The result is that the presence of air doesn't seem to change that much the signals magnitude and shape.
Beside all the differences due to the different set up, I noticed that the "thrusts" signals you obtained (reply #1142, third figure) are all different both in magnitude and shape. I don't see the same level on consistency between the input and the output compared to those obtained by Woodward, Tajmar and Buldrini.
That is exactly what I meant
See image below. V3 of the shaker showed results very similar to woodward effect traces. I've not yet tried to make the traces look similar with V4. I suspect I will need to use chirps
They look similar in shape, but not in duration. Each one of those chirped pulses lasts for almost 10 seconds each, which might or might not be due to the calibration of the balance. In your case the frequency of the pulses seems to be much closer to the driving frequency of the shaker (like one would expect).When I'm referring to the output obtained by Woodward and others I'm thinking about these traces down here. As you can see they are characterized by the presence of transients and by a quite steady signal in the middle. While the magnitude of the thrust signal seems to vary in different tests, its main features don't.The steady signal in the middle is what I find most interesting.
Quote from: Povel on 12/08/2017 02:53 pmThey look similar in shape, but not in duration. Each one of those chirped pulses lasts for almost 10 seconds each, which might or might not be due to the calibration of the balance. In your case the frequency of the pulses seems to be much closer to the driving frequency of the shaker (like one would expect).When I'm referring to the output obtained by Woodward and others I'm thinking about these traces down here. As you can see they are characterized by the presence of transients and by a quite steady signal in the middle. While the magnitude of the thrust signal seems to vary in different tests, its main features don't.The steady signal in the middle is what I find most interesting.I definitely think I will need to use long duration chirps in order to obtain a more similar trace. As for the switching transients, those would be practically non-existent in the shaker because of the lower voltages and currents used. But I did notice ending transients on most of the runs above 30Hz. Woodward would likely be pleased to see no transients as he has spent considerable effort trying to eliminate them.
Chirping a magnetic solenoid probably won't work.
As for the simulations, it seems to me that the asymmetric shaker mounted on an ideal thrust/torsion balance can only produce constant oscillations at the same frequency of the shaker. Without invoking some non-ideality causing Dean drive effects there's no way to get a steady deflection, since at the end of each cycle it would go to zero.
Quote from: Povel on 12/07/2017 06:29 pmAs for the simulations, it seems to me that the asymmetric shaker mounted on an ideal thrust/torsion balance can only produce constant oscillations at the same frequency of the shaker. Without invoking some non-ideality causing Dean drive effects there's no way to get a steady deflection, since at the end of each cycle it would go to zero.Exactly.
Updated Equations
Updated EquationsHere I relate the mass fluctuation formula to the quantum mechanical radiation reaction force and the temperature of the thermal vacuum field.Comments?
Quote from: WarpTech on 12/14/2017 04:47 pmUpdated EquationsHere I relate the mass fluctuation formula to the quantum mechanical radiation reaction force and the temperature of the thermal vacuum field.Comments?I'm still hoping to find simpler ways to do the mass fluctuations with conventional off the shelf components. What I lack is a decent comprehension of what constitutes the right kind of energy variations that could in principle work. We know originally professor Woodward used capacitors. What about micro-mechanical oscillators? Any ideas? Thanks.
I'm still hoping to find simpler ways to do the mass fluctuations with conventional off the shelf components. What I lack is a decent comprehension of what constitutes the right kind of energy variations that could in principle work. We know originally professor Woodward used capacitors. What about micro-mechanical oscillators? Any ideas? Thanks.
Assembly #1 complete.
Quote from: WarpTech on 12/22/2017 04:31 amAssembly #1 complete.Can you share any details such as the PZT disks used and how many, size of the brass mass, will you use rubber gasket(?), and how you plan on mounting the device? Looks nice and clean! I noticed your screws are set into the brass mass. Don't woodward's screws pass through the brass mass and attach to an aluminum mounting bracket? EDIT: I think I see what you have done. You pass through the aluminum and have rubber washer/gasket on each bolt?
So we're told that increasing the internal potential energy of some object also increases its mass in some very tiny miniscule amount (since that increased energy amounts to some tiny mass)
Is it possible to do the Mach Effect using some easily reversible chemical reaction for the internal energy / mass fluctuation part?
@WarpTechTruly a remarkable job!Have you received any supervision/advice from Woodward & co. on the structure and on how to drive this? I ask because the copper reaction mass was one of the suggestions provided by Rodal, if I'm not mistaken.@sanmanQuoteSo we're told that increasing the internal potential energy of some object also increases its mass in some very tiny miniscule amount (since that increased energy amounts to some tiny mass)Not sure if this is what you are implying, but from your wording it seems you are referring to a static mass increase given by special relativity (E=m/c^2). Woodward/Mach effect is supposedly a complete different thing, a transient mass fluctuation that arises only when a non rigid object is accelerated while having its internal energy changing (this last point has been recently challenged by Tajmar, who showed that the data better agree with the model if one considers only the mechanical energy in PZT stack, not the energy stored in the electric field).QuoteIs it possible to do the Mach Effect using some easily reversible chemical reaction for the internal energy / mass fluctuation part?Regardless from the correctness of Tajmar's argument, I think the problem in using reversible chemical reactions is that you would get a quite noisy environment, at least if you use chemical reactions in a liquid solution (chemical reactions in solids tend to be pretty slow, and the ability to have rapid consecutive variations of internal energy is crucial for detecting the effect). Using a fluid fluctuating mass could also produce further complications when dealing with the requirement of acceleration.
@WarpTechTruly a remarkable job!Have you received any supervision/advice from Woodward & co. on the structure and on how to drive this? I ask because the copper reaction mass was one of the suggestions provided by Rodal, if I'm not mistaken.@sanmanQuoteSo we're told that increasing the internal potential energy of some object also increases its mass in some very tiny miniscule amount (since that increased energy amounts to some tiny mass)Not sure if this is what you are implying, but from your wording it seems you are referring to a static mass increase given by special relativity (E=m/c^2). Woodward/Mach effect is supposedly a complete different thing, a transient mass fluctuation that arises only when a non rigid object is accelerated while having its internal energy changing (this last point has been recently challenged by Tajmar, who showed that the data better agree with the model if one considers only the mechanical energy in PZT stack, not the energy stored in the electric field).
QuoteIs it possible to do the Mach Effect using some easily reversible chemical reaction for the internal energy / mass fluctuation part?Regardless from the correctness of Tajmar's argument, I think the problem in using reversible chemical reactions is that you would get a quite noisy environment, at least if you use chemical reactions in a liquid solution (chemical reactions in solids tend to be pretty slow, and the ability to have rapid consecutive variations of internal energy is crucial for detecting the effect). Using a fluid fluctuating mass could also produce further complications when dealing with the requirement of acceleration.
4b. Those are spring-steel cup washers under the head of the screws, not rubber. They will provide the spring-back pressure on the stack for compressive strain. 5. The objective of a shorter stack is that the thrust goes with w4 but only as dx2. So a higher frequency is better than more displacement. 6. The issue with higher frequency is that the applied power requirements also go up as w4. So a 200W audio amplifier is not going to provide enough juice. That is why I'm designing a high power pulsed source, that will ring the device to resonance, like a bell clanger.
As I understand it, Woodward/Mach effect is the alleged propulsive effect that arises from selectively varying a mass while linearly oscillating it. So the mass is higher in value on the upstroke and lower in value on the downstroke.
The hypothesis states that transient mass fluctuations arise in any object that absorbs internal energy while undergoing a proper acceleration.
Okay, fair enough - so perhaps a conventional chemical reaction isn't the best candidate - but has anyone comparatively looked at all the possible candidates for physical changes that correspond to change in internal energy? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like the first candidate was the electricity flow in and out of a capacitor, and then later it was purely about mechanical oscillation through piezos.
Are we sure that mechanical oscillation is the best way to achieve internal energy fluctuation (aka. mass fluctuation) for Mach Effect purposes?
Do you see what I'm saying?