Influence of Photoelectrons on Spacecraft Charging for Artificial Orbiting Spacecraft

Year : 2025 | Volume : 14 | Issue : 01 | Page : 36 46
    By

    Rizwan H. Alad,

  • Vidhi Mistry,

  • Hetvi Makwana,

  • Keyurkumar Patel,

  • Ashish Pandya,

  1. Professors, Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Faculty of Technology, Dharmsinh Desai University, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
  2. Student, Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Faculty of Technology, Dharmsinh Desai University, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
  3. Student, Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Faculty of Technology, Dharmsinh Desai University, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
  4. Professor, Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Faculty of Technology, Dharmsinh Desai University, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
  5. Professor, Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Faculty of Technology, Dharmsinh Desai University, Nadiad, Gujarat, India

Abstract

For the purpose of evaluating the temporal body potential and capacitance of an artificial orbiting spacecraft, this research analyzes the impact of photoelectrons on spacecraft charging. A metallic rectangular cuboid and two coplanar metallic rectangular plates compose the spacecraft model. The Runge-Kutta method is used to calculate the body potential, and the method of moments is used to calculate the capacitance. Depending on the spacecraft’s inclination angle, solar energy from the Sun is directly impacted on the area that receives sunlight. The study also explores how an excessive buildup of charge can cause operational challenges, such as electrical discharges, disruptions in communication, and potential harm to delicate electronic systems. This study explores how spacecraft accumulate charge in space and the role of photoelectrons in this process. It suggests improved methods for managing charges, including the use of specialized materials and protective coatings to minimize potential risks. The findings support the development of more robust spacecraft designed for extended missions. Depending on the spacecraft material’s photon efficiency, the incident solar radiation ejects photoelectrons from the spacecraft surface, increasing the spacecraft body’s positive charge. In addition to accounting for different wavelengths, the variation in body potential is established both with and without the photoelectric effect. It is discovered that the variance of body potential is significantly influenced by the photoelectric current. For different scenarios, the spacecraft’s body potential’s temporal behavior is examined

Keywords: Spacecraft charging, method of moments (MoM), Runge-Kutta method, photoelectric effect, body potential

[This article belongs to Research & Reviews : Journal of Space Science & Technology ]

How to cite this article:
Rizwan H. Alad, Vidhi Mistry, Hetvi Makwana, Keyurkumar Patel, Ashish Pandya. Influence of Photoelectrons on Spacecraft Charging for Artificial Orbiting Spacecraft. Research & Reviews : Journal of Space Science & Technology. 2025; 14(01):36-46.
How to cite this URL:
Rizwan H. Alad, Vidhi Mistry, Hetvi Makwana, Keyurkumar Patel, Ashish Pandya. Influence of Photoelectrons on Spacecraft Charging for Artificial Orbiting Spacecraft. Research & Reviews : Journal of Space Science & Technology. 2025; 14(01):36-46. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/rrjosst/article=2025/view=201976


References

  1. Nakagawa T, Ishii T, Tsuruda K, Hayakawa H, Mukai T. Net current density of photoelectrons emitted from the surface of the GEOTAIL spacecraft. Earth Planets 2000; 52: 283–292.
  2. Kawasaki K, Inoue S, Ewang E, Toyoda K, Cho M. Measurement of electron emission yield by electrons and photons for space aged material. In: Proceedings of the 14th Spacecraft Charging Technology Conference, ESA/ESTEC, Noordwijk, Netherlands, April 4–8, 2016. 1–7.
  3. Koons HC. Summary of environmentally induced electrical discharges on the P78-2 (SCATHA) satellite. J Spacecraft 1983; 20 (5): 425–431.
  4. Matéo-Vélez JC, Theillaumas B, Sévoz M, Andersson B, Nilsson T, Sarrailh P, Thiébault B, Jeanty-Ruard B, Rodgers D, Balcon N, Payan D. Simulation and analysis of spacecraft charging using SPIS and NASCAP/GEO. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci. 2015; 43 (9): 2808–28
  5. Mandell MJ, Davis VA, Cooke DL, Wheelock AT, Roth CJ. Nascap-2k spacecraft charging code overview. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci. 2006; 34 (5): 2084–20
  6. Muranaka T, Hosoda S, Kim JH, Hatta S, Ikeda K, Hamanaga T, Cho M, Usui H, Ueda HO, Koga K, Goka T. Development of multi-utility spacecraft charging analysis tool (MUSCAT). IEEE Trans Plasma Sci. 2008; 36 (5): 2336–23
  7. Garrett HB, Whittlesey AC. Spacecraft charging, an update. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci. 2000; 28 (6): 2017–20
  8. Garrett HB, Whittlesey AC. Guide to Mitigating Spacecraft Charging Effects. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons; 2012.
  9. Hastings D, Garrett H. Spacecraft-Environment Interactions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2004.
  10. Griseri V. Polyimide used in space applications. In: Diaham S, editor. Polyimide for Electronic and Electrical Engineering Applications. London, UK: IntechOpen; 2020. 1–9.
  11. Rich FJ, Reasoner DL, Burke WJ. Plasma sheet at lunar distance: characteristics and interactions with the lunar surface. J Geophys Res. 1973; 78 (34): 8097–8
  12. Manka RH. Plasma and potential at the lunar surface. In: Photon and Particle Interactions with Surfaces in Space: Proceedings of the 6th Eslab Symposium, Noordwijk, Netherlands, September 26–29, 1972. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Netherlands; 1973. 347–361.
  13. Freeman JW, Ibrahim M. Lunar electric fields, surface potential and associated plasma sheaths. In: Lunar Science Institute, Conference on Interactions of the Interplanetary Plasma with the Modern and Ancient Moon, Lake Geneva, WI, USA, September 30–October 4, 1974. The Moon . 1975; 14: 103–
  14. Halekas JS, Bale SD, Mitchell DL, Lin RP. Electrons and magnetic fields in the lunar plasma wake. J Geophys Res Space Phys. 2005; 110: A07222 .
  15. Halekas JS, Lin RP, Mitchell DL. Large negative lunar surface potentials in sunlight and shadow. Geophys Res Lett. 2005; 32 (9): L09102.
  16. Stubbs TJ, Halekas JS, Farrell WM, Vondrak RR. Lunar surface charging: a global perspective using Lunar Prospector data. Dust Planetary Syst. 2007; 643: 181–18
  17. Halekas JS, Delory GT, Brain DA, Lin RP, Fillingim MO, Lee CO, Mewaldt RA, Stubbs TJ, Farrell WM, Hudson MK. Extreme lunar surface charging during solar energetic particle events. Geophys Res Lett. 2007; 34 (2): L02111.
  18. Halekas JS, Delory GT, Lin RP, Stubbs TJ, Farrell WM. Lunar surface charging during solar energetic particle events: measurement and prediction. J Geophys Res Space Phys. 2009; 114: A05110.
  19. Farrell WM, Halekas JS, Killen RM, Delory GT, Gross N, Bleacher LV, Krauss‐Varben D, Travnicek P, Hurley D, Stubbs TJ, Zimmerman MI. Solar‐Storm/Lunar Atmosphere Model (SSLAM): an overview of the effort and description of the driving storm environment. J Geophys Res 2012; 117: E00K04.
  20. Stubbs TJ, Farrell WM, Halekas JS, Burchill JK, Collier MR, Zimmerman MI, Vondrak RR, Delory GT, Pfaff RF. Dependence of lunar surface charging on solar wind plasma conditions and solar irradiation. Planetary Space Sci. 2014; 90: 10–
  21. Breneman AW, Wygant JR, Tian S, Cattell CA, Thaller SA, Goetz K, Tyler E, Colpitts C, Dai L, Kersten K, Bonnell JW. The Van Allen Probes electric field and waves instrument: science results, measurements, and access to data. Space Sci Rev. 2022; 218 (8):
  22. Fennell JF, Roeder JL, Berg GA, Elsen RK. HEO satellite frame and differential charging and SCATHA low-level frame charging. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci. 2008; 36 (5): 2271–227
  23. Leach RD. Failures and Anomalies Attributed to Spacecraft Charging. Huntsville, AL, USA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Marshall Space Flight Center; 1995.
  24. Huang Z, Wang J. Modeling lunar surface charging under space weather conditions derived from the Artemis and Omni data. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci. 2023; 51 (9): 2515–25
  25. Alad RH, Shah H, Chakrabarty SB, Shah D. Effect of solar illumination on ESD for structure used in spacecraft. Prog Electromagn Res 2017; 55: 25–36.
  26. Gibson W The Method of Moments in Electromagnetics. New York, NY, USA: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press; 2007. pp. 33–48, 255–269.
  27. Das BN, Chakrabarty SB. Capacitance and charge distribution of two cylindrical conductors of finite length. IEE Proc Sci Measure Technol. 1997; 144 (6): 280–28
  28. Bai EW, Lonngren KE. On the capacitance of a cube. Computers Electric Eng. 2002; 28 (4): 317–3
  29. Cañas-Peñuelas CS, Catalan-Izquierdo S, Bueno-Barrachina JM, Cavallé-Sesé F. Unit cube capacitance calculation by means of finite element analysis. In: International Conference on Renewable Energies and Power Quality, Valencia, Spain, April 15–17, 2009.
  30. Harrington RF. Field Computation by Moment Methods. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley-IEEE Press; 1993.
  31. Alad RH, Chakrabarty SB. Capacitance and surface charge distribution computations for a satellite modeled as a rectangular cuboid and two plates. J 2013; 71 (6): 1005–1010.
  32. Das BN, Chakrabarty SB. Evaluation of capacitance and charge distribution of cylinder of finite length with top and bottom cover plates. Indian J Radio Space Phys. 1997; 26: 112–115.
  33. Adams A Electromagnetics for Engineers. New York, NY, USA: Ronald Press; 1972. pp. 65–126, 166–220.
  34. Kim CY. A numerical solution for the round disk capacitor by using annular patch subdomains. Prog Electromagn Res 2008; 8: 179–194.
Regular Issue Subscription Original Research
Volume 14
Issue 01
Received 14/02/2025
Accepted 20/02/2025
Published 03/03/2025
Publication Time 17 Days
145

Login


My IP

PlumX Metrics