PIC, Fluid, MC Comparison
The figure below shows Ez/Ng vs. NgR for three different cases:
In each case, R=1.0 cm, height = 20 cm, and gas T = 273 K.
Gas is Argon with the isotropic L&K cross-section set.
1) Ng = 1e14 cm-3, I=15.2 mA ("Reduced Problem"):
Input File.
2) Ng = 3e14 cm-3, I=2.85 mA:
Input File.
3) Ng = 1e15 cm-3, I=0.54 mA:
Input File.
Note the good agreement between the PIC, Fluid and Monte-Carlo (MC) results.
(Previously, when we used an anisotropic differential cross-section,
the Ez/N were consistently lower than the Fluid and MC cases.)
The Tables below shows some PIC, MC, and Fluid output:
(ne0 = electron density on axis,
KE0 = average electron energy on axis,
Phi0 = Potential on axis)
PIC (isotropic L&K XS) Results
|
| NR(cm-2) |
I(ma) |
Ez(V/cm) |
Ez/N(Td) |
ne0(cm-3) |
KE0(eV) |
Phi0(V)
|
| 1e14 |
15.2 |
1.0 |
1000 |
1.6e9 |
14.5 |
34 |
| 3e14 |
2.85 |
1.4 |
467 |
6.7e8 |
10.3 |
27 |
| 1e15 |
0.54 |
2.05 |
205 |
2.7e8 |
8.2 |
22 |
L&K Monte-Carlo Results (J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 3188-98, 1999)
|
| NR(cm-2) |
I(ma) |
Ez(V/cm) |
Ez/N(Td) |
ne0(cm-3) |
KE0(eV) |
Phi0(V)
|
| 1e14 |
15.2 |
1.0 |
1000 |
1.64e9 |
14.7 |
37 |
| 3e14 |
2.85 |
1.4 |
467 |
7.0e8 |
10.4 |
28 |
| 1e15 |
0.54 |
2.2 |
220 |
2.65e8 |
8.4 |
25 |
Ingold Non-Local Fluid Results
|
| NR(cm-2) |
I(ma) |
Ez(V/cm) |
Ez/N(Td) |
| 3e14 |
2.85 |
1.5 |
497 |
| 1e15 |
0.54 |
2.05 |
205 |
Reduced Problem (Ng=1e14 cm-3, I=15.2 mA) Diagnostics
XPDC1 POWER BALANCE OUTPUT:
time = 1.600000e-05, num. steps =200000
species=0, particle loss to wall =2.2085e+10
species=1, particle loss to wall =2.21718e+10
number of ionization events =2.2104e+10
species=0, power loss to wall = 0.0666824 W
species=1, power loss to wall = 0.119956 W
power loss to inelastic colls = 0.107896 W
power loss to elastic colls = 6.21035e-05 W
power loss to charge exchange colls = 0.0093656 W
total power loss to colls = 0.117323 W
total power loss to wall = 0.186638 W
total power loss = 0.303961 W
power Input = 0.301690 W
