Message: Re: Different Ionisation energy Not Logged In (login)
 Next-in-Thread Next-in-Thread
 Next-in-Forum Next-in-Forum

Ok Re: Different Ionisation energy 

Forum: Geometry
Re: None Different Ionisation energy (Volodymyr Rodin)
Re: Idea Re: Different Ionisation energy (Vladimir Ivanchenko)
Date: Feb 01, 10:48
From: Volodymyr Rodin <Volodymyr Rodin>

On Fri, 01 Feb 2019 17:44:35 GMT, Vladimir Ivanchenko wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> sorry for the some delay with the answer, because this question is post
> to the wrong forum. The question is not connected with geometry.
> 
> So called NIST materials properties are based on evaluated data
> published by the NIST experts. NIST material parameters are coherent and
> based on data, which experts had at a moment when they did these
> evaluations.
> 
> One has to take into account, that any concrete material used in a real
> setup, may differ from the NIST one, for example, may have different
> density.
> 
> If you define material by hand, mean ionisation potential is computed as
> an average value for components. So called "chemical" effects (molecular
> shells are different from single atom shells) are not taken into
> account.
> 
> Needless to say that both descriptions have some systematic
> uncertainties. We believe, that usually NIST material uncertainty is
> less, and recommend using these materials. However, for each case an
> extra evaluation of the data for given material may be performed in
> order to reach minimal systematic uncertainty.
> 
> VI
> 

Dear Vladimir

Thank you for the great explanation of this problem. Your reply should be definitely added to the Material section of User Guide to make it clear for everyone

VR

 Add Message Add Message
to: "Re: Different Ionisation energy"

 Subscribe Subscribe

This site runs SLAC HyperNews version 1.11-slac-98, derived from the original HyperNews


[ Geant 4 Home | Geant 4 HyperNews | Search | Request New Forum | Feedback ]