I’ve read about this as well that people believed rockets wouldn’t work in a vacuum. If memory serves its even mentioned in passing in the Haynes manual on the Saturn V.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but this is a non-L2 section and can be linked to externally, correct?
After that debacle (one cant help but wonder WHY the MET was tested along with EmDrive. Was Tajmar's group just trying to do a clearing-house on anything they could fit in the vacuum chamber? ) I hope that the drive gets a proper test regime from someone else.
Quote from: M.E.T. on 06/27/2018 01:20 pmWell this is some of the best news I have read in a while. MET is alive and kicking.All:Find attached Jim Woodward's June 2018 critique of Tajmar's spring 2018 Mach Effect Gravity Assist (MEGA)-drive Seville report that Dr. Woodward sent out to his email distribution on June 25, with some editorial clean-ups from me. I hope you find it informative.Best, Paul March, Friendswood, TX
Well this is some of the best news I have read in a while. MET is alive and kicking.
All: Please note the attached Rev-A revision by Woodward dated June 30, 2018, on the spring 2018 Tajmar MEGA-drive test report. Dr. Woodward added lot more details and pictures with respect to the previous June 08, 2018 rebuttal presentation.
QuoteAll: Please note the attached Rev-A revision by Woodward dated June 30, 2018, on the spring 2018 Tajmar MEGA-drive test report. Dr. Woodward added lot more details and pictures with respect to the previous June 08, 2018 rebuttal presentation. Put bluntly, Woodward is stating that Tajmar's 'thermal event' damaged the mechanism to the point where it produced flawed results? Or am I missing something?Also, for whatever reason, while reading the description of how this device works, I kept thinking 'Dean Drive.'That said, the 'chirping' does sound interesting.
ThinkerX:"Put bluntly, Woodward is stating that Tajmar's 'thermal event' damaged the mechanism to the point where it produced flawed results?"Not flawed results, just degraded results where the stack is now producing less thrust than it use to for a given input power.As to your Dean drive concerns, Woodward has performed extensive stick-slip vibration studies of his PZT stacks in his torque pendulum setup and found little to no sensitivity to such vibrational inputs on the observed thrust signatures.Best, Paul March
QuoteThinkerX:"Put bluntly, Woodward is stating that Tajmar's 'thermal event' damaged the mechanism to the point where it produced flawed results?"Not flawed results, just degraded results where the stack is now producing less thrust than it use to for a given input power.As to your Dean drive concerns, Woodward has performed extensive stick-slip vibration studies of his PZT stacks in his torque pendulum setup and found little to no sensitivity to such vibrational inputs on the observed thrust signatures.Best, Paul MarchThank you for the clarification.That still leaves me with a couple other concerns:1 - what was the 'thermal event?' if these devices are subject to such, would they still be viable in long term deep space situations?2 - the measured thrust seems extremely tiny - within the 'noise level,' unless I'm misreading something (very possible). Is said 'thrust' ('movement?') significantly greater than a photon rocket?
If you keep thinking 'Dean Drive', take a look of 'Henry Bull reaction motor' that I and others discussed in this thread some time ago. You probably will forget Dean Drive.
As to your Dean drive concerns, Woodward has performed extensive stick-slip vibration studies of his PZT stacks in his torque pendulum setup and found little to no sensitivity to such vibrational inputs on the observed thrust signatures
Just a reminder to everyone, the NAIC Symposium is happening in Boston Sept. 25-27 and includes The Phase II funding presentation for the MEGA Drive. Attendance is free and sign-up's are at https://www.nasa.gov/content/niac-symposium.I went to Denver last year and it was three of the best days of my life. Exciting!!!
Quote from: Bob Woods on 07/03/2018 06:33 amJust a reminder to everyone, the NAIC Symposium is happening in Boston Sept. 25-27 and includes The Phase II funding presentation for the MEGA Drive. Attendance is free and sign-up's are at https://www.nasa.gov/content/niac-symposium.I went to Denver last year and it was three of the best days of my life. Exciting!!!Out of interest are you going this year?
QuoteIf you keep thinking 'Dean Drive', take a look of 'Henry Bull reaction motor' that I and others discussed in this thread some time ago. You probably will forget Dean Drive.Yet, 'Star-Drive' insists this sort of effect is accounted for:QuoteAs to your Dean drive concerns, Woodward has performed extensive stick-slip vibration studies of his PZT stacks in his torque pendulum setup and found little to no sensitivity to such vibrational inputs on the observed thrust signaturesI will leave this one for those more knowledgeable than myself to mull over.
Quote from: Star One on 07/03/2018 10:10 pmQuote from: Bob Woods on 07/03/2018 06:33 amJust a reminder to everyone, the NAIC Symposium is happening in Boston Sept. 25-27 and includes The Phase II funding presentation for the MEGA Drive. Attendance is free and sign-up's are at https://www.nasa.gov/content/niac-symposium.I went to Denver last year and it was three of the best days of my life. Exciting!!!Out of interest are you going this year?I have signed up, but not booked a room yet. I'm dealing with some timing and cost issues. I have grandkids, one in particular that I would like to see go, and that means taking them all. The one is 16, and starting college classes this fall at her local community college. She was deep into science when younger, but has lost that interest in the last couple of years.
Quote from: Augmentor on 06/27/2018 05:22 amIMHO the tests were not valid and the experiment was not valid. As you said, the point of the experiments was to demonstrate the quality of the setup. The primary result was they need to improve the magnetic shielding.Nothing in your post explains why this experiment would be "not valid." Also, your claims about the "wrong type of balance" aren't supported by the paper. The errors seen in the experiments can easily be generated by Earth ambient magnetic fields. (Actually the paper doesn't even claim that it is necessarily magnetic, because the experiment only is enough to know that the thrust wasn't from the drive.)Quote from: Augmentor on 06/27/2018 05:22 amTake your pick...A) The future requires retesting of both drives. Try, try again. B) Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.C) Really, it was an interim report.D) At least the press spelled Tajmar correctly.Not really a "take your pick" situation. C is true, and is clear if you read the paper. The word interim also implies A more or less regardless of the results.Quote from: M.E.T. on 06/27/2018 01:20 pmWell this is some of the best news I have read in a while. MET is alive and kicking.This changes nothing about Tajmar's results which were stated in the paper to be run with too low of a voltage to expect to see a signal over the other effects present.The new presentation shows strange data, usually with the "force" oscillating significantly while power is applied. Many artifacts in the data are not discussed in it, and generally, until and unless Woodward retracts previous papers he has written that fail at high school level physics (discussed previously in this thread) data from him is not trustworthy (note: I am not claiming he is intentionally messing with data.)Once Tajmar improves his setup and does more thorough testing, hopefully that will be enough to show some relevant conclusions.
IMHO the tests were not valid and the experiment was not valid.
Take your pick...A) The future requires retesting of both drives. Try, try again. B) Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.C) Really, it was an interim report.D) At least the press spelled Tajmar correctly.
The Harry Bull Reaction Motor is not really a slip-stick effect (asymmetrical frictional resistance) like the classic Dean Drive. Instead, it relies upon one of the collisions being elastic and the other inelastic since there is a damper on one side and not on the other. I ran some simulations a while back to see how something like this might produce a thrust signature on a torsional pendulum. I also built an "asymmetric shaker" device using a voice coil actuator and a ~50g stainless steel reaction mass that generated ~2uN at ~10KHz. Since then I've built a device that I hope will generate ~10uN+ and also improved the simulation. You can see that here:
I guess if this would work, we would be flying through space on washing machines set to a high spin cycle.Or on jack hammers.Devices like these only (seem to) produce 'thrust' when fixed to a solid base, i.e. through friction or springs.However there's nothing in outer space to affix them to.MET seems to use FOAM as a means to 'propel against'.Accelerate a vessel in outer space with a MET on board in one direction, and all the matter in the universe (connected through inertia) accelerates in the other direction.A bit like accelerating your car accelerates the earth (or a piece of a tectonic plate) in the opposite direction, immeasurably as it may be.This also would mean no violation of over unity energy creation.Anyway, it might be that pursuing this 'Harry Bull Reaction Motor' has its merits and therefore might warrant creating its own discussion group.