Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 3  (Read 1804153 times)

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
@rodal - been out shopping for nuisance hardware and trying catch up. The last meep animation...9.0L or 10.2? Considering the last simulation, which would u recommend I select...its10.2 now and easy to shorten...now, not in a couple of days...

Offline wallofwolfstreet

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 169
  • Likes Given: 436
Sorry to interrupt the great modeling work going on right now, but I condensed some of the recent findings on the intellectual property and financial aspects of SPR into a reddit post.

To summarize, it looks like SPR has had alot more money move through the organization over the last 15 years than originally thought.  It has received roughly 600,000 pounds in grants, loans and equity.  This is about 950,000 USD at current exchange rates.  If we adjust the time at which SPR received its' financing for inflation (grants received in 2000, over 250,000 pounds of equity in 2005), we get that SPR has had well over 1 million USD in total financing, in 2015 dollars.

As I wrote in the attached reddit post, I consider this very suspect.  A few patents, a few test articles and zero sales or licensing (at least licensing that SPR would actually get paid for) of any kind is very hard to justify given the resources at SPR had at its' disposal.   

Thanks for being "the one" that is bringing real facts and numbers on SPR. 

How were the  600,000 pounds in grants, loans and equity disbursed in time?

Has it been receiving cash inflow steady through time?  Particularly interesting regarding the last 7 years with the emphasis on superconductivity, which should be more expensive to realize.  Has the money inflow increased with time or decreased with time?

The cash inflow is very unsteady.  Both 2013 and 2104 have seen negligible cash inflow, with 2005 being the single greatest year for cash inflow due to the equity sale.  You can get a general sense of the cash flows by examining changes in the total net assets of the company, which I attach as a spreadsheet. 

Paul Young is still a shareholder, and in fact he has gained a few shares.  He now holds 78, which is 6.89% of the company.  He is only a shareholder of SPR, not a director.

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2744
  • 92129
  • Liked: 705
  • Likes Given: 239
@rodal - been out shopping for nuisance hardware and trying catch up. The last meep animation...9.0L or 10.2? Considering the last simulation, which would u recommend I select...its10.2 now and easy to shorten...now, not in a couple of days...

It was 9 inches, but 10.2 should produce better forces from everything I've read. I had intended to run 10.2 inches but got side tracked, in part by your post that you had already selected 10.2. If so then I have time to run it before or while you are collecting data. It's unlikely the fields will show much different than the 9.0 inches, at least until we get some form of numerical output coded into the simulation. I'll go ahead and set up the model, but that will take only seconds to do. Then maybe I'll do some resonance runs while I take a break and read a book.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline VAXHeadroom

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 194
  • Whereever you go, there you are. -- BB
  • Baltimore MD
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 151
I can't contribute much to the technical discussion - hell, I can barely follow this at the concept level - BUT video editing and production I can do, including multiple layers, overlays, text, and motion tracking.  I will try to contribute (with tech assistance on what makes sense!) in this way - hopefully it will help those whose EM understanding runs way deeper than mine! :)
Emory Stagmer
  Executive Producer, Public Speaker UnTied Music - www.untiedmusic.com

Offline deuteragenie

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
  • Germany
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 0
...

Althouth it looks like the field strength is stronger at the small end, we have no data.  What about averaging the field values for each frame we see in this video and produce the resulting "averaged" field strength ?
We need NUMBERS to quantify this, there is no other way around it.  Without numbers one cannot compare.

At least now we have everything scaled to the same Max Min numbers, unfortunately we don't know the numbers.

Can you tell aero how to output NUMBERS in Meep?

I think this is achieved trough the definition of "flux", excerpt from the Meep tutorial:

...
Finally, we have to specify where we want Meep to compute the flux spectra, and at what frequencies. (This must be done after specifying the geometry, sources, resolution, etcetera, because all of the field parameters are initialized when flux planes are created.)
...
We compute the fluxes through a line segment twice the width of the waveguide, located at the beginning or end of the waveguide. (Note that the flux lines are separated by 1 from the boundary of the cell, so that they do not lie within the absorbing PML regions.) Again, there are two cases: the transmitted flux is either computed at the right or the bottom of the computational cell, depending on whether the waveguide is straight or bent.

=> In 3D and for our case I suppose that the "flux region" in Meep is to be defined as a circle.

...
Finally, we have to output the flux values:
(display-fluxes trans refl)
This prints a series of outputs like:
flux1:, 0.1, 7.91772317108475e-7, -3.16449591437196e-7
flux1:, 0.101010101010101, 1.18410865137737e-6, -4.85527604203706e-7
flux1:, 0.102020202020202, 1.77218779386503e-6, -7.37944901819701e-7
flux1:, 0.103030303030303, 2.63090852112034e-6, -1.11118350510327e-6
flux1:, ...
This is comma-delimited data, which can easily be imported into any spreadsheet or plotting program (e.g. Matlab): the first column is the frequency, the second is the transmitted power, and the third is the reflected power.

So, from there, save the .CSV file and we are ready to go for quantitative analysis.

That all looks fine. Now can you tell me how to make this .ctl file work. --the "flux-in-a-box" part.

And while you're at it, please code (display-fluxes trans refl) into the file and send it back to me.

mmm...

Syntax error:
tut1.ctl:29:0: source expression failed to match any pattern in form (define ((display-flux-in-box dir box)) (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (flux-in-box dir box) "\n"))

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2744
  • 92129
  • Liked: 705
  • Likes Given: 239
Syntax error:
tut1.ctl:29:0: source expression failed to match any pattern in form (define ((display-flux-in-box dir box)) (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (flux-in-box dir box) "\n"))

Yes, I got that. but what is the fix?
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
@rodal - been out shopping for nuisance hardware and trying catch up. The last meep animation...9.0L or 10.2? Considering the last simulation, which would u recommend I select...its10.2 now and easy to shorten...now, not in a couple of days...

It was 9 inches, but 10.2 should produce better forces from everything I've read. I had intended to run 10.2 inches but got side tracked, in part by your post that you had already selected 10.2. If so then I have time to run it before or while you are collecting data. It's unlikely the fields will show much different than the 9.0 inches, at least until we get some form of numerical output coded into the simulation. I'll go ahead and set up the model, but that will take only seconds to do. Then maybe I'll do some resonance runs while I take a break and read a book.

Thanks aero! Was thinking of a nickname/designation for the drive, for good luck...your name should be part of it. However theres so much support here, have decided on NSF-1701(giving away my age). Your efforts are appreciated my friend.

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2744
  • 92129
  • Liked: 705
  • Likes Given: 239
@rodal - been out shopping for nuisance hardware and trying catch up. The last meep animation...9.0L or 10.2? Considering the last simulation, which would u recommend I select...its10.2 now and easy to shorten...now, not in a couple of days...

It was 9 inches, but 10.2 should produce better forces from everything I've read. I had intended to run 10.2 inches but got side tracked, in part by your post that you had already selected 10.2. If so then I have time to run it before or while you are collecting data. It's unlikely the fields will show much different than the 9.0 inches, at least until we get some form of numerical output coded into the simulation. I'll go ahead and set up the model, but that will take only seconds to do. Then maybe I'll do some resonance runs while I take a break and read a book.

Thanks aero! Was thinking of a nickname/designation for the drive, for good luck...your name should be part of it. However theres so much support here, have decided on NSF-1701(giving away my age). Your efforts are appreciated my friend.

NSF-1701 it is!
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8017
  • UK
  • Liked: 1281
  • Likes Given: 168

Sorry to interrupt the great modeling work going on right now, but I condensed some of the recent findings on the intellectual property and financial aspects of SPR into a reddit post.

To summarize, it looks like SPR has had alot more money move through the organization over the last 15 years than originally thought.  It has received roughly 600,000 pounds in grants, loans and equity.  This is about 950,000 USD at current exchange rates.  If we adjust the time at which SPR received its' financing for inflation (grants received in 2000, over 250,000 pounds of equity in 2005), we get that SPR has had well over 1 million USD in total financing, in 2015 dollars.

As I wrote in the attached reddit post, I consider this very suspect.  A few patents, a few test articles and zero sales or licensing (at least licensing that SPR would actually get paid for) of any kind is very hard to justify given the resources at SPR had at its' disposal.   

So are you saying 1 million USD over 15 years? That's about $67K a year.

That's not enough to pay one engineer. It would be total compensation pack, including salary, benefits, and any company required taxes. Don't forget other business expenses would cut into that amount.

SPR is a shoestring operation. Shawyer isn't making any money off of this and I doubt there are any paid employees. Lack of funding is probably why he doesn't have definitive results, assuming his idea works.

Yep, I am saying that over the full 15 years, if we bring all the financing figures into 2015 dollars, more than a million USD has gone into SPR.

You're right that it is not enough to pay an engineer.  SPR, to the best of my knowledge, has never had any employees on the payroll.  Additionally, in at least the last two years,2013 and 2014,Shawyer has deferred any salary himself.  Note that he is 68 years old, so he will be collecting pension.  He is also married, so he will have personal financial support from his wife's pension as well.     

Quote
SPR is a shoestring operation. Shawyer isn't making any money off of this and I doubt there are any paid employees. Lack of funding is probably why he doesn't have definitive results, assuming his idea works.

The reason I disagree with this, is that 1 million dollars isn't exactly small cheese, especially when we consider that there are what, almost a dozen individuals attempting their own replications on maybe a few hundred or thousand each?

You're trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here by implying that this is a huge amount of money when in fact over the timescale involved it is very little money at all as has been already explained. In fact the pittance of money involved gives one probably explanation as too why more progress hasn't been made by him in this time scale.

Offline deuteragenie

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
  • Germany
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 0
Syntax error:
tut1.ctl:29:0: source expression failed to match any pattern in form (define ((display-flux-in-box dir box)) (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (flux-in-box dir box) "\n"))

Yes, I got that. but what is the fix?

No clue.  Looks like this tutorial file is broken no only for that reason.

How about trying out something like this in the run-until clause ?

(at-every 1.0 (
      (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (meep-fields-flux-in-box fields Z (volume (center 5 0 0) (size 0 1 2))) ", \n" )
   ))

or (probably for more recent Meep versions):

(at-every 1.0 (
      (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (flux-in-box Z (volume (center 5 0 0) (size 0 1 2))) ", \n" )
   ))

I read that Meep also has: electric-energy-in-box, magnetic-energy-in-box and field-energy-in-box, and can compute force spectra... when it does not core dump!

Also, it looks like the recommended practice is to define a flux region first:

(define wvg-pwr (add-flux f 0 1
    (make flux-region (direction Z) (center 0 0)
       (size (* 1.2 (+ (* 2 sw) s)) (* 1.2 sw) 0))))

and then display the fluxes (as a CSV):

(display-fluxes wvg-pwr)

See here: http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep_Tutorial/Optical_forces

Update: I successfully tested this last option.
« Last Edit: 06/28/2015 08:53 PM by deuteragenie »

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
I can't contribute much to the technical discussion - hell, I can barely follow this at the concept level - BUT video editing and production I can do, including multiple layers, overlays, text, and motion tracking.  I will try to contribute (with tech assistance on what makes sense!) in this way - hopefully it will help those whose EM understanding runs way deeper than mine! :)
[/quote

May need ur help vax...when I do the live video stream, it will contain a laser dot that (hopefully) will have vertical deflection. Translating that into a "chart" recorder type of display would  could be very helpful to others. Here is a vid I made last week to test a concept...there is a small bit showing deflection.


Next vid will be streamed live w/stationary camera on laser spot

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2744
  • 92129
  • Liked: 705
  • Likes Given: 239
Syntax error:
tut1.ctl:29:0: source expression failed to match any pattern in form (define ((display-flux-in-box dir box)) (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (flux-in-box dir box) "\n"))

Yes, I got that. but what is the fix?

No clue.  Looks like this tutorial file is broken no only for that reason.

How about trying out something like this in the run-until clause ?

(at-every 1.0 (
      (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (meep-fields-flux-in-box fields Z (volume (center 5 0 0) (size 0 1 2))) ", \n" )
   ))

or (probably for more recent Meep versions):

(at-every 1.0 (
      (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (flux-in-box Z (volume (center 5 0 0) (size 0 1 2))) ", \n" )
   ))

I read that Meep also has: electric-energy-in-box, magnetic-energy-in-box and field-energy-in-box, and can compute force spectra... when it does not core dump!

Also, it looks like the recommended practice is to define a flux region first:

(define wvg-pwr (add-flux f 0 1
    (make flux-region (direction Z) (center 0 0)
       (size (* 1.2 (+ (* 2 sw) s)) (* 1.2 sw) 0))))

and then display the fluxes (as a CSV):

(display-fluxes wvg-pwr)

See here: http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep_Tutorial/Optical_forces

Look at the reference I gave at the bottom of the control file. That post was by Steven G., the keeper of Meep source updates and the most knowledgeable Meep authority at MIT.

As for other field outputs available from Meep, see the reference manual, here:
http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep_Reference#Field_computations
There are a lot of choices but I'm concerned that the fix for flux-in-a-box may be in fact to compile/link/load Meep from the latest source.

Does anyone reading this want to volunteer to create a "configure" file to do the compile/link/load from the latest source, here:https://github.com/stevengj/meep/blob/master/src/meep.hpp#L169-L172
to run and install on Ubuntu 15.04? Then send it to me, of course. Given a current version of Meep, I could avoid the question of, "Does my software version even support that capability," which I have encountered many times. The answer is "sometimes yes, sometimes no."

And I'd be willing to bet a nickel that several people would be happy to load a current version of meep if it wasn't for the need to go back to school to learn how.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline deltaMass

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 955
  • A Brit in California
  • Liked: 671
  • Likes Given: 275
Don't be too hard on Shawyer. Woodward has spent at least twice as long with much less funding in total on his bag of tricks to also produce nothing.

Offline VAXHeadroom

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 194
  • Whereever you go, there you are. -- BB
  • Baltimore MD
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 151
I can't contribute much to the technical discussion - hell, I can barely follow this at the concept level - BUT video editing and production I can do, including multiple layers, overlays, text, and motion tracking.  I will try to contribute (with tech assistance on what makes sense!) in this way - hopefully it will help those whose EM understanding runs way deeper than mine! :)
[/quote

May need ur help vax...when I do the live video stream, it will contain a laser dot that (hopefully) will have vertical deflection. Translating that into a "chart" recorder type of display would  could be very helpful to others. Here is a vid I made last week to test a concept...there is a small bit showing deflection.


Can do :)
Emory Stagmer
  Executive Producer, Public Speaker UnTied Music - www.untiedmusic.com

Offline VAXHeadroom

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 194
  • Whereever you go, there you are. -- BB
  • Baltimore MD
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 151


Thanks so much for taking your valuable time to make this movie :)

Could you be so nice to make movies from these four sets also, please ?

 (https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B1XizxEfB23tfmcxbUxsM0lVTGVkemVTX1RaMlZJb001NHVaUDRvYUtjS0lIbjdIcUNkX0k&usp=sharing June 27 runs)

1)  rfmwguy- ez-xyz views June 27 views, Magnetic antenna, Hy views,    Hy-y

and

2)  rfmwguy- ez-xyz views June 27 views, Magnetic antenna, Hy views,    Hy -z

and

3) rfmwguy- ez-xyz views June 27 views, Magnetic antenna, Ex views,    Ex -y
and

4) rfmwguy- ez-xyz views June 27 views, Magnetic antenna, Hz views,    Hz -x

Thanks :)


Example movie made from this data for EX(x,y,z) and HX(x,y,z) Frames 0-9 looped twice, 3 frames/sec.  Is this kind of synchronized output useful?

« Last Edit: 06/28/2015 09:28 PM by VAXHeadroom »
Emory Stagmer
  Executive Producer, Public Speaker UnTied Music - www.untiedmusic.com

Offline DrBagelBites

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
  • Orlando
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 68
It turns out I might be able to check out some measurement equipment from one of the labs on my campus.

The plan would be to measure the change of strain in a beam using a strain gauge connected to a wheatstone bridge that then feeds into a DAQ to be analyzed in LabVIEW.

Thoughts?

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5838
  • USA
  • Liked: 5919
  • Likes Given: 5261
...Example movie made from this data for EX(x,y,z) and HX(x,y,z) Frames 0-9 looped twice, 3 frames/sec.  Is this kind of synchronized output useful?


Yes, thank you.

Suggestions:

1) Run in a time loop for at least 3 minutes, so that one can look for features, maybe with some blank images at the end of each cycle to indicate that the cycle is over and the loop starts again

2) Plot these groups

together

A)  TRANSVERSE ELECTRIC
Ey -x       Ey -y     Ey -z
Ez -x        Ez -y     Ez -z

B) TRANSVERSE MAGNETIC
Hy -x       Hy -y     Hy -z
Hz -x        Hz -y     Hz -z

C)  LONGITUDINAL
Ex -x       Ex -y      Ex -z
Hx -x       Hx -y     Hx -z
« Last Edit: 06/28/2015 09:51 PM by Rodal »

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5838
  • USA
  • Liked: 5919
  • Likes Given: 5261
@rodal - been out shopping for nuisance hardware and trying catch up. The last meep animation...9.0L or 10.2? Considering the last simulation, which would u recommend I select...its10.2 now and easy to shorten...now, not in a couple of days...
The latest simulations on film are 9.0 inches.  These are the advantages of each set:

1) 10.2 inches excites transverse electric mode TE013 similar mode as used by Shawyer and Yang
2) 9.0 inches excites transverse magnetic mode TM212 similar mode as used by NASA Eagleworks

It looks like the choice would be to go first for 10.2 inches because

A) Shawyer and Yang reported much higher force/inputPower than NASA
B) Even if you trust more NASA's work, then you have to go by the fact that NASA reported no thrust without dielectric and you are using no dielectric at the moment
C) IF you ever decide to use a dielectric insert, like NASA, the dielectric insert will bring the natural frequency down, which means that to have it resonate at 2.45GHz with mode TM212 like NASA, you will have to make the frustum shorter than 9.0 inches.
D) You can shorten the cone once you have tested the 10.2 inch configuration and the the configuration with a dielectric insert but you cannot increase it once you have shortened it.
« Last Edit: 06/29/2015 01:48 AM by Rodal »

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2744
  • 92129
  • Liked: 705
  • Likes Given: 239
I have plugged in 10.2 inches length, electric source and antenna into rfmwguy's NSF-1701 model and ran resonance. It resonates nicely at 2.44360748E+009 Hz. Very high Q. I am now running with the drive frequency set to 2.45 GHz exactly just to see what Q meep calculates. Then I will be ready to run some field patterns.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline Prunesquallor

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 174
  • Currently, TeV Brane Resident
  • Liked: 157
  • Likes Given: 73


Next vid will be streamed live w/stationary camera on laser spot

If you want to securely mount a laser for displacement measurements, you might look into the "picatinny" system that is used for laser gun sight mounting and adjusting. It's a toothed, beveled mount that the laser securely mounts to with a simple tightening screw. Most of the lasers have set screw adjustments, too.

http://www.brownells.com/optics-mounting/rings-mounts-amp-bases/rifle-bases/5-5-8-rail-blank-sku100003790-26705-52523.aspx

http://www.brownells.com/optics-mounting/electronic-sights/laser-sights/rail-master-universal-laser-sights-prod54574.aspx?avs|Laser%20Output_1=5mW


Retired, yet... not

Tags: