Paper detail

Advanced fluid modelling and PIC/MCC simulations of low-pressure ccrf discharges

Comparative studies of capacitively coupled radio-frequency discharges in helium and argon at pressures between 10 and 80 Pa are presented applying two different fluid modelling approaches as well as two independently developed particle-in-cell/Monte Carlo collision (PIC/MCC) codes. The focus is on the analysis of the range of applicability of a recently proposed fluid model including an improved drift-diffusion approximation for the electron component as well as its comparison with fluid modelling results using the classical drift-diffusion approximation and benchmark results obtained by PIC/MCC simulations. Main features of this time- and space-dependent fluid model are given. It is found that the novel approach shows generally quite good agreement with the macroscopic properties derived by the kinetic simulations and is largely able to characterize qualitatively and quantitatively the discharge behaviour even at conditions when the classical fluid modelling approach fails. Furthermore, the excellent agreement between the two PIC/MCC simulation codes using the velocity Verlet method for the integration of the equations of motion verifies their accuracy and applicability.

preprint2017arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.