Quote from: rfmwguy on 08/03/2015 08:32 pmThere is growing evidence (I think) that TM is the critical mode and not TE. While I'm not trying to throw stones, it is the direction I am going with my theory. http://processmodeling.org/theory/physics/kinetic.htm<snip>"The conclusion - The kinetic energy of the electron is identical to its magnetic energy."<snip>"6. General conclusion. - Kinetic energies are electromagnetic energies Kinetic energies can, in certain conditions, be restructured (converted) into tangible particles and vice versa, tangible particle can be restructured into field ones, i.e. into kinetic energy.Kinetic energy is conveyed from one object to another in the form of electromagnetic waves (photons)."Both Shawyer and Prof Yang say TE mode delivers more Force.
There is growing evidence (I think) that TM is the critical mode and not TE. While I'm not trying to throw stones, it is the direction I am going with my theory. http://processmodeling.org/theory/physics/kinetic.htm<snip>"The conclusion - The kinetic energy of the electron is identical to its magnetic energy."<snip>"6. General conclusion. - Kinetic energies are electromagnetic energies Kinetic energies can, in certain conditions, be restructured (converted) into tangible particles and vice versa, tangible particle can be restructured into field ones, i.e. into kinetic energy.Kinetic energy is conveyed from one object to another in the form of electromagnetic waves (photons)."
Quote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 07:58 pmQuote from: not_a_physicist on 08/03/2015 03:34 amTheTraveller's post that graphed Shawyer's turnable velocity ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1411849#msg1411849 ) made me curious to see how that lined up with the "power off" event in the video ( http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg ). Attached are my results. To try to be consistent with TheTraveller's data, each 'rotation tick' is half of each line-separated segment on the turntable. There will be a small amount of drift from switching between one of the little black rods rotating around to another. The point's location on the time axis will also jitter a little, since I was only recording times with second resolution.The plot is POSITION vs. TIME.Here's some post-processing for velocity and acceleration. It could benefit from a better filter algorithm. But you get a rough idea. It doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?Looks about right to me. Acceleration stops when the power is turned off, the velocity "slowly" decreases from there due to friction. Since there is very little friction, it keeps moving at nearly the same speed for quite a while but the acceleration stops when it's supposed to.Todd
Quote from: not_a_physicist on 08/03/2015 03:34 amTheTraveller's post that graphed Shawyer's turnable velocity ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1411849#msg1411849 ) made me curious to see how that lined up with the "power off" event in the video ( http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg ). Attached are my results. To try to be consistent with TheTraveller's data, each 'rotation tick' is half of each line-separated segment on the turntable. There will be a small amount of drift from switching between one of the little black rods rotating around to another. The point's location on the time axis will also jitter a little, since I was only recording times with second resolution.The plot is POSITION vs. TIME.Here's some post-processing for velocity and acceleration. It could benefit from a better filter algorithm. But you get a rough idea. It doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?
TheTraveller's post that graphed Shawyer's turnable velocity ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1411849#msg1411849 ) made me curious to see how that lined up with the "power off" event in the video ( http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg ). Attached are my results. To try to be consistent with TheTraveller's data, each 'rotation tick' is half of each line-separated segment on the turntable. There will be a small amount of drift from switching between one of the little black rods rotating around to another. The point's location on the time axis will also jitter a little, since I was only recording times with second resolution.
Quote from: X_RaY on 08/03/2015 08:50 pmQuote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 07:49 pmQuote from: X_RaY on 08/03/2015 07:30 pmQuote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 07:18 pmQuote from: X_RaY on 08/03/2015 07:04 pmI search for good solutions for such problems for over 10 years now. I do it with a well known Prof. of µW engineering. I know what i am saying, believe it or not. If you like to do so, do it and measure and dont forget to post the results. OK?! I have no problem with that, its your turnCan you please explain what bad and good coupling are in reference to an antenna design exciting a desired mode in a waveguide or resonant cavity?The examples I have used are from microwave tech books. Are they incorrect or are there better ways and if so why are the better ways better?OK. Give me a specific problem. Which mode do you like to excite?PS:These books are really helpful, also helpful is to have experience.Theory is right most time, but to bring special solutions into practice is a different thing.Lets start simple and excite TE01 in a 200mm diameter circular waveguide using 2.45GHz (121.9mm wavelength) as the external drive frequency.I get 164.0mm as the cutoff wavelength and 182.2mm as the guide wavelength. To excite I would place the 30.5mm long stub antenna (1/4 wavelength of the external frequency) at a right angle to the side wall length axis and 45.6mm away from an end plate (1/4 of the guide wavelength).Is there a better way?OK first with BD and SD equal to 200mm the wavelength inside the waveguide is: 2*91,906mm=183,812mm(lambda) at 2,45 GHznot 182.2mm (no problem with that difference).There are some possibilities:1) use a bended stub antenna in direction of the E field (goes around the center)2) use a waveguide coupling like tajmar 3) use a set of dipoles near one of the end plates4) a loop like in the NASA coneAll of that will work as well and i think almost better than the stub in your drawing.Test it with a VNA. If it isn't work (only one options) i will take my hat.Ok understand your point. Interesting. Especially the curved antenna to follow the transverse E field.BTW what equation did you use to get the guide wavelength? Did you use c in atmo of vac?Now how about exciting this in TE013?
Quote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 07:49 pmQuote from: X_RaY on 08/03/2015 07:30 pmQuote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 07:18 pmQuote from: X_RaY on 08/03/2015 07:04 pmI search for good solutions for such problems for over 10 years now. I do it with a well known Prof. of µW engineering. I know what i am saying, believe it or not. If you like to do so, do it and measure and dont forget to post the results. OK?! I have no problem with that, its your turnCan you please explain what bad and good coupling are in reference to an antenna design exciting a desired mode in a waveguide or resonant cavity?The examples I have used are from microwave tech books. Are they incorrect or are there better ways and if so why are the better ways better?OK. Give me a specific problem. Which mode do you like to excite?PS:These books are really helpful, also helpful is to have experience.Theory is right most time, but to bring special solutions into practice is a different thing.Lets start simple and excite TE01 in a 200mm diameter circular waveguide using 2.45GHz (121.9mm wavelength) as the external drive frequency.I get 164.0mm as the cutoff wavelength and 182.2mm as the guide wavelength. To excite I would place the 30.5mm long stub antenna (1/4 wavelength of the external frequency) at a right angle to the side wall length axis and 45.6mm away from an end plate (1/4 of the guide wavelength).Is there a better way?OK first with BD and SD equal to 200mm the wavelength inside the waveguide is: 2*91,906mm=183,812mm(lambda) at 2,45 GHznot 182.2mm (no problem with that difference).There are some possibilities:1) use a bended stub antenna in direction of the E field (goes around the center)2) use a waveguide coupling like tajmar 3) use a set of dipoles near one of the end plates4) a loop like in the NASA coneAll of that will work as well and i think almost better than the stub in your drawing.Test it with a VNA. If it isn't work (only one options) i will take my hat.
Quote from: X_RaY on 08/03/2015 07:30 pmQuote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 07:18 pmQuote from: X_RaY on 08/03/2015 07:04 pmI search for good solutions for such problems for over 10 years now. I do it with a well known Prof. of µW engineering. I know what i am saying, believe it or not. If you like to do so, do it and measure and dont forget to post the results. OK?! I have no problem with that, its your turnCan you please explain what bad and good coupling are in reference to an antenna design exciting a desired mode in a waveguide or resonant cavity?The examples I have used are from microwave tech books. Are they incorrect or are there better ways and if so why are the better ways better?OK. Give me a specific problem. Which mode do you like to excite?PS:These books are really helpful, also helpful is to have experience.Theory is right most time, but to bring special solutions into practice is a different thing.Lets start simple and excite TE01 in a 200mm diameter circular waveguide using 2.45GHz (121.9mm wavelength) as the external drive frequency.I get 164.0mm as the cutoff wavelength and 182.2mm as the guide wavelength. To excite I would place the 30.5mm long stub antenna (1/4 wavelength of the external frequency) at a right angle to the side wall length axis and 45.6mm away from an end plate (1/4 of the guide wavelength).Is there a better way?
Quote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 07:18 pmQuote from: X_RaY on 08/03/2015 07:04 pmI search for good solutions for such problems for over 10 years now. I do it with a well known Prof. of µW engineering. I know what i am saying, believe it or not. If you like to do so, do it and measure and dont forget to post the results. OK?! I have no problem with that, its your turnCan you please explain what bad and good coupling are in reference to an antenna design exciting a desired mode in a waveguide or resonant cavity?The examples I have used are from microwave tech books. Are they incorrect or are there better ways and if so why are the better ways better?OK. Give me a specific problem. Which mode do you like to excite?PS:These books are really helpful, also helpful is to have experience.Theory is right most time, but to bring special solutions into practice is a different thing.
Quote from: X_RaY on 08/03/2015 07:04 pmI search for good solutions for such problems for over 10 years now. I do it with a well known Prof. of µW engineering. I know what i am saying, believe it or not. If you like to do so, do it and measure and dont forget to post the results. OK?! I have no problem with that, its your turnCan you please explain what bad and good coupling are in reference to an antenna design exciting a desired mode in a waveguide or resonant cavity?The examples I have used are from microwave tech books. Are they incorrect or are there better ways and if so why are the better ways better?
I search for good solutions for such problems for over 10 years now. I do it with a well known Prof. of µW engineering. I know what i am saying, believe it or not. If you like to do so, do it and measure and dont forget to post the results. OK?! I have no problem with that, its your turn
Quote from: WarpTech on 08/03/2015 09:10 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 07:58 pmQuote from: not_a_physicist on 08/03/2015 03:34 amTheTraveller's post that graphed Shawyer's turnable velocity ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1411849#msg1411849 ) made me curious to see how that lined up with the "power off" event in the video ( http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg ). Attached are my results. To try to be consistent with TheTraveller's data, each 'rotation tick' is half of each line-separated segment on the turntable. There will be a small amount of drift from switching between one of the little black rods rotating around to another. The point's location on the time axis will also jitter a little, since I was only recording times with second resolution.The plot is POSITION vs. TIME.Here's some post-processing for velocity and acceleration. It could benefit from a better filter algorithm. But you get a rough idea. It doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?Looks about right to me. Acceleration stops when the power is turned off, the velocity "slowly" decreases from there due to friction. Since there is very little friction, it keeps moving at nearly the same speed for quite a while but the acceleration stops when it's supposed to.ToddYou don't see the velocity continuing to increase after power is turned off?Perhaps a fan kicked on in one of those pieces of equipment on the table...but not that any of that is published.
Quote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 09:24 pmQuote from: WarpTech on 08/03/2015 09:10 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 07:58 pmQuote from: not_a_physicist on 08/03/2015 03:34 amTheTraveller's post that graphed Shawyer's turnable velocity ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1411849#msg1411849 ) made me curious to see how that lined up with the "power off" event in the video ( http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg ). Attached are my results. To try to be consistent with TheTraveller's data, each 'rotation tick' is half of each line-separated segment on the turntable. There will be a small amount of drift from switching between one of the little black rods rotating around to another. The point's location on the time axis will also jitter a little, since I was only recording times with second resolution.The plot is POSITION vs. TIME.Here's some post-processing for velocity and acceleration. It could benefit from a better filter algorithm. But you get a rough idea. It doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?Looks about right to me. Acceleration stops when the power is turned off, the velocity "slowly" decreases from there due to friction. Since there is very little friction, it keeps moving at nearly the same speed for quite a while but the acceleration stops when it's supposed to.ToddYou don't see the velocity continuing to increase after power is turned off?Perhaps a fan kicked on in one of those pieces of equipment on the table...but not that any of that is published.Here's Shawyer's own data from the 2008 paper when the turntable was demonstrated seven years ago!!. My crude version below. Both show velocity increasing after power is removed. Thermal? Fans? Floobie Dust?
Quote from: rfmwguy on 08/03/2015 08:32 pmThere is growing evidence (I think) that TM is the critical mode and not TE. While I'm not trying to throw stones, it is the direction I am going with my theory. http://processmodeling.org/theory/physics/kinetic.htm<snip>"The conclusion - The kinetic energy of the electron is identical to its magnetic energy."<snip>"6. General conclusion. - Kinetic energies are electromagnetic energies Kinetic energies can, in certain conditions, be restructured (converted) into tangible particles and vice versa, tangible particle can be restructured into field ones, i.e. into kinetic energy.Kinetic energy is conveyed from one object to another in the form of electromagnetic waves (photons)."You are correct. NASA agrees with you: March made it clear in previous threads. NASA measured no thrust whatsoever when resonating at mode TE012 without a dielectric. Their computer modeling shows that TM modes are better. Lastly, NASA is the only research organization up to this date that has clearly measured the resonance mode shape. Shawyer and Yang never reported on any measurements showing that the operating mode shape was the mode they thought it was. Only NASA verified the mode shape with a thermal camera.I hope that TheTraveller and others use a thermal camera to verify the mode shape of operation of the EM Drive under operation.
Wow! Is everyone crabby today!!! Actually, I have been waiting for this. It has been my personal experience that, when dealing a very complex knowledge domain, that just before anyone "Groks" that domain they start to get really quite crabby. It is like a rite of passage it seems - growth pains!
...NASA uses TM mode as they need a axial electric field to excite their dielectric. When Shawyer used dielectrics he also excited in TM mode ...
...As for the EW null Force in TE mode without a dielectric, we both know there is no resonance in any mode for their copper frustum at 2.45GHz. So it is not that TE mode doesn't produce Force, just no resonance, no Force.
Quote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 09:43 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 09:24 pmQuote from: WarpTech on 08/03/2015 09:10 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 07:58 pmQuote from: not_a_physicist on 08/03/2015 03:34 amTheTraveller's post that graphed Shawyer's turnable velocity ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1411849#msg1411849 ) made me curious to see how that lined up with the "power off" event in the video ( http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg ). Attached are my results. To try to be consistent with TheTraveller's data, each 'rotation tick' is half of each line-separated segment on the turntable. There will be a small amount of drift from switching between one of the little black rods rotating around to another. The point's location on the time axis will also jitter a little, since I was only recording times with second resolution.The plot is POSITION vs. TIME.Here's some post-processing for velocity and acceleration. It could benefit from a better filter algorithm. But you get a rough idea. It doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?Looks about right to me. Acceleration stops when the power is turned off, the velocity "slowly" decreases from there due to friction. Since there is very little friction, it keeps moving at nearly the same speed for quite a while but the acceleration stops when it's supposed to.ToddYou don't see the velocity continuing to increase after power is turned off?Perhaps a fan kicked on in one of those pieces of equipment on the table...but not that any of that is published.Here's Shawyer's own data from the 2008 paper when the turntable was demonstrated seven years ago!!. My crude version below. Both show velocity increasing after power is removed. Thermal? Fans? Floobie Dust?Please note when power was on there was acceleration and when power was turned off there was no acceleration.
Quote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 09:43 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 09:24 pmQuote from: WarpTech on 08/03/2015 09:10 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 07:58 pmQuote from: not_a_physicist on 08/03/2015 03:34 amTheTraveller's post that graphed Shawyer's turnable velocity ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1411849#msg1411849 ) made me curious to see how that lined up with the "power off" event in the video ( http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg ). Attached are my results. To try to be consistent with TheTraveller's data, each 'rotation tick' is half of each line-separated segment on the turntable. There will be a small amount of drift from switching between one of the little black rods rotating around to another. The point's location on the time axis will also jitter a little, since I was only recording times with second resolution.The plot is POSITION vs. TIME.Here's some post-processing for velocity and acceleration. It could benefit from a better filter algorithm. But you get a rough idea. It doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?Looks about right to me. Acceleration stops when the power is turned off, the velocity "slowly" decreases from there due to friction. Since there is very little friction, it keeps moving at nearly the same speed for quite a while but the acceleration stops when it's supposed to.ToddYou don't see the velocity continuing to increase after power is turned off?Perhaps a fan kicked on in one of those pieces of equipment on the table...but not that any of that is published.Here's Shawyer's own data from the 2008 paper when the turntable was demonstrated seven years ago!!. My crude version below. Both show velocity increasing after power is removed. Thermal? Fans? Floobie Dust?Excellent analysis and undeniable conclusions on your part.Perhaps there is much greater degree of latitude with which people that have been in this thread for a while are willing to look at EM Drive data, and that's the reason for some responses.Look at it this way: when EM Drive thust results between different experimenters differ by ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE (not just a few percent) , and people have seen such huge variations in data, then people are willing to forgive time delays of seconds, or even really anomalous response like the velocity increasing after power is turned off.There are a number of anomalous time delays associated with EM Drive experiments that are very difficult to reconcile with electromagnetism.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 09:52 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 09:43 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 09:24 pmQuote from: WarpTech on 08/03/2015 09:10 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 08/03/2015 07:58 pmQuote from: not_a_physicist on 08/03/2015 03:34 amTheTraveller's post that graphed Shawyer's turnable velocity ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1411849#msg1411849 ) made me curious to see how that lined up with the "power off" event in the video ( http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg ). Attached are my results. To try to be consistent with TheTraveller's data, each 'rotation tick' is half of each line-separated segment on the turntable. There will be a small amount of drift from switching between one of the little black rods rotating around to another. The point's location on the time axis will also jitter a little, since I was only recording times with second resolution.The plot is POSITION vs. TIME.Here's some post-processing for velocity and acceleration. It could benefit from a better filter algorithm. But you get a rough idea. It doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?Looks about right to me. Acceleration stops when the power is turned off, the velocity "slowly" decreases from there due to friction. Since there is very little friction, it keeps moving at nearly the same speed for quite a while but the acceleration stops when it's supposed to.ToddYou don't see the velocity continuing to increase after power is turned off?Perhaps a fan kicked on in one of those pieces of equipment on the table...but not that any of that is published.Here's Shawyer's own data from the 2008 paper when the turntable was demonstrated seven years ago!!. My crude version below. Both show velocity increasing after power is removed. Thermal? Fans? Floobie Dust?Please note when power was on there was acceleration and when power was turned off there was no acceleration.Rubbish. Look at the data. From the paper: When the power is turned off, at 210 secs, there is a coast period as the slosh effects of 5kg of coolant maintain a reduced acceleration. This is followed by the deceleration due to the friction torqueSlosh. Ah yes.
...You also know what Shawyer said caused that event, ...
Quote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 09:49 pm...NASA uses TM mode as they need a axial electric field to excite their dielectric. When Shawyer used dielectrics he also excited in TM mode ...I fully agree,Quote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 09:49 pm...As for the EW null Force in TE mode without a dielectric, we both know there is no resonance in any mode for their copper frustum at 2.45GHz. So it is not that TE mode doesn't produce Force, just no resonance, no Force.Please go back and re-check your notes: without a dielctric they tested TE012 mode at 2.168 GHz, not 2.45 GHz.This is very close to both the NASA COMSOL FEA prediction for TE012 and to my prediction (I think I calculated around 2.2 GHz from memory).Your Excel spreadsheet may predict a higher frequency (I recall you predicted 2.3 GHz) but usually your Excel spreadsheet predicts natural frequencies higher than my calculations, depending on the mode shape.If you are performing an integration, do you have the means to increase the number of integration points by a multiplying factor of 100 and see what difference it makes in your predicted results?
Quote from: TheTraveller on 08/03/2015 08:38 pmQuote from: rfmwguy on 08/03/2015 08:32 pmThere is growing evidence (I think) that TM is the critical mode and not TE. While I'm not trying to throw stones, it is the direction I am going with my theory. http://processmodeling.org/theory/physics/kinetic.htm<snip>"The conclusion - The kinetic energy of the electron is identical to its magnetic energy."<snip>"6. General conclusion. - Kinetic energies are electromagnetic energies Kinetic energies can, in certain conditions, be restructured (converted) into tangible particles and vice versa, tangible particle can be restructured into field ones, i.e. into kinetic energy.Kinetic energy is conveyed from one object to another in the form of electromagnetic waves (photons)."Both Shawyer and Prof Yang say TE mode delivers more Force.I am aware of that Mr. T. I just happen to respectfully disagree and am pursuing a TM theory. Why? In the simple course of nature, I've not seen electricity, by itself, move anything. I cannot say that about magnetism.Too simple? Perhaps, but nature gives us the clues if we just follow her. I am also not trying to convince or dissuade or argue with anyone else. I find it extremely...uhhhh...distasteful and counterproductive.
...I am also not trying to convince or dissuade or argue with anyone else. I find it extremely...uhhhh...distasteful and counterproductive.