Analysis of Hall-effect thrusters and ion engines for orbit transfer missions

Analytical methods were combined with actual thruster data to create a model used to predict the performance of systems based on two types of electric propulsion thrusters, Hall-effect thrusters and ion engines, for several orbit transfer missions. Two missions were trip time constrained: a LEO-GEO transfer and a LEO constellation transfer. Hall thrusters were able to deliver greater payload due to their higher overall specific power. For the power limited orbit topping mission, the choice of thruster is dependent on the user’s need. Ion engines can deliver the greatest payload due to their higher specific impulse, but they do so at the cost of higher trip time. Study of reusable electric orbit transfer vehicle systems indicates that they can offer payload mass gains over chemical systems, but that these gains are less than those offered by other electric propulsion transfer scenarios due to the necessity of carrying propellant for return trips. Additionally, solar array degradation leads to increased trip time for subsequent reusable transfers. * Research Aerospace Engineer, Member AIAA ** Group Leader, USAF Electric Propulsion Lab, Member AIAA This paper is declared a work of the US Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. INTRODUCTION: The US Air Force has recently completed several studies to investigate the potential advantages of advanced space propulsion for several orbit transfer scenarios. The first study investigated advanced propulsion concepts for expendable orbit transfer vehicles and concluded that the potential launch vehicle downsizing that resulted from the use of high specific impulse thrusters provided significant cost savings over base line chemical launch vehicle/upper stage systems. The second study looked at reusable advanced upper stages and preliminary indications are that while there remains the potential for launch vehicle downsizing, it is significantly reduced compared to expendable systems. This difference was largely due to the added propellant required to perform the round trip mission from low-earth orbit to geostationary orbit. Both studies pointed out advantages for advanced electric propulsion systems based on xenon propellant. The objective of this paper is to analyze the tradeoffs between Hall-effect thrusters and ion engines as a high power propulsion system for orbit transfer missions. Both the Hall-effect thruster and the gridded ion engine are classified as electrostatic thrusters and operate on heavy noble gases, primarily xenon. These electric propulsion devices are capable of specific impulses ranging from approximately 1500 to 4000 seconds, compared to chemical systems which typically operate in the range of 300 to 400 seconds. Electric propulsion is a type of rocket propulsion for space vehicles and satellites which utilizes electric and/or magnetic processes to accelerate a propellant at a much higher specific impulse than attainable using classical chemical propulsion. The concomitant reduction in required propellant mass results in increased payload mass capability. The method of analysis used in this study is based on the model developed by Messerole. It has been modified to reflect the most current information on thruster development levels and

[1]  J. Meserole,et al.  Launch costs to GEO using solar-powered orbit transfer vehicles , 1993 .

[2]  Vincent K. Rawlin,et al.  Mass comparisons of electric propulsion systems for NSSK of geosynchronous spacecraft , 1991 .

[3]  K. H. Groh,et al.  State-of-the-art of radio-frequency ion thrusters , 1989 .

[4]  Kristen Gledhill,et al.  Future trends in space photovoltaics , 1994 .

[5]  H. R. Kaufman,et al.  Technology of closed-drift thrusters , 1983 .

[6]  John M. Sankovic,et al.  Performance evaluation of the Russian SPT-100 thruster at NASA LeRC , 1994 .

[7]  N. Maslennikov,et al.  SPT-100 subsystem development status and plan , 1994 .

[8]  N. Maslennikov,et al.  SPT-100 subsystem qualification status , 1995 .

[9]  S. Fiedler,et al.  Geosynchronous space based radar concept development for theater surveillance , 1996, 1996 IEEE Aerospace Applications Conference. Proceedings.

[10]  Michael J. Patterson,et al.  Performance and optimization of a derated ion thruster for auxiliary propulsion , 1991 .

[12]  J. R. Brophy,et al.  Ion thruster performance model , 1984 .

[13]  J. Pollard,et al.  Electric propulsion flight experience and technology readiness , 1993 .

[14]  Roger M. Myers,et al.  Advanced propulsion for geostationary orbit insertion and north-south station keeping , 1995 .

[15]  John D. Williams,et al.  Flight qualification of an 18-mN xenon thruster , 1993 .

[16]  R. Jahn,et al.  Physics of Electric Propulsion , 1968 .

[17]  R. L. Poeschel,et al.  Xenon ion propulsion subsystem , 1989 .

[18]  John R. Brophy,et al.  Cyclic Endurance Test of an SPT-100 Stationary Plasma Thruster , 1994 .

[19]  R. R. Robson,et al.  Status of xenon ion propulsion technology , 1987 .

[20]  S. Ashley.  Electric rockets get a boost , 1995 .

[21]  Steven J. Isakowitz,et al.  International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems , 1991 .

[22]  ARNON,et al.  - C 1-IEPC-95-212 NOVEL ORBIT RAISING STRATEGY MAKES LOW THRUST COMMERCIALLY VIABLE , .