Abstract
AbstractThe aromatic hydrocarbons (AHs) fluorobenzene, naphthalene, and 1-fluoronaphthalene are introduced as promising alternatives to xenon as propellant for in-space electric propulsion (EP). These storable molecules have similar mass, lower cost, and lower ionization energies compared to xenon, as well as the critical advantage of low post-ionization fragmentation compared to other molecular propellant candidates. The ionization characteristics of AHs are compared with those of xenon and the diamondoid adamantane, previously evaluated as a molecular propellant for EP. Quantum chemical calculations and BEB theory together with 25 eV electron ionization mass spectrometry (EI-MS) measurements have been used to predict the fragmentation of the AHs and adamantane when ionized in a plasma with an electron temperature of 7 eV (a typical electron temperature in EP plasmas). A high fraction (81 − 86%) of the detected AH ions originate from intact molecules, compared to 34% for adamantane, indicating extraordinarily low fragmentation for the selected AHs. The ionization potential of the AHs is similar to that of adamantane but lower compared to xenon (8.14–9.2 eV for the AHs, 9.25 for adamantane and 12.13 eV for xenon). BEB calculations have also been used to predict total ionization cross sections. The calculated ionization cross section of the AHs is comparable to that of adamantane but 3–5 times higher than that of xenon, which together with the low ionization potential can contribute to more efficient ionization. The AHs may have the potential to perform better than xenon, despite the absence of fragmentation in xenon.
Funder
Swedish National Space Agency
Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research
Swedish Research Council
Royal Institute of Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference72 articles.
1. Kieckhafer A, King LB (2007) Energetics of propellant options for high-power Hall thrusters. J Propul Power 23:21–26. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.16376
2. Szabo J, Robin M, Duggan J, Hofer RR (2009) Light metal propellant Hall thrusters. 31st International Electric Propulsion Conference (IEPC-138) 1–12
3. Szabo J, Robin M, Paintal S, Pote B, Hruby V (2012) High density Hall thruster propellant investigations. 48th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit 2012 1–15. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2012-3853
4. Szabo J, Robin M, Hruby V (2017) Bismuth vapor Hall effect thruster performance and plume experiments. 35th International Electric Propulsion Conference (IEPC-25) (October 2017):1–13
5. Doyle KP, Peck MA (2019) Water electrolysis propulsion as a case study in resource-based spacecraft architecture (February 2020). IEEE Aero El Sys Mag 34:4–19. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAES.2019.2923312