484 IEEE Transactions on Electrical Insulation Vol. EI-17 No.

6, December 1982

BREAKDOWN IN SOLID DIELECTRICS

J. J. O'Dwyer
Department of Physics
SUNY/College at Oswego
Oswego, NY

ABSTRACT
This paper summarizes several aspects of
breakdown in solid dielectrics, with emphasis
on the distinction between electrical and
thermal effects. Several current theories
are discussed.

INTRODUCTION The computed results are shown in Fig. 1; the major

All breakdown in solid dielectrics is ultimately
thermal in the sense that the discharge track involves
at least the melting and probably the vaporization of
the dielectric. In common usage, the classification
of a breakdown process as thermal means that it can be
satisfactorily explained using reasonable extrapola-
tions of the electrical and thermal conductivities
from values that obtain substantially below breakdown.
Conversely we classify breakdown as purely electrical
when it cannot be explained as due to processes that
are not in evidence until very close to breakdown.
In this paper we propose to review the historic
milestones in the ongoing search for a theory of di-
electric breakdown in solids, and to comment on the
value and significance of the ideas presented.
Finally, we discuss current approaches to the problem,
and the different aspects of the phenomenon on which
they might be expected to shed some light.
THERMAL BREAKDOWN
Most dielectrics show increasing electrical conduc-
tivity and decreasing thermal conductivity as the tem-
perature increases. For this reason, breakdown at high
temperatures tends to be thermal in nature. Much of
the early experimental work was at high temperatures,
or under conditions in which the electrodes were poor
heat sinks; as a consequence, thermal breakdown was
studied extensively. The basic equation for thermal
breakdown is
C -t div (K grad T) =-E2
- (1)
features are a constant breakdown voltage for thick
slabs (AD >> 2K), and a constant value of voltage
divided by the square root of thickness for thin slabs
(AD « 2K). The importance of this work lies in the
demonstration that increasing dielectric thickness or
electrode cooling do not raise the breakdown voltage
beyond a given value for any dielectric at given ambient
temperature. The frustration of this very complete
calculation arises in applications to room temperature
conditions. Efficient electrode cooling produces criti-
cal voltages so high as to be infinite for all practical
purposes; on the other hand, low electrode cooling leads
to critical voltages that can be made as small as one
wishes. Since electrode cooling is often a very poorly
defined parameter in practical situations, the theory
gives the critical voltage as lying somewhere in the
range of zero to infinity!
Recent revived interest in the thermal breakdown prob-
lem has centered on the distortion of the electric field
distribution that results from the temperature-controlled
variation of the electrical conductivity. Wintle [3]
has investigated steady-state solutions for various
functional forms of the electrical and thermal conduc-
tivities, and Beers and O'Dwyer [4] computed transient
solutions for various electrode geometries. Depending
mainly on ambient temperature, the field adjacent to a
well-cooled electrode can be as large as several times
the value that would be inferred from the geometry of
the electrodes. This could be important in the explana-
tion of the decreasing breakdown strength (as a function
of temperature) that is observed in many substances
above about 100°C. The breakdown mechanism itself may
not be thermal, but it may occur at lower mean field
strengths because of thermally induced field distortion.

where the symbols have their usual meaning.

0018-9367/82/1200-0484*00.75 Cs 1982 IEEE

0'Dwyer.: Breakdown in solid dielectrics
I 102
I0
104
10-2 102
d=AD/ 2K
Fig. 1: Numerical solution in dimensionless form for
thermal breakdown of a dielectric sZab with placne
parallel electrodes. (From the data of Moon [2].)
The ordinate is dimensionlees voltage, the abscissa
is dimensionless thickness, and the parceneter is
reciprocal dimensionless temperature.
A complete solution in dimensionless form was com-
puted by Fock [1] and Moon [2] for the breakdown of a
dielectric slab of constant thermal conductivity K and
electrical conductivity given by
a(T) = a0 exp(-q/kT)
The electrodes with separation D had their heat dis-
sipating ability described by a surface thermal con-
ductivity A. The relevant dimensionless quantities
correspond to voltage, temperature, and thickness
v=vo( 8oK0)
kT 0/
d = XD/2K
where VO is the applied voltage and To is
temperature.
PURELY ELECTRICAL BREAKDOWN
Early scientific work on the breakdown of thin single
crystal dielectrics gave rise to the impression that
breakdown field strength depended only on the dielec-
tric substance and the temperature - hence the concept
of "intrinsic breakdown". Frohlich [5] gave a formula
for a critical field at whcih collision recombination
no longer balances collision ionization
Ec =
( exp(Kw/wkT) -1
In this formula Eo is a field strength determined by
crystal parameters, and is the angular frequency of
w
the longitudinal polarization waves. This result gave
485
excellent order of magnitude agreement (with no dispos-
able constants) for observed breakdown strengths of
alkali halides below about 50°C. Its importance lies
in giving some confirmation to the idea that collision
ionization is a primary cause of breakdown in solids.
It does not, of course, pretend to give a full account
of the breakdown process.
For temperatures above about 50°C the breakdown
strength of alkali halides decreased with increasing
temperature, and Frohlich [6] gave another formula
for amorphous dielectrics
E-= E0 exp(AV/2kT) (5)
Once again Eo is a field strength determined by crystal
parameters, and AV is the energy range of shallow traps
below the conduction band of the dielectric. Compari-
son with experimental results gave reasonable values
for AV (a few tenths of an electron volt), but there
does not seem to be really convincing evidence for
Frolich amorphous breakdown in any substance at all.
The real importance of this work probably lies in the
simple model that it provides for the electronic
structure of an amorphous dielectric.
Further experimental work began to erode the whole
concept of intrinsic breakdown strength. For example,
the combined results of various workers shown in Fig. 2
indicate a change in breakdown strength of NaCl cry-
stals by a factor of about 10 when the electrode separ-
ation is increased by a factor of 103. Clearly the
breakdown is a property of the dielectric material plus
its electrode system, and not just the dielectric alone.
Thickness dependence of breakdown strength was explained
by Seitz [7] who used an order of magnitude argument to
arrive at an avalanche breakdown theory based on 40
generations of collision ionization. However, this
(2) theory did not include the important effect of the
space charge due to the collision ionization products.
A steady state theory to include the effects of space
charge was given by O'Dwyer [8] who used disposable
constants to fit the theory to the experimental re-
sults. The line of best fit is shown on Fig. 2. Once
again, this theory provides no complete account of
breakdown; its value probably goes no further than
giving a means of estimating parameters in the colli-
sion ionization function by fitting theory to breakdown
(3) data.
15 0
the ambient _ 0,,
o,
N,
EIO 0
E ,o
w
5 _0
0o-3 o0-2 lo-,
Thickness (mm)
Fig. 2: Thickness dependence of the breakdown
(4) strength of NaCl. The experimentaZ data are:
J Vorob'ev et aZ. o Watson et al.
OCooper and Smith
The dashed Line represents a fit to the space-
charge-enhanced cathode emission theory.
486 IEEE Transactions on Electrical Insulation Vol. EI-17 No.6, December 1982
RECENT WORK ON BREAKDOWN THEORY
Recent work on breakdown theory has followed various
paths, each one looking at some particular aspect of
the problem. The theory of steady state space charge
conduction in the presence of collision ionization has
been investigated for various geometries by O'Dwyer
[12] who finds a current controlled negative resistance
characteristic for a wide range of material and elec-
trode parameters. DiStefans and Shatzkes [13] point
out that the model does not predict negative resistance
for negligible levels of avalanche multiplication. The
current characteristic is determined by cathode emis-
sion alone up to the point where collision ionization
is significant; immediately thereafter negative resis-
tance occurs. This is, in a sense, a strong point of
the model; however, in its present form it gives no
explanation of the large current transients and partial
discharges that seem to be almost universal precursors
to breakdown.
This concept has been further developed by Klein [14]
who considers the transient problem and derives rela-
tions for the critical field and the time to breakdown.
Klein includes the effect of trapping of the ionizing
carrier, and considers two basic models; in one of these
models recombination is the maj'or reason for the removal
of the products of ionization (IR model), and in the
other this role is filled by drift to the electrodes
(ID model). In all cases the breakdown strength is
strongly affected by electron and hole traps. A
strong point of these models is that they account for
many different processes (ionization, trapping, and re-
combination): their wekaness lies in uncertainties
associated with various assumptions made in obtaining
solutions.
An entirely different approach to the problem has
been taken by Beers et al. [15] who compute the growth
of an electron avalanche using a Monte Carlo technique.
Transport coefficients to be used in the computer model
of the avalanche were assigned or computed from
assigned parameters. The problem was brought into
dimensionless form by assigning the effective electron
mass, the mean free path for acoustic phonon scattering,
and the ionization energy as the fundamental dimsen-
sional set. The development of the avalanche was fol-
lowed as a function of time both in the direction of
the applied field and laterally, with the evolution
being halted when the self-field due to the electrons
and holes reached 50% of the applied field. The dipolar
charge distribution of the products of collision ioni-
zation was then used to set up a macroscopic model to
describe the subsequent evoltuion of the avalanche.
A simple scaling law emerged from the computations
showing that the process could be described by assign-
ment of a single parameter. Computing the number of
electrons in the streamer as a function of time (dimen-
sionless) showed almost the same thing over a range of
different parameter values. The authors conclude that
a single solution probably exists to the problem of
the evolution of negative tip streamers over a large
range of material parameter values. The strong point
of this approach is the way in which it follows the
temporal development of the postulated electron ava-
lanche; its weakness, as a potential theory of break-
down, is that has not so far given a criterion for a
critical applied field.
Yet another school of thought advances the viewpoint
that breakdown is not to be identified with an uncon-
trolled electron avalanche. Budenstein [16] argues
strongly for this opinion, and divides the breakdown
process into four stages:
1) A formative stage in which energy is deposited in
preferred sites in the dielectric; there may be many
mechanisms, and collision ionization could be of pri-
mary importance.
2) A tree initiation stage in which concentrations of
ions in the gaseous phase are formed at places of high
field concentration and deposition of energy.
3) A tree growth stage in which energy is supplied from
the field to the gases which then further erode the
solid.
4) A return streamer which occurs when a tree extends
from one electrode to the other; current through the
highly conducting streamer forms the breakdown channel.
A strong point of this model is its clear identifica-
tion of various physical processes that are postulated
to occur, and which have been observed experimentally
in many instances. A weakness is the large number of
material parameters, and the number and nature of
assumptions that would be needed to proceed with the
computation.
To summarize, early concepts of purely electrical
breakdowndown were simplistic but yielded results that
were easily checked against gross features of experi-
mental data. Refinement of concepts designed to
account for all the experimental details has led to
increasingly complex theoretical models which make
direct comparison with the data ever more difficult.
REFERENCES
[1] V. Fock, Arch. Elektrotech., (1927) Vol. 19, 71.
[2] P. H. Moon, Trans. Am. Inst. Elec. Engrs., (1931)
Vol. 50, 1008.
[3] H. J. Wintle, J. Appl. Phys., (1981) Vol. 52, 4181.
[4] B. L. Beers and J. J. O'Dwyer, (unpublished).
[5] H. Frolich, Proc. Roy. Soc., (1937) A Vol. 160,
230.
[6] H. Frohlich, Proc. Roy. Soc., (1947) A Vol. 188,
521.
[7] F. Seitz, Phys. Rev., (1949) Vol. 76, 1376.
[8] J. J. O'Dwyer, J. Phys. Chem. Solics, (1967)
Vol. 28, 1137.
[9] A. A. Voroblev, G. A. Vorb'ev, and L. T. Murashko,
Sov. Phys. Sol. St., (1963) Vol. 4, 1441.
[10] D. B. Watson, W. Heyes, K. C. Kao, and J. H.
Calderwood, IEEE Trans. Elec. Ins., (1965)
EI-1, 30.
[11] R. Cooper and W. A. Smith, Proc. Phys. Soc.,
(1961) B Vol. 78, 734.
0'Dwyer: Breakdown in solid dielectrics 487

[12] J. J. O'Dwyer, IEEE Trams. Elec. Ins., (1980),
EI-15, 264.
[13] T. H. DiStefano and M. Shatkzes, J. Vac. Sci.
Tech., (1975) Vol. 12, 37.
[14] N. Klein, J. Appl. Phys., (1982) Vol. 53.
[15] B. L. Beers, V. W. Pine and S. T. Ives, Annual.
Rep. CEIDP, (1981) 390.
Manuscript was received 28 JuZy 1982.
This paper was presented at the 1982 Conference on
Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena in
Amherst, MA, on 20 October 1982 at the Symposium on
Universal Features of Electric Breakdown in Gases,
Liquids, Solids, and at Interfaces.

[16] P. Budenstein, IEEE Trans. Elec. Ins., (1980)

EI-15, 225.