Cited by 301Plasma Diagnostics and ApplicationsVacuum and Plasma ArcsMagnetic confinement fusion research

Wall material effects in stationary plasma thrusters. II. Near-wall and in-wall conductivity

Barral, S., Makowski, K., Peradzyński, Z., Gascon, N., Dudeck, M.·2003·Physics of Plasmas

Abstract

Simulations and experimental characterizations of a stationary plasma thruster are compared for four different wall materials to investigate near-wall conductivity (dielectric materials) and in-wall conductivity (conducting materials) in such a discharge. Using a one-dimensional transient fluid model that takes into account a possible electron temperature anisotropy, it is shown that electron-wall backscattering plays a crucial role by maintaining a relatively high electron temperature along the magnetic field lines which in turn drives large electron currents toward the walls. The large differences in discharge current observed experimentally for the dielectric materials are qualitatively recovered, confirming that near-wall conductivity results from the combined effects of secondary electron emission and electron backscattering. A clear correlation is found between the appearance of space charge saturation at the walls and a jump of the discharge current observed in experiments when varying the discharge voltage or the magnetic field. The anomalously high values of discharge current observed experimentally with graphite are also correctly recovered in simulations, which highlight a plasma short-circuiting effect resulting from in-wall currents.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1063/1.1611881

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The most commonly used models for the simulation of neutrals reflection are Maxwell's model and Schamberg's model.

    “The most commonly used models for the simulation of neutrals reflection are the Maxwell's model, which considers a fixed probability for specular and purely diffused reflections, and Schamberg's model 219,221 , which depends on additional tuning coefficients to reproduce an intermediate reflection scenario affected by the impact angle.”

    From Plasma propulsion modeling with particle-based algorithms (2023) · cites this paper as [221]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barral, S., Makowski, K., Peradzyński, Z., Gascon, N., & Dudeck, M.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Fundamental Technological Research (PL)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Venue
Physics of Plasmas
Published
2003-10-01
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
4137-4152
ISSN
  • 1070-664X (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-7674
OpenAlex
W2028414351
Cited by
301
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 10
FWCI
22.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Physics of Plasmas (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Plasma Diagnostics and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Vacuum and Plasma Arcs
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Magnetic confinement fusion research
Keywords
stationary plasma thruster, wall materials, secondary electron emission, electron temperature anisotropy, discharge current, graphite, electron current

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review