IEPC-2015-275／ISTS-2015-b-275

Miniature Ion Thrusters:

A Review of Modern Technologies and Mission Capabilities

IEPC-2015-275
IEPC-2015-275／ISTS-2015-b-275
Presented at Joint Conference of 30th International Symposium on Space Technology and Science
34th International Electric Propulsion Conference and 6th Nano-satellite Symposium,
Hyogo-Kobe, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015

Richard E. Wirz1
University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA

Abstract: There are inherent challenges to ion thruster miniaturization, but many
current thrusters exhibit desirable performance. Depending on mission requirements, modern
ion thrusters provide thruster capabilities that are attractive for missions for both large and
small spacecraft. In addition to providing (1) high specific impulse, Isp, (~1000 – 3000 s), these
thrusters can provide (2) very precise thrust and impulse bits, (3) low disturbance thrust, and
(4) low contamination and spacecraft interaction potential. These capabilities are attractive
for high 'V exploration and orbit/inclination change missions, precision orbit maintenance,
formation flying, or precision pointing/control. Many thruster options exist that employ RF,
microwave, and DC ring cusp discharges. These thrusters use low contamination propellants
such as xenon, but may also use highly-storable propellants such as iodine.

Nomenclature

α = thrust correction factor ݉ሶ௡ = neutralizer mass flow rate

εB = energy required to make a beam ion ݉ሶ௣ = propellant mass flow rate
ηE = electrical efficiency PA = ancillary power
ηm = mass utilization efficiency PB = beam power
ηud = discharge utilization efficiency PD = discharge power
FT = beam divergence correction factor Pin = input power
JB = beam current PN = neutralizer power
mi = ion mass VB = beam voltage
݉ሶ௕ = beam mass flow rate
݉ሶௗ = discharge mass flow rate

I. Introduction

M INIATURE or “micro” ion thrusters, diameter d ~3 cm, offer an important and unique capability for mission
and spacecraft designers since they are capable of delivering desirable thrust levels (up to ~1-2 mN), thrust
control, propellant efficiency (Isp ~1000 – 3000 s), and mission 'V. Recent and continued improvements in miniature
spacecraft technologies and approaches have increased the capabilities and science return that can be delivered by
microsatellites. Most notably, improved solar power collection and processing can provide the power necessary to
achieve challenging and desirable mission objectives for both Earth and near-Earth missions.1 Miniature ion thrusters
are also desirable for the primary or secondary propulsion for distributed formations of small and larger spacecraft.2,3,4

1
Associate Professor, Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, [email protected].
1
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
 The objective of this paper is to review modern ion thruster technology and mission capabilities. The paper begins
with a brief description of ion thruster operation and important considerations at the miniature scale. This is followed
by a review of early development efforts towards miniature ion thrusters that use modern propellants, and then a
discussion of the status, and path forward, for these technologies. Finally, the paper concludes with a discussion of
the mission types that are enabled by this unique electric propulsion technology, which is complemented by a brief
comparison to other EP micropropulsion options for certain missions.

II. Miniature Ion Thruster Performance

To understand the unique challenges, and advantages, of ion thrusters at the miniature scale, we first describe ion
thruster operation and performance metrics. We then discuss ion thruster discharge and neutralization options.

A. Ion Thruster Operation

Ion thruster operation can be thought of as three processes. Following Figure 1, a plasma is first created in a
discharge chamber (here shown as a dc ring cusp), the ions are accelerated through two (possibly three) ion optics
grids, and then a neutralizer emits electrons to provide system charge neutralization.

Figure 1. Ion thruster schematic and processes

The total efficiency of an ion thruster can be expressed as the product of the electrical efficiency, KE, and the mass
utilization efficiency, Km, and the square of the product of losses due to beam divergence and multiplied charged ions.5

ߟ௧ ൌ ߟா ߟ௠ ሺߙ‫ ்ܨ‬ሻଶ

These loss terms are small in miniature ion thrusters,6 such that the total efficiency can be thought of as nearly the
product of the electrical and discharge utilization efficiencies.

ܲ஻ ܸ஻ ‫ܬ‬஻ ͳ
ߟா ൌ ൌ ൌ 
ܲ௜௡ ܸ஻ ‫ܬ‬஻ ൅ ܲே ൅ ܲ஺ ൅ ܲ஽ ͳ ൅ ݈ே ൅ ݈஺ ൅ ߝ஻ Τܸ஻

For ion thrusters, the electrical efficiency is typically dominated by discharge losses, ߝ஻ ൌ ܲ஽ Τ‫ܬ‬஻ , (thought of as
the amount of discharge power needed to create a beam ions in units [W/A] or equivalently [eV/ion]) such that the
2
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
quality of the ion thruster discharge is a strong indicator of overall efficiency of the design. At the miniature scale,
regardless of discharge type, these losses are considerable compared to larger thrusters. For DC discharges, the power
dedicated to the discharge must take into account if any additional power is needed to operate the cathode; while RF
and microwave discharge must account for DC-RF losses and reflected power.
Another consideration that is of increasing importance at miniature scales is the normalized losses associated with
the neutralizer power, ݈ே ‫ܲ ؠ‬ே Ȁܲ஻ , and ancillary power requirements, ݈஺ ‫ܲ ؠ‬஺ Ȁܲ஻ , such as propellant heating, etc. In
particular, neutralizer technologies have not yet been optimized at the miniature scale and associated losses can
become significant without careful design considerations. Some discussion and approaches to this issue are discussed
later.
The mass utilization efficiency, Km, is a measure of the propellant flow that is used as beam ions. For miniature
ion thrusters, where the beam is predominantly single ions, this can be approximated by

݉ሶ௕ ‫ܬ‬஻
ߟ௠ ൌ ൎ
݉ሶ௣ ݉ሶ௣ ሺ݁Ȁ݉௜ ሻ

Since the mass flow rate of propellant is the sum of the discharge and neutralizer flow, i.e. ݉ሶ௣ ൌ ݉ሶௗ ൅ ݉ሶ௡ , it is
important to minimize or eliminate the neutralizer. Another metric to measure the discharge performance is via the
discharge utilization efficiency, Kud. Again, assuming only singly charged beam ions, the discharge utilization can be
approximated by

݉ሶ௕ ‫ܬ‬஻
ߟ௨ௗ ൌ ൎ
݉ሶௗ ݉ሶௗ ሺ݁Ȁ݉௜ ሻ

This efficiency can be interpreted as a measure of the discharge to utilize the discharge propellant as beam ions,
and can also be considered as a measure of the grids ability to contain the unionized neutrals, while allowing the ions
to pass. On the latter perspective, and as will be discussed later, one can find that the relatively smaller area of grids
to allow for more aggressive grid designs that better serve this function.
Using Kud and HB, the discharge efficiency of ion thrusters is commonly plotted along discharge performance curves
as shown schematically in Figure 2, where the most desirable performance is typically found at the knee of the curve.
The superior performance of large ion thrusters are commonly found on curves that knee closer to the bottom right of
the curve, while miniature ion thrusters usually exhibit performance at higher discharge losses overall. For a given
discharge, the losses will increase as the propellant efficiency increases since comparatively more of the discharge
power is lost to inelastic collisions with ions, than in the generation of ions from the neutral background.

Figure 2. Ion thruster discharge performance curve

B. Discharge Types
Historically successful ion thruster discharges can generally be differentiated between those generated by direct
current (DC) electron bombardment (i.e., Kaufman and ring cusp) and those generated by electromagnetic fields, i.e.,
radio frequency (RF) or microwave. DC discharge typically employ a hollow cathode to create a DC-electron
3
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
 discharge. For conventionally sized ion thrusters, the most efficient discharges and thrusters have typically been
achieved using the ring cusp approach, due primarily to lower discharge losses, HB; though, several successful thrusters
and missions have been achieved with Kaufman, RF, and microwave which can exhibit other important advantages.
For example, electromagnetic discharges, such as RF, can be designed such that the antenna is not in contact with
plasma, which can avoid potential issues with discharge cathode life. Many of the ion thrusters indicated as using
“microwave” discharge can be described as electron cyclotron resonance (ECR) discharges since a permanent magnet
is usually used to more efficiently couple to microwave power to the plasma; this paper will use the term microwave
to be in keeping with the ion thruster literature.

III. Modern Miniature Ion Thrusters

This section overviews the development and status of “modern” miniature ion thrusters (i.e., ion thruster that use
modern propellants). First, early thrusters that used cesium and mercury are described, followed by the development
of modern ion thrusters decades later. The modern ion thrusters are differentiated by their discharge type, namely: DC
ring cusp, microwave, and RF. Some discussion is then given to ongoing efforts to improve ion thruster performance.

A. Early Miniature to Small Ion Thrusters

The earliest laboratory tests of miniature ion thrusters were reported in 1967 using cesium propellant at only 1.2 cm
and 3 cm scales, as part of a multi-scale development effort using Kaufman-type discharges by Sohl, et al.7 At larger
scales, ion thrusters of 5 cm and 4 cm were tested using mercury propellant around the same time. For example, 5 cm
mercury ion thrusters with Kaufman discharge were tested from about 1966 through 1973 by several researchers and
institutions.8,9,10,11 Testing results of a 4 cm RF mercury thruster were reported in 1972 by Trojan, et al.,12 thus
demonstrating the first use of and electromagnetic discharge at smaller scales. These ion thruster miniaturization
developments were not pursued for the following decades in favor of larger thrusters with more desirable performance.

B. Modern Miniature Ion Thrusters

Since cesium and mercury propellants were eventually abandoned by the ion thruster community, there was a need
to develop a miniature ion thruster that could exhibit desirable performance on “modern” noble gas propellants, and
meet the needs of electric propulsion mission possibilities in the mN to sub-mN range. This was considered a
challenging task due to the inherent discharge inefficiencies at the miniature scale and inherently lower ionization
potential for noble gas options in comparison to cesium and mercury. Development of miniature noble gas ion
thrusters has been primarily conducted in the United States, Germany, and Japan.
The first successful noble gas miniature ion thruster was reported by Wirz, et al. starting in 2001 using a permanent
magnet DC discharge.13,14,15,2,6,16 This thruster, which came to be known as the Miniature Xenon Ion (MiXI) thruster,
uses a ring cusp DC discharge and advanced ion optics to achieve desirable total efficiency, up to 56%, very high
propellant efficiency, up to 82%, and thrust levels over 1.5 mN. As shown in Figure 3, more recent efforts using
miniaturized hollow cathodes showed that a self-heated cathode discharge could be achieved with similar
performance17. The MiXI thruster was run in pulsed width modulated (PWM) mode and was able to consistently
achieve an impulse bit of only 1 PN•s.18

Figure 3. MiXI Thruster, miniature hollow cathode, and MiXI operating with miniature hollow cathode.

4
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
 Efforts at several institutions in Japan have led to the development of microwave discharge designs that yield
desirable performance and relatively low overall power consumption.19 For example, the P1 ion thruster shown in
Figure 4 employs a 2 cm discharge chamber with a typical thruster performance of approximately 0.3 mN, 1100 s Isp,
and 15.1 W of total power consumption.20

Figure 4. Microwave 2 cm discharge P1 thruster.

Over the past decade, miniature RF ion thruster has become quite popular in Europe and the United States. Giessen
University scaled down the successful 10 cm RIT-10 RF ion engine and continue the earlier RIT-4 work mentioned
above, culminating in the demonstration of a 4 cm RIT-421 in 2005 and then the 2.5 cm diameter PNRIT-2.522 in 2009
by Feili, et al. The PNRIT-2.5 thruster provides up to approximately 0.5 mN, with power efficiency over 40%,
propellant efficiency near 50%, but high ion production costs of over 2400 eV/ion. Similar efforts were also taken by
Mistoco, et al. starting in 200423,24 and Trudel, et al.25 in 2009 for a 1 cm RF discharge.

Figure 5. 2.5 cm RF discharge uNRIT-2.5 thruster

Researchers at Airbus have developed a RIT-PX miniature ion thruster, where a single discharge design is used
while two different grid sizes can be used to achieve thrust ranges of 0.05 – 1.3 mN and 0.084 – 2.5 mN, respectively.26
Recently, researchers at Busek have demonstrated the use of iodine propellant in their BIT-3 RF ion thruster which
allows a 3x storage density over pressurized xenon.27,28 In Figure 1, the thruster is shown operating on an iodine
discharge with a neutralizer cathode operating with xenon.

Figure 6. BIT-3 RF ion thruster operating on iodine.

5
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
 A comparison of some of the thruster performance values reported in the literature are shown in Table 1. Note that
many of these efficiencies do not include full system efficiencies and don’t consider losses such as those attributed to
the neutralizer. Nonetheless, as can be seen from this table, an impressive range of thruster capabilities are available
with miniature ion thrusters.

Table 1. Comparison of some miniature ion thrusters. (The 30 cm NSTAR thruster is includuded for reference.)

Discharge Diameter
Thruster Institution
Type (cm)
Isp (s) Thrust (mN) Kt (%) Kud (%) KE (%) Ref
Caltech/JPL
MiXI Ring-Cusp 3 1764-3184 0.1-1.553 31-56 48-82 >40 14
UCLA
University of
μNRIT-2.5 RF 2.5 363-2861 0.05-0.6 ≤ 24.4 15-52 4-47 22 & 29
Giessen
μ1 ISASJAXA ECR 2.0 1410 0.297 − 46 − 20
MRIT Penn State RF 1 5480 0.059 12.8 <80 15.2 25
MMIT Penn State ECR 2 5500 0.25 32 32 50 30
NSTAR JPL Ring-Cusp 30 3127 92.7 61.9 91 − 5

One performance challenge with miniature ion thrusters is beam neutralization. Several solutions have been
considered, each with their own merit and challenges. The first is to use an external thermionic hollow cathode, or a
designated neutralizer RF or microwave discharge for neutralization, as is done with larger thrusters. This is a robust
option, but has the drawback of requiring some power and propellant to operate the cathode. Another option is to use
a propellant-less field emission cathode, such as the flight-qualified carbon nanotube field emission (CNTFE) cathode
from Busek.31 This option is attractive due to the lack of need for propellant to operate the cathode, but the extractable
electron current density is limited. Most recently, researchers at the university of Tokyo and JAXA/ISAS have
explored the use of bipolar operation, by alternating the ion and electron extraction responsibilities between two
identical thrusters.20 This process is shown schematically in Figure 7. In this figure, the unipolar mode is the condition
where there is a designated neutralizer discharge, while the bipolar mode, though less efficient, could be considered
for a mission where commonality is desired of performance.

Figure 7. Electrical connections and circuits for the P1 ion thruster in unipolar and bipolar operation.

IV. Missions Capabilities

This section overviews some of the many mission enabling capabilities for miniature ion thruster. First of all, a
qualitative correlation of capabilities to mission type is made. Secondly, miniature ion thrusters are compared to other
EP micropropulsion concepts. Finally some mission examples are given.

A. Thruster Features and Mission Capabilities

Miniature ion thrusters have several performance features that make them attractive for a wide range of missions
as summarized in Table 2. Similar to larger ion thruster, the most obvious advantage of miniature ion thrusters is their
ability to achieve high specific impulse, Isp, (~1000 – 3000 s). Some of the less obvious and less advertised advantages
include very precise thrust and impulse bits due to highly controllable electric thrust that is simply proportional to
ඥܸ஻ , low disturbance thrust through the use of amplitude modulated thrust in the mN to sub-mN range, and low

6
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
contamination and spacecraft interaction potential due to the potential to use of inert, non-condensable noble gas
propellants, quiet electrical operation, and inherently low beam divergence half-angle (~5 - 15q). From these
performance features it is clear why many mission designers have incorporated miniature ion thrusters for a wide
range of mission classes and for many spacecraft.

Table 2. Mission Classes for Miniature Ion Thrusters

Nanospacecraft Microspacecraft Small spacecraft Large spacecraft

Mission Class (>1000 kg)
(1 – 10 kg) (10 – 100 kg) (100 – 1000 kg)
Exploration X X

Orbit/Inclination
X X
Change
Precision Orbit
X X X X
Maintenance
Formation Flying X X X X

Precision
X X X
Control/Pointing
X – applicable to mission

For an exploration mission, i.e., beyond GEO, miniature ion thrusters can provide attractive 'V for
microspacecraft to targets such as asteroids.32 The PROCYON asteroid mission, Figure 8, flew a 70 kg spacecraft
using the P1-derived miniature ion thruster unit (ITU) as part of the I-COUPS (Ion thruster and Cold-gas thruster
Unified Propulsion System) thruster combination that shares a common propellant supply.33 To date, the ion thruster
was able to operate for 223 hours with an average thrust of 346 PN, thus being the first micropropulsion system on a
small spacecraft of less than 100 kg to operate in deep space.34 At the time of this writing the ion thruster has
experienced a grid short that has not been cleared.35

Figure 8. I-COUPS Thruster configuration on the PROCYON spacecraft [refPROCYON].

A recent mission study using a MiXI thruster baseline showed that a nanospacecraft could be consider for a lunar
missions, or beyond.1 This same 'V could be used for large orbit and inclination change or maintenance for a
nanospacecraft, as shown in Figure 9. A similar mission architecture was use for a 6U “LunarCube” that uses the
BIT-3 RF ion thruster as shown in Figure 10.36 This architecture is designed to provide 3.2 km/s of Delta-V and a
total impulse of 37 kN-s.

7
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
 ΔV
Δi

Figure 9. Internal configuration and mission capabilities for a high 'V 3U CubeSat employing the MiXI Thruster.1

Figure 10. 6U LunarCube with BIT-3 RF Ion Thruster.36

Of recent interest are missions that provide the next generation of Earth observation using precision orbit
maintenance for small to large spacecraft. Depending on orbit altitude and spacecraft size, miniature ion thrusters can
provide mN to sub-mN level thrust that can maintain constellation type spacecraft architectures using either drag-free
or “loose” formation control.3 A particular example is the Next Generation Gravity Mission (NGGM), which follows
in the footsteps of the the highly successful GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) and GOCE (Gravity
and Steady State Ocean Circulation Explorer) gravity missions. Similar to GOCE, this mission is considering the use
of the precision thrust that can be provided by ion thrusters, but in this case the desired thrust range is 50 P1.
Parallel efforts at Giessen University on the PN-RIT and at Qinetiq on the “MiDGIT” double-ended miniature RF ion
thruster have been undertaken to address the needs of this mission class.37

Double-ended MiDGIT

B. Comparison to Other Micropropulsion Options

When comparing miniature ion thrusters to other micropropulsion options, one must consider many factors. In
general, the requirements of mN to sub-mN thrust level is enough to make miniature ion thrusters a strong candidate.
In the table below, we compare the attractiveness of different propulsion options for a representative formation flying
mission such as the Terrestrial Planet Finder – Interferometer (TPF-I). As discussed in reference 2, these 1000 kg
spacecraft require mN to sub-mN, low-disturbance thrust levels that must performance formation flying maneuvers
8
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
for many years, thus the need for high specific impulse. For this particular mission, the spacecraft are flying in close
formation and the interferometric observation employs very sensitive optics at cryogenic temperatures. As a result,
contamination potential for candidate thruster options must be extremely low. For this mission, and others with similar
requirements, miniature ion thruster may prove to be very well-suited.

Thrust Plume
Thruster Primary Thrust Contamination
Range Isp (sec) Divergence Propellant
Technology Control Potential
(mN) Half-Angle (q)

Formation
Flying Amplitude
0.01 - 1.1 > 1,000 < 20 - Low
Mission Modulated (AM)
Targets

0.02 - 1.5
AM
Mini Ion (0.001 – 2,500 - 3,500 5-15 Xenon Low
(also PWM)
0.1)

4-17 AM Low (except for

Hall 1,200 - 1,600 60-75 Xenon
(0.05 – 4) (also PWM) beam divergence)

Pulse Width
Teflon PPT ~ 1 @ 1 Hz Modulated (PWM)
650-1400 30-45 Teflon High

Cold Gas 4.5 - 1000 PWM 65 45 Nitrogen Low

Ionic
Colloid 0.001-0.1 AM 100 - 500 18 High
Liquids

Cs- FEEP 0.1 – 1.4 AM 6,000 - 12,000 30-45 Cesium Very High

In-FEEP 0.001 - 0.1 AM 4,000 - 12,000 30-45 Indium High

V. Conclusion
Miniature ion thrusters enable a wide range of attractive missions near Earth and beyond. Significant advancements
in miniature ion thruster technology and hardware have been made since the turn of the century, and additional
advancements are sure to come in the forthcoming years.
The author has made an effort to accurately represent the history and state-of-the-art in miniature ion thruster
technology. Due to the copious work in the area, it is likely that I have missed some research or made some
misrepresentations that should be addressed in the peer-reviewed journal version of this paper. If you are aware of
such content, please do not hesitate to contact the author at your earliest convenience.

References

1
Conversano R., Wirz R.E., “Mission Capability Assessment of CubeSats Using a Miniature Ion Thruster,”
Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Apr 2013, pp. 1-12, doi: 10.2514/1.A32435
2
Wirz R., Gale M., Mueller J., Marrese C., “Miniature Ion Thrusters for Precision Formation Flying,” 40th
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA-2004-4115, AIAA, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 2004.
3
Massotti L., Di Cara D., del Amo J.G., Haagmans R., Jost M., Siemes C., Silvestrin P., “The ESA Earth
Observation Programmes Activities for the Preparation of the Next Generation Gravity Mission,” AIAA Guidance,
Navigation, and Control (GNC) Conference, AIAA 2013-4637, Boston, MA, 2013.
4
Tsay M., Frongillo J., Hohman K., “Lunar-Cube: A Deep Space 6U CubeSat with Mission Enabling Ion
Propulsion Technology,” Conference on Small Satellites, SSC15-XI-1, AIAA, 2015.
5
Goebel D.M., Katz I., “Fundamentals of Electric Propulsion: Ion and Hall Thrusters,” Wiley, 2008
9
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
 6
Wirz R., “Computation Modeling of a Miniature Ion Thruster Discharge,” 41st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE
Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA-2005-3887, AIAA, Tucson, AZ, 2005.
7
Sohl G., Fosnight V.V., Goldner S.J., Speiser R.C., “Cesium Electron-Bombardment Ion Microthrusters,”
AIAA 5th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA 67-81, AIAA, New York, 1967.
8
Wasserbauer J.F., “A 5-Centimeter-Diameter Electron Bombardment Thrustor with Permanent Magnets,”
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA TN D-3628, NASA, 1966.
9
Weigand A.J., “5-cm Diameter Ion Thruster Development Program Summary,” NASA TM X-68110, July
1972.
10
Nakanishi S., Richley E.A., Banks B.A., “High Perveance Accelerator Grids for Low-Voltage Kaufman
Thrusters,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, JSR-67-680, JSR,Vol. 5, No. 3, 1967.
11
Hyman J., “Performance Optimized, Small Structurally Integrated Ion Thruster System,” NASA CR-
121183, August 1973.
12
Trojan F.M., Bussweiler K.E., Lang H.H., Loeb H.W., “Development of the Radio Frequency
Microthruster RIT 4,” AIAA 9th Electric Propulsion Conference, AIAA 71-473, AIAA, Bethesda, MD, 1972.
13
Wirz R., Polk J., Marrese C., Mueller J., Escobedo J., Sheehan P., “Development and Testing of a 3cm
Electron Bombardment Micro-Ion Thruster,” 27th International Electric Propulsion Conference, IEPC-01-343, IEPC,
Pasadena, CA 2001.
14
Wirz R., Polk J., Marrese C., Mueller J., “Experimental and Computation Investigation of the Performance
of Micro-Ion Thruster,” 38th AIAA Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA 2002-3835, AIAA, Indianapolis, Indiana,
2002.
15
Wirz R., Goebel D., Marrese C., Mueller J., “Development of Cathode Technologies for a Miniature Ion
Thruster,” 39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA-2003-4722, AIAA, Huntsville, AL, 2003.
16
Wirz, R. E., Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 2005
17
Wirz R.E. “Low-Contamination, High-Precision Thruster for Precision Formation Flying Missions,” JPL
Report #R.06.023.065, 2006
18
Wirz R.E., Gamero M., Goebel D., “Pulsed Operation of an Ion Accelerator,” NASA Tech Brief, NPO-
44961, pg. 52, Vol. 33, No. 2, Feb 2009
19
Takao Y., Masui H., Miyamoto T., Kataharada H., Ijiri H., Nakashima H., “Development of small-scale
microwave discharge ion thruster,” Vacuum, Vol. 73, 2004.
20
Koizumi H., Kuninaka H., “Performance Evaluation of a Miniature Ion Thruster μ1 with a Unipolar and
Bipolar Operation,” 32nd International Electric Propulsion Conference, IEPC-2011-297, IEPC, Wiesbaden, Germany,
2011.
21
Feili D., Loeb H.W., Schartner K.H., Weis S., Kirmse D., Meyer B.K., Kilinger R., Mueller H., Di Cara
D.M., “Performance mapping of new μN-RITs at Giessen,” 29th International Electric Propulsion Conference, IEPC-
2005-252-IEPC, Princeton Univ., 2005.
22
Feili D., Lotz B., St. Bonnet, Meyer B.K., Loeb H.W., “μNRIT-2.5 - A New Optimized Microthruster Of
Giessen University,” 31st International Electric Propulsion Conference, IEPC-2009-174, IEPC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2009.

23
Mistoco V., Bilen S.G., Micci M.M., “Development and Chamber Testing of a Miniature Radio-Frequency
Ion Thruster for Microspacecraft,” 40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA 2004-4124,
AIAA, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 2004.
24
Mistoco V., Trudel T.A., Bilen S.G., Micci M.M., “Vacuum Testing of the Miniature Radio-Frequency
Ion Thruster,” 29th International Electric Propulsion Conference, IEPC-2005-265, IEPC, Princeton Univ., 2005.
25
Trudel T.A., Bilen S.G., Micci M.M., “Design and Performance Testing of a 1-cm Miniature Radio-
Frequency Ion Thruster,” 31st International Electric Propulsion Conference, IEPC-2009-167, IEPC, Ann Arbor, MI,
2009.
26
Altmann C., Leiter H., Kukies R., “The RIT-μX Miniaturized Ion Engine System way to TRL 5 for an
extended thruster range,” 34th International Electric Propulsion Conference and 6th Nano-satellite Symposium, IEPC-
2015-91069, IEPC, Hyogo-Kobe, Japan, 2015.
27
Tsay M., Frongillo J., Hohman K., “Lunar-Cube: A Deep Space 6U CubeSat with Mission Enabling Ion
Propulsion Technology,” Conference on Small Satellites, SSC15-XI-1, AIAA, 2015.
28
Tsay M., Frongillo J., Hohman K., “Iodine-Fueled Mini RF Ion Thruster for CubeSat Applications,” 34th
International Electric Propulsion Conference and 6th Nano-satellite Symposium, IEPC-2015-273/ISTS-2015-b-273,
IEPC, Hyogo-Kobe, Japan, 2015.

10
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015
 29
Mueller J., Hofer R., Ziemer J.K., “Survey of Propulsion Technologies Applicable to Cubesats,” Joint
Army-Navy-NASA-Air Force (JANNAF), Colorado Springs, Colorado, May 3, 2010.
30
Lubey D.P., Bilen S.G., Micci M.M., Taunay P., “Design of the Miniature Microwave-Frequency Ion
Thruster,” 32nd International Electric Propulsion Conference, IEPC-2011-164, Wiesbaden, IEPC, Germany, 2011.
31
Busek Space Propulsion and Systems, “3cm RF Ion Thruster BIT-3,” 2015
32
Funase R., Koizumi H., Nakasuka S., Kawakatsu Y., Fukushima Y., Tomiki A., Kobayashi Y., Nakatsuka
J., Mita M., Kobayashi D., Nonomura T., “50kg-class Deep Space Exploration Technology Demonstration Micro-
spacecraft PROCYON,” 28th Annual AIAA/USU: Conference on Small Satellites, SSC14-VI-3, SSC, Logan, UT, 2014.
33
Koizumi H., Komurasaki K., Arakawa Y., “Development of the Miniature Ion Propulsion System for 50
kg Small Spacecraft,” 48th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA 2012-3949, AIAA, Atlanta
GE, 2012.
34
Koizumi H., Kawahara H., Yaginuma K., Asakawa J., Funase R., Komurasaki K., “In-Flight Operation of
the Miniature Propulsion System installed on Small Space Probe: PROCYON,” 34th International Electric Propulsion
Conference and 6th Nano-satellite Symposium, IEPC-2015-276/ISTS-2015-b-276, IEPC, Hyogo-Kobe, Japan, 2015.
35
“Flight Status of Micro Deep-Space Explorer ‘PROCYON,’” Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency
(JAXA), URL: http://global.jaxa.jp/press/2014/12/20141204_procyon.html [cited 26 May 2015]
36
Tsay M., Frongillo J., Hohman K., “Lunar-Cube: A Deep Space 6U CubeSat with Mission Enabling Ion
Propulsion Technology,” Conference on Small Satellites, SSC15-XI-1, AIAA, 2015.
37
Collingwood C., “Investigation of a Miniature Differential Ion Thruster,” University of Southampton, PhD
Thesis, July 2011

11
Joint Conference of 30th ISTS, 34th IEPC and 6th NSAT, Kobe-Hyogo, Japan
July 4 – 10, 2015