40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit AIAA 2004-3605

11 - 14 July 2004, Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Stretching the Operational Envelope of the PPS®X000

Plasma Thruster

Olivier Duchemin*, Pierre Dumazert†, and Nicolas Cornu‡

Snecma Moteurs, Site de Villaroche Nord – BP 93, 77552 Moissy-Cramayel Cedex, France

Denis Estublier§
ESA / ESTEC, Keplerlaan 1, Postbus 299, 2200 AG Noordwijk, The Netherlands

and
Franck Darnon**
CNES, Centre Spatial de Toulouse, 18 avenue Édouard Belin, 31401 Toulouse Cedex 4, France

The PPS®X000 technological demonstrator thruster has been characterized by testing up

to a power level of 6.5 kW and a discharge voltage of 1 kV, corresponding to a maximum
total specific impulse of 3240 s. A peak thrust efficiency of 58% was obtained at 5 kW of
discharge power near 650 V, with a corresponding total specific impulse of 2600 s. The
maximum demonstrated thrust was 335 mN at 6 kW / 300 V. The test data indicate a rather
large domain of stable thruster operation, in particular between 550 V and 850 V of
discharge voltage. The low-voltage discharge characteristics emphasise the role of the
discharge oscillations on electron mobility in the discharge channel, and the effect of
adjusting magnetic induction.

Nomenclature
F = thrust
Id = discharge current
Idosc = discharge current oscillation amplitude
Im = magnet current (subscript 1 for internal coil, subscript 2 for external coils)
Isp = specific impulse
m& a = main (anode) mass flow rate
m& c = cathode mass flow rate
Pd = discharge power
pe = thrust-specific power
Pvac = background gas pressure
UCRP = cathode coupling voltage, or cathode reference potential
Ud = discharge voltage
η = efficiency

I. Introduction
Electric propulsion systems based on plasma (or Hall-effect) thrusters are now widely recognized as a key
technology for many Earth-orbiting satellite applications as well as space exploration missions. In addition to the

*
R&D Engineer, Plasma Propulsion Section, Space Propulsion Division. AIAA Member.
†
Former supervisor, Plasma Propulsion Section, Space Propulsion Division.
‡
Supervisor, Plasma Propulsion Section, Space Propulsion Division.
§
Member of Technical Staff, ESTEC/TOS.
**
Propulsion Engineer, Pyrotechnics and Propulsion Section, CNES.

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright © 2004 by copyrightSnecma Moteurs, ESA and CNES. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.
extensive flight heritage accumulated aboard Russian spacecraft, plasma propulsion technology is now entering
service on board western spacecraft as well. First, the Astra 1K and Stentor satellites, although not successfully
launched, contributed significantly in terms of systems and flight hardware experience.1 More recently, the
successful launch and on-going Earth-orbit raising operations of the ESA Smart-1 mission2 demonstrate solar-
electric propulsion combined with gravity-assist maneuvers for the first time. At the time of writing, the single
PPS®1350 engine powering Smart-1 has logged over 2600 hours of operation. Commercial spacecraft launched this
year include the Space Systems/Loral-built MBSAT broadcast communications satellite (launched in March), which
incorporates SPT-100 thrusters, and the Astrium-built Intelsat-X-02 satellite (launched in June), which uses Snecma
Moteurs-built plasma propulsion modules featuring the same thrusters.
The benefits of plasma propulsion, however, are still not fully utilized on commercial platforms because such
systems are currently limited to station-keeping duties and have to include 3 years of chemical propulsion
redundancy. Bi-modal propulsion systems, which can be throttled to efficiently perform orbit transfer or
repositioning as well as station-keeping maneuvers, are therefore currently being considered both in the US3 and in
Europe.4 The demands placed on the propulsion system differ significantly for these two tasks: while orbit transfer
generally places a maximum time constraint on the maneuver, so that thrust-specific power pe (in kW/N) must be
minimized, station-keeping on the contrary demands that propellant mass savings (or Isp, which is proportional to
pe) be maximized. The growing need for versatility of performance in propulsion systems, for Earth orbit as well as
space exploration missions, is also exemplified by the current activities conducted on hybrid (coupled plasma/ion)
propulsion systems5 as well as dual-stage Hall thrusters.6 Since thruster requirements for station-keeping keep
driving the Isp up while the need for orbit transfer capability is also becoming clearer,7 the operating points at which
high efficiency is desired are being drawn further apart. Figure 1 shows the operational envelope of a typical (single
stage) Hall thruster, based on a performance model. The main physical as well as practical limitations that bound the
domain are also indicated.

Thermal limits
- PPU
400
300 V - Available power
275 V
340 V Region of
20 A
380 V interest for
Discharge
350 420 V
station
460 V
stability 18 A 500 V keeping
540 V
300 580 V
620 V
16 A 660 V
Thrust /mN

700 V
740 V
780 V
250 800 V
14 A
6000 W

12 A 5500 W
200
5000 W
10 A
4500 W
8A
150
4000 W
- Electronics/PPU
Region of interest 6A
5A
3500 W
- Lifetime
for orbit topping 4A
3000 W - discharge stability
100
1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700

I SP /s
Discharge stability

Figure 1. Typical operating envelope of a Hall thruster with physical or practical boundaries.

After developing the PPS®1350, Snecma Moteurs recognized the promise of bi-modal capability for the next
generation of satellites, and in 1999 started pre-development activities on a 5-kW class Hall thruster, the PPS®5000,8
designed to the specifications of the European @bus program.4 A technological demonstrator model, dubbed
PPS®X000 (pronounced X-thousand) and shown in Fig. 2, was first built and underwent initial characterization at
discharge voltages up to 580 V. The results of this first testing campaign are discussed in Ref. 9, with maximum
reported thrust and total Isp of 335 mN and 2480 s, respectively.
Because Snecma Moteurs was committed to further pursuing and understanding high specific impulse operating
conditions for the station-keeping mode, characterization tests were later extended to discharge voltages up to
1000 V. This paper presents the results of this second, high voltage characterization testing campaign. An overview

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
of the performance and stability issues at high voltage has been given in Ref 10. This paper provides a more
extensive presentation of the test results, including low-voltage discharge characteristics.

II. Apparatus
The tests were carried out in the LEEP 2 (Large European
Electric Propulsion) facility at QinetiQ, Farnborough, UK.
The test facility has been described in great detail in
References 9 and 11. We mention here only the general
experimental setup and relevant upgrades that are specific to
this test.

A. Vacuum Chamber
The vacuum chamber is 3.8 meters in diameter in its
widest section, which is 4 meter long, and has a total length
of 10 meters. High vacuum is achieved using 2×600 mm
diameter cryogenic pumps assisted by a large xenon
®
Figure 2: The PPS X000: a technological cryogenic pumping array. The effective pumping speed of
®
demonstrator model for the PPS 5000. The xenon with the thruster operating at a discharge power of
thruster is shown mounted on its mechanical 5 kW was found to be better than 30000 l/s. This ensured a
interface, with a single QinetiQ cathode. background pressure lower than 5×105 hPa or Torr (measured
with a nitrogen-calibrated gauge) under all flow conditions
for discharge voltages Ud above 650 V, i.e., a total mass flow rate lower than 8.73 mg/s (89.35 sccm for xenon) at
5 kW of discharge power. No attempts were thus made in the results to correct for possible effects of the background
pressure, since the ingested xenon would then represent less than 1.6% of the anode mass flow rate and the mean
free path for beam ions in the background xenon would be on the order of a meter.

B. Facility Configuration
The general test configuration was similar to the one used previously9, as shown in Fig. 3. Briefly, the flow was
metered and controlled via a facility propellant supply system (PSS). The power processing rack (PPR) delivered the
required currents and voltages to the cathode heater and ignitor, electromagnet coils, flow valves and controllers,
and anode. A bench filter-unit (BFU) was
placed on the anode line to facilitate PPR DACS Thruster
Power
discharge ignition12 and to decouple the BFU

voltage and current oscillations between the Power

Power Xe
thruster and the anode supply. The BFU was PSS
13 control
a classical inductive-capacitive arrangement
and the magnet coils were wired Power/control
Balance
Vac chamber

independently (Fig. 4). The anode supply

itself was upgraded from the earlier
characterization campaign to allow for higher Control

voltage operation, and a 16 A × 1 kV computer

Glassmann switched-mode power supply unit

(PSU) with a switching frequency of 40 kHz
Facility go/no-go
was used. Data acquisition, PPR control and bi-stable signal
facility monitoring were performed
autonomously via a LabVIEW-based Figure 3. General facility configuration. Courtesy of QinetiQ.
computer system.
The discharge current oscillation amplitude was measured in amperes peak-to-peak (App) by means of a
transformer circuit placed on the anode positive line, between the BFU and the thruster. The sensor had a bandwidth
of ~1 – 200 kHz, with a specified accuracy of the transfer function gain within ±7%.
The thrust measurement system consisted of a single-axis thrust balance based on an actively controlled
pendulum supporting the thruster. In operation, the control system generates an equal and opposite force to the thrust
such that the deflection of the pendulum is nullified. A second, identical pendulum balance (with a dummy mass to
represent the thruster) and control system enable the elimination of null-point drift due to residual thermal and

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
mechanical drift, and low
Gas discharge
frequency vibration. Its output is
+
subtracted from the output of the I (magnet 1) Magnet 1 Magnet
balance carrying the thruster. As Voltage source
+
in previous tests, the (mA) analog
I (magnet 2) Magnet 2 Current source
output ran alongside the thruster
Current flow
power cables to the vacuum Lf 2 BFU
chamber feedthrough, after which Diode
+
the signal was converted and V (anode)
Cf 2
Rf 2 Anode
amplified. Thus, the signal in the CRP Thruster
discharge
tests reported in this paper was + I (heater)

prone to sudden offsets when + Cathode

severe thruster transients were V (ignitor)

experienced. The offsets could be PPR 1.4-V

clamp
Thruster
corrected using the measurements
at engine shutdown, but the low Figure 4. General cabling schematic.
quality of the thrust signal is
responsible for the rather large
±10 mN uncertainty indicated in the results section. This problem has since been corrected by placing the signal
interpolator near the optical read-head under vacuum.
Finally, xenon flow through the PSS was controlled using a 300-sccm (for the anode line) and 10-sccm (for the
cathode line) Aera thermal mass flow controller (MFC). The MFC units were calibrated for xenon at the factory
using argon as surrogate gas and applying a standard experimental correction factor. The calibration set points
covered the range 10 – 100% of full scale, and the specified accuracy is 1% of full scale.

III. Test Procedure

25
The first PPS®X000 testing
campaign investigated thruster
6 kW operation between 2 kW and
6 kW of discharge power, and
20 A
between 300 V and 580 V of
5kW discharge voltage. Points A
1 A though D+ (Fig. 5) were thus
15 extensively characterized in
B terms of thruster performance
Id /A

C and stability of operations, and

10
3kW this for seven different thruster
D D+
configurations.9 Running the
OG E engine at up to 580 V of
2kW F
G discharge voltage—the
5
Start-up/outgas
H maximum voltage allowed by
I the test facility at the time—
revealed that such limitations
0 could not permit to test the
200 300 400 500 600
U /V
d
700 800 900 1000 1100 thruster to its design limits. The
objective of the tests reported in
Figure 5. Characterization points for the PPS®X000. this paper was thus to extend the
known thruster operating
envelope to higher voltages, a
possibility allowed by subsequent facility upgrades. Points E through I in Fig. 5 were therefore characterized with
the thruster in the reference configuration and following the procedure detailed in this section.
All measurements were made with the thruster outgassed and warmed up. The thruster was declared outgassed
when, after being left under secondary vacuum at least overnight, it had operated for a minimum of three hours at
the outgassing point (OG) and two anode current measurements separated by 30 minutes were equal (±0.01 A) at a
constant anode mass flow rate.

4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 The performance characterization included magnet current optimization, magnet current balance optimization,
cathode flow rate variations and vacuum pressure variations. In addition to this, a constant flow rate voltage sweep
from 300 V to 1 kV was performed, as well as a thermal characterization at points A1 and E. The thermal
characterization consisted of data collection from a total of seven thermocouples while the thruster was allowed to
achieve complete thermal equilibrium. Finally, the low plasma density limit was sought for Ud =1 kV. This was
achieved by progressively decreasing the anode current towards point I after the engine had stabilized at point H
(Ud =1 kV and Pd =5 kW) for 15 minutes.
Magnet current optimization meant that once the thruster had been throttled to the desired operating point, both
inner and outer magnet currents were adjusted in order to 1) stabilize the thruster if applicable; and 2) minimize the
discharge current, i.e., optimize discharge efficiency. Magnet current balance optimization meant that, from the
setting obtained in the magnet current optimization, the outer electromagnet coil current Im2 was varied by ±15%
while the inner coil current Im1 was held constant.
Cathode flow-rate variations were carried out at the optimized setpoint to establish the sensitivity of cathode
coupling potential (or cathode reference potential, CRP) to cathode flow rate. Another parameter that was monitored
was the discharge current oscillation amplitude. In this part, cathode flow rate was varied within ±15% of its initial
setting, which corresponded to 5% of the anode mass flow rate.
Finally, the xenon background pressure in the facility was increased by leaking neutral Xe through the loadlock
in the upper part of the vacuum chamber via a spare feed line and flow controller in the PSS. This was carried out in
order to experimentally establish the sensitivity of thruster performance and stability to background gas pressure.
The vacuum pressure was allowed to progressively increase by 50%.
The control parameters varied during the characterization were always changed in small steps. The thruster was
then allowed to stabilize for a minimum of 5 minutes between changes, except for cathode flow variations where a
minimum of 10 minutes were given between each 5% step.

IV. Results and Discussion

This part presents a discussion of the results obtained in the characterization tests detailed in Part III. Current-
voltage characteristic curves are presented for both the high-voltage (300 V—1 kV) and low voltage (below 300 V)
regimes.

A. Current-Voltage Characteristics
The first part of the characterization consisted of constant mass-flow-rate voltage sweeps to establish the current-
voltage characteristic, so
that a preliminary 8 6

assessment of the
discharge voltage range 7
5
for stable thruster
operations might be 6

obtained. This was done 4

by first setting the 5
Id /A

Idosc /App

discharge current to 6 A
4 3
for 300 V of discharge
voltage (anode mass flow
3
rate m& a =6.8 mg/s) and 2

with the cathode flow- 2

rate fixed at 5% of the 1
anode flow rate. The 1

magnet current was left

constant at the maximum 0 0
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
allowable value (25 A). Ud /V
Voltage was then ramped
up at an approximate rate Figure 6. Discharge current Id and discharge current oscillation amplitude Idosc
of 10 V/s, with a 5-min vs. discharge voltage Ud. Anode and cathode mass flow rates, as well as magnet
stabilization time every current, were kept constant during the voltage sweeps.
100-V step. This voltage

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
sweep was performed once up to 800 V, and was then repeated up to 1 kV (Fig. 6). Since an increase in discharge
current was observed toward the upper end of the voltage range, anode flow rate was slightly reduced from its initial
value at 900 V in order not to exceed a discharge current greatly above the initial target of 6 A at 1 kV.

18

Id /A
16

14

12

10

6
ma=6.9mg/s - Im=20A
ma=6.9mg/s - Im=16A
4 ma=6.9mg/s - Im=12A
ma=11.6mg/s - Im=20A
ma=11.6mg/s - Im=16A
ma=11.6mg/s - Im=12A
2
ma=14.0mg/s - Im=20A
ma=14.0mg/s - Im=16A
ma=14.0mg/s - Im=12A
0
80 110 140 170 200 230 260 290
Ud /V

Figure 7. Families of low-voltage discharge I-V characteristics for varying anode mass
flow-rates (ma) and magnet currents (Im).

12

Idosc /App

10

ma=6.9mg/s - Im=20
ma=6.9mg/s - Im=16A
ma=6.9mg/s - Im=12A
8 ma=11.6mg/s - Im=20A
ma=11.6mg/s - Im=16A
ma=11.6mg/s - Im=12A
ma=14.0mg/s - Im=20A
ma=14.0mg/s - Im=16A
6 ma=14.0mg/s - Im=12A

0
80 110 140 170 200 230 260 290
Ud /V

Figure 8. Peak-to-peak amplitude of the discharge current oscillations vs. discharge

voltage for varying anode mass flow-rates (ma) and magnet currents (Im).
The behavior of the discharge current oscillations amplitude shows that a (relatively) strong oscillatory regime
centered at 450 V is present, with a sharp transition near 425 V and a smoother transition between 475 V and 550 V.
The dominant frequency was in the range 15 – 30 kHz, and increasing with voltage. This is consistent with previous
observations on smaller-scale thrusters such as the PPS®1350, which has been run at up to 900 V,14 or the SPT-
100.15 This behavior is associated with the known sharp mode transition from the so-called “fluctuating regime” at
low voltage to the “oscillatory regime” near 400 V, with a smoother transition then to the “high-voltage regime” at

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
yet higher voltage.15 The current-voltage characteristic itself remains flat up to about 700 V, and then rises very
slightly with voltage. It is not known which of the possible mechanisms dominates (creation of multiply charged
ions vs. turbulence-induced electron-mobility enhancement) as the charge states in the ion beam were not studied.
An additional effect on the measurements could come from unfiltered AC components when the oscillations are
large, which in particular is believed to cause the small but noticeable change in discharge current that can be
observed at the mode transition near 425 V.
The behavior at low voltage is shown in Fig. 7, where I-V discharge characteristics for Ud ≤ 300 V are shown for
several values of ma and Im. The data were collected over a progressive decrease of Ud starting at 300 V, with a few
minutes stabilization every 25 V. Note that the data corresponding to the highest flow rate is truncated at Id = 16 A
because of the anode supply limitation. The classical “negative impedance” knee can be observed, where the onset
of high-amplitude oscillations (fluctuating mode) coincides with an increase in Id at low values of Ud (Fig. 8). This
most likely is due to a turbulence-induced enhancement of electron mobility in the axial direction of the discharge
chamber. For larger values of Im, the oscillation amplitude decreases and so does the discharge current Id.

B. Minimum Plasma Density Limit

Continuous operation was possible (typically a minimum of one hour was spent at each operating point) at
voltages as high as 800 V included. Full characterization was not possible at point H, however, because the thruster
could not be operated continuously at 1 kV and 5 kW of discharge voltage and power, respectively, for more than
about 15 minutes. The thermocouple readings indicated that the thermal limits on the thruster were not reached,
although the downstream ends of the ceramic walls as well as the anode eventually appeared to be glowing red at
that voltage and power, a phenomenon that has been reported before.17 Because the materials constituting both parts
are high-temperature materials, this in itself was not considered immediately harmful to the thruster, but this
suggests a high rate of ceramic erosion since the sputtering yield of borosilicate ceramics becomes a strong function
of temperature above 700°C.19 Rather, the operating conditions at 1 kV correspond to the lowest current density (in
A/m2) and the lowest plasma density (in m-3) of the operating domain, and it is likely that at least one of these
parameters had reached its lower limit. Indeed, the current density at point H is about 0.06 A/cm2, a value lower than
and consistent with the minimum characteristic density of 0.1 A/cm2 indicated in Ref. 20 for xenon Hall thrusters.
Attempts at decreasing the anode current at 1 kV from point H toward point I (Fig. 5) confirmed this functional
limit. Point I could not be reached, and the thruster was extinguished near 4 A on two attempts. Since the PPS®X000
has been operated at steady state down to 360 W of discharge power at low voltage, the minimum power density
was not reached here. Instead, either the minimum discharge current density and/or the minimum plasma density
limits were reached between 4 and 5 kW at 1 kV.

C. Magnet Current Optimi-

zation 18 5
The results of the electromagnet Id /A
coils current optimization are 16 4.5
Id pt. A
shown in Fig. 9. The observed 1

4
behavior shows a sensitivity of the 14

discharge current to magnet current 3.5

12
that is much lower than expected.16
3
Magnetic characterization of the
Idosc /App

10
PPS®X000 demonstrator shows Id pt. E 2.5

that the loss of linearity of 8

Id pt. F
2
magnetic induction with coil Id osc pt. A 1

6
current does not become significant Id pt. G 1.5
until 19 – 20 A. This suggests that 4
the magnetic circuit of the Id osc pt. F
1

demonstrator thruster can sustain a 2 Id osc pt. E

0.5
Id osc pt. G
sufficient magnetic induction B for
voltages up to about 800 V. In 0
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
0

addition, the absence of the Im /A

expected mode transition to the

right-hand side of the Id vs. Im Figure 9. Discharge current Id and discharge current oscillation
characteristic suggests either an amplitude Idosc vs. magnet current Im.
effect of scale or of voltage on

7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
regime transitions. This will be the subject of further studies.

D. Cathode Flow Optimization 28

Varying the cathode mass flow rate under
26
constant discharge conditions produced the
expected decrease in magnitude of the cathode 24 Point E (650V)
Point F (725V)
coupling voltage (UCRP) with increasing xenon 22 Point G (800V)

flow rate. This is shown in Fig. 10. In this part,

|Ucrp| /V
20
mc was varied by 15% and the thruster was left to
stabilize for 10 minutes at each step. This 18
explains the multiple values of UCRP stacked 16
together in correspondence with each step of mc
14
variation. The optimization of mc is a trade-off
between high cathode tip temperatures, 12
detrimental to cathode life, and Isp : a larger flow- 10
rate decreases |UCRP | and therefore cathode tip 0,3 0,35 0,4 0,45 0,5
temperature, but increases the “cold flow” loss of mc /[mg/s]
xenon through the cathode. Setting the cathode
mass flow rate equal to 5.5% of the anode mass Figure 10. Cathode coupling voltage UCRP vs. cathode
flow rate for all operating points provided a good mass flow rate mc.
compromise.

E. Influence of Background Pressure

The influence of background xenon pressure on Id and Idosc is shown in Fig. 11. As expected, the discharge
current rises linearly with Pvac, albeit with a very small slope of about 0.04 A / 10-5 hPa (or about 0.04 A / 10-5 Torr).
The effect on thrust, which should be close to 0.8 mN / 10-5 hPa, could not be resolved experimentally. We note that
the amplitude of the discharge current oscillations, Idosc, also rises with increasing pressure. This appears, however,
to be caused by the increase in Id itself since Idosc is usually proportional to Id at given Ud and Im.

F. Thruster performance
7,98 1
Finally, the propulsive performance is
7,96 summarized in Figures 12 and 13, where the
0,9
previous characterization points are
7,94 represented for completeness. The error bars
translate the ±10 mN thrust uncertainty
0,8
7,92
mentioned in Part 2.2, which was found to
0,7
Idosc /App

7,9 dominate in the error analysis. All performance

Id /A

7,88
data reported here include cathode mass flow
0,6
rate. In addition, electromagnet coil power and
7,86 power dissipated in the cabling have als been
0,5
taken into account, so that the input power
7,84 Id
Idosc considered in the efficiency is the total thruster
0,4
7,82 input power. The thrust efficiency reaches a
maximum near 2700 s of Isp, (700 V of
7,8 0,3
discharge voltage) at 5 kW of discharge power.
5,0E-05 5,5E-05 6,0E-05 6,5E-05 7,0E-05 7,5E-05 8,0E-05
This behavior is consistent with both the fact
Pvac /hPa (or Torr)
that the beam current and/or plasma density are
approaching their lower limits, and that the
Figure 11. Discharge current Id and discharge current magnetic circuit begins to saturate at operating
oscillation amplitude Idosc vs. background xenon pressure conditions near 800 V. The overall
Pvac. Presented data is for Point E (5 kW / 650 V). performance is consistent with other published
results (References 17, 18, 22, 23, and 24).

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 400

350
A
A-
A1
300
B
C
250 D+
D E
F H+
F/mN

G
200

H
150
OG H-

100

50

0
1200 1700 2200 2700 3200

Total Isp /s

Figure 12. Thrust vs. Isp. Extra points correspond to the following discharge
conditions: 300 V / 5.5 kW for A-; 1 kV / 6.3 kW for H+; and 1 kV / 4 kW for H-.

70

60 E
A1
F G
D+
C H+
50 OG
B D H-
A-
Thrust efficiency η (%)

A H

40

30

20

10

0
1200 1700 2200 2700 3200
Total Isp /s

Figure 13. Thrust efficiency vs. Isp. Extra points correspond to the following
discharge conditions: 300 V / 5.5 kW for A-; 1 kV / 6.3 kW for H+; and 1 kV / 4 kW for H-.

V. Conclusion
The technological demonstrator PPS®X000 is the precursor thruster for the flight-design PPS®5000, and is
shown operating in Fig. 14. Extensive characterization testing has been completed up to a total thruster power of
6.5 kW and a discharge voltage of 1 kV, with a maximum total specific impulse of 3240 s. A maximum thrust

9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 efficiency of 58% was obtained at 5 kW / 650 V. The
maximum demonstrated thrust was 335 mN at 6 kW /
300 V, corresponding to a minimum thrust-specific power
of 18.3 kW/N.
This high-voltage characterization campaign was
successful not only in demonstrating performance levels
well above the state of the art, but also in identifying the
functional limits of the present design at high discharge
voltage. In particular, steady-state operation was
demonstrated for order-of-magnitude variations of the
discharge voltage (100 – 1000 V) and power (360 –
6300 W).

Figure 14. PPS®X000 operating under

discharge conditions of 5 kW and 800 V. Acknowledgments
This work was performed with the support of CNES and
ESA, in particular within the framework of the @bus program. The contributions of the GdR research group
“Propulsion à plasma pour systèmes spatiaux” are also acknowledged. Finally, the authors wish to thank the
QinetiQ team for their efforts in support of the testing described in this paper.

References
1
Garnero, P., “Astra 1K and Stentor Plasma Propulsion Subsystem Experience.” In 39th Joint Propulsion Conference,
Huntsville, AL, 2003. AIAA 2003-4547.
2
Koppel, C.R., Marchandise, F., Estublier, D., and Jolivet, L., “The SMART-1 Electric Propulsion Subsystem In-Flight
Experience.” In 40th Joint Propulsion Conference, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, 2004. AIAA 2004-3435 (submitted).
3
Fisher, J., Wilson, A., King, D., Meyer, S., de Grys, K ., and Werthman, L., “The Development and Flight Qualification of
a 4.5 kW Hall Thruster Propulsion System.” In 39th Joint Propulsion Conference, Huntsville, AL, 2003. AIAA 2003-4551.
4
Lyszyk, M., and Jacob, V., “Electric Propulsion on @bus Platform.” In 28th International Electric Propulsion Conference,
Toulouse, France, 2003. IEPC 03-170.
5
Chesta et al., “Hybrid (Coupled Plasma/ion) Electric Propulsion Systems.” In 3rd International Space Propulsion
Conference, Chia Laguna, Italy, 2004.
6
Prioul et al., “Double Stage HET Development Activities at Snecma.” In 3rd International Space Propulsion Conference,
Chia Laguna, Italy, 2004.
7
Marcuccio, S., Ceccanti, F., Leonelli, M., Milana, C., Tartara, F., and Ciccioli, A., “An Orbital Transfer Vehicle with
Electric Propulsion to enhance the Vega Launcher operational Envelope.” In 3rd International Space Propulsion Conference,
Chia Laguna, Italy, 2004.
8
Duchemin, O., Dumazert, P., Carichon, S., Boniface, C., Garrigues, L ., and Bœuf, J-P., “Performance and Lifetime
Predictions by Testing and Modeling for the PPS®5000 Thruster.” In 39th Joint Propulsion Conference, Huntsville, AL, 2003.
AIAA 2003-4555.
9
Duchemin, O., Dumazert, P., Clark, S.D., and Mundy, D.H., “Development and Testing of a High-Power Hall thruster.” In
28th International Electric Propulsion Conference, Toulouse, France, 2003. IEPC 03-032.
10
Duchemin, O., Dumazert, P., Estublier, D., and Darnon, F., “Testing the PPS®X000 Plasma Thruster at High Discharge
Voltage.” In 3rd International Space Propulsion Conference, Chia Laguna, Italy, 2004.
11
Simpson, H.B., Wallace, N.C., Clark, S.D ., and Mundy, D.H., “A Description of the New 3.8m Diameter High Power
Electric Propulsion Test Facility at QinetiQ, Farnborough, UK.” In 28th International Electric Propulsion Conference, Toulouse,
France, 2003. IEPC-03-213.
12
Arkhipov, B., Koryakin, A., Murashko, V., Nesterenko, A., Olotin, S., Yuriev, A., and Lyszyk, M., “Transients During
Stationary Plasma Thruster Start-up.” In 3rd International Conference on Spacecraft Propulsion, Cannes, France, 2000.
13
Hargus, W.A. Jr, and Pote, B., “Examination of a Hall thruster Start Transient.” In 38th Joint Propulsion Conference,
Indianapolis, IN, 2002. AIAA 2002-3956.
14
Prioul, M ., and Dumazert, P., Essais du PPS®1350 dans un domaine de fonctionnement étendu. Snecma technical report
FS0302988A. 2003.
15
Darnon, F., Comportements transitoires d’un propulseur à plasma type SPT-100. Caractéristiques dynamiques de la
décharge, du plasma et du jet ionique. Thesis dissertation, Orléans University. 1999.
16
Kim, V., “Main Physical Features and Processes Determining the Performance of stationary Plasma Thrusters,” Journal of
Propulsion and Power 14(5):736 – 743. 1998.
17
Szabo, J.J., Warner, N.Z ., and Martinez-Sanchez, M., “Instrumentation and Modeling of a High Isp Hall Thruster.” In 38th
Joint Propulsion Conference, Indianapolis, IN, 2002. AIAA 2002-4248.

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 18
Bouchoule, A., Lazurenko, A., Vial, V., Kim, V., Kozlov, V ., and Skrylnikov, A., “Investigation of the SPT Operations
under High Discharge Voltage.” In 28th International Electric Propulsion Conference, Toulouse, France, 2003. IEPC 03-211.
19
Duchemin, O., Analyse des possibilités d’amélioration des matériaux céramiques – Rapport final phase 1. Snecma
technical report FS0203799A. 2002.
20
Semenkin, A.V., Tverdokhlebov, S.O., Garkusha, V.I., Kochergin, A.V., Chislov, G.O., Shumkin, B.V., Solodukhin, A.V .,
and Zakharenkov, L.E., “Operating Envelopes of Thrusters with Anode Layer.” In 27th International Electric Propulsion
Conference, Pasadena, CA, 2001. IEPC 01-013.
21
Pote, B., and Tedrake, R., “Performance of a High Specific Impulse Hall Thruster.” In 27th International Electric
Propulsion Conference, Pasadena, CA, 2001. IEPC 01-035.
22
Noah, Z.W., Szabo, J.J ., and Martinez-Sanchez, M.M., “Characterization of a High Specific Impulse Hall Thruster Using
Electrostatic Probes.” In 28th International Electric Propulsion Conference, Toulouse, France, 2003. IEPC 03-082.
23
Belikov, M.B., Blinov, N.V., Gorshkov, O.A., Rizakhanov, R.N ., and Shagayda, A.A, “Operation Peculiarities of Hall
thruster with Power 1.5 – 2.0 kW at High Discharge Voltages.” In 28th International Electric Propulsion Conference, Toulouse,
France, 2003. IEPC 03-121.
24
Hofer, R.R ., and Jankovsky, R.S., “The Influence of Current Density and Magnetic Field Topography in Optimizing the
Performance, Divergence, and Plasma Oscillations of High Specific Impulse Hall Thrusters.” In 28th International Electric
Propulsion Conference, Toulouse, France, 2003. IEPC 03-142.

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics