What question did this study set out to answer?

To correct errors in previous calculations regarding power and filament density in a plasma device.

May 29, 2026

Corrigendum: Bubbling Water‐Treating DBD Plasma Device Optimization Using Experimental and Computational Methods

Key Points

To correct errors in previous calculations regarding power and filament density in a plasma device.
Review of current measurements and recalculation of power based on corrected data.
Adjustment of filament density calculations based on the correct electrode area.
Application of a multifilament model for accurate results.
Average power deposited was incorrectly calculated, now corrected with accurate factors.
The average filament density per second was recalibrated to range from 8.25 to 24.75.
Peak densities of NO3 and O3 were updated to 2 × 10^15 cm² and 3 × 10^17 cm², respectively.

Abstract

In Robinson et al. 1, two errors occurred. First, in the analysis, the current measurements from the oscilloscope. The data were misinterpreted by a factor of 50 and subsequently the calculated power was also increased by this factor. The average power deposited by a single plasma filament is also impacted by this error. Second, an error occurred in the calculation of the average number of filaments observed by the air transporting through the plasma discharge. The area of the powered electrode was taken 26. 4 cm2 rather than the correct value of 2. 64 cm2, which resulted in the average filament density per second being calculated as an order of magnitude low. The correct average filament density per second ranges from 8. 25 to 24. 75 and the average number of the air volume transporting through the plasma ranges from 2. 62 to 7. 85. This is not sufficiently portrayed by a single filament model, and a multifilament model has been employed for the corrected results. The relevant figures (Figures 1 and 2) displaying the measured current and calculated power are shown in their corrected form below. Figures 3 and 4 display the corrected modeled densities after updating the number of filaments encountered and their average deposited power. While these errors do impact the quantitative results of the model, the discussion and conclusions discussed were focused on the qualitative trends thereof. The authors maintain this qualitative discussion has not been significantly impacted. The general trends observed in the species densities and relevant reaction pathways have remained consistent. The new peak densities of NO 3 \, NO₃ and O 3 {O}₃ is 2 × 1 0 15 2 10^15 cm2 and 3 × 1 0 17 3 10^17 cm2, respectively. This work was partly supported by the North Carolina State University's Game-Changing Research Incentive Program for the Plant Sciences Initiative (GRIP4PSI). This material is partly based upon work supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Fusion Energy Science under Award Number DE-SC0023235 and partly based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY 2107901. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in Dryad at https: //doi. org/10. 5061/dryad. crjdfn3d9.

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay