Sie sind auf Seite 1von 46

Investigation of Instabilities

and Scaling Effects on


steady-state AF-MPDT SX3
MSc student Luca Malacci - University of Pisa
Supervisors.: Prof. Georg Herdrich, Prof. M. Andrenucci, PhD Candidate Adam Boxberger
Investigate possible critical regimes in the SX3
Analysis of different criteria in order to predict instabilities occurrence
Comparison of operational regime with existing experimental data
Experimental test with predetermined operational parameters*
Assessment of the results
*All these tasks, especially experimental ones, have to be performed accordingly with the present available
hardware at IRS, taking into account timing and feasibility of the procedure.
SF-MPDT: Self-field
Propellant (Ar, Li, He, Xe, H) is injected
in an acceleration chamber consisting in
two coaxial electrodes
Acceleration process is mainly due to
the interaction between the self-field
magnetic field and the current density j,
according to the momentum eq.:
AF-MPDT: Applied-field
Externally imposed magnetic field allows
to increase efficiency at low-mid power
regime (up to 100 kW) [5]
4 acceleration processes [5]:
Self-magnetic acceleration
Swirl acceleration
Hall component
Gas-dynamic acceleration:
Joule heating and expansion of the
gas in a physical or magnetic nozzle
!
"
du
dt
= #$p + j % B (1)
!
j
r
" B
#
j
z
" B
#
j
r
" B
z
j
z
" B
r
j
#
" B
z
j
#
" B
r
Acceleration process is derived by the generalized Ohms law, eq (2)
!
j = " E + u # B] [
$
%
e
&
e
B
j # B [ ] (2)
Since Hall currents in azimuthal directions can only take place trough a particle
colllisional process, the Hall parameter (according eq 3) is a characteristic variable for
AF-MPDs operation:
The first two factors on the right-hand side are respectively the gyration frequency an
mean free path period of electrons. Hall parameters has the meaning of a ratio of
gyration frequency of electrons to the related collision frequency. Considering
operational mode characterized by a consistent Hall component the higher the gyration
frequency and the lower the collision frequency, the higher will be the amount of
induced Hall current.
!
" = #
e
$
e
(3)
Taking into account effects of the Hall parameter on thrust operation means to analyze
his dependence on the magnetic field strength, pressure, and temperature. Defining the
electron gyration, collisional frequency, electronic pressure respectively as (4) (5) (6) (7)
!
and considering the dependence of the conductivity on the electron temperature, the
Hall parameter can be rearranged as follow (8)
Thus in order to increase the azimuthal flows following steps are required:
Large magnetic fields
low values of pressure, high electron temperature (nearly square dependence)
o The difference between theoretical expected values of the Hall parameters (ranging
between 10-100) and experimental evidences (azimuthal currents measurements)
implies that the efficiency of the magnetic nozzle in the energy conversion is
limited [5]
!
"
e
#
e
=
$B
en
e
%
BT
e
5/2
p
e
(8)
!
"
e
=
eB
m
e
(4)
!
v
e
=
n
e
e
2
"m
e
(5)
!
v
e
=
p
e
e
2
kT
e
"m
e
(7)
!
p
e
= n
e
kT
e
(6)
Due to the different acceleration mechanisms involved in thrust generation:
A proper design of the magnetic field plays an essential role in the acceleration
process
High values of ionization are required in order to ensure an appropriate degree of
mass to electromagnetic effects (being mass involved in the specific impulse and the
thrust generated trough electromagnetic effects)
Anomalous diffusion of electrons across the magnetic field as well as the presence of
a non uniform azimuthally discharge have to be taking into account affecting
operation of the thruster. [5] [6]
Geometry of the applied magnetic field affects operation parameters as discharge
voltage V, anode voltage losses, electron density [6]
!
"
e
= #D
e
dn
e
dr
#
e
n
e
E
!
E = "
1
en
e
16 j
e
B+ kT
e
dn
e
dr
#
$
%
&
'
(
Considering the flux of electrons to the anode with the Bohm coefficient for the
anomalous diffusion, and rearranging the Einstein relation as follows
!
D
e= Bohm
=
1
16
k
B
T
eB
we obtain an expression for the electric field as function of he external applied field [6]
Results from both experimental campaign and theoretical efforts [1][4][6][14][15][16] show
directions for changing the thruster geometry and to improve thruster performances:
Observed rapid increase in thruster performance with applied-field strength using a
larger anode radii indicate that both larger anodes and increased magnetic fields
should be adopted. [6]
Using both cathode and short anode yielded the highest measured performance due
to the reduction of anode/electrode losses. [6]
Designing the anode and applied-field so that the field lines cross the anode surface*
thus reducing the requirement for a high anode fall voltage, is believed also to
reduce the anode power losses and increase thruster efficiency. [16]
*Has to be noticed that in regarding to the last point others authors point out to design the applied
field line to be parallel to the anode surface in order to minimize anode losses [1]
SX3 design includes several of these features
cathode to the anode radio is high if compared with similar class devices
cathode is a recessed one and anode exhibit a short extension
applied magnetic field in this case is shaped to be flattered to the anode surface
Instabilities & operational conditions
Definition of Instabilities and Onset related phenomena.
How instabilities affects overall thruster performances?
Phenomenology: Onset is defined as a collection of behaviours associated with a transition to
large-amplitude terminal voltage fluctuations (hash), transients in plasma properties, and growth
in anode fall voltages once exceeded a certain value of a critical parameter k* (ratio
between discharge current and mass flow rate) [16]
Effects:
Limits the max achievable Isp
Decrease in thrust efficiency (as anode losses increase)
Electrode erosion (decreasing thruster lifetime) (1)
Effect of erosion on a McHc operated above the
onset (quasi-steady regime)
(left) BoL (right) after 200 shots
Alta AF-MPD 100kW [19]
Fig. (1)
Instabilities & operational conditions
Current and Voltage fluctuactions
at the Onset (2)
(Up) Discharge Current:
Amplitude: 600-900 [A] ! 20% Im*
(Down) Discharge Voltage:
Amplitude 16-21 [V]
Sampling Frequency: 0.5 [ms]
Discharge
current I [A]
750
MFR [mg/s] 100
B** [T] 0.1
Ra [mm] 38
Rc [mm] 6.4
NASA-Lewis AF-MPDT 100 kW class
Configuration I
Water cooled Cu anode
W-2%Th alloy cathode
** Applied magnetic field B measured at the
centerline of the cathode tip
* Mean value of discharge current
(2)
Anode starvation [4][10]
Diffuse current conduction to the anode
is sheath-limited
reversal in the sign of the anode sheath
as the driven current increase cause a
drop in the density of charge carriers
near the anode
anode can no longer collect the total
current imposed by the external source
current conduction turns to discrete
anode spots, implying local anode
vaporization
Plasma Instabilities
drift instabilities, excited by large relative
velocities between electrons and ions
Micro instabilities (GLHDI, ECDI, space
charge instabilities) [11][12][13]
Macro instabilities (MHD kink instabilities)
[2][3]
Formulated Theories for the Onset riddle explanation:
Effect of the back EMF [8]
Increasing of the current to mass flow
ratio leads to it is possible for the
accelerator plasma to flow quickly
enough to impede current from flowing
between the electrodes instabilities)
Instabilities & operational conditions
k* onset parameter
operated current, ionization current ratio
current ratio for SF and AF according to
Tikhonov
Tikhonov parameter for SF and AF-MPD
!
k
*
=
(
I
2
m
,
I
2
m M
ion
)
" =
I
I
ci
"
T
SF
=
I
I
crit
SF
"
T
AF
=
I
I
crit
AF
A
o
SF
=

o
#I
2
4$a
o
m
A
o
AF
=
(R
a
% R
c
)(B
self
+ B
ext
)I
4$a
o
m
Definition:
Classic onset parameter is defined as the ratio between current and mass flow rate.
Influence of the atomic mass of the propellant has been verified by several authors [4]
Ratio between operated and ionization current measures the edge over critical conditions [4]
Tikhonov parameter Ao represents the ratio between the gas-dynamic and magnetic
pressure. The eq. in the case AF-MPDT, has been developed empirically, still capturing
relevant trends of operated parameters. [1]
Instabilities & operational conditions
Parameters used to define Critical Regimes:
Tikhonov criterion for AF-MPDTs
General theoretical formulation is based upon the analysis of the ideal MHD channel
In the AF-MPDT case the Tikhonov parameter links different operational parameters:
applied magnetic field, mass flow rate, discharge current.
The computed value is compared with a geometric parameter, function of the
thruster geometry in terms of anode and cathode radii
Equating these two parameters allows to determine different critical conditions
!
A
o
AF
" A
o
geo
Stability condition:

!
A
o
= f (B
ext
, B
self
, m , I , R , a
o
)
B
ext
= f (I) parametric m
B
ext
= f ( m ) parametric I
Equivalent representations
!
A
o
AF
=
(R
a
" R
c
)(B
self
+ B
ext
)I
4#a
o
m
!
A
o
geo
=
3.6
R
a
R
c
"
1
2
(3) Comparison of Tikhonov geometric parameter and operated conditions for different
AF-MPDs thrusters
Considerations:
o Arrows indicates thruster operated in critical conditions or above it
o When not clearly expressed critical conditions are assumed by the analysis of available
voltage/current diagrams
o Two types of thruster clearly operated safely even in conditions in which Tikhonov
criterion provides indications of unstable behaviours occurrence
o Both Tohuku University and SX3 AF-MPDTs are characterized by relatively much higher
slender magnetic field geometry w.r.t. others thrusters
o Differences in the SX3 operated conditions for the 2012 and 2013 campaigns only
depend on a different magnetic field geometry
Summary of geometric and operational characteristic of analyzed AF-MPDs thrusters
Influence of Temperature & Ion sound velocity
In the general formulation by Tikhonov the ion sound velocity is computed assuming
the same temperature for both ions and electrons.
Values of ion sound velocity depend on the the atomic mass of the propellant
politropic constant is usually assumed to be close to the value for ideal gases,
(5/3)
however
several Japanese authors [20] dropped off the assumptions of an equal politropic
constant and temperature for both electrons and ions in relation to the very peculiar
operated conditions of high power (MW order), high mass flow rate, high applied
magnetic field with different propellant (He). ( Te ! 4-5 [eV] )
Temperature measurements performed at Alta with HpT ranges between 3-4 [eV] without
applied magnetic field up to 9 [eV] when an external field is applied [4]
Original measurements of Tikhonov group range between 2-3 [eV] for electron
temperature at the cathode tip.
Work of Myers at NASA-Lewis center shows electron temperature ranging from 1 [eV] to
2 [eV] exhibiting a trend clearly related to that one of the electron number density w.r.t.
the radius of electrodes gap. [6]
Computation of Ion sound velocity
Influence of Ion sound velocity on the Admissible current
!
a
o
=
"kT
e
M
i
Wi t hi n t he as s umpt i on of an
e q u a l t e mp e r a t u r e f o r b o t h
e l e c t r o n s a n d i o n s a n d
as s umi ng t he adi abat i c i ndex
v a l u e f or p e r f e c t g a s e s , t h e
i o n s o u n d v e l o c i t y r e d u c e s
to eq. (I)
Ao Ti khonov parameter can be
c omput ed as f unc t i on of t he
I on s ou n d v e l oc i t y : e q u a t i n g
t h i s v a l u e t o t h e g e o me t r i c
p a r a m e t e r l e a d s t o a
representati on of the admi ssi bl e
current as function of Te.
Admissible current increases
as Te increases
Effect of electron temperature
variations are more relevant
as the mass flow rate increases
!
k = Boltzmann constant
!
T
e
= electron temperature " 2.5 [eV]
!
M
i
= propellant atomic weitgh
!
" =
5
3
= adiabatic index
(I)
Ra [mm] 43 Discharge current, I [A] 450 max
Rc [mm] 6 MFR [mg/s] 20
RcII* [mm] 12 Applied magnetic field, B [T] 0.1
Analysis of the SX3 case:
SX3 has been operated at IRS in the 2012 and 2013 with different operational
parameters
A complete new magnetic flux density geometry has been implemented in last exp
campaign, trough the usage of a new designed set of coils.
This modification results in a drastic improvements of performances: during the
2012 exp campaign the SX3 has been operated at current levels up to 400 [A], [14]
In comparison previous experimental campaign achieved operations up to 225 [A] at
which the probable occurrence of instability [15]
SX3 Geometric features Operated conditions
*RcII: Alternative cathode, not implemented yet
Exp campaign analysis (2012)
Constrained represents the
relation between applied
magnetic field and
discharge current for
parametric values of mass
flow rate at critical
conditions.
For a given value of mass
flow rate increasing
discharge current implies
to operate at lower value
of applied magnetic field
This trend is more evident
at low values of mass flow
r a t e a n d d i s c h a r g e
currents
Tikhonov criterion underestimates admissible current at given operated conditions of
mass flow rate, applied magnetic field
Considering the I=200 [A] measurement the predicted value of Tikhonov critical
current (lower curve) is about 80 [A] lower than the operated condition

!
A
o
= f (B
ext
, B
self
, m , I , R , a
o
)
B
ext
= f (I) parametric m
!
R " 7.12
a
o
" 2500 [m/s]
Trends:
Increasing mass flow rate allows to
operate at higher values of discharge
current for any given value of applied
magnetic field
Curves represents the same parametric
formulation for different cathode radii,
respectively Rc = 9 [mm] (up) and Rc =
12 [mm] (down)
Anode to cathode ratio is a critical
parameter, an increasing of this ratio
leads to higher value of admissible
current
As the external magnetic field increases,
lower values of current are permitted
Effect of increasing the anode to
cathode ratio also affects the trends of
parametric curves: an increasing of
mass flow rate is more effective in order
to operate at higher current conditions
if applied for higher anode to cathode
radii
Is worth to notice that operated
conditions with the SX3 in 2012
correspond to a Tikhonov criterion
applied to a lower anode to cathode
ratio
!
R " 4.78
!
R " 3.58

!
A
o
= f (B
ext
, B
self
, m , I , R , a
o
)
I = f ( m ) parametric B
ext
!
R " 7.12
a
o
" 2500 [m/s]
!
R " 5
!
R " 3.58
Trends:
Curves represent t he same
par amet r i c f or mul at i on f or
d i f f e r e n t c a t h o d e r a d i i ,
respectively Rc = 9 [mm] (up) and
Rc = 12 [mm] (down)
Effect of i ncreasi ng appl i ed
magnetic field on values of
critical current is higher for lower
values of the magnetic field itself
As the applied magnetic field
i ncr eases above val ues of
0.3-0.35 [T] the effect in terms of
reduction of admissible current
decreases (thi s tendency i s
highlighted by the decreasing in
the values of curves slope with
increasing magnetic field)
The effect of a reduction in the
admissible current as the applied
f i e l d i n c r e a s e s , i s l e s s
pronounced as the anode to
cathode ratio increases
Even i n thi s case operated
condition of the SX3 correspond
to a Tikhonov criterion applied to
a anode to cathode ratio equal
to R = 5
Trends:
Curves in graph (1) summarized trends
of the discharge current as function of
the mass flow rate for parametric values
of magnetic field and for 3 different
values of anode to cathode radius ratio
(R=7.12 - 4.78 3.58)
Effects of a reduction of the anode to
cathode radius are nearly equivalent to
an increasing in the applied magnetic
field.
Curves in graph (2) represent the
applied magnetic field Vs discharge
current relation in critical conditions for
the ZT1 thruster case.
The ZT1 operated in safety regime with
no occurrence of instability.
Tikhonov criterion correctly predict
critical conditions above the operated
one.
Has to be pointed out that ZT1 has an
anode to cathode ratio R=5.34: from
this and previous considerations is
argued that Tikhonov criterion validity is
s t r ongl y af f ect ed by t he anode
to cathode ratio.
Thi s characteri sti c al so suggests
a way t o cor r ect t he Ti khonov
criterion at high values of R
(1)
(2)
Kruskal-Shafranov criterion is based on a model describing a typical instability mode that
may arise in several confined plasmas geometries (fusion devices, z-machines, plasma
guns)
such as configurations (i.e. Tokomak) are potentially unstable to the current driven
external kink instability
The kink stability of a cylindrical magnetic plasma column is often quantified in terms of
the so-called safety factor, q
The safety factor measures the pitch of the magnetic field lines as they helically wind
around the axis of the plasma column.
If the field line pitch becomes too steep (q becomes too low), the flux rope will kink in
response to long-wavelength magnetic perturbations. The onset of the most dangerous
kink mode, the external kink, depends theoretically only on the value of the edge
safety factor
Different geometries have been object of study with this criterion in several fields (fusion
devices, solar coronal simulation, MHD converters)
toroidal geometries (Tokamak configuration) (I)
line-tied partial-toroidal (plasma column held fixed at both ends) (II)
open-end geometries (such as AF-MPDTs) (III)
I
II III
Among the very large amount of literature currently available on the topic a list of works
focused on the analysis of the Kruskal-Shafranov limit is also reported in the following [18]
Modelling of instabilities with Kruskal-Shafranov limit: Experimental and theoretical efforts
Kruskal-Shafranov limit has been extensively used in several studies aimed to detect
and identify instabilities in AF-MPDTs [2] [3] and later also in SF-MPDTs [22]
Experimental activities at Alta firstly attempted to modelize the instabilities
occurrence with the Kruskal-Shafranov limit
The campaign consisted in both electrostatic and magnetostatic measurements of
voltage, discharge current, azimuthal and axial magnetic field.
A Fourier analysis of the signals allowed to detect a regular oscillation of 100 kHz
in both electrostatic and magnetic output.
This picture is consistent with an azimuthal propagation of the kink mode.
A direct correlation between energy modes* of the kink and operational parameter
has been investigated, specifically w.r.t. discharge current I and applied magnetic
field B
A correlation between the energy modes and the critical current threshold
computed using the Tikhonov criterion has been identified.
*As widely know definition of energy modes m,n are referred to the expression of the expansion of cylindrical
displacement of the plasma column in perturbation analysis. (See for example [17] [18])
Summary of the experimental and theoretical results achieved at Alta:
Kink mode instabilities have been observed in several exp campaign at Alta
This kind of external mode instabilities are considered as the principal cause of
the occurrence of Instabilities and Onset behaviours in the AF-MPDs thruster
Development of m=0 and m=1 modes is believed to cause lower efficiency
operated conditions above the Onset
Kruskal-Shafranov limit and current regime: on the applicability on the SX3 case
Alta experimental campaign involved at least three AF-MPDTs design; HpT, MAI
Type, and a conventional single hollow cathode design [21]
HpT and MAI Type especially follow a so called HCMM high current approach in
comparison with standard pursed DLR/IRS approach based on LCHM high
magnetic flux low current [15]
...is the kink mode instability hypothesis applicable to the SX3 operational regime?
Have to be noticed that as the Alta design thrusters are characterized by an high
discharge current design, the MFR (mass flow rate) used is also much higher and
ranging between 100 and 660 [mg/s] for the HpT and up to 100 [mgr/s] for the
other cases [3] so in the best case at least 5 times the operated MFR currently
experienced with the SX3
Summary of the experimental and theoretical results achieved at Alta:
Kink mode instabilities have been observed in several exp campaigns at Alta
This kind of external mode instabilities are considered as the principal cause of the
occurrence of Instabilities and Onset behaviour in the AF-MPDs thruster [2]
Mode m=0 and m=1 are modes considered as responsible of lower efficiency operation
above the critical regime
Modes energy is negligible if I
tot
< I
crit
Modes energy increase as the I-V characteristic of the discharge becomes critical
Axial plasma wavelength represents the characteristic length of the kink, and is verified
to be comparable with the length of thruster plume L
Instability mode is regarded as a m/n = 1 helical kink mode
Time [ms] 0 3
0 Bz [T] 0.1
Voltage & Current
characteristic
Power Spectrum of the
Voltage signal at
critical conditions
Axial wavelength Vs Bz
V-I characteristic and
critical current
threshold
Safety factor condition at
resonant surface of radius a
Safety factor considered as
function of inverse pinch
radius
!
2"R
0
= L
!
q =
2"
(r)L
#1
Kruskal-Shafranov condition for stability
!
q(a) "1
Definition of relevant parameters:
Safety factor q
Inverse pitch of magnetic field line
Starting from the Kruskal-Shafranov limit in the case of a toroidal configuration a safety
factor q can be expressed for an open-end case: the inverse pitch is considered as the
ratio between the axial current and the magnetic flux
From this formulation an admissible current value can be establish as follow [3]:
!
=

0
I
"
=

0
I
z
(r)
B
z
(r)A
=

0
I
B
z
#r
2
!
q =
2"
(r)L
=
4"r
2
B
z

0
I
z
L
#1
!
I
z
"
(2#r)
2
B
z

0
L
!
q(r) =
rB
z
(r)
B
"
(r)
=
1
(r)R
0
!
q =
2"rB
z
(r)
LB
#
(r)
=
2"
(r)L
=1
1
2
3
4
!
2"R
0
= L
Admissible current
Following parameters are defined as in figure (k)
Plasma column length L is proportional to
the extension of the plume. [4]
Assumed values for L have been computed
considering the Tikhonov correlation between
plume extension and Ra at a given applied
magnetic field B
Radius r is assumed equal to the cathode
radius Rc
Constant axial magnetic field Bz
Axial current Iz, constant along the z axis
over the cathode surface tip, represents the
overall discharge current
L represents the characteristic
length of the kink[3]
Exp camapign assests that the
kink originates at the cathode tip
and exhibit an initial radial
extension comparable with the
cathode dimension [2]
Constant applied magnetic field
!
L = (2 3.5)D
a
!
B
z
" B
ext
= 0.1
!
r " R
c
Parameters meaning
Fig. (k)
Influence of plasma column length L on critical current I
computation
Influence of plasma column radius r
Influence of magnetic field strength
An increase of the
plasma column radius
r l eads to hi gher
values of admissible
current
Assuming a longer
plasma column length
L decrease the value
of admissible current
Computed results for
the SX3 represent the
lower and upper limit
of t he admi ssi bl e
current for different
v al ues of pl asma
column length
For L ranging from 2
t o 3Da e x p e c t e d
critical current for the
kink mode instability
ranges from 550 to
650 A
Within the Taylor theory (time decay of magnetic helicity longer than the time decay of
magnetic energy) magnetic field can be modelized as Bessel Functions (begin solution of
Ampere law in these states) [18]
This modelization gives an indication of the fraction of the induced magnetic field as
function of radial direction for parametric values of L
According to this model in the SX3 case induced values of axial magnetic field are negligible
w.r.t. the external applied magnetic field for a wide range of operational parameters
Theoretical value of inverse pinch as function of the plasma column length is
represented in the following graph (1)
Expected values of experimental inverse pinch parameter are plotted Vs the
plasma column length
Assuming L ranging between 2 and 3Da different values of inverse pinch
parameter can be computed
Each of the results correspond to a certain value of admissible current
!
=
4"
L
!
=

0
I
"
" = #r
2
B
z
(1)
Results:
Critical current values with Tikhonov criterion for instability are underestimated
Kruskal-Shafranov limit predicts critical current values between 550 and 650 [A] for
the analyzed conditions
Strongly influence of the magnetic field geometry on the admissible current for the
SX3 is evident from the analysis with Tikhonov criterion
At low current regime magnetic field geometry seems to be the most important
parameter to affect thruster functioning if compared for instance with variations in
the mass flow rate
Currently ongoing activities:
Criteria for magnetic field topology similarity: aimed to determine comparable
operational conditions w.r.t. magnetic field topology between different thruster
geometries (electrodes radii)
Preliminary consideration on a future experimental campaign related to Instabilities
investigation: aims, hardware availability, feasibility, expected outcomes
Consideration about Ionization current formulation for AFMPD thrusters
Similarity of magnetic field topology
between 2 different configurations is
crucial for:
I nstabi l i ti es behavi ors: arc
c u r r e n t s p a t t e r n s a n d
discharge voltage are strongly
affected by the magnetic field
geometry and strength
Thrust, efficiency: theoretical
determination and verification
of those parameters depends
g r e a t l y o n p r o p e r
characterization of magnetic
field in the plume
Possible future caharcterization
of discharge plume (electron
temperatue, particle number
density)
How to compare different geometric configurations? (different electrodes geometries)
Comparison of divergence of magnetic field lines at Anode and Cathode
reference points
!
"
A,z
!
"
A,B
!
"
C,B
!
"
A,z
=
!
"
A,B
=
!
"
C,B
=
angle between anode surface and magnetic field line
angle between anode magnetic field line and z axis
angle between cathode magnetic field line and z axis
Simply analysis of magnetic field geometry
performed with FEEM software includes the
study of an additional Inner magnetic coil in
order to achieve same similarity condition for
different configurations.
Following examples in figures are related to
the analysis with the current Outer coil set up,
operated with the following parameters:
SX3 Outer Coil (71 turns)
Total current = 452 Amps " Ba = 0.1 T
Voltage Drop = 8.83697 Volts
Flux Linkage = 0.940809 Webers
Flux/Current = 0.00208144 Henries
Voltage/Current = 0.0195508 Ohms
Power = 3994.31 Watts
Configuration 1:
Ra = 32.25 mm,
Rc = 12 mm
Configuration 2:
Ra = 43 mm,
Rc = 12 mm
Anal ysi s wi t h FEEM al l ows t o
determine also others figures of merit
for a given coil set up such as:
mean value of magnetic flux density
across anode surface,
average value of magnetic field for a
given length
power consumption of operated coil
set up
The definition of a feasible experimental campaign requires the identification of:
Instruments available at IRS
Variables that can be measured
Timing and set-up feasibility
Alternative I
Voltage & currents measurements:
Aimed to:
Assessment of predicted critical condition with the Kruskal-Shafranov limit
Indications for a modified Tikhonov criterion**
Assessment of the effect of magnetic field strength and geometry on critical current
Analysis of voltage spectrum in order to identify a dominant frequency peak
Possible hardware requirement for the electrostatic set-up
(Voltage Discharge current signals)
Required bandwidth up to 500 kHz
Acquisition sampling frequency up to 10 MHz
**See Current ongoing activities in the previous.
Alternative II
(In addition to exp measurements at point II)
Optical measurements of Electron temperature, plume length, plume oscillations
Aimed to:
Determination of plume characteristic
Analysis of emitted spectrum line in order to assess the presence of single, doubled
ionized charge ions
Assessment of the presence of spectral lines associated with the sputtering emission
from electrodes in critical conditions
Confrontation of Te with assumed values of temperature with Tikhonov criterion
Analysis of brightness spectrum in order to verify the existence of dominant frequencies
a) Note: Previous exp campaign has been already focused on measurements of voltage,
current, thrust, so in the following only some hints about the spectroscopy analysis are
provided
Emission Spectroscopy set-up
Hardware:
Spectrometer
Collimator
neutral filter
data recording & post process
Methods & Constraints
Identification of a suitable centerline-average emitted intensity
Assessment of required parameters
(intensity ratio resolution, wavelength range)
Model and assumption for the computation of the electron temperature
(es. relative line intensities approach)
Spectrometer calibration
Corrections (transmittance of the medium)
Vielen Dank fr Ihre freundliche Aufmerksamkeit.
[1] Research of Plasma acceleration processes in self-field and applied magnetic field thruster, V.B. Tikhonov, S.A. Semenihin, RIAME, Moscow,
IEPC, 1993
[2] Further Experimental Evidences of the Development of Kink Instabilities in MPD Thrusters, F. Paganucci, M. Andrenucci, M. Agostini, et al.
Centrospazio-ALTA, Consorzio RFX, ENEA - Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, (2005)
[3] Critical regimes and magnetohydrodynamic instabilities in a magneto-plasma-dynamic thruster, M. Andrenucci, F. Paganucci, and P.
Rossetti Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Pisa, and Centrospazio, V. Antoni and M. Bagatin Consorzio RFX, PHYSICS OF
PLASMAS (2004)
[4] A critical review of the State-of-the-Art in the performances of AF-MPDs, A.D. Kodys and E.Y. Choueiri, Joint Propulsion Conference Acts,
(2005)
[5] The Investigation of Applied-Field MPD Thrusters on the International Space Station, Monika Auweter-Kurtz, Gerd Krulle, Helmut Kurtz, (1998)
[6] An Investigation of Magnetic Field Effects on Plume Density and Temperature Profiles of an Applied-Field MPD Thruster S. Ray Bullock, R.M.
Myers (1993)
[7] Experimental Study of a 100-kW class Applied-Field MPD Thruster, R. Albertoni, P. Rossetti, F. Paganucci, M. Andrenucci et al 32nd
International Electric Propulsion Conference
[8] Theory of Onset in Magnetoplasmadynamic Thrusters, J.L. Lawless, V.V. Subramaniamt, Carnegie-Mellon University, (1987)
[9] Experimental MPD thruster investigations, H. L. Kurtz, M. Auweter-Kurtz, W. D. Merke, and H. O. Schrade, 19th International Electric
Propulsion Conference, no. AIAA-87-1019, 1987.
[10] Critical regime of a plasma accelerator, F. G. Baksht, B. Y. Moizhes, and A. B. Rybakov, Soviet Physics Technical Physics, vol. 18, p. 1613,
June 1974.
[11] Microinstabilities in a 10-Kilowatt Self-Field Magnetoplasmadynanic Thruster, Dennis L. Tilley, Edgar Y. Choueiri, Arnold J. Kelly, Robert G.
Jahn
[12] Instabilities in MPD thruster flows: 1. Space charge instabilities in unbounded and inhomogeneous plasmas, H P Wagner, H J Kaeppeler
and M Auweter-Kurtz (1998)
[13] Instabilities in MPD thruster flows: 2. Investigation of Drift and Gradient Driven Instabilities Using Multi-Fluid Plasma Models, H P Wagner,
H J Kaeppeler and M Auweter-Kurtz (1998)
[14] Experimental Test Campaign of Gas-fed Steady State Applied-Field Magnetoplasmadynamic Thruster SX3, Adam Boxberger, Georg Herdrich,
IEPC, 2013
[15] Experimental Investigation of Steady-State Applied-Field Magnetoplasmadynamic Thrusters at Institute of Space Systems, Adam Boxberger,
Patrick Bambachy, Georg Herdrich, Stefanos Fasoulas, Institute of Space Systems, 2012
[16] Influence of Tailored Applied Magnetic Fields on High-Power MPD Thruster Current Transport and Onset-Related Phenomena, Robert C.
Moeller, James E. Polk, Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), California Institute of Technology, IEPC 2013
[17] Introduction to Kink Modes: the Kruskal-Shafranov Limit, Steve Cowley UCLA (2011)
[18] H. Goedbloed and S. Poedts Principles of Magneto-hydrodynamics, Cambridge (2004).
[19] Experimental study of a 100-kW class AF-MPD thruster, R. Albertoni, F. Paganucci, M. Andrenucci, et al., IEPC 2011
[20] Characteristics of electromagnetically accelerated plasma flow in an externally applied magnetic field, Hiroyuki Tobari, Akira Ando, Masaaki
Inutake, Physics of Plasmas (2007)
[21] MHD instabilities in magneto-plasma-dynamic thrusters, F Paganucci, M Zuin, M Agostini, M Andrenucci, V Antoni, et al. (2008)
[22] High-Speed Imaging of the First Kink Mode Instability in a Self-Field Magnetoplasmadynamic Thruster, Jonathan, A. Walker, Samuel
Langendorf, Mitchell Walker et al., George Washington University, IEPC 2013