Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 3  (Read 3130647 times)

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3628
  • 92129
  • Liked: 1145
  • Likes Given: 360
Would like to thank everyone for such diversified input on this since I have been silently following this topic since "thread one". Personally, I have a deep respect for each persons current thoughts on this.

While I do realize that this is "Way out there!".

Is it possible that whatever reactions/movements AKA "Thrust" could be being caused by the inverse of what's being done to slow down atoms using frequencies of light Atomic telescope brings atoms to standstill by using microwave frequencies to excite virtual particles, dark matter or even dark energy?

I ask because this also seems to at least potentially show a classical to quantum transition taking place in some form.

Unless it turns out that all prior experiments have had the same non discovered faults/flaws inside and outside a vacuum.

Don
Welcome to the thread ... And what would we put the probibility of all test systems and/or cavities having the same flaws/faults?

Regarding the ionization of gasses within the cavity, what is the high frequency at where it becomes difficult to construct a resonant cavity using known materials and construction techniques? Three-D printing comes to mind as a construction technique but at some size pressurizing small cavities must become difficult.

I wonder if the guys making the 25 GHz beauty will make it gas filled?
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline WarpTech

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Do it!
  • Statesville, NC
  • Liked: 1453
  • Likes Given: 1925
@WarpTech raises a very good point.  Any system which provides propellant-less acceleration should also work as an accelerometer.   Photon resonators are already used as accelerometers. (and by extension, gravity wave detectors)

Exactly, that's where Dr. McCulloch's work comes in, though I'm not well versed in his model yet. Accelerating a cavity full of energy, oscillating in modes will cause a doppler shift to propagate through. Here, that doppler shift is being caused by energy lost to the cavity.

Momentum is being input to the cavity via the microwaves, dp_in/dt, and is stored in the oscillating modes, Q*dp_in/dt. The rate of dissipation of that momentum, -dp/dt = F, will determine the forces on each surface. If that rate is not simply a constant of the metal, but a variable of the geometry, there will be asymmetrical forces, velocities and doppler shifts. Agreed?

Todd

One thing I had almost forgotten about that Accelerometer because it's been so long since I've worked on it. IF it were possible to create a device that, when simply placed in an accelerated reference frame, it would output a voltage from which constant power could be extracted. It implies (deltaMass?) that if it were sitting on the floor in my garage, I could extract infinite energy from the gravitational field, which is an accelerated reference frame relative to the Accelerometer sitting on the floor.

What happens instead is, the accelerometer becomes polarized and the charge density on the "charged objects" is no l longer evenly distributed. It cannot output more than the amount of power required to polarize it. I can input energy to depolarize it, and then extract it as it polarizes again, but I can't get free energy from it.

Therefore, any propellant-less propulsion device, must have some means of becoming depolarized. In the case of the frustum, stored energy is lost to heat as well as thrust, and this eventually depolarizes it so it can be re-charged and thrust again. Once again, it can only work in a pulsed mode, when power is ramping up and down quickly.

Todd

Offline deltaMass

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 955
  • A Brit in California
  • Liked: 671
  • Likes Given: 275
Since I have no model for how this thing is supposed to work, I can't speculate as to its inner workings.
What I can do (and have done here) is treat it as a single system and describe its gestalt dynamics.

Offline zellerium

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 172
  • Pittsburgh, PA
  • Liked: 283
  • Likes Given: 402
I did some more investigation into this paper by Yang Juan published  2014-01-09:
http://wulixb.iphy.ac.cn/EN/abstract/abstract60316.shtml

I couldn't find a translated version so I put it through google translate. Unfortunately that didn't work very well, but I was able to fix it up and figure out what they did (see attachment).

My takeaway:
This paper did not include any thrust measurement or high power sources. They simply injected a mW signal into their apparatus to figure out how to tune it to maximize Q. They tested many different aperture dimensions and used two tuning screws to minimize reflectance. The tuning screws seem like an easy way to augment the input signal, perhaps someone could help me understand how that works. It appears they use the aperture to minimize return loss and improve the Q by narrowing the bandwidth. [They still maintain that a higher Q factor in the frustum is more desirable. ]

They also investigated the effect of temperature by using an external heat source. They determined that heating up the small plate has the greatest impact on quality factor; an increase of 17.4 C shifts the resonant frequency by 1 MHz. The effect of heating the other plate and sidewalls does not have as great of an impact, but still changes things. They heated these plates from the outside so as to not disturb the signal, so I imagine heating from the inside would produce a much greater shift.

I'm still unsure where the 'matched' system comes into play (first picture). Maybe this was their initial design and was reformed to be the tuning mechanism with the screws and aperture. I didn't see any comment as to which one was better.

I realize that a lot of info was lost in translation, so I'm going to ask my friend help translate some of it.

I think Yang is getting much better thrust values because she isn't sending the energy through coaxial cables and antennas as done by Shawyer. Maybe this allows the whole system to resonate together whereas the antennas and cables have some associated impedance and attenuation that increase losses.

So now I'm thinking we should try to create a very thick cavity, we could forge one using aluminum pretty easily and clean it up with a CNC. [backyard casting: url:youtube.com/watch?v=sGr_XoFTKmc]

Take a look at my sloppy translated version and see what you can make of it.

Kurt
« Last Edit: 05/26/2015 04:11 am by zellerium »

Offline Supergravity

  • Member
  • Posts: 43
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 3
Can someone possibly get me up to speed on the theoretical work done on this so far, if any? It seems from what I'm reading, most of the apparent groundbreaking work seems to be on the experimental side. Have these scientists come up with a better explanation than "quantum-vacuum-plasma-phonon-hocus-pocus" that actually conserves momentum as well being consistent with the weak and strong energy conditions in GR?

As far as I know, the only thing slightly controversial even to this day in classical electrodynamics is angular momentum conservation. It is conserved, of course, but there are certain contrived circumstances that could apparently break conservation of L in CED. But, for linear momentum, there are no thought experiments one can think up that violates it conservation.

Offline zen-in

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 541
  • California
  • Liked: 483
  • Likes Given: 371
I did some more investigation into this paper by Yang Juan published  2014-01-09:
http://wulixb.iphy.ac.cn/EN/abstract/abstract60316.shtml
...

 It appears they use the aperture to minimize return loss and improve the Q by narrowing the bandwidth. [They still maintain that a higher Q factor in the frustum is more desirable. ]

Good work on improving the translation.  You are partly right.  The aperture is used to isolate the load from the feed.    The forward wave gets through the aperture but the reflected wave, because it is out of phase can't.   To get a high Q the return loss has to be at a maximum.  A return loss of 1 dB is the same as reflection coefficient of .89 and a VSWR of  17.4.  At the other end a return loss of 40 dB is the same as a reflection coefficient of .01 and a VSWR of 1.02.   A high return loss means less RF is being reflected from the cavity so the Q is higher.

...
I think Yang is getting much better thrust values because she isn't sending the energy through coaxial cables and antennas as done by Shawyer. Maybe this allows the whole system to resonate together whereas the antennas and cables have some associated impedance and attenuation that increase losses.

While I don't believe any em-drive produces thrust I do entertain a <1% possibility because Shawyer and Yang did something different.    Stardrive mentioned their PA got damaged and I noted they used a large in-line attenuator at one point.  That indicates a high SWR.  So instead of confining the RF to the cavity it was getting reflected back.   Coax can absorb a lot of RF power.   Waveguide on the other hand is much less lossy and can be configured to minimize reflected power.

...

So now I'm thinking we should try to create a very thick cavity, we could forge one using aluminum pretty easily and clean it up with a CNC. [backyard casting: url:youtube.com/watch?v=sGr_XoFTKmc]

You should stick with Copper sheet.   Cast Aluminum, even if it is pure Al will not have as good conductivity due to microcracks, slag inclusions, bubbles, etc.   Aluminum is not forged because it cracks when heated and hit with hammers.   A fine Silver cavity would have a higher Q  than Copper, and would be much easier to form. Since there is not as much markup on Silver the cost would be about 5X the cost of Copper.  A fusion weld can be done to close the cone with no discontinuity at the seam.    For Copper you can get the cone crimped at the ends and use Be-Cu finger stock to bridge the flat ends (instead of solder) and adjustable slug with the cone.  That would make it easy to disassemble.   Later, when all is said and done it will make a good museum display.
...

Kurt
« Last Edit: 05/26/2015 05:29 am by zen-in »

Offline deltaMass

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 955
  • A Brit in California
  • Liked: 671
  • Likes Given: 275
I've misplaced the Wiki/FAQ thread on EmDrive
Could I have that link please?
And shouldn't it be easy to find? (I couldn't, though I tried).

Offline R.W. Keyes

  • Member
  • Posts: 77
  • Philadelphia
  • Liked: 54
  • Likes Given: 45
I believe more experiments, much of them performed competently and honestly, have happened without results being publicly reported. We know that Dr. Yang has retreated from publicity because of potential military applications of her work. It can be assumed that Roger Shawyer has a specific interest in keeping certain information confidential, so that he can make good economic benefit from his work. It is also known the Boeing has an EMdrive interest, and as they do, then it is likely that Lockheed-Martin has some project at their "skunkworks" as well. With Chinese and American defense organizations involved, I imagine that Russia, and perhaps India, and European interests, also have programs related to the EMdrive and similar developments. Because of the significant military uses of the EMDrive, in addition to the commercial advantages, who can blame these organizations for being tight-lipped? It is also conceivable that these organizations, being in great competition with each other, may attempt to sabotage each other's work by the means of false data releases. Such subterfuge has happened in the past, in other areas of science and engineering,  and I see no reason why it EMdrive research should be exempt from such actions.

In light of this, the lack of reported results from tests done in vacuum should not make one presume that such tests haven't been done. I've considered the idea that USAF's latest X-37B mission may have some EMdrive experiment on board.

But please realize that most of this is semi-informed speculation, and I don't claim to know specifics. I merely think it's likely that much is occurring sub-rosa.

Offline zellerium

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 172
  • Pittsburgh, PA
  • Liked: 283
  • Likes Given: 402

You should stick with Copper sheet.   Cast Aluminum, even if it is pure Al will not have as good conductivity due to microcracks, slag inclusions, bubbles, etc.   Aluminum is not forged because it cracks when heated and hit with hammers.   A fine Silver cavity would have a higher Q  than Copper, and would be much easier to form. Since there is not as much markup on Silver the cost would be about 5X the cost of Copper.  A fusion weld can be done to close the cone with no discontinuity at the seam.    For Copper you can get the cone crimped at the ends and use Be-Cu finger stock to bridge the flat ends (instead of solder) and adjustable slug with the cone.  That would make it easy to disassemble.   Later, when all is said and done it will make a good museum display.

Thanks for the advice.

I think you misunderstood, we would cast the aluminum in a dye and then use a computer controlled mill to shave of the excess. I'd imagine a 1 inch thick frustum that is well polished on the inside would have a better Q factor than a 20 mil copper sheet after several tests because it will be able to absorb much more heat without deforming. NWPU doesn't publish their dimensions, but the pictures seem to indicate a very thick cavity. The flight thruster also seems quite thick.
I think we are probably going to end up trying both.

Why don't you believe the EM Drive is producing a thrust?
Seems to me most of the spurious effects have been eliminated, or at least minimized. The results are certainly inconsistent, but so are the experiments. Whatever the cause of this anomalous thrust, it has definitely stumped a lot of great minds for quite a while...

Kurt

Offline Karlman

  • Member
  • Posts: 23
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 4
Wiki/FAQ Thread

http://emdrive.echothis.com/Main_Page

Created by ???

Can this get added to the first post maybe?
---
Edit Removed attribution to R.W. Keyes (my apologies.. was the only name I could find associated with the wiki).
« Last Edit: 05/26/2015 05:11 pm by Karlman »

Offline R.W. Keyes

  • Member
  • Posts: 77
  • Philadelphia
  • Liked: 54
  • Likes Given: 45
Wiki/FAQ Thread

http://emdrive.echothis.com/Main_Page

Created by R.W._Keyes

Can this get added to the first post maybe?

While I am in favor of this Wiki, it is unfair to attribute it to me as I did not create it.

That being said, I encourage all of the more advanced members of this forum to contribute, discuss, and correct issues on the wiki so that it can serve as an introduction to the topics at hand, and also show where the theoretical disagreement exist, with references to back them up.
« Last Edit: 05/26/2015 07:58 am by R.W. Keyes »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13996
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220

You should stick with Copper sheet.   Cast Aluminum, even if it is pure Al will not have as good conductivity due to microcracks, slag inclusions, bubbles, etc.   Aluminum is not forged because it cracks when heated and hit with hammers.   A fine Silver cavity would have a higher Q  than Copper, and would be much easier to form. Since there is not as much markup on Silver the cost would be about 5X the cost of Copper.  A fusion weld can be done to close the cone with no discontinuity at the seam.    For Copper you can get the cone crimped at the ends and use Be-Cu finger stock to bridge the flat ends (instead of solder) and adjustable slug with the cone.  That would make it easy to disassemble.   Later, when all is said and done it will make a good museum display.

Thanks for the advice.

I think you misunderstood, we would cast the aluminum in a dye and then use a computer controlled mill to shave of the excess. I'd imagine a 1 inch thick frustum that is well polished on the inside would have a better Q factor than a 20 mil copper sheet after several tests because it will be able to absorb much more heat without deforming. NWPU doesn't publish their dimensions, but the pictures seem to indicate a very thick cavity. The flight thruster also seems quite thick.
I think we are probably going to end up trying both.

Why don't you believe the EM Drive is producing a thrust?
Seems to me most of the spurious effects have been eliminated, or at least minimized. The results are certainly inconsistent, but so are the experiments. Whatever the cause of this anomalous thrust, it has definitely stumped a lot of great minds for quite a while...

Kurt

It's not an easy subject for people who haven't already made up their minds on one side of the debate or the other to know where to pitch their scepticism..
« Last Edit: 05/26/2015 08:07 am by Star One »

Offline StrongGR

Thought experiment: Can people please supply thoughts/feedback on the following

If a suitable length of fiber optic cable was acquired and wound around a hollow cylinder that was just bigger than the diameter of a cavity, such that the fiber cylinder fitted over top of the cavity.

The fiber is hooked up to a laser light source.

Either a second laser light source (or a half silvered mirror is used to split the original beam into two paths) such that both paths end their journey at a single visual screen.

Could we achieve interferometry with a setup like this and therefore a means to test for the potential presence of G waves emitting from an active cavity?.

Realising that both the second beam and the visual display unit would need to be some distance away from the cavity such that any effect on the primary beam is potentially noticeable (eg emerging G waves will be at atmospheric C)

 OR
Could a coiled length of fiber optic attached to one end of the cavity achieve the same sort of result?

There is a type of fiber made of some sort of plastic? material that is used in server rooms for short haul data....  might be useful?

This is what White and his team did with a rectangular box. The effect is there as they observed satellite frequencies of the input laser beam. I have shown this in my paper too. When you apply the idea to the computation of the thrust, for the current geometries and input powers, the gravitational effect appears to be too minuscule to account for the measured one.

I believe more experiments, much of them performed competently and honestly, have happened without results being publicly reported. We know that Dr. Yang has retreated from publicity because of potential military applications of her work. It can be assumed that Roger Shawyer has a specific interest in keeping certain information confidential, so that he can make good economic benefit from his work. It is also known the Boeing has an EMdrive interest, and as they do, then it is likely that Lockheed-Martin has some project at their "skunkworks" as well. With Chinese and American defense organizations involved, I imagine that Russia, and perhaps India, and European interests, also have programs related to the EMdrive and similar developments. Because of the significant military uses of the EMDrive, in addition to the commercial advantages, who can blame these organizations for being tight-lipped? It is also conceivable that these organizations, being in great competition with each other, may attempt to sabotage each other's work by the means of false data releases. Such subterfuge has happened in the past, in other areas of science and engineering,  and I see no reason why it EMdrive research should be exempt from such actions.

In light of this, the lack of reported results from tests done in vacuum should not make one presume that such tests haven't been done. I've considered the idea that USAF's latest X-37B mission may have some EMdrive experiment on board.

But please realize that most of this is semi-informed speculation, and I don't claim to know specifics. I merely think it's likely that much is occurring sub-rosa.

I would like to thank everybody for the contribution to this thread! I have been following it for quite a while now.

Do you remember the video of the EmDrive test published by some russian guy on YouTube?
It was published in this thread as well - unfortunately I was unable to find the particular post.
Anyway, meanwhile this video got deleted from the YouTube.
And also from all other social networks which repost usually such videos.
Might support the above theory.

 

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5911
  • USA
  • Liked: 6124
  • Likes Given: 5564
...Do you remember the video of the EmDrive test published by some russian guy on YouTube?
It was published in this thread as well - unfortunately I was unable to find the particular post.
Anyway, meanwhile this video got deleted from the YouTube.
And also from all other social networks which repost usually such videos.
Might support the above theory.
I remember a video from Russia in a vertical set-up.  The video I remember involved a waveguide having one end closed and the other end open.  The author wrote in Russian that he thought that Shawyer was wrong to use a close cavity because nothing comes out of a completely close cavity and therefore the author of the video thought it made much more sense to have an open waveguide.  The device he tested looked like the shape of a bottle having a big opening, made of metal.  It behaved as one would expect: with the close end of the waveguide being pushed forward, and the open end of the waveguide trailing behind.  I don't recall something unusual in the video, as it is known that open microwave waveguides will have propulsion as photons leave the waveguide: it is essentially a photon rocket with photons at microwave frequencies.  It satisfies conservation of momentum.  It is an inefficient method of space propulsion.

The Russian author also had written words to the effect that he didn't have much resources to conduct a better test.

If this is the same video you are referring to, I suggest that the video may have been deleted from YouTube as the author may have been made aware that an open waveguide is supposed to behave this way, and therefore it was not noteworthy and not directly related to Shawyer's EM Drive invention which is a completely closed cavity.

I looked for the video that I recalled on YouTube, searching for "EM Drive Russia" and nothing shows up.

« Last Edit: 05/26/2015 12:23 pm by Rodal »

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5911
  • USA
  • Liked: 6124
  • Likes Given: 5564

You should stick with Copper sheet.   Cast Aluminum, even if it is pure Al will not have as good conductivity due to microcracks, slag inclusions, bubbles, etc.   Aluminum is not forged because it cracks when heated and hit with hammers.   A fine Silver cavity would have a higher Q  than Copper, and would be much easier to form. Since there is not as much markup on Silver the cost would be about 5X the cost of Copper.  A fusion weld can be done to close the cone with no discontinuity at the seam.    For Copper you can get the cone crimped at the ends and use Be-Cu finger stock to bridge the flat ends (instead of solder) and adjustable slug with the cone.  That would make it easy to disassemble.   Later, when all is said and done it will make a good museum display.

Thanks for the advice.

I think you misunderstood, we would cast the aluminum in a dye and then use a computer controlled mill to shave of the excess. I'd imagine a 1 inch thick frustum that is well polished on the inside would have a better Q factor than a 20 mil copper sheet after several tests because it will be able to absorb much more heat without deforming. NWPU doesn't publish their dimensions, but the pictures seem to indicate a very thick cavity. The flight thruster also seems quite thick.
I think we are probably going to end up trying both.

Why don't you believe the EM Drive is producing a thrust?
Seems to me most of the spurious effects have been eliminated, or at least minimized. The results are certainly inconsistent, but so are the experiments. Whatever the cause of this anomalous thrust, it has definitely stumped a lot of great minds for quite a while...

Kurt
When assessing the pros and cons of a thicker or thinner EM Drive, please consider that a thick (where thick means larger (thickness/characteristicLength) ratio) metal EM Drive accomplishes (at least) these purposes to minimize thermal effects:

1) It drastically minimizes thermal bending, and distortion

2) it practically eliminates the possibility of thermal buckling
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268804028_NASA%27S_MICROWAVE_PROPELLANT-LESS_THRUSTER_ANOMALOUS_RESULTS_CONSIDERATION_OF_A_THERMO-MECHANICAL_EFFECT

3) It provides a heat sink for heat to be absorbed.  It greatly increases the Fourier time: the time parameter associated with heat diffusion and hence it serves to minimize thermal effects.

4) It alleviates the possibility of thermal convection currents being set up by heated external surfaces of the EM Drive (as the exterior surface of a thick metal EM Drive will reach a lower temperature at a given time from initial turn on of the power)

Thin sheets contribute to thermal distortion and thermal bending and greatly enhance the possibility that the EM Drive goes out of resonance as the thermal effect distorts the cavity.

The thickness enters the thermal deformation and the Fourier time as higher powers of the dimensionless ratio (thickness/length) so thickness has a great effect.

A thin sheet EM Drive, on the other hand is an invitation to endless thermal effects: distortion, thermal expansion, thermal bending, thermal buckling, hot spots, enhancement of thermal convection currents, etc. etc.

EDIT: My understanding of the reason why NASA used thin sheet for the EM Drive is that they were very constrained by the allowed weight they could have on their horizontal torsional pendulum.   

One alternative: think smaller dimensions, which allows for thicker thickness/CharacteristicLength ratio
« Last Edit: 05/26/2015 02:25 pm by Rodal »

Offline frobnicat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 518
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 151
...
I remember a video from Russia in a vertical set-up.  The video I remember involved a waveguide having one end closed and the other end open. 
...
I don't recall something unusual in the video, as it is known that open microwave waveguides will have propulsion as photons leave the waveguide: it is essentially a photon rocket with photons at microwave frequencies.  It satisfies conservation of momentum.  It is an inefficient method of space propulsion.

1kW photon thrust makes for only about 3µN, unless it is efficiently recycled (like photonic laser thruster by BAE) which I doubt is the case, the setup looked open enough to leak microwaves copiously around. If this is the video in question, I recall the scale registering a gram force or so, from those values I doubt this was due to just EM beamed force...

Quote
The Russian author also had written words to the effect that he didn't have much resources to conduct a better test.

It's always easy to criticize from afar, but looks to me a heat induced convection flow would very likely be the cause of pushing a plate above such a heated chimney. Demo would have been much more convincing by showing that placing a thin cardboard (or otherwise microwave transparent thin membrane) between the pipe and the weighed plate above (to block the convective air flow) would not alter the readings, if not dropping them to 0.

Quote
If this is the same video you are referring to, I suggest that the video may have been deleted from YouTube as the author may have been made aware that an open waveguide is supposed to behave this way, and therefore it was not noteworthy and not directly related to Shawyer's EM Drive invention which is a completely closed cavity.

Though not directly related to EM drives closed cavities, it would be very noteworthy for a DIYer to really "beam" a gram force at a distance of a few decimetres (?) with only 1kW. Bae is not much beyond that with PLT at optical wavelength (but with better long range prospect obviously).
« Last Edit: 05/26/2015 02:18 pm by frobnicat »

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5911
  • USA
  • Liked: 6124
  • Likes Given: 5564
...1kW photon thrust makes for only about 3µN, unless it is efficiently recycled (like photonic laser thruster by BAE) which I doubt is the case, the setup looked open enough to leak microwaves copiously around. If this is the video in question, I recall the scale registering a gram force or so, from those values I doubt this was due to just EM beamed force...
I didn't recall the measured force and I couldn't find the video again to be able to check it.  If he measured 1 gram, that's thousands of times better performance than a photon rocket, and as you said, it would be very noteworthy (if the measurement was not  an artifact). 

So perhaps he pulled the video out of YouTube once he realized that what he was measuring was an artifact.

I hope he didn't get hurt during the experiment.

Thanks for pointing this out.
« Last Edit: 05/26/2015 02:57 pm by Rodal »

Offline StrongGR

Maybe I missed some information due to my delay on following these threads. What are the characteristics of the cavities used by NASA? I mean the physical dimensions, the input power (I know this is around tenth of W) and the relative dielectric constant of the material used as a dielectric (HDPE). Could the latter be similar to conjugate polymers or some ceramic material with this value ranging to some 10^5?

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5911
  • USA
  • Liked: 6124
  • Likes Given: 5564
Maybe I missed some information due to my delay on following these threads. What are the characteristics of the cavities used by NASA? I mean the physical dimensions, the input power (I know this is around tenth of W) and the relative dielectric constant of the material used as a dielectric (HDPE). Could the latter be similar to conjugate polymers or some ceramic material with this value ranging to some 10^5?

Please find the physical dimensions of NASA's truncated cone (they have only one) here:  http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379668#msg1379668




experimental results here:

Table 2, page 18,  (original document)
http://www.libertariannews.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/AnomalousThrustProductionFromanRFTestDevice-BradyEtAl.pdf



EM Drive experimental results compilation:

http://emdrive.echothis.com/Experimental_Results



Dielectric used in NASA's truncated cone experimental results was HDPE only:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1378069#msg1378069



Document showing dielectric used for NASA's truncated cone:  http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=36313.0;attach=634621

« Last Edit: 06/01/2015 12:37 am by Rodal »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0