Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 72 references

Characterization of the VKI Plasmatron subsonic ICP jet combining optical emission spectroscopy, intrusive measurements, and CFD simulations

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two measured free-jet quantities, temperature and dynamic pressure, plus a quasi-one-dimensional stagnation-line solver, reproduce intrusive heat-flux measurements across a range of plasma wind tunnel conditions.

desk verdict Careful OES-based characterization with a genuinely forward stagnation-line procedure, but the CF-ICP-derived inlet-location correlation needs a sensitivity study before the 'measured data only' claim is fully secure. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02469 v1 pith:YCQVLEVQ submitted 2025-06-03 physics.flu-dyn

Andrea Fagnani , Bernd Helber , Damien Le Quang , Alessandro Turchi , Jimmy Freitas Monteiro , Annick Hubin , Olivier Chazot This is my paper
classification physics.flu-dyn
keywords plasmawindtunnelinductivelycoupledopticalemissionspectroscopyfree-jetenthalpystagnationlineflowcold-wallheatfluxlocalthermodynamicequilibriumcatalyticrecombination
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

This paper proposes that the subsonic plasma jet in a 1.2 MW inductively coupled plasma wind tunnel can be characterized without the usual inverse heat-transfer rebuilding or tunable catalytic-efficiency parameters. The authors use spatially resolved ultraviolet-to-near-infrared optical emission spectroscopy to show that the free jet is in local thermodynamic equilibrium below about 7000 K at the probe location, so the flow enthalpy can be read directly from the measured temperature. Combining that temperature with a Pitot-derived dynamic pressure, they impose two boundary conditions on a quasi-one-dimensional Navier-Stokes computation of the stagnation line and find that the predicted cold-wall heat flux brackets the intrusive measurements for both probe radii. The agreement holds for free-jet enthalpies between roughly 20 and 40 MJ/kg and for copper recombination coefficients in the range commonly reported in the literature, offering a framework that is independent of the catalyst assumptions that limit the traditional method.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a forward stagnation-line computation built on the quasi-one-dimensional form of the Navier-Stokes equations in conservation form, which needs fewer inputs than the boundary-layer approach: at an inlet point chosen far enough upstream that the radial velocity gradient and its axial derivative are negligible, the only boundary conditions are the free-jet temperature, chamber pressure, and free-jet velocity. The temperature comes from absolute emission spectra after Abel inversion, using the oxygen 777 nm triplet as the reference line, and the velocity comes from the measured dynamic pressure with a low-Reynolds-number correction. The location of the inlet point, $\delta_u^*$, is taken from a correlation computed with the two-dimensional magnetohydrodynamics solver, and the procedure is verified against that solver, showing the thermal boundary layer is reproduced within about 1 percent and the velocity gradient within about 10 percent. The computation also yields a boundary-layer-edge radial velocity gradient that is nearly insensitive to the wall recombination coefficient, which the paper identifies as the quantity needed for local heat-transfer simulation.

What would settle it

A direct test would be to measure the axial velocity profile along the stagnation line upstream of a probe without relying on the Pitot conversion, for example by laser Doppler or particle imaging velocimetry in the plasma, and compare it with the profile the forward computation produces from the $\delta_u^*$ correlation; if the true $\delta_u^*$ at a given free-jet velocity differs substantially from the correlation, the computed heat flux should move outside the experimental envelope. A cheaper version is a sensitivity sweep: re-run the procedure with $\delta_u^*$ varied by the known velocity uncertainty and check whether the predicted heat-flux range still contains the measured values, especially at 100 mbar and enthalpies below 20 MJ/kg where the paper already reports degraded agreement.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the central discovery is that the stagnation-line flow and the cold-wall heat flux on a hemispherical copper probe can be computed forward from only two experimentally measured free-jet quantities, the centerline temperature inferred from the oxygen 777 nm emission and the dynamic pressure from a Pitot probe, together with the chamber pressure and probe geometry. The paper argues that the traditional inverse boundary-layer rebuilding method overpredicts the gas enthalpy at 100 mbar for the standard catalytic-efficiency assumptions, while the forward quasi-one-dimensional computation reproduces the measured heat-flux-versus-enthalpy trends at 50 and 100 mbar, for 30 and 50 mm probes, with the data mostly falling inside the 0.01 to 0.1 recombination-coefficient envelope. A supporting observation is that the equilibrium heat flux nearly equals the non-equilibrium fully catalytic heat flux at these conditions, so the earlier disagreement with the two-dimensional magnetohydrodynamics solver is attributed to that solver under-predicting the axial velocity rather than to wall catalysis.

Load-bearing premise

The forward procedure assumes a distance from the probe, $\delta_u^*$, where the measured free-jet conditions are imposed, and that distance is taken from a numerical solver that the paper itself finds under-predicts the jet velocity; if this distance is biased, the whole computation shifts and the reported agreement with heat-flux measurements could be lost.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Free-jet enthalpy maps can be built from optical emission spectroscopy temperature alone, giving experimental $h_s$ versus $\dot{q}_{cw}$ and $h_s$ versus $p_{dyn}$ data for benchmarking models.
  • The strong dependence of the traditional inverse rebuilding procedure on the reference copper recombination coefficient is bypassed; the forward method brackets measurements with the literature range $0.01<\gamma_{ref}<0.1$.
  • The boundary-layer-edge radial velocity gradient, a key quantity for local heat-transfer simulation, can be extracted without knowing the wall catalytic efficiency.
  • The observed under-prediction of dynamic pressure by the two-dimensional magnetohydrodynamics solver implies that improving the velocity prediction in that solver is the main route to extending this characterization away from the stagnation line.
  • Within the tested envelope the approach works for two probe radii, so it can be used to define consistent test conditions for material response studies.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the $\delta_u^*$ correlation from the two-dimensional solver carries a bias, the imposed inlet location shifts along the jet; a sensitivity study of the predicted heat flux to $\delta_u^*$ would show how much of the reported agreement depends on that correlation.
  • The same two-input forward framework could be applied to other test gases and probe geometries, provided the equilibrium assumption remains valid at the chosen free-jet point; this is a direct extension the paper does not demonstrate.
  • Combining the forward stagnation-line computation with a velocity measurement technique that does not rely on the Pitot correction, for example laser Doppler or particle imaging velocimetry, would provide an independent check of the dynamic-pressure-to-velocity conversion and could extend the method to lower enthalpies where jet decay degraded the agreement.
  • The paper's restriction to temperatures below 7000 K is tied to the LTE spectral fits, so extending the characterization to higher-power conditions will require modeling the observed non-equilibrium molecular emission rather than a single-temperature fit.
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 / 7 minor

Summary. This paper presents a combined experimental and numerical characterization of the subsonic air plasma jet in the VKI Plasmatron at 50 and 100 mbar and 150-300 kW. Spatially resolved OES yields radial temperature profiles from atomic lines, Boltzmann plots, and spectral fits, together with electron densities from H-beta Stark broadening; the diagnostics are mutually consistent below about 7000 K, supporting LTE and allowing inference of the free-jet enthalpy. The OES data are compared with CF-ICP simulations, whose power efficiency is tuned to match the measured temperature, and with the traditional inverse heat-flux rebuilding procedure, exposing discrepancies in velocity and enthalpy. A forward procedure is then proposed: measured free-jet temperature and dynamic pressure are imposed as inlet conditions for the quasi-1D STAGLINE solver, with the inlet distance delta*u taken from a CF-ICP correlation. The computed cold-wall heat-flux envelopes agree with intrusive measurements for enthalpies above about 20 MJ/kg at 100 mbar and over the full tested range at 50 mbar, for recombination coefficients between 0.01 and 0.1.

Significance. If the forward procedure is robust, it provides a valuable alternative to inverse enthalpy rebuilding for ICP ground testing, reducing reliance on assumed catalytic efficiencies and yielding boundary-layer edge velocity gradients useful for LHTS scaling. The OES dataset is a genuine strength: the calibration chain, Abel inversion, and internal consistency checks (line-to-line agreement, oxygen Boltzmann plots, H-beta electron densities) are carefully documented. The main risk is that the heat-flux agreement is demonstrated with one particular CF-ICP-derived inlet-location correlation, and the paper does not quantify the sensitivity of the result to that correlation; the 'measured data only' claim is therefore not yet fully secured. A sensitivity study is within the scope of the manuscript and should be required before publication.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 7.1 and Fig. 12(c)] The claim that the forward procedure uses only measured free-jet temperature and dynamic pressure is not supported as written, because the inlet location delta*u(us) comes from a CF-ICP correlation. Section 6.2 reports that CF-ICP underpredicts the axial velocity for a given free-jet enthalpy, and Section 7.1 explicitly concedes that delta*u may be mispredicted; a biased delta*u shifts the STAGLINE inlet along the jet, altering the inviscid deceleration length and potentially the BL-edge velocity gradient and cold-wall heat flux. Appendix A verifies only that STAGLINE reproduces CF-ICP at one condition (50 mbar, 100 kW), which is not a sensitivity test of the delta*u choice. Please add a sensitivity study varying delta*u by an amount consistent with the CF-ICP velocity mismatch and the dynamic-pressure uncertainty, and report the resulting change in the Fig. 13 heat-flux envelope.
  2. [Section 7.2 and Fig. 13] The claimed agreement at 100 mbar is restricted to hs > 20 MJ/kg, and the paper attributes the failure below this threshold to jet-decay effects not represented in the quasi-1D formulation. This is the same regime in which Fig. 12(c) shows delta*u to be largest (low us), so the limitation and the delta*u uncertainty are confounded; without a quantitative bound on how much the heat-flux envelope shifts when delta*u is varied, the conclusion that the procedure agrees with intrusive heat-flux measurements across the reported range is not fully established.
  3. [Section 3.2 and Eq. (3)] The +/-5 Pa uncertainty in pdyn is a large relative error at the low end of the data (e.g., pdyn = 15 Pa at 100 mbar, 148 kW in Table B.3), yet the paper does not propagate this uncertainty through Eq. (3) into us and hence into delta*u and the heat-flux envelope. The sensitivity study should include this propagation, as it directly affects the inlet-location correlation and the low-enthalpy regime where agreement is already limited.
  4. [Section 6.1 and Section 7.1] The delta*u(us) correlation is generated with CF-ICP simulations whose numerical power efficiency is tuned to match the OES free-jet temperature; because the same OES temperature defines the inferred enthalpy hs in the forward procedure, the heat-flux comparison in Fig. 13 is not a fully independent test of the measured-only method. This indirect circularity should be addressed, for example by recomputing delta*u with a fixed power efficiency or by measuring the location experimentally, e.g., from Pitot pressure profiles at two axial stations.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Section 4.1] The phrase 'region region' is duplicated in the sentence describing the boundary layer; remove the repetition.
  2. [Footnote 1] The word 'affliation' should be 'affiliation'.
  3. [Section 3.4] The words 'Reseach Center' should be 'Research Center'.
  4. [Appendix A] The word 'multidimentional' should be 'multidimensional'.
  5. [Fig. 13] The figure shows only fitted trend lines without uncertainty bands; adding representative error bars for the experimental heat flux and enthalpy would make the claimed compatibility easier to assess.
  6. [Section 6.2] The sentence 'the numerical power efficiency is not considered here' is confusing because Fig. 9 explicitly uses eta_sim to match the OES temperature; clarify that Fig. 10 compares data and simulation at matched free-jet enthalpy rather than matched input power.
  7. [Table C.4] The header 'Acc.˚A' appears garbled; the accuracy column should be formatted properly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the heat-flux comparison is an independent output of STAGLINE, and the CF-ICP-derived inlet correlation is a model input rather than a fitted target.

full rationale

The paper's central comparison is the STAGLINE heat-flux envelope against intrusive calorimeter measurements (Sec. 7.2). The STAGLINE inputs are the measured free-jet temperature Ts and the velocity us obtained from measured dynamic pressure, plus the inlet distance delta*u taken from a CF-ICP correlation (Sec. 7.1). CF-ICP's electrical power is tuned in Sec. 6.1 to match the OES temperature at z = 385 mm, so the delta*u(us) correlation is partly influenced by that fit. However, the measured cold-wall heat flux is never used to adjust any parameter in the forward procedure; the heat flux is a physical output of the stagnation-line calculation, not a quantity that is fitted or defined in terms of the inputs. The enthalpy hs = h_LTE(Ts, pc) is a definitional mapping from the measured temperature under the stated LTE assumption and is used only as a plotting and comparison variable, not as a derived prediction. Appendix A verifies STAGLINE against CF-ICP by feeding STAGLINE with CF-ICP-derived values of Ts, us, and delta*u; this is an internal consistency check, and the paper correctly labels it as a numerical verification rather than experimental validation. The main limitation, acknowledged in Sec. 7.1, is that CF-ICP underpredicts axial velocity for a given enthalpy and that delta*u may therefore be mispredicted; this is an unquantified sensitivity risk, not a circularity. No equation in the paper reduces to an input by construction, and no load-bearing argument relies on a self-citation. The result is therefore self-contained with respect to the circularity concerns considered here.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim relies on standard plasma diagnostics and the new STAGLINE procedure. The main non-standard input is the delta*u correlation from CF-ICP, which carries the fitted power efficiency and the velocity underprediction. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • Numerical power efficiency eta_sim = 36-39% at 100 mbar; 36-39% at 50 mbar
    Chosen so CF-ICP centerline temperature matches OES measurement at z=385 mm, r=0 (Sec. 6.1). Used to generate CF-ICP solutions, including the delta*u correlation used in the forward procedure.
  • LTE temperature cutoff = 7000 K
    Analysis restricted to temperatures below 7000 K because NEQAIR LTE spectral fits deviate from O777 line temperatures above this value (Sec. 5). This post hoc selection limits the validation range.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption LTE at the free-jet point
    Used to infer enthalpy from OES temperature (Sec. 6.2) and to compute gas properties. Supported by OES self-consistency below 7000 K, but not proven.
  • domain assumption Axisymmetric, optically thin plasma for Abel inversion
    Required to convert line-of-sight radiance to local emission intensity (Sec. 3.4).
  • domain assumption Quasi-1D NS with beta=0 and beta'=0 at inlet
    STAGLINE solves stagnation-line equations with inlet conditions imposed at delta*u where the radial velocity gradient and its derivative vanish (Sec. 7.1).
  • ad hoc to paper delta*u(us) correlation from CF-ICP
    The inlet location is obtained from a correlation computed with CF-ICP, which is itself tuned to match OES temperature and underpredicts velocity (Sec. 6.2, 7.1). This is a modeling input specific to this paper.
  • domain assumption CEQ heat flux equals CNEQ with gamma_w=1
    Used in Sec. 6.2 and Appendix A to argue CF-ICP should overpredict heat flux if velocity were correct. Verified numerically for one condition.
  • standard math Homann low-Reynolds correction for Pitot probe
    Used to convert measured dynamic pressure to free-jet velocity (eq. 3).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Characterization of the VKI Plasmatron subsonic ICP jet combining optical emission spectroscopy, intrusive measurements, and CFD simulations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YCQVLEVQ

@misc{pith2026250602469,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Characterization of the VKI Plasmatron subsonic ICP jet combining optical emission spectroscopy, intrusive measurements, and CFD simulations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YCQVLEVQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02469}
}
read the original abstract

This paper addresses the characterization of the subsonic flow in the 1.2~MW Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) wind tunnel at the von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics (VKI), targeting chamber pressures of 50 and 100~mbar, and input electric powers between 150 and 300~kW. Ultraviolet to near-infrared optical emission spectroscopy measurements of the free-jet flow are carried out with an updated experimental set-up, calibration procedure, and data processing, providing high-quality absolute spatially-resolved emission spectra. Emission measurements agree with thermochemical equilibrium predictions within a range of conditions, allowing to extract experimental maps of cold-wall heat flux and dynamic pressure against the inferred free-jet enthalpy. A detailed comparison with the characterization methodology traditionally employed is presented, highlighting the need for an improved modeling strategy. Using the measured free-jet temperature and dynamic pressure only, a forward procedure for the computation of the stagnation line flow is proposed. The latter agrees with intrusive heat flux measurements through a range of test conditions, and for values of the recombination coefficient of the reference copper probe commonly found in the literature. Results demonstrate that a consistent framework between numerical simulations and experimental data can be achieved, defining an improved framework for the characterization of the subsonic ICP jet.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.02469 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic of the experimental set-up designed for this work, showing the VKI Plas [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. CF-ICP-PR temperature field computed for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Sketch of representative velocity or temperature profiles for flow conditions with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Example of measured spatially resolved spectral radiance (a) and rebuilt spectral [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a, b) Example of measured spatial LTE temperature profiles from the atomic lines at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison between measured and simulated LTE spectral emission intensity for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison between radial temperature profiles obtained from the O777 lines and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a) Normalized spectral image of the Hβ transition around λ0 = 486.1 nm for pc = 100 mbar, Pel = 290 kW and z = 195 mm. (b) Subtraction of the baseline spectrum measured in synthetic air (AIRS) at r = 0 mm. (c) Hβ lineshapes as a function of the radial position after A…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison between the experimental temperature profiles and the ones simulated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Experimental cold-wall heat flux (for HS50 and HS30 geometries), dynamic pressure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison between measured free-jet enthalpy vs cold-wall heat flux and rebuilt [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Example of temperature (a) and velocity (b) profiles as a function of the distance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Measured hs − q˙cw trends lie within the 0 < γref < 1 envelope predicted with the new procedure (SL FW) starting from the measured T s and us at δ ∗ u , except below 20 MJ/kg at 100 mbar. The relevance of jet decay effects is believed to degrade the accuracy at low fr…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bottin, O

    B. Bottin, O. Chazot, M. Carbonaro, V. Van Der Haegen, S. Paris, The VKI Plasmatron Characteristics and Performance, Technical Report, Defense Technical Information Center - Measurement Techniques for High Enthalpy and Plasma Flows, 2000

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    Panerai, O

    F. Panerai, O. Chazot, Characterization of gas/surface interactions for ce- ramic matrix composites in high enthalpy, low pressure air flow, Materials Chemistry and Physics 134 (2012) 597–607. doi:10.1016/j.matchemphys. 2012.03.036

    doi:10.1016/j.matchemphys 2012

  3. [3]

    Helber, A

    B. Helber, A. Turchi, J. B. Scoggins, A. Hubin, T. E. Magin, Experimental investigation of ablation and pyrolysis processes of carbon-phenolic ablators in atmospheric entry plasmas, International Journal of Heat and Mass Trans- fer 100 (2016) 810–824. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2016.04.072

    doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2016.04.072 2016

  4. [4]

    El Rassi, B

    J. El Rassi, B. Helber, S. Del Monte, S. Pierre, A. Turchi, M. Thierry, L. Walpot, Demise performance of Composite Overwrapped Pressure Ves- sels in reentry conditions, Proceedings of the Aerospace Europe Conference - EUCASS - CEAS (2023). doi:10.13009/EUCASS2023-957

    work page doi:10.13009/eucass2023-957 2023

  5. [5]

    P. F. Barbante, O. Chazot, Flight extrapolation of plasma wind tunnel stagnation region flowfield, Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer 20 (2006) 493–499. doi:10.2514/1.17185

    work page doi:10.2514/1.17185 2006

  6. [6]

    Turchi, J

    A. Turchi, J. J. Matesanz Saiz, T. E. Magin, O. Chazot, Duplication of hypersonic stagnation-region aerothermochemistry and gas-surface interac- tion in high-enthalpy ground testing, Experiments in Fluids 62 (2021) 238. doi:10.1007/s00348-021-03320-6

    doi:10.1007/s00348-021-03320-6 2021

  7. [7]

    Fagnani, B

    A. Fagnani, B. Dias, P. Schrooyen, B. Helber, T. E. Magin, O. Chazot, In- vestigation of Quartz Ablation in the VKI Plasmatron Facility: Comparison Between Experimental and Numerical Results, AIAA Aviation and Aeronau- tics Forum and Exposition, Virtual event (2021). doi:10.2514/6.2021-3137

    work page doi:10.2514/6.2021-3137 2021

  8. [8]

    Line-of-sight gas radiation effects on near-infrared two-color ratio pyrometry measurements during plasma wind tunnel experiments

    A. Fagnani, B. Helber, A. Hubin, O. Chazot, 3D infrared temperature maps measurements of ablative materials during plasma wind tunnel experiments, Measurement Science and Technology 34 (2023). doi:10.1088/1361-6501/ acc67c.arXiv:2309.17254

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

Show all 72 references
  1. [9]

    Degrez, P

    G. Degrez, P. Barbante, M. de la Llave, T. E. Magin, O. Chazot, Determina- tion of the catalytic properties of TPS Materials in the VKI ICP Facilities, ECCOMAS Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference (2001). 38

    2001

  2. [10]

    C. Park, G. A. Raiche, D. M. Driver, J. Olejniczak, I. Terrazas-Salinas, T. M. Hightower, T. Sakai, Comparison of enthalpy determination methods for arc- jet facility, Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer 20 (2006) 672–679. doi:10.2514/1.15744

    2006 doi

  3. [11]

    Viladegut, O

    A. Viladegut, O. Chazot, Empirical modeling of copper catalysis for enthalpy determination in plasma facilities, Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Trans- fer 34 (2020) 26–36. doi:10.2514/1.T5683

    2020 doi

  4. [12]

    Turchi, P

    A. Turchi, P. M. Congedo, T. E. Magin, Thermochemical ablation modeling forward uncertainty analysis—Part I: Numerical methods and effect of model parameters, International Journal of Thermal Sciences 118 (2017) 497–509. doi:10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2017.04.004

    2017 doi

  5. [13]

    Sanson, F

    F. Sanson, F. Panerai, T. E. Magin, P. M. Congedo, Robust reconstruction of the catalytic properties of thermal protection materials from sparse high- enthalpy facility experimental data, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 96 (2018) 482–492. doi:10.1016/j.expthermflusci.20...

    2018 doi

  6. [14]

    Fagnani, D

    A. Fagnani, D. Le Quang Huy, B. Helber, S. Demange, A. Turchi, O. Cha- zot, A. Hubin, Investigation of a Free-Stream Air Plasma Flow by Optical Emission Spectroscopy and Comparison to Magnetohydrodynamics Simula- tions, AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum, Orlando, FL, USA (2020). doi:10....

    2020

  7. [15]

    J. A. Fay, F. R. Riddel, Theory of Stagnation Point Heat Transfer in Dissociated Air, Journal of the Aerospace Sciences 25 (1958) 73–85. doi:10.2514/8.7517

    1958 doi

  8. [16]

    Goulard, On Catalytic Recombination Rates in Hypersonic Stagnation Heat Transfer, Journal of Jet Propulsion 28 (1958) 737–745

    R. Goulard, On Catalytic Recombination Rates in Hypersonic Stagnation Heat Transfer, Journal of Jet Propulsion 28 (1958) 737–745. doi:10.2514/8. 7444

    1958 doi

  9. [17]

    P. H. Rose, W. I. Stark, Stagnation Point Heat-Transfer Measurements in Dissociated Air, Journal of the Aerospace Sciences 25 (1958) 86–97. doi:10. 2514/8.7519

    1958

  10. [18]

    A. F. Kolesnikov, Conditions of simulation of stagnation point heat transfer from a high-enthalpy flow, Fluid Dynamics 28 (1993) 131–137. doi:10.1007/ BF01055676

    1993

  11. [19]

    A. F. Kolesnikov, Extrapolation from High Enthalpy Tests to Flight Based on the Concept of Local Heat Transfer Simulation, Technical Report, RTO 39 AVTVKI Special Course on Measurement Techniques for High Enthalpy and Plasma Flows, 1999

    1999

  12. [20]

    A. Kolesnikov, The concept of local simulation for stagnation point heat transfer in hypersonic flows - Applications and validation, 21st Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference, Denver, CO, USA (2000). doi:10.2514/6.2000-2515

    2000 doi

  13. [21]

    E. V. Zoby, Empirical stagnation-point heat-transfer relation in several gas mixtures at high enthalpy levels, Technical Report, NASA Technical Note (TN) 19680025996, 1968

    1968

  14. [22]

    R. B. Pope, Measurements of enthalpy in low-density arc- heated flows, AIAA Journal 6 (1968) 103–110. doi:10.2514/3.4448

    1968 doi

  15. [23]

    doi:10.1520/E0637-05R16.2

    ASTM Standard E637, Standard Test Method for Theory and Experimental MeasurementsofStagnation-Point, TechnicalReportReapproved2016, 2012. doi:10.1520/E0637-05R16.2

    2012 doi

  16. [24]

    Turchi, P

    A. Turchi, P. M. Congedo, B. Helber, T. E. Magin, Thermochemical ablation modeling forward uncertainty analysis—Part II: Application to plasma wind- tunneltesting, InternationalJournalofThermalSciences118(2017)510–517. doi:10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2017.04.005

    2017 doi

  17. [25]

    Panerai, Aerothermochemistry Characterization of Thermal Protection Systems, Ph.D

    F. Panerai, Aerothermochemistry Characterization of Thermal Protection Systems, Ph.D. thesis, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics & Univer- sità degli Studi di Perugia, 2012

    2012

  18. [26]

    Nawaz, D

    A. Nawaz, D. M. Driver, I. Terrazas-Salinas, S. Sepka, Surface catalysis and oxidation on stagnation point heat flux measurements in high enthalpy arc jets, 44th AIAA Thermophysics Conference (2013) 1–15. doi:10.2514/6. 2013-3138

    2013 doi

  19. [27]

    J. W. Linnett, D. G. H. Marsden, The kinetics of the recombination of oxygen atoms at a glass surface, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 234 (1956) 489–504. doi:10.1098/ rspa.1956.0052

    1956

  20. [28]

    J. C. Greaves, J. W. Linnett, The recombination of oxygen atoms at sur- faces, Transactions of the Faraday Society 54 (1958) 1323–1330. doi:10. 1039/tf9585401323

    1958

  21. [29]

    J. C. Greaves, J. W. Linnett, Recombination of atoms at surfaces: Part 5. - Oxygen atoms at oxide surfaces, Transactions of the Faraday Society 55 (1959) 1346–1354. doi:10.1039/TF9595501346. 40

    1959 doi

  22. [30]

    R. A. Young, Measurements of the diffusion coefficient of atomic nitrogen in molecular nitrogen and the catalytic efficiency of silver and copper oxide surfaces, The Journal of Chemical Physics 34 (1961) 1295–1301. doi:10. 1063/1.1731735

    1961

  23. [31]

    D. E. Rosner, Scale effects and correlations in nonequilibrium convective heat transfer, AIAA Journal 1 (1963) 1550–1555. doi:10.2514/3.1854

    1963 doi

  24. [32]

    P. G. Dickens, M. B. Sutcliffe, Recombination of oxygen atoms on oxide surfaces. Part 1.-Activation energies of recombination, Transactions of the Faraday Society 60 (1964) 1272–1285. doi:10.1039/TF9646001272

    1964 doi

  25. [33]

    R. A. Hartunian, W. P. Thompson, S. Satron, Measurements of catalytic efficiency of silver for oxygen atoms and the O-O2 diffusion coefficient, The Journal of Chemical Physics 43 (1965) 4003–4006. doi:10.1063/1.1696633

    1965 doi

  26. [34]

    E. L. Winkler, R. E. Sheldahl, Influence of calorimeter surface treatment on heat-transfer measurements in arc-heated test streams, AIAA Journal 4 (1966) 715–716. doi:10.2514/3.3516

    1966 doi

  27. [35]

    R. B. Pope, Stagnation-point convective heat transfer in frozen boundary layers, AIAA Journal 6 (1968) 619–626. doi:10.2514/3.4554

    1968 doi

  28. [36]

    G. A. Melin, R. J. Madix, Energy accommodation during hydrogen atom recombination on metal surfaces, Transactions of the Faraday Society 67 (1971) 2711–2719. doi:10.1039/TF9716702711

    1971 doi

  29. [37]

    Halpern, D

    B. Halpern, D. E. Rosner, Chemical energy accommodation at cata- lyst surfaces. Flow reactor studies of the association of nitrogen atoms on metals at high temperatures, Journal of the Chemical Society, Faraday Transactions 1: Physical Chemistry in Condensed Phases 74 (1978) 1...

    1978 doi

  30. [38]

    doi:10.2514/2.6323

    P.Cauquot, S.Cavadias, J.Amouroux, Thermalenergyaccommodationfrom oxygen atoms recombination on metallic surfaces, Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer 12 (1998) 206–213. doi:10.2514/2.6323

    1998 doi

  31. [39]

    Chazot, H

    O. Chazot, H. W. Krassilchikoff, J. Thömel, TPS ground testing in plasma wind tunnel for catalytic properties determination, 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit (2008). doi:10.2514/6.2008-1252

    2008 doi

  32. [40]

    Park, Oxygen catalytic recombination on copper oxide in tertiary gas mixtures, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 50 (2013) 540–555

    G. Park, Oxygen catalytic recombination on copper oxide in tertiary gas mixtures, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 50 (2013) 540–555. doi:10. 2514/1.A32312. 41

    2013

  33. [41]

    D. M. Driver, S. Sepka, Side arm reactor study of copper catalysis, 45th AIAA Thermophysics Conference (2015) 1–14. doi:10.2514/6.2015-2666

    2015 doi

  34. [42]

    D. G. Fletcher, J. M. Meyers, Surface catalyzed reaction efficiencies in oxygen plasmas from laser-induced fluorescence measurements, Journal of Thermo- physics and Heat Transfer 31 (2017) 410–420. doi:10.2514/1.T4923

    2017 doi

  35. [43]

    Viladegut, Assessment of Gas-Surface Interaction Modelling for Lifting Body Re-Entry Flight Design, Ph.D

    A. Viladegut, Assessment of Gas-Surface Interaction Modelling for Lifting Body Re-Entry Flight Design, Ph.D. thesis, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics & Universitat Polytecnica de Catalunya, 2017

    2017

  36. [44]

    Y. Yang, S. Lee, S. H. Park, G. Park, J. G. Kim, I. Kim, Analysis of wall partial pressure-dependence on oxygen surface catalytic recombination with shock-heated flow, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 28 (2021). doi:10.1016/j.csite.2021.101600

    2021

  37. [45]

    Helber, Material Response Characterization of Low-density Ablators in Atmospheric Entry Plasmas, Ph.D

    B. Helber, Material Response Characterization of Low-density Ablators in Atmospheric Entry Plasmas, Ph.D. thesis, von Karman Insitute for Fluid Dynamics and Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2016

    2016

  38. [46]

    Sakraker, Aerothermodynamics of Pre-Flight and In-Flight Testing Methodologies for Atmospheric Entry Probes, Ph.D

    I. Sakraker, Aerothermodynamics of Pre-Flight and In-Flight Testing Methodologies for Atmospheric Entry Probes, Ph.D. thesis, von Karman In- stitute for Fluid Dynamics & Université de Liège, 2016

    2016

  39. [47]

    Viladegut, O

    A. Viladegut, O. Chazot, Catalytic characterization in plasma wind tunnels under the influence of gaseous recombination, Physics of Fluids 34 (2022). doi:10.1063/5.0077603

    2022 doi

  40. [48]

    T. E. Magin, F. Mechanics, A. Engineering, Cooled Pitot probe in inductive air plasma jet: what do we measure?, 2nd International Symposium on Atmospheric reentry vehicles and systems, Arcachon, France (2001)

    2001

  41. [49]

    Homann, The effect of high viscosity on the flow around a cylinder and around a sphere, Technical Report, NACA TN 1334, 1952

    F. Homann, The effect of high viscosity on the flow around a cylinder and around a sphere, Technical Report, NACA TN 1334, 1952

    1952

  42. [50]

    A. M. Brandis, C. O. Johnston, B. A. Cruden, Non-equilibrium Radiation for Earth Entry, 46th AIAA Thermophysics Conference, Washington, D.C., USA (2016). doi:10.2514/6.2016-3690

    2016 doi

  43. [51]

    B. A. Cruden, Absolute Radiation Measurements in Earth and Mars En- try Conditions, Radiation and Gas-Surface Interaction Phenomena in High Speed Re-Entry - STO AVT-218 (2014) 1–40. 42

    2014

  44. [52]

    Kunze, Introduction to Plasma Spectroscopy, volume 56 ofSpringer Series on Atomic, Optical, and Plasma Physics, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009

    H.-J. Kunze, Introduction to Plasma Spectroscopy, volume 56 ofSpringer Series on Atomic, Optical, and Plasma Physics, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02233-3

    2009 doi

  45. [53]

    D. D. Hickstein, S. T. Gibson, R. Yurchak, D. D. Das, M. Ryazanov, A di- rect comparison of high-speed methods for the numerical Abel transform, Review of Scientific Instruments 90 (2019) 1–9. doi:10.1063/1.5092635. arXiv:1902.09007

    2019 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Kramida, Y

    A. Kramida, Y. Ralchenko, J. Reader, NIST ASD Team, NIST Atomic Spec- tra Database (version 5.7.1), 2019. URL:https://physics.nist.gov/asd. doi:https://doi.org/10.18434/T4W30F

    2019 doi

  47. [55]

    J. B. Scoggins, V. Leroy, G. Bellas-Chatzigeorgis, B. Dias, T. E. Magin, Mutation++: MUlticomponent Thermodynamic And Transport properties for IONized gases in C++, SoftwareX 12 (2020). doi:10.1016/j.softx. 2020.100575.arXiv:2002.01783

    2020

  48. [56]

    E. E. Whiting, C. Park, Y. Liu, J. Arnold, J. Paterson, NEQAIR96, Nonequi- librium and Equilibrium Radiative Transport and Spectra Program: User’s Manual, Technical Report, 1996

    1996

  49. [57]

    B. A. Cruden, A. M. Brandis, Updates to the NEQAIR radiation solver, 6th International Workshop on Radiation in High Temperature Gases, St Andrews, Scotland, UK (2014)

    2014

  50. [58]

    M. A. Gigosos, V. Cardeñoso, New plasma diagnosis tables of hydrogen Stark broadening including ion dynamics, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 29 (1996) 4795–4838. doi:10.1088/0953-4075/29/20/ 029

    1996 doi

  51. [59]

    Yubero, M

    C. Yubero, M. D. Calzada, M. C. Garcia, Using the Stark broadening of the Hα, Hβand Hγlines for the measurement of electron density and tempera- ture in a plasma at atmospheric pressure, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 74 (2005) 2249–2254. doi:10.1143/JPSJ.74.2249

    2005 doi

  52. [60]

    C. O. Laux, T. G. Spence, C. H. Kruger, R. N. Zare, Optical diagnostics of atmospheric pressure air plasmas, Plasma Sources Science and Technology 12 (2003) 125–138. doi:10.1088/0963-0252/12/2/301

    2003 doi

  53. [61]

    doi:10.1017/CBO9780511524578

    H.R.Griem, PrinciplesofPlasmaSpectroscopy, CambridgeUniversityPress, Cambridge, 1997. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511524578. 43

    1997 doi

  54. [62]

    Degrez, D

    G. Degrez, D. V. Abeele, P. Barbante, B. Bottin, Numerical simulation of inductively coupled plasma flows under chemical non-equilibrium, Interna- tional Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat and Fluid Flow 14 (2004) 538–558. doi:10.1108/09615530410532286

    2004 doi

  55. [63]

    A. Lani, N. Villedieu, K. Bensassi, L. Kapa, M. Vymazal, M. S. Yalim, M. Panesi, COOLFluiD: An open computational platform for multi-physics simulation and research, 21st AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Confer- ence, San Diego, CA, USA (2013). doi:10.2514/6.2013-2589

    2013 doi

  56. [64]

    Magin, A Model for Inductive Plasma Wind Tunnels, Ph.D

    T. Magin, A Model for Inductive Plasma Wind Tunnels, Ph.D. thesis, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics & Université libre de Bruxelles, 2004

    2004

  57. [65]

    Panesi, P

    M. Panesi, P. Rini, G. Degrez, O. Chazot, Analysis of chemical nonequi- librium and elemental demixing in plasmatron facility, Journal of Thermo- physics and Heat Transfer 21 (2007) 57–66. doi:10.2514/1.25378

    2007 doi

  58. [66]

    Barbante, Accurate and Efficient Modelling of High Temperature Nonequi- librium Air Flows, Ph.D

    P. Barbante, Accurate and Efficient Modelling of High Temperature Nonequi- librium Air Flows, Ph.D. thesis, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics & Université libre de Bruxelles, 2001

    2001

  59. [67]

    P. F. Barbante, G. Degrez, G. S. Sarma, Computation of nonequilibrium high-temperature axisymmetric boundary-layer flows, Journal of Thermo- physics and Heat Transfer 16 (2002) 490–497. doi:10.2514/2.6723

    2002 doi

  60. [68]

    Munafo, Multi-Scale Models and Computational Methods for Aerother- modynamics, Ph.D

    A. Munafo, Multi-Scale Models and Computational Methods for Aerother- modynamics, Ph.D. thesis, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics & École centrale Paris, 2014

    2014

  61. [69]

    Klomfass, S

    A. Klomfass, S. Müller, Calculation of stagnation streamline quantities in hypersonic blunt body flows, Shock Waves 7 (1997) 13–23. doi:10.1007/ s001930050057

    1997

  62. [70]

    B. A. Cruden, R. Martinez, J. H. Grinstead, J. Olejniczak, Simultaneous vacuum ultraviolet through near IR absolute radiation measurement with spatiotemporal resolution in an Electric Arc Shock Tube, 41st AIAA Ther- mophysics Conference (2009) 1–12. doi:10.2514/6.2009-4240

    2009 doi

  63. [71]

    Kumar, A

    S. Kumar, A. Munafo, D. J. Bodony, M. Panesi, Numerical analysis of three- dimensional magnetohydrodynamic effects in an inductively coupled plasma wind tunnel, 2025. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2504.07218.arXiv:2504.07218

    2025 doi arXiv

  64. [72]

    C. Park, R. L. Jaffe, H. Partridge, Chemical-Kinetic Parameters of Hyper- bolic Earth Entry, Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer 15 (2001) 76–90. doi:10.2514/2.6582. 44

    2001 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.