Antenna in Plasma (AIP) Code

Timothy W. Chevalier
Umran S. Inan
Timothy F. Bell

March 4, 2008
 Stanford MURI Tasks

Scientific Issues:
 The sheath surrounding an electric dipole antenna operating in a plasma has
a significant effect on the tuning properties.
 Terminal impedance characteristics vary with applied voltage.
 Active tuning may be needed.
 Stanford has developed a general AIP code to determine sheath effects
on radiation process.

MURI Tasks:
 Validation of our AIP code by laboratory experiments using LAPD.
 UCLA will provide time measurements of voltage, current and field
patterns for dipole antennas to compare with Stanford model.
 Locate sources of error in current model and identify means for
improvement.
 Perform LAPD experiments on magnetic loop antennas.
2
 Outline

1. Introduction
2. Cold Plasma Electromagnetic Model
3. Current Distribution and Impedance Results
4. Warm Plasma Electrostatic Model
5. Plasma Sheath Results

3
 Coupling Regions

Sheath Region
 Near field (R ¿ ¸ m i n )
 Reactive Energy (ES)
 Highly nonlinear

R
Warm Plasma Region
 Transition zone (R ¼ ¸ )
 Reactive/Radiated Energy (EM &
ES)
 Nonlinear effects still important

Cold Plasma Region

 Far field (R À ¸ )
 Radiated Energy (EM)
 Linear environment
ES: Electrostatic
EM: Electromagnetic
4
 Modeling Methodology

 Near field antenna characteristics

 Electrically short dipole antennas
 ES & EM approaches

(Poisson/Maxwell)-Vlasov
· ¸ Formulation
@f F
+ (v ¢r r )f + ¢r v f = 0 F = q( E~ + v £ B~ ) (Lorentz Force)
@t m
P
~ ®
½®
(Poisson) r ¢E = ²
o
( P
~
r £ H = ~® + ² o d E~
J
N dt
(Maxwell) r £ E~ = ¡ ¹ o d H ~
dt
5
 Moments of Vlasov Equation

· ¸
@f F
F (v ) = + (v ¢r r )f + ¢r v f
@t m

Nth moment
8
>
> m F (v )dv
ZZZ >
< m v F (v )dv
th
Mn =
>
> m [v ¡ u ] [v ¡ u ] F (v ¡ u )d(v ¡ u )
v >
:
m [v ¡ u ] [v ¡ u ] [v ¡ u ] F (v ¡ u )d(v ¡ u )

v ´ phase space velocity

u ´ average ° ow velocity
c = [v ¡ u ] ´ random velocity due t o t hermal mot ions

6
 Fluid Representation of Plasma

Fluid Moments
(0th: mass density) @t (n m ) + r ¢(n m u ) = 0
(1st: momentum).. @t (n m u ) + r ¢(n m u u + P ) ¡ n q (E + u £ B ) = 0
(2nd: pressure)...... @t (P ) + r ¢(u P + Q ) + f P ¢r (u ) + ­ c £ P gs y m = 0
1 sy m
(3 : heat flux)…… @t (Q ) + r ¢(v Q + R ) + f Q ¢r (u ) + ­
rd c £ Q ¡ P r ¢(P )
nm
g = 0

Fluid Variables Additional Variables

n ´ number density E ´ elect ric ¯eld vect or
u ´ average ° ow velocity vect or B ´ magnet ic ¯eld vect or
P ´ pressure t ensor m ´ mass
Q ´ heat ° ux t ensor q ´ charge
R ´ r-moment t ensor ­ c ´ gyrofrequency vect or
u P = t ensor product
7
 Outline

1. Introduction
2. Cold Plasma Electromagnetic Model
3. Current Distribution and Impedance Results
4. Warm Plasma Electrostatic Model
5. Plasma Sheath Results

8
 Cold Plasma Fluid Approximation

Fluid Description:
@t (nm) + r ¢(nmu ) = 0
@t (nmu ) + r ¢(nmu u + P ) ¡ nq (E + u £ B ) = 0
@t (P ) + r ¢(u P + Q ) + f P ¢r (u ) + ­ c £ P gs y m = 0
1 sy m
@t (Q ) + r ¢(vQ + R ) + f Q ¢r (u ) + ­ c £ Q ¡ P r ¢(P ) g = 0
nm

Closure Assumption:
P = nkT = 0

Generalized Ohms Law

dJ~® q ³ ´
+ º ® J~® = ®
q® n ® E~ + J~® £ B
~o
dt m®

9
 Finite Difference Time and Frequency
Domain Techniques (FDTD/FDFD)

Time Domain (FDTD) FDTD Method:

X dE~
~ =
r £ H ~
J ® + ²o  Time domain solution of Maxwell’s
dt equations.
N

dH~  Wide spread use in EM community

~
r £ E = ¡ ¹o
dt
dJ~® ³ ´
+ º ® J~® =
q ®
q n E~ + J~® £ B
~o Frequency
X
Domain (FDFD)
dt m® ® ® ~
r £ H = ¾® E~ + ² o j ! E~

Computational Mesh: r £ E~
N
~
¡ ¹ oj ! H
=

¾® = ² o ! p2 (j ! I ¡ ­ ) ¡ 1
0 1
¡ º ¡ ! bz ! by
­ = @ ! bz ¡ º ¡ ! bx A
¡ ! by ! bx ¡ º

Solves: Ax=B
10
 Outline

1. Introduction
2. Cold Plasma Electromagnetic Model
3. Current Distribution and Impedance Results
4. Warm Plasma Electrostatic Model
5. Plasma Sheath Results
 Cold Plasma Simulation Setup

Computational Domain: Antenna Properties

 Length: 100 m
 Diameter: 20 cm
 Orientation: Perpendicular to Bo
 Position: Equatorial Plane

12
 Current Distribution for 100 m
Antenna in Freespace

Current distribution on linear antenna Excitation frequency: 10 kHz

· µ ¶¸
2¼ L
I / I o sin § z
¸ 2

¸
L= L¿ ¸
2

13
 Current Distributions for 100 m
Antenna at L=2
Excitation frequency: f < fLHR Excitation frequency: f > fLHR

14
 Simulation vs. Theory

Previous Analytical Work Input Impedance Formula

R
[Wang and Bell., 1969,1970] V(f ) ( E~ ¢dl) f e e d
[Wang., 1970] Z in = = H~
I (f ) ( H ¢dl)
[Bell et. al., 2006] f eed

L=2 L=3

15
 Conclusions Based upon Cold
Plasma Approximation

 Current distribution is triangular for cases demonstrated.

 This result supports triangular assumption made in early analytical
work.
 Input impedance does not vary significantly as a function of
frequency
 The same antenna can be used over a broad frequency range; self
tuning property.
 Early analytical work should provide accurate estimates of
radiation pattern of dipole antennas in a magnetoplasma
[Wang and Bell., 1972].
 What about the Sheath?

16
 Outline

1. Introduction
2. Cold Plasma Electromagnetic Model
3. Current Distribution and Impedance Results
4. Warm Plasma Electrostatic Model
5. Plasma Sheath Results
 Warm Plasma Fluid Approximation

Isothermal Approximation (2-moments)

@t (nm) + r ¢(nmu ) = 0
@t (nmu ) + r ¢(nmu u + P ) ¡ nq (E + u £ B ) = 0
@t (P ) + r ¢(u P + Q ) + f P ¢r (u ) + ­ c £ P gs y m = 0
1 sy m
@t (Q ) + r ¢(vQ + R ) + f Q ¢r (u ) + ­ c £ Q ¡ P r ¢(P ) g = 0
nm
Closure Assumption:
P = nkT

Adiabatic Approximation (3-moments)

@t (nm) + r ¢(nmu ) = 0
@t (nmu ) + r ¢(nmu u + P ) ¡ nq (E + u £ B ) = 0
@t (P ) + r ¢(u P + Q ) + f P ¢r (u ) + ­ c £ P gs y m = 0
1 sy m
@t (Q ) + r ¢(vQ + R ) + f Q ¢r (u ) + ­ c £ Q ¡ P r ¢(P ) g = 0
nm
Closure Assumption:
r ¢Q = 0 18
 Electrostatic Approximation

Nonlinear Equations Time domain approach

Sheath region < ¸ m in Electrostatic approach is valid

Constant Voltage
Poisson’s PEquation
½®
r ¢E~ = ®
²o

 Removes EM time-stepping Triangular current distribution

constraint L¿ ¸
 Avoids problems associated
with PML

19
 Outline

1. Introduction
2. Cold Plasma Electromagnetic Model
3. Current Distribution and Impedance Results
4. Warm Plasma Electrostatic Model
5. Plasma Sheath Results
 Warm Plasma Simulation Setup
(2-D)
Computational Domain:
Antenna Properties
 Length: Infinite in z-direction
 Diameter: 10 cm
 Position: Equatorial Plane

Plasma Properties
L=2: L=3:
 N = 2e9 #/m3  N = 1e9 #/m3
 fpe = 400 kHz  fpe = 284 kHz
Fluid closure relations:  fpi = 28 kHz  fpi = 20 kHz
 Isothermal (2 - moments)  fce = 110 kHz  fce = 33 kHz
P = nkT  fci = 550 Hz  fci = 163 Hz
 Adiabatic (3 - moments)
mi
Mass ratio: m = 200
r ¢Q = 0 e

21
 Simulation of Infinite Line Source

Simulation Properties Plane of symmetry:

 25 kHz sinusoid
 f>fpi
 No magnetic field

22
 Simulation of Infinite Line Source

Simulation Properties
 25 kHz sinusoid
 f>fpi
 No magnetic field

Plane of symmetry:

23
 Simulation of Infinite Line Source

Simulation Properties
 25 kHz sinusoid
 f>fpi
 No magnetic field

Plane of symmetry:

24
 IV Characteristics (Sinusoid)

15 kHz (f < fpi) 25 kHz (f > fpi)

Non-magnetized

Non-magnetized
Magnetized

Magnetized

25
 IV Characteristics (Pulse)

15 kHz (f < fpi) 25 kHz (f > fpi)

Non-magnetized

Non-magnetized
Magnetized

Magnetized

26
 Warm Plasma Simulation Setup
(3-D)
Computational Domain: Antenna Properties
 Length: 20 m
 Gap: 2 m
 Diameter: 10 cm
 Position: Equatorial Plane
 Electron gun (removes charge)

Plasma Properties
L=2: L=3:
 N = 2e9 #/m3  N = 1e9 #/m3
 fpe = 400 kHz  fpe = 284 kHz
 fpi = 28 kHz  fpi = 20 kHz
 fce = 110 kHz  fce = 33 kHz
 fci = 550 Hz  fci = 163 Hz
mi
Mass ratio: m = 200
e
Adiabatic (full pressure tensor)
27
 Simulation of 20 m Dipole at L=3

Orthographic Projection Potential and Density Variation

Current-Voltage

Gap Current

28
 Simulation of 20 m Dipole at L=3 with
20 cm Gap
Orthographic Projection Potential and Density Variation

Current-Voltage

Gap Current

29
 Simulation of 20 m Dipole at L=3
without Electron Gun
Orthographic Projection Potential and Density Variation

Current-Voltage

Gap Current

30
 Circuit Diagrams

Diagram of Sheath Impedance: Tuning Circuit

31
 Conclusions Based upon Sheath
Calculations

 Sheath structure is periodic with both sinusoid and pulse

waveform excitation.
 Sheath is a quasi-steady state structure.
 Proton densities vary significantly throughout sheath region
and contribute to current collection.
 Commonly used assumption of immobile protons within sheath
region for frequencies above and below proton plasma frequency is
not necessarily accurate.
 Most notable in case of floating antenna.

32
 Validity of Fluid Code for Sheath
Region
 Ma and Schunk [1992], Thiemann et al. [1992]: Compared PIC and 2-moment fluid
codes with diagonal pressure tensors surrounding spherical electrodes stepped to
10,000V.
 Noisy PIC simulations agreed with results of fluid code with addition of more particles
 Under-sampled distribution functions in PIC code are inherently noisy.
 Plasma ringing and double layer formation was captured in both fluid and PIC simulations.
 Very good qualitative agreement
 Borovsky [1988], Calder and Laframboise[1990], Calder et al. [1993]: PIC simulations
of spherical electrodes stepped to very large potentials.
 Calder and Laframboise [1990], noted ringing effects could be driven to large amplitude by
ion-electron two steam instability which a fluid code can capture.
 No presence of electron-electron two-stream instability in any of the PIC simulations
 Landau damping is negligible since the phase velocity of waves within the sheath region are
generally different than thermal velocities.
 No need to capture this effect in fluid code.
 Though particle trapping within sheath is possible (mainly slow moving ions), the relatively
small number of trapped particles results a minimal deviation of the potential variation within
the sheath.
 A fluid code can provide an accurate and more computationally efficient method for the
determination of sheath characteristics!

33