Quote from: Rodal on 07/01/2015 01:24 pmQuote from: TheTraveller on 07/01/2015 05:12 am////QUESTION: Concerning your rotary test rig, are you planning to use an air bearing set-up, like Shawyer's ?========================As for the test rig, will use a DIY magnetic thrust bearing as the max load will be around 10kg as against SPR's 100kg test load. Will have 1,000s of output pulses per rev to enable easy accel calcs. All data logged. Will not have adjustable load as such but can vary the mass to get different accel as per A = F/M.When SPR did this they found the KE transferred to the 100kg load mass was what which was drawn from the power supply, adjusting for losses.As SPR have not yet published this data, my tests may be the 1st to show the KE gain by the load is sourced from the power supply, which eliminates ZPE as the energy source. Can't do this with scales.I need to stop as phone battery is almost dead and the nurse will be around any minute. Will be good to be home again.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 07/01/2015 05:12 am////QUESTION: Concerning your rotary test rig, are you planning to use an air bearing set-up, like Shawyer's ?
Good job, Shell...this helix has high power capability and appears to be a double helix, just like DNA, so if it doesn't provide thrust, it might become a new life form Welcome back Mr. T. slow and steady as she goes.Aero and all, very impressed with the NSF-1701 analysis. Need a summary: is 10.2L looking less promising than 9.0L? Initial images appear to be. I can still change the exoskelelton to 9.0L easily now, but the new copper support bars will arrive today and need to have a consensus from the braintrusts here: stick with [email protected] or go to [email protected]? I have no issues either way.Onward and upward...
Since many times posters have inquired as to why we even bother to understand the reported claims behind the EM Drive, I have added the reported experimental results of Ad Astra's VASIMR VX-200 magnetoplasma engine with argon propellant http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/research-and-development to the experimental results in http://emdrive.wiki/Experimental_Results for comparison purposes.This will help people to understand that NASA's present reported results for the (claimed to be propellant-less) EM Drive force/inputPower are not too far off from the argon-propellant VASIMIR's results, and that Prof. Yang at NorthWestern Polytechnic University in China reported results for her EM Drive have 38 times higher force/InputPower than VASIMIR's. Of course, there is the important question of scaling, as VASIMIR is reporting 5.7 Newtons with 200 kW InputPower, while Prof. Yang reported 0.27 Newtons with 0.3 kW InputPower.For discussion of VASIMIR, NSF has a thread dedicated to this topic.
Big differance 1.2814 foot lbs for 200kW on the VASIMIRvs Yang's @ 200Kw would be 40.4656 foot lbsI like cars so forgive me Foot Pounds works a little better for me.
Quote from: SeeShells on 07/01/2015 05:09 pmBig differance 1.2814 foot lbs for 200kW on the VASIMIRvs Yang's @ 200Kw would be 40.4656 foot lbsI like cars so forgive me Foot Pounds works a little better for me.Unfortunately for the EM Drive, Prof. Yang has shown that the force/PowerInput for the EM Drive does not scale linearly beyond that,
Quote from: Rodal on 07/01/2015 04:48 pmSince many times posters have inquired as to why we even bother to understand the reported claims behind the EM Drive, I have added the reported experimental results of Ad Astra's VASIMR VX-200 magnetoplasma engine with argon propellant http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/research-and-development to the experimental results in http://emdrive.wiki/Experimental_Results for comparison purposes.This will help people to understand that NASA's present reported results for the (claimed to be propellant-less) EM Drive force/inputPower are not too far off from the argon-propellant VASIMIR's results, and that Prof. Yang at NorthWestern Polytechnic University in China reported results for her EM Drive have 38 times higher force/InputPower than VASIMIR's. ...Of course, there is the important question of scaling, as VASIMIR is reporting 5.7 Newtons with 200 kW InputPower, while Prof. Yang reported 0.27 Newtons with 0.3 kW InputPower.For discussion of VASIMIR, NSF has a thread dedicated to this topic.Big differance 1.2814 foot lbs for 200kW on the VASIMIRvs Yang's @ 200Kw would be 40.4656 foot lbsI like cars so forgive me Foot Pounds works a little better for me.
Since many times posters have inquired as to why we even bother to understand the reported claims behind the EM Drive, I have added the reported experimental results of Ad Astra's VASIMR VX-200 magnetoplasma engine with argon propellant http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/research-and-development to the experimental results in http://emdrive.wiki/Experimental_Results for comparison purposes.This will help people to understand that NASA's present reported results for the (claimed to be propellant-less) EM Drive force/inputPower are not too far off from the argon-propellant VASIMIR's results, and that Prof. Yang at NorthWestern Polytechnic University in China reported results for her EM Drive have 38 times higher force/InputPower than VASIMIR's. ...Of course, there is the important question of scaling, as VASIMIR is reporting 5.7 Newtons with 200 kW InputPower, while Prof. Yang reported 0.27 Newtons with 0.3 kW InputPower.For discussion of VASIMIR, NSF has a thread dedicated to this topic.
http://captiongenerator.com/48295/Hitler-Reacts-to-current-EmDrive-Situation
Quote from: SeeShells on 07/01/2015 05:57 pmhttp://captiongenerator.com/48295/Hitler-Reacts-to-current-EmDrive-SituationThat was both hilarious and poignant.But when has science really at the limits of knowledge not been fraught with both joy and disappointment? And work, lots of sometimes grueling, ungrateful work.
@Dr. RodalI think I have found what I was doing wrong, maybe not all of it, but one thing for sure. Here's what I did.- - - Increased resolution by 2.5 times- - - Replaced copper with perfect metal- - - Looked at the csv file of the big end base. Same view as I have uploaded- - - Made the same run using Copper model instead of the perfect metal.- - - Looked at the corresponding csv file.By noting that the Copper model csv file showed energies on the order of 10-30 (smaller than before due to increased resolution) while the perfect metal showed exact zero energies throughout, I determined that my x-slice was actually outside of the cavity. That is why you don't see the cavity in the uploaded data. All of the previously uploaded data is wrong and will be removed.I have attached the perfect metal csv file, as .txt, with the x-slice moved to inside the cavity. (the forum won't attach files with .csv extensions. (same with .sh extensions))I need to make 72 more runs of h5totxt and h5topng. Can someone help me by converting the attached list of commands into a BASH shell command file. Running those commands manually at the terminal is challenging, exhausting and very prone to errors and I haven't bothered to learn BASH since moving to Ubuntu from Windows a few months ago. Given one working command file, I can likely make the rest myself, and maybe learn to recognize a BASH command file in the process.
Yes, I plan to generate and upload the full set of 18 views and csv data files.
Quote from: aero on 07/01/2015 06:29 pmYes, I plan to generate and upload the full set of 18 views and csv data files.here it is !!!!!!!!!!!!
As a means of comparison, this is an early movie (attached below with title "2.1-cone-out2.1" as a mp4 attachment - do NOT confuse with the YouTube movie shown as reference) that was posted by aero of NASA's EM Drive with a dielectric insert. The Meep model in this movie is 2-D instead of 3-D. Observe that it converges to a p=3 mode which was not observed in NASA' experiments (they only observed TM212 and TE012 both of which have p=2 insted of p=3).The interesting thing that I would like to point out is that this movie shows:1) The fields settle into standing waves, with a sinusoidal--in-time variation. The behavior is as predicted by standard resonance in a cavity with standing waves fixed in space, instead of the always changing fluctuating steady state with time-asymmetry shown in the recent 3D modeling without a dielectric insert.2) One can also clearly observe that although the EM Drive being modeled has flat ends, the wave field wants to settle into a spherical wave pattern in its interior, as it should be according to resonant standing waves.So, it is clear that Meep can predict a standing wave field inside the EM Drive or a fluctuating, time-asymmetric field, depending on the Meep model.Compare the attached movie mp4 movie using a 2-D model, to the behavior of Ex -y on this 3-D model on the YouTube here :https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=26&v=Cm9Nl-x1hj4