7
$\begingroup$

Reading the operational mechanism of Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket (VASIMR) on Wikipedia, I encountered the following:

The propellant, a neutral gas such as argon or xenon, is injected into a hollow cylinder... bombards the gas with electromagnetic energy, at a frequency of 10 to 50 MHz, stripping electrons off the propellant atoms and producing a plasma of ions and free electrons

How is this possible? To strip the electron of a noble gas such as argon requires electromagnetic radiation at frequencies in the GHz range. How is it ionized then?

$\endgroup$

5 Answers 5

4
$\begingroup$

The full quote in wikipedia is

"the gas is first heated to a “cold plasma” by a helicon RF antenna/couple that bombards the gas with electromagnetic energy, at a frequency of 10 to 50 MHz, stripping electrons off the propellant atoms and producing a plasma of ions and free electrons."

bold mine.

The radiation heats the gas, which means transfers kinetic energy to the atoms. The energy distribution of the atoms of the heated gas will have a high kinetic energy tail which allows through scatterings between atoms to ionize the atoms.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Why do you mention infrared radiation? 10-50 MHz is not normally considered infrared radiation (britannica.com/science/infrared-radiation). $\endgroup$
    – akhmeteli
    Commented Nov 19, 2021 at 6:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @akhmeteli by everyday maning of heat. you are correct , it is only the process of heating that is used, i.e raising the temperature of the gas. I will edit $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Commented Nov 19, 2021 at 6:49
  • $\begingroup$ "The radiation heats the gas, which means transfers kinetic energy to the atoms." My understanding is different. If it is not multi-photon ionization, but avalanche ionization, initial random free electrons are accelerated in the field, a combination of this acceleration and collisions with atoms increases kinetic energy of these electrons, and eventually they are able to ionize atoms and start an avalanche. $\endgroup$
    – akhmeteli
    Commented Nov 19, 2021 at 7:05
  • $\begingroup$ @akhmeteli reading the article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… I interpret it differently. after all there are no "free electrons" to start with in the initial gas. $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Commented Nov 19, 2021 at 8:23
  • $\begingroup$ I don't find confirmation of your reading in that article. You may look at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paschen%27s_law#Physical_mechanism , the gas discharge mechanism at radio frequency is pretty much the same. There are always some initial electrons (for example, from cosmic rays), but some external source of electrons can be used as well for stable discharge. $\endgroup$
    – akhmeteli
    Commented Nov 19, 2021 at 9:45
2
$\begingroup$

This question stems from a misunderstanding that I also held personally for a VERY long time, and only just recently comprehended: A "radio frequency source" is not the same as a photon in the radio part of the frequency spectrum. These systems do not rely on hitting the fuel gas with photons.

Your intuition is 100% correct that photon bombardment at radio frequencies would not make many ions. A photon from the radio part of the spectrum (call it 5 mm wavelength) will contain 0.000248 eV of energy, while the energy required for ionizing xenon (a common electric thruster fuel) is 12.13 eV. There's a bunch of other complicated dynamics with gas-phase photoionization like excitation lifetimes and interaction cross sections at different wavelengths (which, at radio wavelengths, are vanishingly small - we use it for communication because it goes right through quite a bit of matter without interacting at all), but you can get the sense of the situation just from the dummy math: 12.13 / 0.000248 = 48,912 radio wavelength photons that would need to hit a xenon atom simultaneously to ionize it. Simultaneously, here, means "within the excitation lifetime of the initial excitation from the first photon that hits" which for most materials and most photon energies is on the order of a few nanoseconds to a few femtoseconds, unless the photon has an energy level resonance with the atom or molecule it is hitting. Anyway, we are usually lucky if we can get two photons to hit the same atom at the same time. Nearly 50,000 ain't gonna happen.

So, what gives with this RF source thing? Well, there are other things that can oscillate at the same frequencies as radio waves, namely electric fields. This is what people are actually talking about when they refer to RF plasmas or RF power sources: they are using an AC electric current, except that instead of switching polarities at 60 hz or 50 hz like your wall electrical socket, they switch polarities at khz to Ghz, like radio waves. Probably the most common frequency for plasma generation is 13.56 Mhz - if this was a photon frequency, that photon would be a radio wave, hence they are called "radio frequency" oscillations. But, it's not a photon.

The way this actually works to generate a plasma is to make electrons dance. As the polarity of the RF source switches, an electron will feel an electric (or magnetic - either will work, just different configurations) field that pulls it first one way, then another. The amount of acceleration that the electron can pick up during each oscillation is determined by the voltage for any given frequency - higher voltage, faster electron, more energy added to the gas. Free electrons in the gas will hit neutral molecules, and if you make the oscillation voltage high enough, eventually those collisions start to happen with enough energy to knock electrons off the neutrals, and create more ions. There are some factors that impact the rate of ionization, such as recombination, energy absorption into the plasma, and energy loss through de-excitation (light emission) and thermal collisions, but fundamentally if you keep pumping in power from these RF oscillations, and the voltage is sufficient, you will end up with a lot of free electrons, which will maintain a very highly ionized plasma.

These systems have a few dynamics that should be noted:

First, you need free electrons to seed the system - the voltages used are way below the voltages required for an electric field to just yank electrons off of molecules, so the only electrons that really interact with the oscillations in field are those already out in free space. This means that a perfectly neutral gas cannot be turned to plasma by an RF source. In practice, there are almost always a few free electrons in a gas because of cosmic rays that are always passing through, and DO have enough energy in single photons to ionize an atom in free space (some have enough energy in one photon to flip a bit in a computer!). But, if you get the gas thin enough (reduce its pressure quite close to vacuum) there are not enough atoms in a given volume to get hit by these rays, and you might need to supply free electrons independently to spark and maintain the plasma, using a cathode of some kind. And, if the gas gets really thin, you start having electrons make it all the way to a grounding surface before they hit anything (i.e. the mean free path becomes long compared to the oscillation length or the physical dimensions of the plasma chamber) and electrons are just oscillating their way through free space until they hit the walls - no way to start the chain reaction of ionizing and freeing more electrons to go make more ions, so you can't spark a plasma at all. So there is a lower bound on operating pressure for these systems.

Second, the ions (once you spark the plasma and have ions) in the system are barely affected at all by the oscillating field. Ion masses are thousands of times as much as the electron mass, so they are thousands of times slower to accelerate in an electric field. Thus, if the oscillations are fast enough, the positively charged ions barely get moving at all before the polarity has switched, and starts pushing them back the opposite direction. They accelerate through so little of the potential field during each oscillation that almost none of the energy ends up in the ions and nearly all ends up in the electrons. This is useful for two reasons: First, it means that the electrons will always have very high relative velocity to the ions, which is why the impacts are energetic - if they danced at the same speed in the same field, then they would always be moving in parallel and the electrons could not ionize the atoms. Second, it means that an applied DC field across the plasma can extract the ions over time - because the oscillation has almost no net effect, the ions will drift almost entirely under control of the DC bias, which is used in processes like sputtering and plasma etching for semiconductor fabrication to direct ion bombardment at from a plasma at a target.

So, yeah, your thinking was right about RF photons. That's just not what they are actually using.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

A strong enough electromagnetic field would ionize gas no matter what frequency. It can be avalanche or multiphoton ionization.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ But does this not go against the principles of quantum mechanics. Fundamentally, the ideas of a discrete energy package ("quanta") comes from the discovery in the photoelectric effect that only certain light frequencies would make a material emit electrons, no matter how intense a lesser frequency light be shone. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 19, 2021 at 5:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What is the theoretical and mathematical background for this. How can one calculate how much energy is required to ionize then? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 19, 2021 at 5:51
  • $\begingroup$ @C-Consciousness : "no matter how intense a lesser frequency light be shone" This wording is a simplification. You don't need to believe me on my word. See e.g. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211379715000066 or iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0034-4885/54/10/002/pdf . I cannot describe here how to perform calculations for such processes. $\endgroup$
    – akhmeteli
    Commented Nov 19, 2021 at 6:35
0
$\begingroup$

Gas atoms can be ionized by a variety of ways. Radio frequency is one of them, and it is faster to have some free electrons created first, but not necessary. The FCC harmonics reserved for plasma researchers are multiples of 12.5 MHz (hazily recollection - might start at 6.25). DC in coils can also be used, but is much slower than using AC in coils. The physical mechanism for AC radio waves is the electron orbits will change shape per the incident angle of the EM waves. Some small increase in orbital lobe/diameter will result, allowing either the electron to be more easily collided off, or even wiggle off, if the intensity is great enough (it takes time). As free electrons are created by these processes, the rate of ionization increases.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

It seems they are using a variation of "cyclotron resonance" heating. This relies on the presence of the electromagnets in the ionization region.

There will be a few free electrons present at first, and by driving the electrons near their orbital cyclotron frequency in a magnetic field, they can be accelerated to higher and higher velocity. Eventually the electrons will have sufficient energy to ionize the gas molecules they collide with, thereby creating even more electrons. So, technically the electrons are doing the ionization.

I believe electron cyclotron resonance ionization sources typically uses microwave frequencies (still not large enough to ionize with a single photon), so this method seems to ionize in a much weaker magnetic field for some reason. I'm also intentionally ignoring any true plasma effects that may be occurring, because plasmas are really complicated.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.