Paper detail

THGEM gain calculations using Garfield++: Solving discrepancies between the simulation and experimental data

Discrepancies between the measured and simulated gain in Thick Micropatterned gaseous detectors (MPGD), namely THGEM, have been observed by several groups. In order to simulate the electron avalanches and the gain the community relies on the calculations performed in Garfield++, known to produce differences of 2 orders of magnitude in comparison to the experimental data for thick MPGDs. In this work, simulations performed for Ne/5%CH4, Ar/5%CH4 and Ar/30%CO2 mixtures shows that Garfield++ is able to perfectly describe the experimental data if Penning effect is included in the simulation. The comparison between the number of excitations which may lead to a Penning transfer, is shown for THGEM and GEM, explaining the less pronounced gain discrepancies observed in GEM.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

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.