A Simple Model of the Effect of Solar Array Orientation on SMART-1 Floating Potential

Hilgers, A.; Thiébault, B.; Estublier, Denis; Gengembre, E.; Amo, J.A.G. del; Capacci, M.; Roussel, Jean

doi:10.1109/tps.2006.883405

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The numerical core and the user interface have been developed by ONERA and the Artenum company, respectively (Roussel et al, 2008 [9]). Various applications to spacecraft and ground experiment were performed by them and ESA (Roussel et al, 2010 [10], Hilgers et al (2006) [16]).…”

Section: B Spis Tool For Simulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation Study of Spacecraft Electrostatic Sheath Changes With the Heliocentric Distances From 0.044 to 1 AU

Guillemant

Génot

Velez

et al. 2013

IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper the electrostatic sheath of a simplified spacecraft is investigated for heliocentric distances varying from 0.044 to 1 AU, using the 3D Particle in Cell (PIC) software Satellite Plasma Interaction System (SPIS). The baseline context is the prediction of sheath effects on solar wind measurements for various missions including the Solar Probe Plus mission (perihelion at 0.044 AU from the Sun) and Solar Orbiter (perihelion at 0.28 AU). The electrostatic sheath and the spacecraft potential could interfere with the low energy (a few tens of eV) plasma measurements, by biasing the particle distribution functions measured by the detectors. If the spacecraft charges to large negative potentials, the problem will be more severe as low energy electrons will not be seen at all. The Solar Probe Plus and Solar Orbiter cases will be presented in details and extended to other distances through a parametric study, to investigate the influence of the heliocentric distance to spacecraft. Our main result is that for our spacecraft model the floating potential is a few volts positive from 1 AU to about 0.3 AU while below 0.3 AU the space charge of the photoelectrons and secondary electrons create a potential barrier that drives the spacecraft potential negative.

show abstract

Section: B Spis Tool For Simulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation Study of Spacecraft Electrostatic Sheath Changes With the Heliocentric Distances From 0.044 to 1 AU

Guillemant

Génot

Velez

et al. 2013

IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our objectives in this modeling are to determine the electric potential and currents around a spacecraft in a tenuous plasma, and to determine the effects of these potentials and currents on the spacecraft instruments. In contrast to the well‐established Nascap2k model [ Mandell et al , 2006] or the new open‐source SPIS/PicUp3D initiative [ Roussel et al , 2005; Hilgers et al , 2006; Forest et al , 2006], we do not attempt to self‐consistently determine the spacecraft potential. However, we do use the correct geometry, including long wire booms at the correct scale.…”

Section: Numerical Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrostatic structure around spacecraft in tenuous plasmas

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] Most satellite-based in situ plasma experiments are affected in some manner by the electrostatic structure surrounding the spacecraft. In order to better understand this structure, we have developed a fully three-dimensional self-consistent model that can accept realistic spacecraft geometry, including both thin ($10 À4 m) wires and long ($10 2 m) booms, with open boundary conditions. The model uses an integral formulation incorporating boundary element, multigrid and fast multipole methods to overcome problems associated with the large range in scale sizes and inherently three-dimensional structure. By applying the model to the Cluster spacecraft, we show that the electric potential structure is dominated by the charge on the wire booms, with the spacecraft body contributing at small distances. Consequently, the potential near the EFW (Electric Fields and Waves experiment) probes at the end of the wire booms is typically significantly above the true plasma potential. For the Cluster spacecraft, we show that this effect causes a 19% underestimation of the spacecraft potential and 13% underestimation of the ambient electric field. We further assess the electric field due to the sunward-oriented photoelectron cloud, showing that the cloud contributes little to the observed spurious sunward field in the EFW data.Citation: Cully, C. M., R. E. Ergun, and A. I. Eriksson (2007), Electrostatic structure around spacecraft in tenuous plasmas,

show abstract

“…Recent enhancements have consisted in improving multi time scale and multi physics capabilities (Roussel et al, 2012). One first paper on a real engineering application, SMART-1 by Hilgers et al (2006), studied the electrostatic potential variation of the probe and the first SPIS validations by comparison with theoretical models are presented in Hilgers et al (2008). The effect of inorbit plasma on spacecraft has been modelled in a wide range of configurations: geosynchronous (GEO) spacecraft charging (Roussel et al, 2012), electric propulsion (Roussel et al, 2008b), barrier of potential at millimetre scale (Roussel et al, 2008a) and electrostatic discharge onset on GEO solar panels (Sarrailh et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solar wind plasma interaction with solar probe plus spacecraft

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. 3-D PIC (Particle In Cell) simulations of spacecraft-plasma interactions in the solar wind context of the Solar Probe Plus mission are presented. The SPIS software is used to simulate a simplified probe in the near-Sun environment (at a distance of 0.044 AU or 9.5 R S from the Sun surface). We begin this study with a cross comparison of SPIS with another PIC code, aiming at providing the static potential structure surrounding a spacecraft in a high photoelectron environment. This paper presents then a sensitivity study using generic SPIS capabilities, investigating the role of some physical phenomena and numerical models. It confirms that in the near-sun environment, the Solar Probe Plus spacecraft would rather be negatively charged, despite the high yield of photoemission. This negative potential is explained through the dense sheath of photoelectrons and secondary electrons both emitted with low energies (2-3 eV). Due to this low energy of emission, these particles are not ejected at an infinite distance of the spacecraft and would rather surround it. As involved densities of photoelectrons can reach 10 6 cm −3 (compared to ambient ions and electrons densities of about 7 × 10 3 cm −3 ), those populations affect the surrounding plasma potential generating potential barriers for low energy electrons, leading to high recollection. This charging could interfere with the low energy (up to a few tens of eV) plasma sensors and particle detectors, by biasing the particle distribution functions measured by the instruments. Moreover, if the spacecraft charges to large negative potentials, the problem will be more severe as low energy electrons will not be seen at all. The importance of the modelling requirements in terms of precise prediction of spacecraft potential is also discussed.

show abstract

A Simple Model of the Effect of Solar Array Orientation on SMART-1 Floating Potential

Cited by 16 publications

References 11 publications

Simulation Study of Spacecraft Electrostatic Sheath Changes With the Heliocentric Distances From 0.044 to 1 AU

Simulation Study of Spacecraft Electrostatic Sheath Changes With the Heliocentric Distances From 0.044 to 1 AU

Electrostatic structure around spacecraft in tenuous plasmas

Solar wind plasma interaction with solar probe plus spacecraft

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About