The equation for the change in velocity of a spacecraft is given by the
rocket equation as follows: :\Delta v = v_\text{e} \ln \frac{m_0}{m_1} where: :\Delta v\ is delta-v - the maximum change of speed of the vehicle (with no external forces acting), :v_\text{e} is the
effective exhaust velocity (v_\text{e} = I_\text{sp} \cdot g_0 where I_\text{sp} is the
specific impulse expressed as a time period and g_0 is
standard gravity), :\ln refers to the
natural logarithm function, :m_0 is the initial total mass, including propellant, :m_1 is the final total mass. PPTs have much higher exhaust velocities than chemical propulsion engines, but have a much smaller fuel flow rate. From the Tsiolkovsky equation stated above, this results in a proportionally higher final velocity of the propelled craft. The exhaust velocity of a PPT is of the order of tens of km/s while conventional chemical propulsion generates
thermal velocities in the range of 2–4.5 km/s. Due to this lower thermal velocity, chemical propulsion units become exponentially less effective at higher vehicle velocities, necessitating the use of electric spacecraft propulsion such as PPTs. It is therefore advantageous to use an electric propulsion system such as a PPT to generate high interplanetary speeds in the range 20–70 km/s.
NASA's research PPT (flown in 2000) achieved an exhaust velocity of 13,700 m/s, generated a
thrust of 860 μN, and consumed 70W of electrical power. has been developed by CU Aerospace, L.L.C. on NASA
Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) funds and demonstrated to have an ISP > 3,500 s. == Advantages and disadvantages ==