Paper detail

Comparison of dust charging between Orbital-Motion-Limited theory and Particle-In-Cell simulations

The Orbital-Motion-Limited (OML) theory has been modified to predict the dust charge and the results were contrasted with the Whipple approximation [Tang and Delzanno, Phys. Plasmas 21, 123708 (2014)]. To further establish its regime of applicability, in this paper the OML predictions (for a non-electron-emitting, spherical dust grain at rest in a collisionless, unmagnetized plasma) are compared with Particle-In-Cell simulations that retain the absorption radius effect. It is found that for large dust grain radius $r_d$ relative to the plasma Debye length $λ_D$, the revised OML theory remains a very good approximation as, for the parameters considered ($r_d/λ_D\le10$, equal electron and ion temperatures), it yields the dust charge to within $20\%$ accuracy. This is a substantial improvement over the Whipple approximation. The dust collected currents and energy fluxes, which remain the same in the revised and standard OML theories, are accurate to within $15-30\%$.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.