4.3 Article

Effect of Plasma Sheaths on Earth-Entry Magnetohydrodynamics

期刊

出版社

AMER INST AERONAUTICS ASTRONAUTICS
DOI: 10.2514/1.T6784

关键词

Electron Temperature; Planets; Magnetohydrodynamics; Heat Flux Distribution; High Electrical Conductivity; Electrodynamics; Streamwise Velocity; Electrical Resistance; Conservation of Momentum Equations; Aerothermodynamics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The first study of coupling aerothermodynamics, magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), and plasma sheaths in Earth-entry flows is performed. The problem addresses a force-generating MHD patch between the stagnation point and the aft of a capsule entering Earth's atmosphere at Mach 34. The study considers the effects of electrode material on the MHD process, finding a significant increase in Lorentz forces and reduction in heat fluxes when using thoriated tungsten instead of graphite.
The first study of the full coupling between the aerothermodynamics, the magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), and the plasma sheaths within Earth-entry flows is here performed. The problem addressed herein is representative of a force-generating MHD patch located between the stagnation point and the aft of a capsule entering the Earth's atmosphere at Mach 34. The reactions are obtained from the Park chemical solver and the transport coefficients from the Gupta-Yos model with modifications. The physical model fully couples the drift-diffusion model for the sheaths to the multispecies Navier-Stokes equations for the plasma flow. The Hall and ion slip effects are taken into consideration within the plasma flow and within the sheaths. The effect of the electrode material on the MHD process is studied. Using thoriated tungsten instead of graphite leads to a thirtyfold increase in the Lorentz forces and also leads to significantly reduced heat fluxes on the cathode. This is attributed to the much higher electrical conductivity of the thoriated tungsten sheath reducing by orders of magnitude the plasma electrical resistance near the surfaces.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据