Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 3  (Read 1805141 times)

Offline jmossman

  • Member
  • Posts: 72
  • San Jose, CA
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 173
@SeeShells

Yes, I can add as many sources as I want. But someone else must tell me what and where. And will that help the experimenters or theorists? I wonder if the experimenters here will be able to do add many different sources. Just the problem of coming up with the equipment and materials applied in such a way as to avoid degrading the measurements.

And what is the noise bandwidth of a magnetron?
http://file.scirp.org/Html/8-9801080%5C7aa0f806-9c62-4bf5-ae30-1c09e7756ab9.jpg
This help?

Company... need to get but will be back.
Shell

Paul March had also done a quick-and-dirty measurement of a microwave while warming some coffee (~2.45GHz with ~BW +/- 30MHz)...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=36313.0;attach=821772

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5845
  • USA
  • Liked: 5927
  • Likes Given: 5270
@SeeShells

Yes, I can add as many sources as I want. But someone else must tell me what and where. And will that help the experimenters or theorists? I wonder if the experimenters here will be able to do add many different sources. Just the problem of coming up with the equipment and materials applied in such a way as to avoid degrading the measurements.

And what is the noise bandwidth of a magnetron?
http://file.scirp.org/Html/8-9801080%5C7aa0f806-9c62-4bf5-ae30-1c09e7756ab9.jpg
This help?

Company... need to get but will be back.
Shell

Paul March had also done a quick-and-dirty measurement of a microwave while warming some coffee (~2.45GHz with ~BW +/- 30MHz)...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=36313.0;attach=821772

Thank, you this spectrum does make it look like, when using a magnetron, the EM Drive can be switching between  modes, so I think we are on to something here: mode superposition at single frequencies + mode switching with the magnetron frequency varying between 2.42 to 2.48 GHz

So the magnetron makes for an always changing situation instead of the frozen standing wave envisioned by Egan.

« Last Edit: 06/29/2015 11:58 PM by Rodal »

Online aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2744
  • 92129
  • Liked: 705
  • Likes Given: 240
Been following this thread for a few weeks, decided to hop in to help if I could.

Aero, do you need only the most recent MEEP package?
I was going to go ahead and compile it from source for you but I found:
http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep_Download

According to the wiki, they have a precompiled source package available:
"apt-get install meep h5utils"

There is also a parallel source file:
"apt-get install meep-mpi"

If you need other packages compiled with it or the OpenMPI version, I will see what I can do.

Oh Thank you so much!

The problem with pre compiled is that they are older packages. I am using a pre compiled package now but it is not current with the documentation. The Meep reference manual was revised/released with the latest source code release so it describes how to do things that exist only in the latest release. My machine has 4 processors and I use OpenMPI.

What I would really like is the configure file to run at the Ubuntu prompt which builds and installs the executable, including Meep, MPB, Harminv, h5utils as well as the other libraries needed to use the Scheme interface. The claim is that if I compile it on my own machine it will run faster. But a complete object module would be my second choice and from there a current, generic downloadable object module.

Your links point to the same place I went when I started. The pre-compiled version is 1.2.1-2 and the multiprocessor version that is claimed, doesn't really exist. It goes to "Package not available in this suite." I was able to get the regular package to use a my processors. (The current Meep source software version is 1.3 or 1.3.1 so it was considered a significant upgrade)

Anyhow, I think this https://github.com/stevengj/meep/blob/master/src/meep.hpp#L169-L172 is the latest source. But I don't want to make it to hard for you, anything you can do beyond version 1.2.1-2 will help.

The source link you gave, http://ab-initio.mit.edu/meep/meep-1.3.tar.gz does include some configures, make_files and an INSTALL file and it is 1.3. I tried to use this data back when I started and got it down to two compile errors before I gave up and went back to my installed the Debian object.
« Last Edit: 06/30/2015 12:16 AM by aero »
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
@SeeShells

Yes, I can add as many sources as I want. But someone else must tell me what and where. And will that help the experimenters or theorists? I wonder if the experimenters here will be able to do add many different sources. Just the problem of coming up with the equipment and materials applied in such a way as to avoid degrading the measurements.

And what is the noise bandwidth of a magnetron?
http://file.scirp.org/Html/8-9801080%5C7aa0f806-9c62-4bf5-ae30-1c09e7756ab9.jpg
This help?

Company... need to get but will be back.
Shell

Paul March had also done a quick-and-dirty measurement of a microwave while warming some coffee (~2.45GHz with ~BW +/- 30MHz)...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=36313.0;attach=821772

Thank, you this spectrum does make it look like, when using a magnetron, the EM Drive can be switching between  modes, so I think we are on to something here: mode superposition at single frequencies + mode switching with the magnetron frequency varying between 2.42 to 2.48 GHz

So the magnetron makes for an always changing situation instead of the frozen standing wave envisioned by Egan.
Basically, a narrow band comb generator. This is slamming the TE & TM modes all over the place, which MAY account for some anomalous results. Modulation: am/fm/phase/pulse and just about anything else you could think up. Shell's idea to filter would require a high Q bandpass but modulation characteristics would remain.

While not (normally) scientifically ideal (with all the spectral spewing) perhaps it is...and perhaps this Intermix could be desireable...the old addage...more data needed.

p.s. Had no time today to secure a 100mW exciter (typical) and given the simplicity of magnetron sources, NSF posters, etc...looks like I will take this route as well. Designed the frustum exoskeleton to hold a magnetron, got a good handle on the liquid splices to supply bias and best of all, can still use the fulcrum...off to the races.

Offline AnalogMan

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2935
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 644
  • Likes Given: 20
@SeeShells

Yes, I can add as many sources as I want. But someone else must tell me what and where. And will that help the experimenters or theorists? I wonder if the experimenters here will be able to do add many different sources. Just the problem of coming up with the equipment and materials applied in such a way as to avoid degrading the measurements.

And what is the noise bandwidth of a magnetron?

This help?

Company... need to get but will be back.
Shell

Paul March had also done a quick-and-dirty measurement of a microwave while warming some coffee (~2.45GHz with ~BW +/- 30MHz)...


Thank, you this spectrum does make it look like, when using a magnetron, the EM Drive can be switching between  modes, so I think we are on to something here: mode superposition at single frequencies + mode switching with the magnetron frequency varying between 2.42 to 2.48 GHz

So the magnetron makes for an always changing situation instead of the frozen standing wave envisioned by Egan.


This paper on phase locking magnetrons to a stable reference oscillator may be of interest.  It has spectra of a 2.45GHz magnetron showing the effect of varying the heater power from nominal levels to much lower levels.  Frequency hopping is noted. (click on image to enlarge)

Noise Performance of Frequency- and Phase-Locked CW Magnetrons Operated as Current-Controlled Oscillators IEEE Trans Electron Dev Vol 52 No 9 2096-2103

Note that injection phase-locking of magnetrons is a well known technique, but may be overly complicated for EM-drive experiments (and may even be detrimental if wideband operation is favored).
« Last Edit: 06/30/2015 12:26 AM by AnalogMan »

Online aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2744
  • 92129
  • Liked: 705
  • Likes Given: 240
So I'm thinking that BW = 60 MHz, or 0.025 * drive frequency should work. Maybe Meep can deal with that. I just completed a resonance run on NSF-1701 using Bandwidth = 0.038 * drive freq. and it only took 20 minutes. But resonance runs take a lot longer than the time/field evolution runs.

By the way, I made that run because I moved the antenna nearer to the small end, it is now 1/4 wavelength from the inside face of the small end. The cavity resonated at very nearly the same frequency as before but the already good quality factor, Q went up about 3 times. (From 99,000 to about 300,000) This is very high and I am using the copper model so I wonder about those Q values.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
Weird, take a look at: http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/act/html/omptv1.htm

"On January 31, 2002, the NASA patent application US2002012221 " Apparatus and Method for generating a thrust using a two dimensional asymmetrical capacitor module " has been granted."

Looks alot like a shawyer frustum...

Offline demofsky

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 96
  • Likes Given: 1662
Weird, take a look at: http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/act/html/omptv1.htm

"On January 31, 2002, the NASA patent application US2002012221 " Apparatus and Method for generating a thrust using a two dimensional asymmetrical capacitor module " has been granted."

Looks alot like a shawyer frustum...

And if the video is to be believed produces more thrust than non superconducting EM drives!

Offline frobnicat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 518
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 151
...
In short, one claim is that an EM Drive is an "inertial ratchet": it resists a change in momentum in one direction, and amplifies a change in the opposite direction. The general mechanism by which this is proposed to work is: by maintaining some "angular momentum" (e.g. the EM field, in the case of the EM drive), the ratchet must oppose changes that would increase its angular momentum, and amplify changes that would decrease its angular momentum -- all in order to obey conservation of momentum. A perfect inertial ratchet would negate acceleration in one direction and amplify acceleration in the other (extracting energy from its angular momentum), regardless of its own mass. Another claim is that this inertial ratchet effect can extract work from external vibrations.

I am not certain whether these are reasonable claims. And I suppose the reason why I am painstakingly trying to clearly describe what these claims are is so that they can be properly critiqued. Because TheTraveller's descriptions were so vague, I don't think it was really possible for anyone here to unequivocally refute them.
...

Here is attached a toy model for a kind of (uncontroversial) mechanical ratchet, ballast in a box, perfect slip in a direction, perfect stop the other way (idealised) :
center -> start position
top -> if pushed to left a certain apparent acceleration (of the green box) is observed
bottom -> if pushed to right a greater apparent acceleration (of the green box) is observed

So this is in effect a system that, as seen from the outside, exhibits higher inertia in a way (mass casing+ballast) and lower the other way (mass of casing alone). Obviously the scheme is limited in total travel (displacement from start) when pushed to the right, in the low inertia direction. At some point the system would need to be "desaturated", that is the inner ballast be put back at right of box, which would neutralise any apparent gain in momentum that a free floating spacecraft could initially get by alternatively pulling and pushing on such box. Source of energy alone is not enough to have the process go on for a long time, conservation of centre of mass is still valid at any time, the centre of mass doesn't move at all.

So an apparent "inertial ratchet" is an easily satisfiable claim, the question is the possibility of such a device that could work for long "unlimited" total displacement, to me this appears more like a problem of conservation of centre of mass than of available energy (unless energy directly beamed to vacuum to get net momentum => photon rocket again). A note of caution : it is easy to get apparent net non zero results from transients or "one shot" effects, that doesn't imply possibility for any long term stationary mode of operation.

Offline apoc2021

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
  • Liked: 37
  • Likes Given: 27
Guys

I would like to humbly submit for consideration that the efforts in this thread could in effect be viewed as a distributed research project. We have resilient experimenters, brilliant theorists, persistent data analysts.. even some equipment. However, this day in age, there are many other resources potentially available for the community to use - if only we become organized enough to identify and seek them out.

What other resources are needed to move forward the collective work taking place here?

For example, do we need:
- More MEEP analysts, to lessen the load on our brave Aero?
- AmazonAWS/Google Cloud compute time?
- A recurring schedule of group Google Hangouts to discuss current theory and next steps?
- A machine learning/data science expert, to find hidden or subtle relationships?
- Funding/donations for equipment? Perhaps held in a multisig crypto wallet with a major provider?
- A better platform for distributed research projects?
- Simply more hobbyists paying attention and contributing views?
- Perhaps we don't need anything, and this is the most efficient that we can be?

It seems we are all driving towards the same goal.. just some thoughts to consider to take this exploration one efficient step further. Happy to help however possible.

Offline zen-in

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • California
  • Liked: 468
  • Likes Given: 365
Weird, take a look at: http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/act/html/omptv1.htm

"On January 31, 2002, the NASA patent application US2002012221 " Apparatus and Method for generating a thrust using a two dimensional asymmetrical capacitor module " has been granted."

Looks alot like a shawyer frustum...

The JNaudin website has many variants of Byfield-Brown effect lifters.  I remember seeing balsa wood electrostatically driven hoverers in Popular Science in the early 60's.  They only work in air and there has been nothing new in over 50 years.    The patent you are referring to is something else.   It is just an actuator that uses high voltage DC; a kind of capacitor where the two terminals are concentric.  It's kind of the same idea as an actuator that uses an iron armatur in a selenoid magnet.   When the magnet is energised the armature is pulled in.   Similarly when a capacitor is charged up the plates are attracted to each other and that principal can be used to make an actuator as well.   There is no relationship to an em-drive cavity except both are empty metal shells and neither one creates momentum out of thin air.

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
Guys

I would like to humbly submit for consideration that the efforts in this thread could in effect be viewed as a distributed research project. We have resilient experimenters, brilliant theorists, persistent data analysts.. even some equipment. However, this day in age, there are many other resources potentially available for the community to use - if only we become organized enough to identify and seek them out.

What other resources are needed to move forward the collective work taking place here?

For example, do we need:
- More MEEP analysts, to lessen the load on our brave Aero?
- AmazonAWS/Google Cloud compute time?
- A recurring schedule of group Google Hangouts to discuss current theory and next steps?
- A machine learning/data science expert, to find hidden or subtle relationships?
- Funding/donations for equipment? Perhaps held in a multisig crypto wallet with a major provider?
- A better platform for distributed research projects?
- Simply more hobbyists paying attention and contributing views?
- Perhaps we don't need anything, and this is the most efficient that we can be?

It seems we are all driving towards the same goal.. just some thoughts to consider to take this exploration one efficient step further. Happy to help however possible.
Nice post, I'll take a swing...afaik, everyone here is independent and non commercial. However, it will only take a few positive experiments before many more join in. I've thought about exactly what you are proposing...the emdrive.wiki page is a great start, but eventually an entity should be formed, not to control but to consolidate info, organize needs and supply material help as required. I have a sense that a not for profit 501c3 will be a good way to proceed. The nature of all here seems to be for the love of mystery, science, math, etc., and tired of public and private institutional secrecy. That, we have in abundance...

Offline DrBagelBites

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
  • Orlando
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 68
Guys

I would like to humbly submit for consideration that the efforts in this thread could in effect be viewed as a distributed research project. We have resilient experimenters, brilliant theorists, persistent data analysts.. even some equipment. However, this day in age, there are many other resources potentially available for the community to use - if only we become organized enough to identify and seek them out.

What other resources are needed to move forward the collective work taking place here?

For example, do we need:
- More MEEP analysts, to lessen the load on our brave Aero?
- AmazonAWS/Google Cloud compute time?
- A recurring schedule of group Google Hangouts to discuss current theory and next steps?
- A machine learning/data science expert, to find hidden or subtle relationships?
- Funding/donations for equipment? Perhaps held in a multisig crypto wallet with a major provider?
- A better platform for distributed research projects?
- Simply more hobbyists paying attention and contributing views?
- Perhaps we don't need anything, and this is the most efficient that we can be?

It seems we are all driving towards the same goal.. just some thoughts to consider to take this exploration one efficient step further. Happy to help however possible.

Some great ideas!  Also a video repository for all tests would be useful as well.

As for the funding idea, are you thinking of just a paypal system where someone can contribute to their favorite builder(s)? Or as a pool where builders request what they need. Obviously, you just came up with this idea, so I am not sure how much thought was put into it. Just some questions.

Brilliant ideas, though. I'll try to help with what I can.

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
...

The JNaudin website has many variants of Byfield-Brown effect lifters.  I remember seeing balsa wood electrostatically driven hoverers in Popular Science in the early 60's.  They only work in air and there has been nothing new in over 50 years.    The patent you are referring to is something else.   It is just an actuator that uses high voltage DC; a kind of capacitor where the two terminals are concentric.  It's kind of the same idea as an actuator that uses an iron armatur in a selenoid magnet.   When the magnet is energised the armature is pulled in.   Similarly when a capacitor is charged up the plates are attracted to each other and that principal can be used to make an actuator as well.   There is no relationship to an em-drive cavity except both are empty metal shells and neither one creates momentum out of thin air.
Thanks. curious, are u 100% certain, beyond any reasonable doubt, that an "empty shell" can never gain momentum and that propulsion must utilize propellants?

Online aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2744
  • 92129
  • Liked: 705
  • Likes Given: 240
Guys

I would like to humbly submit for consideration that the efforts in this thread could in effect be viewed as a distributed research project. We have resilient experimenters, brilliant theorists, persistent data analysts.. even some equipment. However, this day in age, there are many other resources potentially available for the community to use - if only we become organized enough to identify and seek them out.

What other resources are needed to move forward the collective work taking place here?

For example, do we need:
- More MEEP analysts, to lessen the load on our brave Aero?
- AmazonAWS/Google Cloud compute time?
- A recurring schedule of group Google Hangouts to discuss current theory and next steps?
- A machine learning/data science expert, to find hidden or subtle relationships?
- Funding/donations for equipment? Perhaps held in a multisig crypto wallet with a major provider?
- A better platform for distributed research projects?
- Simply more hobbyists paying attention and contributing views?
- Perhaps we don't need anything, and this is the most efficient that we can be?

It seems we are all driving towards the same goal.. just some thoughts to consider to take this exploration one efficient step further. Happy to help however possible.

I like it, and I certainly like the first bullet. Not so sure about the brave part but the "lessen the load" part sure would help if we could somehow divide the load into parts that could be more responsive to valid and doable requests for data.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline zen-in

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • California
  • Liked: 468
  • Likes Given: 365
...

The JNaudin website has many variants of Byfield-Brown effect lifters.  I remember seeing balsa wood electrostatically driven hoverers in Popular Science in the early 60's. 

...

There is no relationship to an em-drive cavity except both are empty metal shells and neither one creates momentum out of thin air.
Thanks. curious, are u 100% certain, beyond any reasonable doubt, that an "empty shell" can never gain momentum and that propulsion must utilize propellants?
Propulsion does not always require propellants.   For example deep space satellites are often swung around a planets to add delta v.  However there is no machine that will by itself create momentum.  The em-drive will eventually take its place next to cold fusion, polywater, and 300 MPH submarines in the Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience.

Offline DrBagelBites

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
  • Orlando
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 68
Guys

I would like to humbly submit for consideration that the efforts in this thread could in effect be viewed as a distributed research project. We have resilient experimenters, brilliant theorists, persistent data analysts.. even some equipment. However, this day in age, there are many other resources potentially available for the community to use - if only we become organized enough to identify and seek them out.

What other resources are needed to move forward the collective work taking place here?

For example, do we need:
- More MEEP analysts, to lessen the load on our brave Aero?
- AmazonAWS/Google Cloud compute time?
- A recurring schedule of group Google Hangouts to discuss current theory and next steps?
- A machine learning/data science expert, to find hidden or subtle relationships?
- Funding/donations for equipment? Perhaps held in a multisig crypto wallet with a major provider?
- A better platform for distributed research projects?
- Simply more hobbyists paying attention and contributing views?
- Perhaps we don't need anything, and this is the most efficient that we can be?

It seems we are all driving towards the same goal.. just some thoughts to consider to take this exploration one efficient step further. Happy to help however possible.

I like it, and I certainly like the first bullet. Not so sure about the brave part but the "lessen the load" part sure would help if we could somehow divide the load into parts that could be more responsive to valid and doable requests for data.

I can try and install Meep on my machine. Running ubuntu, will have to play around and learn syntax and whatnot, though for the program.

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
...

The JNaudin website has many variants of Byfield-Brown effect lifters.  I remember seeing balsa wood electrostatically driven hoverers in Popular Science in the early 60's. 

...

There is no relationship to an em-drive cavity except both are empty metal shells and neither one creates momentum out of thin air.
Thanks. curious, are u 100% certain, beyond any reasonable doubt, that an "empty shell" can never gain momentum and that propulsion must utilize propellants?
Propulsion does not always require propellants.   For example deep space satellites are often swung around a planets to add delta v.  However there is no machine that will by itself create momentum.  The em-drive will eventually take its place next to cold fusion, polywater, and 300 MPH submarines in the Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience.
Gravity assist is not technically propulsion nor is dropping a rock. although you did not answer directly, you apparently are on record believing that space propulsion requires propellants. No problem, that is a safe belief system many have from the sidelines. Me? I'm not so sure we're as omnipotent as we may think we are. Otherwise, why bother with imagination and experimentation...everything has been discovered worthy of discovery.

Offline SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 2956
  • Likes Given: 2590
@SeeShells

Yes, I can add as many sources as I want. But someone else must tell me what and where. And will that help the experimenters or theorists? I wonder if the experimenters here will be able to do add many different sources. Just the problem of coming up with the equipment and materials applied in such a way as to avoid degrading the measurements.

And what is the noise bandwidth of a magnetron?

Aero,

These are the calculated TM and TE modes from NASA.  Try a couple TM modes, be a good first start to see if it can produce a viable sequence. Double check me Jose if you would like something else... no problem.

TM 311 2.4157 Ghz
TM 212 2.45032 Ghz

Shell

Online aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2744
  • 92129
  • Liked: 705
  • Likes Given: 240
@SeeShells

Yes, I can add as many sources as I want. But someone else must tell me what and where. And will that help the experimenters or theorists? I wonder if the experimenters here will be able to do add many different sources. Just the problem of coming up with the equipment and materials applied in such a way as to avoid degrading the measurements.

And what is the noise bandwidth of a magnetron?

Aero,

These are the calculated TM and TE modes from NASA.  Try a couple TM modes, be a good first start to see if it can produce a viable sequence. Double check me Jose if you would like something else... no problem.

TM 311 2.4157 Ghz
TM 212 2.45032 Ghz

Shell
That's a thought. However, I thought that next I might try to generate some numbers from the cavity to get a handle on the field strength and distribution. That should provide some immediately useful data. Not immediate data, but data that will be useful as soon as it arrives.
Retired, working interesting problems

Tags: