Posted on 01/26/2006 5:58:39 PM PST by saganite
A new ion engine that promises to propel spacecraft faster and further is four times more fuel efficient than the best available, scientists say.
They say the results of recent tests suggest the engine, the Dual Stage Four Grid Thruster (DS4G), would reduce the time for craft to reach Mars or Pluto and beyond.
Dr Orson Sutherland and team at the Australian National University's Space Plasma Power and Propulsion Group designed and built the engine with the European Space Agency (ESA).
Sutherland says laboratory tests show the DS4G it is four times more fuel efficient than the best ion engines available and 10 times more fuel efficient than used to propel ESA's SMART-1 Moon mission.
"The underlying technology has been around for 40 years," he says. "All we did with the DS4G is to add some extra components which basically gave it a 10-fold improvement."
Sutherland says missions to Pluto and the Kuiper Belt would be "quite easily" made, with trips out beyond the solar system also more feasible.
"All of that within the working lifetime of a mission scientist," he says.
Another option is the new engine could help take heavier missions to shorter distances such as the Moon or Mars.
How it works
A standard ion engine works by using electrodes to extract ions from plasma, in this case heated xenon gas.
The ions are focused into beams that accelerate through tiny holes in the electrodes and thrust metres out into space, propelling the spacecraft in the opposite direction.
The standard engine has only three electrodes, capable of generating up to 5000 volts between them.
Anything greater than this would cause the ion beams to miss the holes in the electrodes and hit the metal, destroying the electrodes and causing less efficient thrusting.
Sutherland found a way to add another electrode to the system and boost voltage up to 30,000 volts without the ion beams hitting the electrodes. He says, given enough power, it would be possible to generate 70,000 volts over the electrodes.
He says the bigger the voltage, the faster the ions in the beam accelerate, and the more efficient the propulsion.
ESA reports tests on DS4G produced an ion exhaust plume that travelled at 210,000 metres per second.
Trend towards ion propulsion
Sutherland says that over the past 10 years such ion propulsion thrusters have become more popular because they provide constant propulsion for a spacecraft.
By contrast, he says, conventional chemical thrusters, which rely on ballistics to get the spacecraft on the right path, give the spacecraft "one big kick" and then rely on it to coast along in space until it slows down.
Ion propulsion also means mission scientists can bettr control a spacecraft's steering, says Sutherland, compared to the one-off chemical thruster.
Nuclear powered?
Sutherland says the ion engine needs megawatts of power to generate the necessary voltage across the electrodes and to generate the ion-providing plasma.
"This particular thruster has high performance but the cost of that high performance is it requires more power to run," he says.
He says standard photovoltaic cells, as used on the SMART-1 mission, would not be adequate and an on-board power system would be required.
This would be necessary anyway if the engine was to propel a spacecraft into deep space where there is little available light, he says.
"People are talking about CTRs - controlled thermonuclear reactors - small plutonium chunks like, for example, the power system that just went up on the NASA mission to Pluto."
The DS4G, which was funded by ESA's Advanced Concepts Team, will undergo more testing before industry partners are sought for a mission, says Sutherland, who estimates this process will take at least 10 years.
On a Wing and a JoltThe crucial thing, says Millis, is whether Goodwin's magnet would produce any net motion at all--it might just sit there and vibrate. "It's a definite possibility that any forces arising from Goodwin's concept will only act within the components of the device itself, resulting in no net force," he says. "There are a lot of unresolved physics issues to address."
by Ian Sample
New Scientist
December 9, 2000
original URL
new NS URL
Yes, there have been a few posts here (by me) about it. The claims are pretty extraordinary though. The current crop of ion engines are already 10 times more efficient than chemical rockets. The claims for this one would mean we have a real deep space tool. Of course, they've got to scale this thing up and eventually get in space. I guess we'll know in ten years time if it meets all the hype.
Why does this engine require a rare gas (xenon) to operate, instead of something more common, and readily available in space, like Hydrogen??
Bear with me if this is a really basic question, but I wasn't one of those people who excelled in High School Chemistry; in fact I got myself permanently booted from Chem Lab for (accidentally) setting it on fire.
[=O=]
In 1984, Hughes Research Laboratories, a unit of Hughes Electronics Corporation, began investigating the use of xenon and found that it offered the highest thrust of all the inert, non-reactive gases. And, because it is an inert gas, it is neither corrosive nor explosive, and therefore does not pose a risk to the life of the satellite or a safety hazard to personnel loading the xenon propellant tanks.
Bump. For later consideration.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.