thus yielding situations, boiling and superheating.
50 LASER-PULSE SPU I=I BRING OF ALUMINUM: ... 4719
3000
c) E, = 3.30 J/cm without boilin
2500
D
2000
FIG. 1. Surface temperature of an Al sam-
ple irradiated with a single 30ns laser pulse
K
1500 with energy density equal to 3.00 J/cm for
Q
(a) and to 3.30 J/cm for (b) and (c). In (b)
it has been assumed that boiling is possible
1000 on the relevant time scale 30ns while in (c)
C3
it has been assumed to be impossible.
500
CO
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
TIME (ns)
4720 ANDREA PETERLONGO, ANTONIO MIOTELLO, AND ROGER KELLY 50
1.0—
E E, = 3.10 J/c
O 0.8—
I—
0O 0.6—
EI
—3.00 J/cm
FIG. 2. Velocity of Al surface recession,
v„, for two energy densities of the laser pulse
)Z
UJ
0.4— /
/
/
/
/
which give maximum temperatures below Tg.
A recondensation boundary condition is as-
0 /
/
/
sumed for backstreaming particles whenever
(0 a KL is present.
(6
0 0.2-
UJ
UJ /
/
PULSE
CC /
/
/
0.0 ' I
0 10 20 30 40
TIME (ns)
400-
& Tb (BOILING POSSIBLE)
EI = 3.70 J/cm
350-
E -3.50 J/cm
O EI /
300- /
/
I— /
250— /
/ FIG. 3. Velocity of Al surface recession,
0 E, = 3.30 J/cm
/
v„, for four energy densities of the laser pulse
UJ 200— /
/ which give maximum temperatures above Tq.
O Here it is assumed that boiling is possible on
Z'. 3.20 J/cm
0 150- /
/ the relevant time scale 30ns. A. recondensa-
(0 / tion boundary condition is assumed for back-
0) 100— streaming particles whenever a KL is present.
PULSE
0
LU
UJ 50- /
CC /
e /
/
I
Q
0 10 20 30 40
TIME (ns)
T POSSIBLE)
EI = 3.70 J/c
E 6- EI —3.50 J/c
I— FIG. 4. Velocity of Al surface recession,
00
—
EI 3.30 J/c
/ v„, for four energy densities of the laser pulse
/
which give maximum temperatures above Tg.
) 4 /
UJ E, = 3.20 J/c Here it is assumed that boiling is impossi-
/
Z'. 3
/ ble on the relevant time scale 30ns. A re-
0 /
/
/
condensation boundary condition is assumed
(0 for backstreaming particles whenever a KL is
UJ PULSE present.
0
UJ /
/
/
CC /
/
/
I
Q
0 10 20 30 40
TIME (ns)
50 LASER-PULSE SPU'l l ERING OF ALUMINUM: ... 4721
Here El is the total internal energy of the gas, is the j where n~, u~, and T~ are, respectively, the nuxnber
member of internal degrees of freedom, I' is the gamma density, the Bow velocity, and the temperature at the
function, and Tp and n~ are, respectively, the temper- "boundary" of the KL. Conditions of local equilibrium
ature and the number density of the gas at the surface. then hold. (In fact a KL is really infinitely thick, but
The pre-exponential term EIq/2-Z serves to ensure that is nearly fully developed after only 2— 3 mean &ee paths
(Ez) deduced from Eq. (15) assumes a thermodynami- [19,20]. This is why we speak of a boundary. )
cally correct value given by (j/2)ka Ta [15,16]. A kind There are now two possibilities. If the sticking coefB-
of "center of xnass velocity" is given by cient for backstreaxning particles is given by C& —1, one
has a recondensation boundary condition, as described in
Appendix A. If, on the other hand, the sticking coefB-
v fa+ dv dv„dv, cient is given by Cs, ——0, one has a reflection boundary
condition, as described in Appendix B.
fs dv dv„dv, In either case the important result is that jump condi-
tion8 emerge. They are expressed in terms of the ratios
r2kaTs'I ' ' Tz /Ta and px/pa as in Eqs. (A4), (A5), (B4), and (B5),
7t'm
(16) p~ and pg being mass densities corresponding to n~ and
) ng
For low rates of vaporization, the density of the par-
ticles is so low that a collision is an unusual event: the
particles therefore undergo a so-called collision free flo-m C. Beyond the Knudsen layer
[14,17]. In this situation each particle keeps its original
velocity and, in the limit t )& r~, where r~ is (as before) The Boltsmann equation
the duration of the laser pulse, the position of each par-
ticle emitted at the instant t~ is given by buffa
A rigorous study of the dynaxnical behavior of particles
emitted as in Eq. (15) may be done by using the well
z=v (t —ti) v t, known Boltzmann equation [21)
where 0 ( (
t~ ~~. The corresponding
tion may be approximated by
velocity distribu- Bfa
+ Vfav+) F; Bfa = bcfa,
Bt Bv~
+ v. )
fa(v» = v„~(fa fa~ —fa fa~)odvqdv'dv~
vw~
Ej/2 —1
=" (*') r 2. l,aT. ) r(j/2)(~aT, )'/'(* V1 V Vg
~ ~
"*') (19)
1 m Here fa(x, v, t) is the Boltzmann velocity distribution,
(17)
ass -2 I'; is the force per unit mass acting on each particle,
0. is the cross section for an elastic binary collision,
where n~ is the gas number density and D stands for
v v& v vy are, respectively, the velocities of two col-
Dirac.
lidhng particles before and after the collision, and v„~ is
Collision-free How is characterized by the fact that the
given by v„~ = (v —vq( = ~v' —v~(. Moreover the index
ratio T~~~/T~ undergoes a strong reduction termed kine
matic cooling for z )& 0 or t &) r~ due to the fact that
i assumes the meaning of x, y, z.
Equation (19) holds under very weak restrictions.
((v —(v )) ) (which is proportional to T~~) goes to 0 However, to solve it the cross section must be known, and
[18]. Here T~~ and T~ are, respectively, the temperature to take into account Eq. (15) as the boundary condition
parallel and perpendicular to the direction of the fiow.
a Monte Carlo calculation must be performed, which is
very expensive in CPU time [18,22].
B. The Knudsen layer
We have not yet commented on the problem that ther- 2. The flow equations
mally emitted particles, described by Eq. (15), are not
really in equilibriuxn. Equilibration occurs in the 6rst few For most purposes one is not interested in the time evo-
collisions near the surface in a region termed the Knud- lution of fa itself but in that of the mean values of a phys-
sen layer (KL). At the "boundary" of the KL the velocity ical quantity y(x, v, t), which will depend on the position
distribution takes on the form of a displaced Maxwellian and velocity of one single particle. The Enskog equation
3/2 Ej/2 1 may then be used. There are then no more constraints
q I than those for the Boltzmann equation [21,23]. When
(2 z ka Tzr ) I'(j/2) (ka Tzc)~/2
dealing with average y(x, v, t) functions during each bi-
xexp
1 —
m
[(v —uzi) 2 + v„+
2
v,2 ]+ Ez
nary collision, the Enskog equation has the form
kg Tg 2
where Dy is given by From Eqs. (23a) and (23b) follows the relation
X )~ X )~ X 2 ps
(23c)
z Ox Ox
index i (as before) assumes the meaning of x, y, z, and
x (for example) is equivalent to x. Moreover when g is 8. Unsteady adiabatic expansion
equal to the particle mass m, or to the linear momentum If the density of the gas at the boundary of the KL
mv, or to the energy of two colliding particles (1/2) mv2, is high enough, then the particles enter into a so-called
then Eq. (20) yields the mass continuity equation, the unsteady adiabatic expansion (UAE), which is well de-
Euler equation, and the energy conservation equation, re- scribed by the gas-dynamic equations [4]. However, it
spectively. However, these three equations form a system should be noticed that at the expansion &ont, even in
that is not complete, i.e. , there are more unknowns than the presence of an UAE, the number density of the par-
equations. ticles is so low that only the Boltzmann equation can give
A complete three equation system, that is, the gas- a good description of the gas. The threshold for the UAE
dynamic equations, may be obtained via the Chapman- corresponds roughly to an emission rate of about 1 ML in
Enskog perturbation method [24], holding when the col- 20 ns, which [neglecting the difFerence between v„and v„
lisional term of the Boltzmann equation (b, c fz) is pre- seen in Eq. (13)] is equivalent to v„" (2.8x10 s cm)/(20
ponderant with respect to the dynamical terms (the re- ns) =1.4 cm/s for the recession velocity of the surface [14].
mainder). They are as follows: the continuity equation If the vaporization rate is below v„", then gas-dynamic
eKects do not occur at all, except possibly for formation
+ V'(ps u) = 0, (21a) of the KL, and we neglect them. On the other hand, as
Bt soon as the vaporization rate reaches v„" at time t = t"
the Euler equation we make full use of Eqs. (21a), (2lb), and (23a). The
Bt(""-)')-B&i
B
("". "" BZ~
=0, (21b)
equations were integrated numerically in one-dimensional
form by following the Godunov scheme [25] with the KL
jump conditions and M = 1 as boundary conditions (see
Appendix C). Here M is the Mach number, given by
and the energy conservation equation M = u/a for a one-dimensonal flow. Moreover, since the
crater depth is relatively small compared to the distance
—
B —u+E/
Bt ps/ g2
scale of gas dynamics, we neglect the motion of the re-
ceding surface [v„as in Eq. (13)] in connection with the
gas dynamics.
+) . Bz~B )1,
—u +f+ —
pl =) Concerning Eq. (23a), the logical choices for po and
psu, *. (2lc)
~
(2 Bz~ pso are obviously y~ and p~. However, as the ratio p/p~
ps(
~
D. Numerical results ing the time and spatial step lengths, a procedure which,
however, implies a heavy increase in the CPU expense.
In Fig. 5 we geport the results obtained using a re- In curve (5), at the end of the emission phase, when
condensation boundary condition, energy density of 3.70 we have v = v and t = tf — t„= 27.4 ns, no important
J/cm2, and three values of t. Three different aspects are differences with respect to the previous case are observed
illustrated. even if the How velocity (ult. = 404m/s) and density of
Emission leading to a UAE begins at t = t; = t" = 14.9 the gas (pz = 78pg /cm ) at the KL boundary are a bit
ns and we consider in curve (a) the gas density and How lower. We would point out that analytical descriptions of
velocity when the surface temperature reaches its max- the problem [26,27] normally do not have a regime similar
imum at t=20.3 ns. The gas density has its maximum to curve (b) because they assume an instantaneous onset
at the KL boundary (pa = 200 pg/cms) and drops to and ending of the emission.
0 well away &om the surface. The Bow velocity of the Finally, in curve (c) at t = 39.9ns, the density and
gas at the KL boundary is urt = 1051 m/s, but increases How velocity display a line of contact (LOC), which is a
with distance. According to previous analytical work, u remembrance of the abrupt density drop that occurs at
at the expansion &ont should be a maximum, given by the end of the emission. For short enough times this LOC
u = 4ult for atoms with p = 5/3 [14,26, 27). The ob- coincides with the absolute density maximum. Near the
served discrepancy, i.e., that the How velocity reaches a surface the velocity exhibits negative values due to the
maximum slightly before the expansion front, is due to recondensation process. These results are very similar to
the fact that near the front the density is so low that the those found for one-dimensional expansions based on the
numerical method and rounding error play a signi6cant Boltzmann equation [18], as well as for solutions based on
role. More accurate results may be obtained by decreas- the gas-dynamic equations [26,27). At 39.9 ns some 6.7%
of the emitted gas has already recondensed, a quantity to
~
I
~
I
~
I
~
I ~
I I I ~
I
~
I ~
be compared with 2.4—5.2% for t = 271 47~ for — a "top-
200 RECONDENSATION
hat" laser pulse [28].
E Figure 6 shows a comparison between densities and
O aporization rate Bow velocities with recondensation and re8ection bound-
co 150
ary conditions for backstreaming within the KL. The
0-
100 f vaporization
CO
Z'. 300 I I
IJJ (c) After the end MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE
50 d LOC of vaporization 250—
E
O dition
U cn 200
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
~
I I
I
~
I ~
I ~
I
~
I ~
I ~
I ~
150
undary condition
4000— CO
Z 100-
UJ
E Cl
3000 g) 50
I—
0~ 2000 10 15 20
)
UJ
1000
~
3500
3000
E
I I I ~ I ~ I ~ I I I I I ~ I ~
2500
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
O
DISTANCE (pm) 0 2000
FIG. 5. Pro6les of gas density and Sow velocity for an en- 1500
ergy density equal to 3.70 J/cm, three values of t, a reconden-
sation boundary condition, and the assumption that boiling 0 1000—
is not possible. Emission leading to a UAE is found to begin I
300 ~
I ~
I ~
I ~
I
~
I ~
I ~
I ~
I I CONCLUSXONS
250— REF LECTION
E We have described a laser sputtering process as it
CD aporization rate would occur in a thermal regime when both a primary
cn 200
mechanism (due to absorption of the laser pulse) and
150 a secondary mechanism (gas dynamics) are taken into
vaporization account. In particular the following physical quantities
(0
100 1st LOC were computed: (a) surface temperature as a function of
UJ
C3 (c) After the end time and with the postulate that boiling either is or is not
50 zation
possible on a 30 ns time scale (Fig. 1 and Table II); (b)
C9 duration of the liquid phase at the surface and duration
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 of boiling (Table II); (c) surface recession velocity due to
the vaporization process (Figs. 2 —4 and Table II); (d) the
crater depth (Table II); and (e) density and flow velocity
4000 I I ~
I ~
I ~
I ' I
' I ' I ' I
of the emitted particles as a function of time with the
assumption that the gas-dynamic equations (rather than
the Boltzmann equation) may be adopted (Figs. 5—7).
E 3000 In spite of there being only a limited possibility of di-
rect comparison with experimental results, due both to
I—. the lack of published data (crater depth for instance)
00 2000 and to the difficulty in imaging the gas cloud, qualita-
LLI
tive agreement with previous theoretical work was found
0 1000 [18,26—28]. The latter, however, involved rather heavy
restrictions in the choice of boundary conditions. As a
result the Qow velocity assumed a rather simple structure
0 given by a single straight line during the vaporization and
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 by either two or three nearly straight lines after the end
DISTANCE (pm) of the vaporization. On the contrary, the boundary con-
ditions used in our model are less restrictive, the How ve-
FIG. 7. ProSles of gas density and Sow velocity for an en- locity and gas density (Figs. 5—7) being free to follow the
ergy density equal to 3.70 J/cm, three values of t, a reliection temperature changes of the sample surface (Fig. 1). This
boundary condition, and the assumption that boiling is not implies a more structured Qow velocity function, which
possible. Emission leading to a UAE is found to begin at departs &om having straight or nearly straight compo-
t, = t„' = 14.9 ns, when we have v„" and T = 2693K. v„= nents.
Curve (a) corresponds to the time when the surface temper- Even our approach, however, is not methodologically
ature is at its maximum, namely, t = 20.3 as. Curve (5) is for perfect. We have had to adjust the ratio p/p~ for each
the time at the end of the emission, namely, t y —t„' = 27.4 ns value of t.
when we again have v„= v„" and T = 2693 K. Curve (c) is for The scheme adopted here for describing laser sputter-
the time when a period equal to the emission duration (i.e. , ing may be improved by taking into account the tem-
ty —t; 12.5ns) has passed since the end of the emission, perature and phase dependence of the density, reQection
namely, t = 39.9 ns. Two LOC's are seen to be present. and absorption coefficients, specific heat, conductivity,
and heat of vaporization. Likewise, the heat input into
the gas should have been considered.
A deeper understanding of the boiling mechanism is
temperature of the sample has been taken as being at necessary to overcome our "hybrid" description of va-
its maximum. In this situation there are no strong dif- porization and boiling, which are supposed to happen
ferences even if, in the case of a reQection boundary con- at a pressure of 1 atm, and the gas expansion, which is
dition, p~ is a bit higher. Even the temperature profile of supposed to be into vacuum.
the surface is not significantly affected by the differences Despite these possible improvements the results we
in Cb, at the maximum the difFerence in temperature is have obtained should describe well enough the laser ab-
less than 2 K. lation process at rather low CPU expense. Indeed the
Figure 7 shows the results obtained when reQection in- study of the whole process described here required more
stead of recondensation is assumed. Although curves (u) or less 90 h of VAX6320 computer CPU time. This time
and (5) are almost the same as the corresponding curves applies to a situation in which the spatial and time steps
of Fig. 5, curve (c) shows three important differences. were, respectively, Lx 23 nm and At 2 ps for the
First, for all times the Qow velocity at the surface is 0. integration of the heat Qow equation and Ax 4 nm
Second, two LOC's are present both in the Qow velocity and b, t 0.1 ps for the integration of the gas-dynamic
and in the density profile. Third, the density exhibits equations.
a plateau between the surface and the first LOC. This At the saxne time the model is quite general. The laser
is rigorously true only for atoms, but is always approxi- ablation of other materials may be described simply by
mately true [26,27]. providing alternative parameters for Table I.
50 LASER-PULSE SPUD l ERING OF ALUMINUM: ... 4725
= PS!(kaTs
t'1
PKuK
( 27l'm ) and
(kaTK& '
1
(1-uK2 kaTK
PK uK + —1 j
(2 m
l
ka Ts (ka Ts )
m (2am)
'1 ( p +1
g2(p —1)J
+ PK
ka TK
m
( ka TK 't '
2s'm)
1
n
(, +n —1)y!x1
(p
(,n2+ 2(~-1)).
g g
xerfc(n) —e ~ p+1
! ! (A3)
Here n is given by n = M(7/2) ~~2 and p, is the saturated (total Sux) —(escaping Hux)
vapor mass density at T, .
—
From Eqs. (Al) (A3), the following jump conditions
(total flux)
[holding for 0 & M & 1 (Appendix C)] may be deduced: (kaTs l —PKuK
g 2nmp
2
TK
1+ (p —1 nl '1 1p —1 n
A4
(kaTs) '~'
7r ps
Ts (p+1 2) p+1 2J ( 2n'm )
1/2
(As)
ps E Tsj
'
'1 = PS!(kaTs)
—M!(7 kaTKI
PKuK
uK —M aK (A7) g27rm)
m
Here a~ is the local sound speed at the KL boundary,
(1 2
and M = u/a is the Mach number for a one-dimensional PK uK! —uK + kaTa —1)
How. (2 m p
Rn'thermore, from Eqs. (Al) the backstreaming co-
kaTs (kaTsl '
1
efficient Cb p as used in Eq. (14) may be deduced very ( p+ 1
simply: m g
2n. m) g2(p —1) j
4726 ANDREA PETERLONGO, ANTONIO MIOTIC, LQ, A%to ROGER KELLY 50
In regard to the linear moment»~ Bux, in the reflec- tionary. If the Poisson equation [Eq. (23b)] and the re-
tion case the surface acts on the backstreaming particles lation seen in Eq. (23c) are used, then Eqs. (21a) and
as a negative-to-positive "linear momentum converter. " (2lb) can be rewritten as
Equation (A2) must therefore be replaced by
—
Ba —
Ba (p —1) a Ou
=0,
ka Tace le
+u Bx
+ 2 Ox
pK ua. + m (CI)
1
Ps
ka Ts
+' pK
kyar T~ —+u —+ p —
Ou
Ot
Ou
192;
2a Oa
1 Ox
= 0.
2 m m
x o. +—
Il erfc(cx)— , ne
1
Then "stationary" or "alxnost stationary" How at the KL
~
2) ~
2 7r
boundary means
u —+ (p —1) a Bu ~ 0
Oa
Oz 2 Ox
Pz (T )"' 1
(B5) Ou— 2a Oa
(C3)
ps 2 a rr1/2 ( TK ) (2rr)'~' '
u
Bx
+ —18x ~ 0
f
where the final values correspond to M = 1. Obviously
the new value of Cb.o is given by Cb.o ——0 and the coef-
ficient P (P g 0) is not needed. A discussion of the KL Equations (C3) can be rearranged to
for conditions of reflection apparently has not been made
previously. (C4)
[1] N. Bloembergen, H. Kurz, J. M. Liu, snd R. Yen, in Laser [11] G. M. Pound, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 1, 135 (1972).
and E/ection-Beam Intern, ctions with Solids, edited by [12] J. P. Hirth snd G. M. Pound, J. Phys. Chem. 64, 619
B. R. Appleton and G. K. Celler (Elsevier Science, New (1960).
York, 1982), p. 3. [13] F. V. Bunkin snd M. I. Tribel'skiI, Usp. Fiz. Nauk 130,
[2] M. M. Martynyuk, Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 48, 741 (1976) [Sov. 193 (19SO) [Sov. Phys. Usp. 2$, 105 (1980)].
Phys. Tech. Phys. 21, 430 (1976)]. [14 R. Kelly, J. Chem. Phys. 92, 5047 (1990).
[3] D. L. Lin, X. Li, snd T. F. George, Mst. Sci. Eng. B 2$, [15] R. Kelly snd R. W. Dreyfus, Surf. Sci. 198, 263 (198S).
L9 (1994). [16 C. Cercignsni, in Rarefied Gas Dynamics, edited by S. S.
[4] B. Brsren, A. Gupts, and K. Casey,
R. Kelly, A. Miotello, Fisher (AIAA, New York, 1981), p. 305.
Nucl. Instrum. Methods B85, 18? (1992) [17] K. L. Ssenger, J. Chem. Phys. 75, 2467 (1981).
[5] V. A. Batanov, F. V. Bunkin, A. M. Prokhorov, snd V. [18] D. Sibold snd H. M. Urbsssek, Phys. Rev. A 43, 6722
B. Fedorov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 8$, 586 (1972) [Sov. (1991).
Phys. JETP 38, 311 (1973)]. [19] I. NoorBstcha, R. R. Lucchese, snd Y. Zeiri, J. Chem.
[6] J. Lin snd T. F. George, J. Appl. Phys. 54, 382 (1983). Phys. 86, 5816 (1987).
? H. S. Csrslaw snd J. C. Jseger, Conduction of Heat in [20] I. NoorBstchs, R. R. Lucchese, snd Y. Zeiri, J. Chem.
Solids (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1959), p. 50. Phys. 89, 5251 (1988).
[8] R. E. Harrington, J. Appl. Phys. $8, 3266 (1967)]. [21] F. Reif, Fundamentals of Statistical and Thermal Physics
[9] L. F. Dona dslle Rose snd A. Miotello, in European (McGrsw-Hill, Tokyo, 1965), p. 516.
Scientific Laser Workshop on Mathematical Simulation, [22] H. M. Urbassek snd J. Michl, Nucl. Instrum. Methods
edited by H. W. Bergmsnn (Sprechsssl, Coburg, 1989), Phys. Res. Sec. B 22, 480 (198?).
p. 242. [23] S. Chapman snd T. G. Cowling, The Mathematical The
[10] S. Williamson, G. Morou, and J. C. M. Li, Phys. Rev. ory of Non Uniform Gases (Csmb-ridge University Press,
Lett. 52, 2364 (1984). Cambridge, 1970).
INURING
50 LASER-PULSE SPU l OF ALUMINUM: ... 4727
[24] J. H. Ferziger
and H. G. Kaper, Mathematical Theory of [27] D. Sibold and H. M. Urbassek, Phys. Fluids A 4, 165
Transport Processes in, Gases (North-Holland, Amster- (1992).
dam, 1972), p. 107. [28] R. Kelly and A. Miotello, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys.
[25) S. K. Godunov, A. V. Zabrodin, and G. P. Prokopov, Res. Sec. B 91, 682 (1994).
U. S.S.R. Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 4, 1187 (1962). [29] T. Ytrehus, in Rarefied Gas Dynamics, edited by J. L.
[26] R. Kelly and A. Miotello, Appl. Phys. B 57, 145 (1993). Potter (AIAA, New York, 1977), p. 1197.