Hall thruster modeling with multiple simulation techniques: Model benchmarking, fluid–kinetic consistency, and experimental validation

F Federico Petronio (Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas (LPP), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, École Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris 1 , 91120 Palaiseau,) A Alejandro Alvarez Laguna (Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas (LPP), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, École Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris 1 , 91120 Palaiseau,) A Anne Bourdon (Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas (LPP), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, École Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris 1 , 91120 Palaiseau,) T Trevor Lafleur (School of Engineering and Technology, University of New South Wales Canberra 2 , Canberra, ACT 2600,) P Pascal Chabert (Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas (LPP), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, École Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris 1 , 91120 Palaiseau,)

Abstract

Numerical plasma models are critical tools for aiding the design and understanding of electric propulsion systems, such as Hall thrusters, particularly when considering challenges associated with diagnostic access and reliable internal measurements. For complex plasma systems, such as Hall thrusters, theoretical verification solutions are often missing, and therefore, benchmarking represents an important element in assessing the correctness and consistency of the underlying mathematical model, and the computational performance of the numerical implementation. In this work, we benchmark three different numerical codes by simulating an SPT-100 Hall thruster under identical operating conditions. The codes include one-dimensional stationary and non-stationary fluid models describing the axial thruster direction, as well as a two-dimensional axial–azimuthal Particle-In-Cell/Monte Carlo Collision (PIC/MCC) model. A partial validation is performed with available experimental measurements of the discharge current, thrust, and anode specific impulse, showing good agreement. Overall, the fluid and PIC/MCC models compare favorably with each other, and several fluid approximations are found to be acceptable. For example, axial electron energy transport is relatively minor such that the electron temperature is reasonably determined by a local energy balance. Other approximations, however, require a more careful examination: particularly the assumption of Maxwellian electrons and the neglect of electron–wall collisions in the electron momentum balance equations.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 139, Issue 9
Published March 07, 2026
ISSN 0021-8979
Publisher American Institute of Physics

Journal Info

Journal of Applied Physics

American Institute of Physics

ISSN: 0021-8979 Physical Sciences

Authors (5)

F

Federico Petronio

Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas (LPP), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, École Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris 1 , 91120 Palaiseau,

A

Alejandro Alvarez Laguna

Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas (LPP), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, École Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris 1 , 91120 Palaiseau,

A

Anne Bourdon

Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas (LPP), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, École Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris 1 , 91120 Palaiseau,

T

Trevor Lafleur

School of Engineering and Technology, University of New South Wales Canberra 2 , Canberra, ACT 2600,

P

Pascal Chabert

Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas (LPP), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, École Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris 1 , 91120 Palaiseau,