Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 33 references

A rational design method for the Nagoya type-III antenna

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Keeping electron inertia and Trivelpiece–Gould coupling in the wave model predicts the optimum Nagoya type-III antenna length with an average relative error of about 18 percent, the best of three design rules tested against full-wave 3D…

desk verdict A clean numerical comparison of three sizing rules; the recommendation is useful, but the FEM reference shares the same model as the recommended method, so the 18% accuracy is conditional on that model being faithful. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.20839 v1 pith:2T5ET375 submitted 2024-12-30 physics.plasm-ph

Daniele Iannarelli , Francesco Napoli , Antonella Ingenito , Alessandro Cardinali , Antonella De Ninno , Simone Mannori This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.plasm-ph PACS 52.35.Hr52.50.Dg52.65.-y
keywords heliconthrusterNagoyatype-IIIantennadesignTrivelpiece–Gouldwavescold-plasmadielectrictensorfull-waveFEMsimulationlengthoptimizationRFplasmasource
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper addresses a practical sizing question: given the quartz tube radius and target plasma density and magnetic field, how long should a Nagoya type-III antenna be? It compares three analytical design rules against the optimum lengths obtained from full-wave 3D simulations of the antenna–plasma system. The generalized-helicon method, which keeps electron inertia and couples helicon waves to Trivelpiece–Gould waves, has the lowest average relative error, about 18 percent over the three test cases. The paper proposes this method as a fast first-sizing tool that can initialize more expensive full-wave simulations or guide rapid prototyping of the antenna.

What carries the argument

The central object is the spectral antenna–plasma resistance $R_A(m,L_a)=\int P_k(k,m,L_a)\,dk$, built as the product of a plasma power density $S_k$ and an antenna power density $p_A$ obtained from the Fourier transform of the antenna current, $K_\phi(k,m,L_a)\propto \sin(kL_a/2)$. Maximizing $R_A$ with respect to $L_a$ selects the optimum length. The physics that distinguishes Method 1 is the two-root dispersion relation that appears when electron inertia is retained: the helicon root $\beta_1=k_w^2/k$ and the strongly damped Trivelpiece–Gould root $\beta_2=k/\delta$, with $\delta=(\omega+i\nu)/\omega_c$, are coupled at the boundary, and their combined spectrum produces the $kL_a=\pi(2h+1)$ condition used for the first optimal length.

What would settle it

Run a Nagoya type-III antenna on a 4 cm quartz tube in an argon discharge at 13.56 MHz with electron density near $10^{18}\ \mathrm{m^{-3}}$ and field near 10 mT, then sweep antenna length from about 8 to 16 cm and record coupled RF power or plasma density. Method 1 predicts a peak around 13.5 cm while the FEM reference used in the paper gives 10.6 cm, so the measured peak position would decide whether the generalized theory or the simulation reference (or neither) sizes the antenna correctly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that Design Method 1, based on the generalized theory of helicon waves with electron inertia and Trivelpiece–Gould coupling, predicts the optimum antenna length more accurately than two simpler methods. Across the three simulated discharge configurations, its average relative error is 18.46 percent, compared with about 39 percent for both the Landau-damping method and the simple half-wavelength method. The paper also finds that the simple method becomes quite accurate in the high-density case, while the Landau-damping method performs worst, and argues that the generalized method is consistent with experiments in which the excited parallel wavelength is governed by plasma parameters rather than by antenna length.

Load-bearing premise

The whole comparison leans on the full-wave simulation being a faithful proxy for the optimum antenna length in a real discharge, even though it was validated against only one previous simulation and uses the same cold-plasma dielectric model that underpins the winning method.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Design Method 1 gives a fast, low-cost first sizing of a Nagoya type-III antenna with an average error near 18 percent, before any full-wave optimization.
  • For high-density helicon discharges, the simpler Method 3 is accurate enough for preliminary sizing, so expensive modeling can be avoided in that regime.
  • The Landau-damping-based Method 2 is the least accurate and should not be the basis for choosing antenna length.
  • Because a fixed antenna excites a spectrum of propagating modes, the same physical length can remain near-optimal across a range of densities and magnetic fields, which matches experimental observations that the parallel wavelength is set by the plasma.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The error pattern across cases suggests a systematic density and magnetic-field dependence: Method 1 overestimates the length at low density and underestimates it at high density; a correction fitted to those trends could push the average error below 18 percent, though the paper does not propose one.
  • The same resistance-maximization procedure should extend to other antenna geometries, such as helical or birdcage antennas, by substituting the appropriate current-density Fourier transform; the paper only treats the Nagoya type-III.
  • Since the reference optimum comes from one cold-plasma FEM model validated at a single operating point, an experimental length sweep in a real discharge would be the decisive check; the ranking of the methods could change if nonlinear absorption or density nonuniformity shifts the real optimum.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a rational design procedure for sizing a Nagoya type-III helicon antenna for a given quartz tube radius and target plasma parameters. Three analytic methods are compared: Method 1, based on the generalized helicon theory of Chen and Arnush including Trivelpiece-Gould coupling; Method 2, based on the Landau-damping hypothesis; and Method 3, based on the simple bounded-plasma helicon dispersion relation with a half-wavelength antenna condition. The predicted optimal antenna lengths are benchmarked against full-wave 3D FEM simulations of the antenna resistance as a function of length for three test cases that vary plasma density and magnetic field. The authors report that Method 1 has the lowest average relative error (18.46%) and recommend it as a fast first-sizing tool, while Method 3 does well in the high-density case. The FEM solver is validated against one prior simulation at a single operating point.

Significance. If the claimed accuracy holds, the paper delivers a genuinely useful and parameter-free engineering rule: the optimum Nagoya type-III antenna length follows from kLa = pi with k taken from the generalized helicon dispersion, requiring only plasma density, magnetic field, frequency, and tube radius as inputs. No parameter is fitted to the simulated optima, and the comparison across three methods is clearly presented. The significance is, however, limited by the fact that the FEM reference and Method 1 share the same cold-plasma, uniform-density constitutive model, and by the absence of any experimental or independently simulated benchmark in the parameter window of interest. The paper is best read as a proof-of-concept that the method is internally consistent with a particular full-wave cold-plasma solver, rather than as an externally validated design law.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, Fig. 2 and Table 2] The FEM simulation is the sole reference used to rank the three design methods, but the code is validated at only one operating point (B0 = 100 mT, f = 15 MHz, a = 2 cm, La = 5 cm), which lies outside the parameter range of all three test cases (B0 = 10-15 mT, f = 13.56 MHz, a = 4 cm). No mesh-convergence study, error bars, or comparison with experimental data is provided. Because Method 1 and the FEM solver both use the same uniform cold-plasma dielectric model (Eqs. (1) and (31)), the reported agreement can reflect internal consistency rather than predictive fidelity for a real helicon discharge, which has radial density gradients, density feedback, and finite-length boundary effects. Please add a benchmark inside the test window or an independent reference, or clearly re-label the comparison as a validation against a cold-plasma full-wave model rather than against a real discharge.
  2. [Section 2.1, Eq. (8)] Equation (8) is dimensionally inconsistent in SI units. The quantity beta must have units of m^-1, but the expression beta = (omega + i nu) k n_e0 e mu0 / B0 has units of m^-3. Comparison with Eq. (10) and the definition k_w^2 = k_s^2 delta indicates that the intended helicon wavenumber is beta = (omega + i nu) mu0 n_e0 e / (B0 k), with k in the denominator rather than the numerator. Please correct this expression and check whether the error propagates into the integration interval and the optimal-length predictions of Method 1.
  3. [Section 2.1, Eq. (12)] The stated integration interval for the parallel wavenumber k, k_min = 2 delta k_s and k_max = beta, is not adequately justified. Equation (11), k = delta (beta + k_s^2/beta), has a minimum at beta = k_s, giving k_min = 2 delta k_s, but it has no finite maximum in beta; the upper bound k_max = beta appears to require an additional, unstated assumption. Since the optimal length in Method 1 is obtained by maximizing Eq. (13), the choice of the integration domain affects the claimed optimum. Please state the exact domain of integration and demonstrate that L_optimum is insensitive to the treatment of the upper bound.
  4. [Section 4 and Table 2] The conclusion that Method 1 provides 'good accuracy' overstates the reported results. The per-case errors for Method 1 are 27.4% for Case 1, 12.5% for Case 2, and 15.5% for Case 3, with all three cases sharing the same tube radius, frequency, electron temperature, and neutral pressure. With only three points and no external validation, the evidence supports a proof-of-concept within the tested parameter window, not a general design rule. Please narrow the conclusion accordingly and state explicitly that the ranking is relative to a cold-plasma full-wave simulation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction, 'Trievelpiece-Gould'] The name is misspelled as 'Trievelpiece-Gould' in the sentence introducing TG waves; it should be 'Trivelpiece-Gould'.
  2. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption contains a stray apostrophe in 'f '= 15 MHz'; this should read f = 15 MHz.
  3. [Section 2.2, after Eq. (21)] The sentence 'where the energy of primary electrons Ee must satisfy Equation (21)' is unclear: Equation (21) only relates the phase velocity to Ee, and the energy is actually fixed by the dispersion relation in Eq. (22). Please revise the cross-reference.
  4. [Section 2.1, Eq. (16)] The phrase 'unless scaling factors and slowly varying terms with k' is vague; please specify which terms are dropped and under what condition they are negligible, since Eq. (16) is the basis for the spectral power density used in Method 1.
  5. [Table 1] The three test cases vary only B0 and ne0; the antenna radius b, tube radius a, frequency, temperature, and pressure are fixed. This should be acknowledged in the discussion as a limitation of the reported parameter sweep.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Method 1 predicts antenna lengths from an analytic dispersion integral with Table 1 inputs, and the FEM benchmark is an independent numerical solution of the same cold-plasma model.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain, Design Method 1 determines L_optimum from the generalized helicon dispersion (Eqs 7-12), the spectral resistance integrand (Eqs 13-20), and the kL_a=pi condition for the m=1 Nagoya current Fourier transform (Eq 20). The inputs are the discharge parameters in Table 1 and standard collision formulas [28]; no parameter is fitted to the simulated peak lengths (10.60, 4.80, 20.60 cm) reported in Table 2. The FEM reference is an independent full-wave solution of Maxwell's equations with the Stix cold-plasma tensor (Eqs 31-32), so the comparison is a consistency check between an analytic reduction and a numerical solution of the same constitutive model rather than a circular reduction. The shared cold-plasma, uniform-density assumptions, and the fact that the FEM code is validated at B0=100 mT while Cases 1-3 use 10-15 mT, are legitimate external-validity limitations for real-discharge accuracy, but they do not make Method 1's prediction equivalent to its inputs. Self-citations are minimal and non-load-bearing (Ref [31] only supports use of the MATLAB PDE solver); the core helicon theory is cited to external works [9,10] and validation to [27]. No fitted-parameter-as-prediction, no imported uniqueness theorem, and no renaming of a known result occurs; hence no circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The claim does not introduce fitted free parameters; the single hand-picked value is c = 10a. All other inputs are stated plasma and geometry parameters. The comparison rests on the shared uniform cold-plasma model and the peak-resistance criterion, so the FEM benchmark is not independent of the analytic methods' constitutive assumptions. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • external conductive wall radius c = 10a
    Chosen by hand in Section 2.1 to neglect the influence of the wall in Method 1; it enters D(a,c,k) and therefore the spectral resistance Sk(k,m). No sensitivity study is reported.
assumptions (9)
  • domain assumption Plasma is spatially uniform in the quartz tube.
    Stated in Section 2: 'The plasma is considered to be spatially uniform in order to simplify the analysis.' This assumption underlies all three design methods and the FEM reference, so a violation would shift optimal lengths in both benchmark and predictions.
  • domain assumption Plasma radius is approximately equal to the quartz tube radius a.
    Stated in Section 2: 'we also assume that, for the sake of simplicity, the plasma radius is approximately equal to the quartz tube radius.' Used in all methods and simulations.
  • domain assumption The tube is long enough that end reflections can be neglected.
    The Introduction states the quartz tube length is much greater than the helicon wavelength in the axial direction to minimize the effects of end reflections; the finite-length tube model depends on this.
  • domain assumption Mode m = 1 is the relevant azimuthal mode for a Nagoya type-III antenna.
    Section 2.1: 'having here selected the propagation mode m = 1 that is the expected propagating helicon mode according to measurements.' All design lengths are computed for m = 1.
  • domain assumption The cold-plasma Stix dielectric tensor with collisional corrections describes the discharge in the FEM model.
    Section 3, Equations (31)-(32). The reference optimum length is obtained from this constitutive model, not from a kinetic or experimental plasma.
  • domain assumption A maximum in antenna resistance identifies the optimal antenna length.
    Section 2 and Section 3 use the peak of Ra(La) as the reference optimum; this equates coupled RF power with design quality and ignores thruster-specific performance such as exhaust velocity or efficiency.
  • domain assumption The FEM solver is adequately validated for this parameter range by one comparison with Melazzi and Lancellotti.
    Section 3: 'The numerical code has been validated by comparing the obtained results with those from a previous study [27].' Validation is against another simulation at one operating point, with no experimental data.
  • standard math The boundary condition Br(Ta) = 0 fixes the transverse wave number T = 3.83/a for m = 1.
    Section 2.3 uses the first zero of J1 to set T; this is a standard wave-guide boundary condition for a conducting or insulating wall.
  • domain assumption Electron inertia can be neglected in Methods 2 and 3.
    Sections 2.2 and 2.3 assume a single uniform electron fluid without electron inertia, which excludes Trivelpiece-Gould coupling; the paper itself notes this is less accurate except at high density.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A rational design method for the Nagoya type-III antenna." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2T5ET375

@misc{pith2026241220839,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A rational design method for the Nagoya type-III antenna},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2T5ET375}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.20839}
}
read the original abstract

The current study, as part of a PhD project on the design of a helicon thruster, aims to provide a rational methodology for the design of the helicon thruster's main component, i.e., the helicon antenna. A helicon thruster is an innovative electrodeless plasma thruster that works by exciting helicon waves in a magnetized plasma, and its antenna is capable of producing a uniform, low-temperature, high-density plasma. A magnetic nozzle is used to accelerate the exhaust plasma in order to generate a propulsive thrust. In this paper, we consider a simple helicon antenna, specifically the Nagoya type-III antenna. We consider a common experimental setup consisting of a quartz tube with finite length containing a uniform magnetized plasma and a Nagoya type-III antenna placed at the tube centre. Considering previous studies on helicon waves theory, we compare three different design methods, each based on simplifying different modelling assumptions, and evaluate the predictions of these models with results from full-wave 3D simulations. In particular, we concentrate on deriving a rational design method for the helicon antenna length, given the dimension of the quartz tube and the desired target plasma parameters. This work aims to provide a practical and fast method for dimensioning the antenna length, useful for initializing more accurate but computationally heavier full-wave simulations in 3D geometry or simply for a rapid prototyping of the helicon antenna. These results can be useful for the development of a helicon thruster but also for the design of a high-density radiofrequency plasma source.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.20839 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An image of the Nagoya type-III antenna (the brown cylindrical structure) wrapped around the quartz tube ionization chamber (shown in green) containing the plasma (shown in red). 2.1. Design Method 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of antenna resistance values for a Nagoya type-III geometry, for validation of the FEM code used in this work. (B0 = 100 mT, pn = 2 Pa, b = 3 cm, La = 5 cm, Te = 3 eV, f‘= 15 MHz [27]). Starting from this 3D simulation model, a parametric full-wave simulation of the antenna length (La) has been performed in order to evaluate the real part of the antenna impedance. We consider three simulation test cases. … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The antenna resistance (Ra, shown in red) computed as a function of the antenna length (La) for the three simulation test cases [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Modulus (in dB) of the function Sk in the Gauss plane, for the three simulation test cases [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    High power helicon thruster

    Ziemba, T.; Carscaddenl, J.; Slough, J.; Prager, J.; Winglee, R.M. High power helicon thruster. In Proceedings of the 41st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, Tucson, AZ, USA, 10–13 July 2005

    work page 2005

  2. [2]

    Electrodeless plasma thrustersfor spacecraft: A review

    Bathgate, S.N.; Bilek, M.M.M.; McKenzie, D.R. Electrodeless plasma thrustersfor spacecraft: A review. Plasma Sci. T echnol. 2017, 19, 083001. [CrossRef]

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Some features of RF excited fully ionized low pressure argon plasma

    Boswell, R.; Porteous, R.; Prytz, A.; Bouchoule, A.; Ranson, P . Some features of RF excited fully ionized low pressure argon plasma. Phys. Lett. A 1982, 91, 163–166. [CrossRef]

    work page 1982

  4. [4]

    Physics of Electric Propulsion ; Dover Books: Mineola, NY, USA, 2006

    Jahn, R.G. Physics of Electric Propulsion ; Dover Books: Mineola, NY, USA, 2006

    work page 2006

  5. [5]

    Plasma Production Using a Standing Helicon Wave

    Boswell, R.W. Plasma Production Using a Standing Helicon Wave. Phys. Rev. Lett. A 1970, 33, 457. [CrossRef]

    work page 1970

  6. [6]

    Very efficient plasma generation by whistler waves near the lowerhybrid frequency.Plasma Phys

    Boswell, R.W. Very efficient plasma generation by whistler waves near the lowerhybrid frequency.Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 1984, 26, 1147. [CrossRef]

    work page 1984

  7. [7]

    Plasma ionization by helicon waves

    Chen, F.F. Plasma ionization by helicon waves. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 1991, 33, 339. [CrossRef]

    work page 1991

  8. [8]

    Upper limit to Landau damping inhelicon discharges

    Chen, F.F.; Blackwell, D.D. Upper limit to Landau damping inhelicon discharges. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1999, 82, 2677. [CrossRef]

    work page 1999

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    Generalized theory of helicon waves I

    Chen, F.F.; Arnush, D. Generalized theory of helicon waves I. Normal modes. Phys. Plasmas 1997, 4, 3411–3421. [CrossRef]

    1997

  2. [10]

    Generalized theory of helicon waves II

    Arnush, D.; Chen, F.F. Generalized theory of helicon waves II. Excitation and absorption. Phys. Plasmas 1998, 5, 1239–1254. [CrossRef]

    1998

  3. [11]

    Review of Helicon High-Density Plasma: Production Mechanism and Plasma/Wave Characteristics

    Isayama, S.; Shinohara, S.; Hada, T. Review of Helicon High-Density Plasma: Production Mechanism and Plasma/Wave Characteristics. Plasma Fusion Res. 2018, 13, 1101014. [CrossRef]

    2018

  4. [12]

    Helicon discharges and sources: A review

    Chen, F.F. Helicon discharges and sources: A review. Plasma Sources Sci. T echnol. 2015, 24, 014001. [CrossRef]

    2015

  5. [13]

    Space charge waves in cylindrical plasma columns.J

    Trivelpiece, A.W.; Gould, R.W. Space charge waves in cylindrical plasma columns.J. Appl. Phys. 1959, 30, 1784–1793. [CrossRef]

    1959

  6. [14]

    Stable modes and abrupt density jumps in a helicon plasma source.Plasma Sources Sci

    Shamrai, K.P . Stable modes and abrupt density jumps in a helicon plasma source.Plasma Sources Sci. 1998, 7, 499–511. [CrossRef]

    1998

  7. [15]

    Evidence for Trivelpiece-Gould modes in a helicon discharge.Phys

    Blackwell, D.D.; Madziwa, T.G.; Arnush, D.; Chen, F.F. Evidence for Trivelpiece-Gould modes in a helicon discharge.Phys. Rev. Lett. 2002, 88, 145002. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

    2002

  8. [16]

    Discharge modes and wave structures using loop antennae in a helicon plasma source

    Shinohara, S.; Yonekura, K. Discharge modes and wave structures using loop antennae in a helicon plasma source. Plasma Phys. Control Fusion 2000, 42, 41. [CrossRef]

    2000

  9. [17]

    Plasma Production by m=0 Standing Helicon Waves

    Nisoa, M.N.; Sakawa, Y.S.; Shoji, T.S. Plasma Production by m=0 Standing Helicon Waves. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 2000, 39, L429. [CrossRef]

    2000

  10. [18]

    Helicon wave excitation with helical antennas

    Light, M.; Chen, F.F. Helicon wave excitation with helical antennas. Phys. Plasmas 1995, 2, 1084–1093. [CrossRef]

    1995

  11. [19]

    Helicon wave plasma generated by a resonant birdcage antenna: Magnetic field measurements and analysis in the RAID linear device

    Guittienne, P .; Jacquier, R.; Duteil, B.P .; Howling, A.A. Helicon wave plasma generated by a resonant birdcage antenna: Magnetic field measurements and analysis in the RAID linear device. Plasma Sources Sci. T echnol. 2021, 30, 075023. [CrossRef]

    2021

  12. [20]

    Design, set-up, and first ignition of the RF Helicon-based Plasma Thruster

    Romano, F.; Chan, Y.A.; Herdrich, G.; Traub, C.; Fasoulas, S.; Roberts, P .; Crisp, N.; Holmes, B.; Edmondson, S.; Haigh, S.; et al. Design, set-up, and first ignition of the RF Helicon-based Plasma Thruster. In Proceedings of the Space Propulsion Conference 2021, Online, 17–1...

    2021

  13. [21]

    Electromagentic Analysis and Design in Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1998

    Jin, J.M. Electromagentic Analysis and Design in Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1998

    1998

  14. [22]

    RF helicon-based inductive plasma thruster (IPT) design for an atmosphere-breathing electric propulsion system (ABEP)

    Romano, F.; Chan, Y.-A.; Herdrich, G.; Traub, C.; Fasoulas, S.; Roberts, P .; Smith, K.; Edmondson, S.; Haigh, S.; Crisp, N.; et al. RF helicon-based inductive plasma thruster (IPT) design for an atmosphere-breathing electric propulsion system (ABEP). Acta Astronaut. 2020, 176...

    2020

  15. [23]

    Towards an optimal antenna for helicon waves excitation.J

    Guittienne, P .; Chevalier, E.; Hollenstein, C. Towards an optimal antenna for helicon waves excitation.J. Appl. Phys. 2005, 98, 083304. [CrossRef]

    2005

  16. [24]

    Helicon wave-generated plasmas for negative ion beams for fusion

    Furno, I.; Agnello, R.; Fantz, U.; Howling, A.; Jacquier, R.; Marini, C.; Plyushchev, G.; Guittienne, P .; Simonin, A. Helicon wave-generated plasmas for negative ion beams for fusion. EPJ Web Conf. 2017, 157, 03014. [CrossRef]

    2017

  17. [25]

    Cavity ring-down spectroscopy to measure negative ion density in a helicon plasma source for fusion neutral beams

    Agnello, R.; Barbisan, M.; Furno, I.; Guittienne, P .; Howling, A.A.; Jacquier, R.; Pasqualotto, R.; Plyushchev, G.; Andrebe, Y.; Béchu, S.; et al. Cavity ring-down spectroscopy to measure negative ion density in a helicon plasma source for fusion neutral beams. Rev. Sci. Inst...

    2018

  18. [26]

    Radio-frequency plugging of a high density plasma

    Watari, T.; Hatori, T.; Kumazawa, R.; Hidekuma, S.; Aoki, T.; Kawamoto, T.; Inutake, M.; Hiroe, S.; Nishizawa, A.; Adati, K.; et al. Radio-frequency plugging of a high density plasma. Phys. Fluids 1978, 21, 2076–2081. [CrossRef]

    1978

  19. [27]

    A comparative study of radiofrequency antennas for Helicon plasma sources

    Melazzi, D.; Lancellotti, V . A comparative study of radiofrequency antennas for Helicon plasma sources. Plasma Sources Sci. T echnol.2015, 24, 025024. [CrossRef]

    2015

  20. [28]

    NRL Plasma Formulary; Pulsed Power Physics Branch, Plasma Physics Division, Naval Research Laboratory: Washington, DC, USA, 2019

    Richardson, A.S. NRL Plasma Formulary; Pulsed Power Physics Branch, Plasma Physics Division, Naval Research Laboratory: Washington, DC, USA, 2019

    2019

  21. [29]

    Development of a Helicon Plasma Source for Neutral Beam Injection System of the Alborz Tokamak.J

    Soltani, B.; Habibi, M. Development of a Helicon Plasma Source for Neutral Beam Injection System of the Alborz Tokamak.J. Fusion Energy 2017, 36, 152–160. [CrossRef]

    2017

  22. [30]

    Partial Differential Equation T oolbox™; MATLAB R2023b; MathWorks: Portola Valley, CA, USA, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    Full Helicon thruster modeling

    Iannarelli, D.; Ingenito, A.; Napoli, F.; Cichocki, F.; Castaldo, C.; De Ninno, A.; Mannori, S.; Cardinali, A.; Taccogna, F. Full Helicon thruster modeling. In Proceedings of the 38th International Electric Propulsion Conference, Toulouse, France, 23–28 June 2024

    2024

  24. [32]

    Waves in Plasmas; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1992

    Stix, T.H. Waves in Plasmas; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1992

    1992

  25. [33]

    Ray-tracing WKB analysis of Whistler waves in non-uniform magnetic fields applied to space thrusters

    Cardinali, A.; Melazzi, D.; Manente, M.; Pavarin, D. Ray-tracing WKB analysis of Whistler waves in non-uniform magnetic fields applied to space thrusters. Plasma Sources Sci. T echnol. 2014, 23, 015013. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data ...

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.