Grammar: The Simple Predicate

Word List:

1. SPT	стационарный плазменный реактивный двигатель
2. satellite	спутник
3. propulsion devices	двигатели
4. Hall thruster  plasma thruster	ракетный двигатель малой тяги Холла плазменный ракетный двигатель малой тяги
5. orbit transfer	переход на другую орбиту
6. reposition	изменение положения
7. station-keeping	позиционирование, удержание станции на орбите
8. contamination	загрязнение
9. plume	струя, шлейфовый факел
10. propellent	ракетное топливо
11. charge exchange plasma	плазма, образующаяся за счет обмена зарядами
12. concern, n	беспокойство, озабоченность, проблема
13. influence of experimental facilities	инструментальные ошибки
14. codes = software	компьютерные программы
15. verification	подтверждение
16. Particle-in-Cell (PIC) technique	методика PIC
17. simulation	моделирование
18. DSMC	моделирование по методу Монте-Карло
19. momentum transfer	передача кинетической энергии
20. overabundance	переизбыток

Particle Simulations of the SPT

As with other electric propulsion devices, Hall thrusters offer a high specific impulse well-suited for satellite station-keeping, repositioning, and orbit transfer. The Stationary Plasma Thruster (SPT) variety has been flown for many years on Russian satellites and has been reliable. However, there is concern about contamination of the satellite surface due to the plasma in the plume. Xenon gas is currently the propellent of choice for such devices, because it is an inert gas with a relatively low ionization potential. The charge exchange plasma, created by collisions between ions and un-ionized propellent in which an electron is transferred, is of particular concern. The charge exchange ions have much lower velocities than the beam ions; therefore they are more influenced by the self-consistent electric fields and may interact with spacecraft surfaces. Computational modeling allows the dynamics of the plume and its interaction with its environment to be examined. The ability to simulate the plumes of these devices allows a wider variety of operating conditions to be tested and also eliminates the influence of the experimental facilities. However, computer codes need verification from experimental data.

To assess the ability to simulate these plumes accurately a computer code which combines the direct simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC) and the Particle-in-Cell (PIC) techniques is being developed to understand in detail the plasma behavior of the plumes of Hall thrusters. The PIC method determines the trajectories of charged particles as predicted by imposed and self-consistent electric fields. The DSMC method is used to deal with the collisional effects in the flow field. Both charge exchange and momentum transfer collisions are modeled. Ions, neutral atoms from the thruster, and background atoms are simulated. The code has previously been verified for an ion thruster and is currently being applied to Hall thrusters. The plumes of these two types of thrusters are similar. The main differences in modeling are in the geometry and the ratio of neutral atoms to ions.

Since electric propulsion devices such as ion thrusters, arc-jets, and Hall thrusters inherently involve charged propellent, the PIC technique is well-suited to simulate their plumes.

The behavior of the ions is of primary interest. A sufficient number of ion particles are needed in each cell to avoid statistical effects in the PIC method. Therefore, to increase the ion particle count without creating an overabundance of neutrals, a particle weighting scheme is used. 

Focused Practice

I. Answer the following questions:

1. What do Hall thrusters offer?

2. Why is there concern about contamination of the satellite surface?

3. Why is the charge exchange plasma of particular concern?

4. What do computer codes need verification from?

5. What are the methods used to understand the plasma behavior of the plumes of Hall thrusters?

6. Why is the PIC technique well-suited to simulate the plumes of electric propulsion devices?

II. Analyse the grammar structures underlined in the above text.

III. Speak on: 1. Hall thrusters. 2. DSMC and PIC methods.

Unit 3

Grammar: Modal Verbs – would, should, could.
The Inversion

Word List:

1. cortex	кора больших полушарий головного мозга
2. motor cortex	часть коры головного мозга, которая отвечает за движение
3. owl monkey-dowroucouli	маленькая обезьянка с глазами, как у совы, обитающая в Южной Америке, ведущая ночной образ жизни. Относится к роду Aotus; вымирающий вид
4. soundproof	звуконепроницаемый
5. joystick	ручка управления
6. dispenser	разливочный автомат
7. plastic connector	пластиковый разъём
8. brain tissue	ткань мозга
9. spinal cord	спинной мозг
10. multijointed	многошарнирный
11. limb	конечность
12. prone	склонный к чему-либо
13. randomly, at random	наугад, наобум, случайно
14. a box of electronics	электронное устройство

Controlling Robots with the Mind

Belle, our tiny owl monkey, was seated in her special chair inside a soundproof chamber at our Duke University laboratory. Her right hand grasped a joystick as she watched a horizontal series of lights on a display panel. She knew that if a light suddenly shone and she moved the joystick left or right to correspond to its position, a dispenser would send a drop of fruit juice into her mouth. She loved to play this game. And she was good at it.

Belle wore a cap glued to her head. Under it were four plastic connectors. The connectors fed arrays of microwires - each wire finer than the finest sewing thread - into different regions of Belle’s motor cortex, the brain tissue that plans movements and sends instructions for enacting the plans to nerve cells in the spinal cord. Each of the 100 microwires lay beside a single motor neuron. When a neuron produced an electrical discharge - an “action potential” - the adjacent microwire would capture the current and send it up through a small wiring bundle that ran from Belle’s cap to abox of electronics on a table next to the booth. The box, in turn, was linked to two computers, one next door and the other half a country away.

In a crowded room across the hall, members of our research team were getting anxious. After months of hard work, they were about to test the idea that they could reliably translate the raw electrical activity in a living being’s brain - Belle’s mere thoughts - into signals that could direct the actions of arobot. Unknown to Belle on this spring afternoon in 2000, we had assembled a multijointed robot arm in this room, away from her view, that she wouldcontrol for the first time. As soon as Belle’s brain sensed a lit spot on the panel, electronics in the box running two real-time mathematical models would rapidly analyze the tiny action potentials produced by her brain cells. That lab computer would convert the electrical patterns into instructions that woulddirect the robot arm. Six hundred miles north, in Cambridge, Mass., adifferent computer would produce the same actions in another robot arm.

If they had done everything correctly, the two robot arms would behave as Belle’s arm did, at exactly the same time. We would have to translate her neuronal activity into robot commands in just 300 milliseconds - the natural delay between the time Belle’s motor cortex planned how she should move her limb and the moment it sent the instructions to her muscles. If the brain of a living creature could accurately control two dissimilar robot arms - despite the signal noise and transmission delays inherent in our lab network and the error-prone Internet - perhaps it could someday control a mechanical device or actual limbs in ways that would be truly helpful to people.

Finally the moment came. They randomly switched on lights in front of Belle, and she immediately moved her joystick back and forth to correspond to them. The robot arm moved similarly to Belle’s real arm. So did a computer in Cambridge.Belle and the robots moved in synchrony, like dancers choreographed by the electrical impulses sparking in Belle’s mind. Amid the loud celebration that erupted Cambridge, the teamcould not help thinking that this was only the beginning of a promising journey.

Focused Practice

I. Answer the following questions:

1. Who was the main participant of the experiment?

2. Where did the experiment take place?

3. What was the essence of that experiment?

4. What idea was the research team about to test?

5. What results did the research team expect from that experiment?

6. What was the final stage of the experiment?

II. Analyse the grammar structures underlined in the above text.

III. Speak on: The idea of the experiment.

Unit 4