copy and paste this google map to your website or blog!
Press copy button and paste into your blog or website.
(Please switch to 'HTML' mode when posting into your blog. Examples: WordPress Example, Blogger Example)
What are the tradeoffs in propellant choices for ion electric based . . . Think F = ma, where F in this case is the force of the electric field acting on the ion If you change fuels (say from xenon to krypton, which is lighter), but don't change field strengths, then F stays the same, while m decreases, which means a (acceleration on the ion) must be bigger
physics - Why might krypton have a lower utilization fraction than . . . 4 A comment below Why will Starlink satellites use krypton instead of xenon for electric propulsion? links to the 2011 preprint A Performance Comparison of Xenon and KryptonPropellant on an SPT-100 Hall Thruster; IEPC-2011-003 which explains that in this study using a SPT-100 Hall Thruster krypton had a lower utilization fraction than xenon
ion thruster - Space Exploration Stack Exchange Krypton is far more common (~1 ppm, over 10x that of xenon), and is produced with similar strategies, so it is a lot cheaper than xenon, at 290 USD per kilogram SpaceX is launching Starlink very fast, so they can't wait for a suitable xenon supply to show up Xenon is commonly used only because it has a higher performance
How much does it cost to fill an ion thuster with Xenon for a . . . The Starlink constellation v1 satellites used Krypton for its ion thrusters Starlink v2 satellites use Argon Alibaba shows Krypton at around ~$100 cubic meter, which is less than a tenth of the of the price volume wise And Argon costs far less than Krypton
What is the fate of Krypton exhaust from Starlink thrusters? If the thrusters have a specific impulse of 1500s, that means the krypton atoms are traveling roughly 15 km s when they exit the nozzle, which exceeds the escape velocity of earth