-
#1220 by FinalFrontier on 04 Jan, 2016 09:11
-
Random question time. While this concept is still in the conceptual/theory proving stage, and idea has occurred to me. It seems to me having read through some/skimmed other/followed parts of this so far since it was first announced, that a big contention here with regard to this device has to do with accurate testing in hard vacuum/ruling out instrument contamination. Since results so far have been at least somewhat consistently in favor of the device producing thrust, why not consider building say a microsat sized demonstrator and trying to get it flown on something/raising capital to do so?
Or is it still far too soon to consider flying even the current laboratory experiment sized device? Seems to me if you could simply build a space worthy version of the lab experiment and fly it you might be able to get a better idea of whether its producing even minute thrust or not (depending on orbit/altitude ect ofc).
Perhaps this is off the wall but there you go. -
#1221 by Chrochne on 04 Jan, 2016 09:12
-
Very true! In terms of nature, the Emdrive thrust is its.I have seen an article mentioned: the Chinese academy of sciences of superconducting niobium rf cavity at work, can produce a powerful inner surface lorentz force, powerful (more than 3000 N) to make the cavity shell bending and vibration.Other than as it affects experimental results, why would Lorentz forces be a problem for a satellite or other space application?
Are you talking about the "huge surface lorentz force"? If so, you may know that It has another name, "radiation pressure".
Is that article you speak about also in English please? It would be very interesting to read it. -
#1222 by TheTraveller on 04 Jan, 2016 09:46
-
Random question time. While this concept is still in the conceptual/theory proving stage, and idea has occurred to me. It seems to me having read through some/skimmed other/followed parts of this so far since it was first announced, that a big contention here with regard to this device has to do with accurate testing in hard vacuum/ruling out instrument contamination. Since results so far have been at least somewhat consistently in favor of the device producing thrust, why not consider building say a microsat sized demonstrator and trying to get it flown on something/raising capital to do so?
Or is it still far too soon to consider flying even the current laboratory experiment sized device? Seems to me if you could simply build a space worthy version of the lab experiment and fly it you might be able to get a better idea of whether its producing even minute thrust or not (depending on orbit/altitude ect ofc).
Perhaps this is off the wall but there you go.
That is my plan.
1) build a flat end plate S band (2.45 GHz) frustum to test out various options and get rough scale based quasi static thrust data.
2) build a high performance S band spherical end plate frustum with all the bells & whistles to obtain optimum thrust while continually accelerating on a rotary test rig.
3) convert that proven design into a X band 1U CubeSat thruster and prove it in a high vac chamber.
4) fly it in space in a 2U form factor with 0.1 m^2 of 39% efficiency 3J solar cells, generating 40-45W dc, 15W Rf and 6mN thrust. At 2kg total mass, should get 3 mm/s/s acceleration. Have been advised that size CubeSat can be tracked from Earth and the acceleration measured / confirmed. I say confirmed as the expected continual thrust will have been confirmed in a high vac chamber.
Intend to fund steps 1 thru 3 from my own funds. Achieving step 4 should be very interesting as many folks will have a commercial interest in success.
1st build Mark 3.6 frustum design is attached. Waiting on frustum forming hoops and VNA to arrive, plus furniture to depart my workshop. Then we ENGAGE!
Once I have confirmed thrust, anyone wishing to buy this frustum will be able to do so. Frustum will have antenna and coax connector fitted. Just need to feed it with Rf at the correct freq to obtain thrust. Will provide Specific Thrust (N/kW) for each frustum sold plus video of the test data.
-
#1223 by oyzw on 04 Jan, 2016 10:26
-
I'm sorry I haven't found, as if the pressure in the resonator is 217000 pa
Very true! In terms of nature, the Emdrive thrust is its.I have seen an article mentioned: the Chinese academy of sciences of superconducting niobium rf cavity at work, can produce a powerful inner surface lorentz force, powerful (more than 3000 N) to make the cavity shell bending and vibration.Other than as it affects experimental results, why would Lorentz forces be a problem for a satellite or other space application?
Are you talking about the "huge surface lorentz force"? If so, you may know that It has another name, "radiation pressure".
Is that article you speak about also in English please? It would be very interesting to read it. -
#1224 by oyzw on 04 Jan, 2016 11:29
-
A very exciting job！How to reach 120 n/KWRandom question time. While this concept is still in the conceptual/theory proving stage, and idea has occurred to me. It seems to me having read through some/skimmed other/followed parts of this so far since it was first announced, that a big contention here with regard to this device has to do with accurate testing in hard vacuum/ruling out instrument contamination. Since results so far have been at least somewhat consistently in favor of the device producing thrust, why not consider building say a microsat sized demonstrator and trying to get it flown on something/raising capital to do so?
Or is it still far too soon to consider flying even the current laboratory experiment sized device? Seems to me if you could simply build a space worthy version of the lab experiment and fly it you might be able to get a better idea of whether its producing even minute thrust or not (depending on orbit/altitude ect ofc).
Perhaps this is off the wall but there you go.
That is my plan.
1) build a flat end plate S band (2.45 GHz) frustum to test out various options and get rough scale based quasi static thrust data.
2) build a high performance S band spherical end plate frustum with all the bells & whistles to obtain optimum thrust while continually accelerating on a rotary test rig.
3) convert that proven design into a X band 1U CubeSat thruster and prove it in a high vac chamber.
4) fly it in space in a 2U form factor with 0.1 m^2 of 39% efficiency 3J solar cells, generating 40-45W dc, 15W Rf and 6mN thrust. At 2kg total mass, should get 3 mm/s/s acceleration. Have been advised that size CubeSat can be tracked from Earth and the acceleration measured / confirmed. I say confirmed as the expected continual thrust will have been confirmed in a high vac chamber.
Intend to fund steps 1 thru 3 from my own funds. Achieving step 4 should be very interesting as many folks will have a commercial interest in success.
1st build Mark 3.6 frustum design is attached. Waiting on frustum forming hoops and VNA to arrive, plus furniture to depart my workshop. Then we ENGAGE!
Once I have confirmed thrust, anyone wishing to buy this frustum will be able to do so. Frustum will have antenna and coax connector fitted. Just need to feed it with Rf at the correct freq to obtain thrust. Will provide Specific Thrust (N/kW) for each frustum sold plus video of the test data. -
#1225 by TheTraveller on 04 Jan, 2016 11:38
-
A very exciting job！How to reach 120 n/KWRandom question time. While this concept is still in the conceptual/theory proving stage, and idea has occurred to me. It seems to me having read through some/skimmed other/followed parts of this so far since it was first announced, that a big contention here with regard to this device has to do with accurate testing in hard vacuum/ruling out instrument contamination. Since results so far have been at least somewhat consistently in favor of the device producing thrust, why not consider building say a microsat sized demonstrator and trying to get it flown on something/raising capital to do so?
Or is it still far too soon to consider flying even the current laboratory experiment sized device? Seems to me if you could simply build a space worthy version of the lab experiment and fly it you might be able to get a better idea of whether its producing even minute thrust or not (depending on orbit/altitude ect ofc).
Perhaps this is off the wall but there you go.
That is my plan.
1) build a flat end plate S band (2.45 GHz) frustum to test out various options and get rough scale based quasi static thrust data.
2) build a high performance S band spherical end plate frustum with all the bells & whistles to obtain optimum thrust while continually accelerating on a rotary test rig.
3) convert that proven design into a X band 1U CubeSat thruster and prove it in a high vac chamber.
4) fly it in space in a 2U form factor with 0.1 m^2 of 39% efficiency 3J solar cells, generating 40-45W dc, 15W Rf and 6mN thrust. At 2kg total mass, should get 3 mm/s/s acceleration. Have been advised that size CubeSat can be tracked from Earth and the acceleration measured / confirmed. I say confirmed as the expected continual thrust will have been confirmed in a high vac chamber.
Intend to fund steps 1 thru 3 from my own funds. Achieving step 4 should be very interesting as many folks will have a commercial interest in success.
1st build Mark 3.6 frustum design is attached. Waiting on frustum forming hoops and VNA to arrive, plus furniture to depart my workshop. Then we ENGAGE!
Once I have confirmed thrust, anyone wishing to buy this frustum will be able to do so. Frustum will have antenna and coax connector fitted. Just need to feed it with Rf at the correct freq to obtain thrust. Will provide Specific Thrust (N/kW) for each frustum sold plus video of the test data.
Rogers latest published cyro test data, in his peer reviewed paper, shows that 120N/kW was achieved in 2014 as attached.
-
#1226 by oyzw on 04 Jan, 2016 12:02
-
His high temperature superconducting cavity disclose too little information
A very exciting job！How to reach 120 n/KWRandom question time. While this concept is still in the conceptual/theory proving stage, and idea has occurred to me. It seems to me having read through some/skimmed other/followed parts of this so far since it was first announced, that a big contention here with regard to this device has to do with accurate testing in hard vacuum/ruling out instrument contamination. Since results so far have been at least somewhat consistently in favor of the device producing thrust, why not consider building say a microsat sized demonstrator and trying to get it flown on something/raising capital to do so?
Or is it still far too soon to consider flying even the current laboratory experiment sized device? Seems to me if you could simply build a space worthy version of the lab experiment and fly it you might be able to get a better idea of whether its producing even minute thrust or not (depending on orbit/altitude ect ofc).
Perhaps this is off the wall but there you go.
That is my plan.
1) build a flat end plate S band (2.45 GHz) frustum to test out various options and get rough scale based quasi static thrust data.
2) build a high performance S band spherical end plate frustum with all the bells & whistles to obtain optimum thrust while continually accelerating on a rotary test rig.
3) convert that proven design into a X band 1U CubeSat thruster and prove it in a high vac chamber.
4) fly it in space in a 2U form factor with 0.1 m^2 of 39% efficiency 3J solar cells, generating 40-45W dc, 15W Rf and 6mN thrust. At 2kg total mass, should get 3 mm/s/s acceleration. Have been advised that size CubeSat can be tracked from Earth and the acceleration measured / confirmed. I say confirmed as the expected continual thrust will have been confirmed in a high vac chamber.
Intend to fund steps 1 thru 3 from my own funds. Achieving step 4 should be very interesting as many folks will have a commercial interest in success.
1st build Mark 3.6 frustum design is attached. Waiting on frustum forming hoops and VNA to arrive, plus furniture to depart my workshop. Then we ENGAGE!
Once I have confirmed thrust, anyone wishing to buy this frustum will be able to do so. Frustum will have antenna and coax connector fitted. Just need to feed it with Rf at the correct freq to obtain thrust. Will provide Specific Thrust (N/kW) for each frustum sold plus video of the test data.
Rogers latest published cyro test data, in his peer reviewed paper, shows that 120N/kW was achieved in 2014 as attached. -
#1227 by TheTraveller on 04 Jan, 2016 12:09
-
His high temperature superconducting cavity disclose too little information
Don't agree. There is a LOT of information there for those experienced in the tech. Read the paper: http://www.emdrive.com/IAC14publishedpaper.pdf -
#1228 by Flyby on 04 Jan, 2016 12:58
-
I'm sorry TT, but this graph does not look like an actual measured result.
Rogers latest published cyro test data, in his peer reviewed paper, shows that 120N/kW was achieved in 2014 as attached.
That graph is clearly not a sampling of real data. Much too clean for that...
Got to say that the graph results of prof. Yang, with all their variations and irregular output, at least have the appearance of being credible.
What mr. Shawyer did there is nothing more that producing a graph of what he hopes to obtain, not what he actually achieved...
As said often here, words and claims are easily made, it is getting the actual results, that is the hard part.
In all honesty, I'm still waiting for the first results that will actually convince me there is something going on. So far, the experimental results do no exclude that possibility (that thrust is generated), but neither do they confirm it...
What is needed are unambiguous test results, that go well beyond statistical interpretations and thermal background noise...
Non-realistic force prediction graphs do not contribute to the credibility of the (potential) phenomenon, so I don't think it is wise to use them as "evidence" in a discussion...
As it is , graphs like that still remain in the domain of science-fiction, not science.
Get results first, then produce graphs, not the other way around... -
#1229 by oyzw on 04 Jan, 2016 13:47
-
Rogers has been in the style of a writer to publish his data
I'm sorry TT, but this graph does not look like an actual measured result.
Rogers latest published cyro test data, in his peer reviewed paper, shows that 120N/kW was achieved in 2014 as attached.
That graph is clearly not a sampling of real data. Much too clean for that...
Got to say that the graph results of prof. Yang, with all their variations and irregular output, at least have the appearance of being credible.
What mr. Shawyer did there is nothing more that producing a graph of what he hopes to obtain, not what he actually achieved...
As said often here, words and claims are easily made, it is getting the actual results, that is the hard part.
In all honesty, I'm still waiting for the first results that will actually convince me there is something going on. So far, the experimental results do no exclude that possibility (that thrust is generated), but neither do they confirm it...
What is needed are unambiguous test results, that go well beyond statistical interpretations and thermal background noise...
Non-realistic force prediction graphs do not contribute to the credibility of the (potential) phenomenon, so I don't think it is wise to use them as "evidence" in a discussion...
As it is , graphs like that still remain in the domain of science-fiction, not science.
Get results first, then produce graphs, not the other way around... -
#1230 by VAXHeadroom on 04 Jan, 2016 14:11
-
I believe you can see the mode in this animation of 10 slices for on cycle and how it relates to Maxheadroom's graphic in thermal. I paused it at the peak of of the energy in the mode to see. It matches the CSV data quite closely. How close it matches the real world using the thermal camera is to be seen.
Shell
Added: What would be interesting is to drop the small end CSV data sample down into the mode and see it it also agrees and the difference in energy levels.
I'm on it.
Here is the Z+10 energy summation graphic. Location determined using H5View to be where the center H values are maximized.
meep control file set to resolution 275 (the highest I could fit into memory). The simulation grid is 390x327x291 and 112 time slices are output to the H5 files. So the middle of the Z axis is 145, the big end is -112 from the center and the small end is +58 from the center making the frustum 170 tall. This slice is +10 from the center (going toward the small end).
The energy values are >10x what those on the small end. Remember, these are 'meep units'...
-
#1231 by OnlyMe on 04 Jan, 2016 14:21
-
(...)
Rogers has been in the style of a writer to publish his data
I agree, this paper does not read like it represents any real experimental results.
One thing that is interesting though, is that it seems Shawyer is suggesting that it may be more efficient to pulse the input power on/off. Power for any individual frustum, on for 1/8 of the total power cycle and for only about 27 ms at a time. It isn't entirely clear but this seems the cycling proposed for two of the three systems. The third still being pulsed, but over a shorter time frame.
It is difficult to know whether this is for the handling of heat or production of thrust.
Is it possible that by pulsing the input power, reflected power can be minimized?... Which might improve overall thrust? Or is it just intended as a mechanism to help minimize and handle heat build up and the mechanics of distribution/radiation? -
#1232 by SeeShells on 04 Jan, 2016 14:38
-
I've went back and watched this several times over and I'll agree that this is some very nice work...
Shell> pats MAXHeadroom on the back!
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39004.msg1467619#msg1467619 -
#1233 by rfmwguy on 04 Jan, 2016 15:52
-
I've been looking a some of shawyers work for many months and guess I would agree with many here that the value centers around creating the enthusiasm for new work. I know some people are tired of seeing his old data, but if we use just a small part of it as motivation once in a while for future efforts on our part, its shortcomings can be overlooked.
Each of us is experimenting, designing, modeling, discussing and theorizing for different reasons, but the history of this enigma is always interesting.
I know nsf staff here want to have our thread remain THE source for the latestest and greatest emdrive news as long as its proven viable. We should endeavor to keep content fresh and relevant...such as Vax's new modeling vids. If you look at Threads 1-6 as THE place of record as emdrive discussions continue, I think we can understand what nsf staff wants to accomplish. -
#1234 by TheTraveller on 04 Jan, 2016 16:29
-
I'm sorry TT, but this graph does not look like an actual measured result.
Rogers latest published cyro test data, in his peer reviewed paper, shows that 120N/kW was achieved in 2014 as attached.
That graph is clearly not a sampling of real data. Much too clean for that...
Got to say that the graph results of prof. Yang, with all their variations and irregular output, at least have the appearance of being credible.
What mr. Shawyer did there is nothing more that producing a graph of what he hopes to obtain, not what he actually achieved...
As said often here, words and claims are easily made, it is getting the actual results, that is the hard part.
In all honesty, I'm still waiting for the first results that will actually convince me there is something going on. So far, the experimental results do no exclude that possibility (that thrust is generated), but neither do they confirm it...
What is needed are unambiguous test results, that go well beyond statistical interpretations and thermal background noise...
Non-realistic force prediction graphs do not contribute to the credibility of the (potential) phenomenon, so I don't think it is wise to use them as "evidence" in a discussion...
As it is , graphs like that still remain in the domain of science-fiction, not science.
Get results first, then produce graphs, not the other way around...
It is my understand the Force graph is a real time recording. Note the slight overshoot, dip and recovery as the Rf pulse stops. Also the upward curve is not straigth as would be expected when reflected power was rapidly dropping and forward power was increasing as the cavity fill was starting. Which means while the Rf output power was at 1kW, the forward power was very much less and it would have increased following the same curve as the generated Force.
From my calcs the TC was approx 150ms, so the Rf pulse lasted about 20% of 1 TC.
As I said, those who have studied and understand what happens as a cavity fills from empty can gain quite a lot of info from that graph.
BTW working out the true forward power at the end of the pulse, generates a Specific Force well above 120N/kW, which is based on the generated power and not forward power.
Attached is a graph of Forward versus Reflected versus TC. From this graph, Forward power to the frustum at the end of the 20% TC pulse was around 325Ws, so the Specific Force was more like 370N/kW.
-
#1235 by OnlyMe on 04 Jan, 2016 16:41
-
(...)
It is my understand the Force graph is a real time recording. ...
(...)
TT, that does not seem realistic. The graph follows a description of an eight frustum superconductor design, with no documentation that it has been built. It applies to the Lift Off engine design. If it were real data, the issue of whether the EMDrive works or not would be settled.
It seems more like a N/Kw thrust projection, than real test data. -
#1236 by TheTraveller on 04 Jan, 2016 16:55
-
(...)
It is my understand the Force graph is a real time recording. ...
(...)
TT, that does not seem realistic. The graph follows a description of an eight frustum superconductor design, with no documentation that it has been built. It applies to the Lift Off engine design. If it were real data, the issue of whether the EMDrive works or not would be settled.
It seems more like a N/Kw thrust projection, than real test data.
The EmDrive has been real since Roger's 1st patent in 1988.
The issue is not if the EmDrive is real but if some folks can get their heads around a new to physics effect. Well new in 1988. Seems they can't and so shout "IT CAN'T WORK AS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE" as loudly as they can and deny ALL the experimental data that says they are incorrect. Which upsets them as they are the self proclaimed experts.
Very shortly that view will die forever.
BTW I'm not here to argue with anybody. The soon to be presented EmDrive experimental data will stop all the deniers dead in their tracks.
Well past my bed time. Almost morning. Nite all. -
#1237 by Mulletron on 04 Jan, 2016 17:14
-
Anyone here familiar enough with topology and computer animation who can show if one can morph two hollow tori which are connected..into a cylinder? More specifically, are two whispering gallery resonators of different diameters (connected by a fiber optic channel), equivalent to a frustum?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genus_%28mathematics%29
-
#1238 by A_M_Swallow on 04 Jan, 2016 17:56
-
A 435 Mhz TE013 frustum design
Big end: 1.6 m dia
Small end: 0.85 m dia
Length: 1.7 m
Area: 9.28 m^2
Volume: 2.07 m^3
Df: 0.803
Resonance: 435.0 MHz
Qu: 162k
Specific Force: 0.434 N/kW
TC: 59.2 us, 5 x TC: 296.2 us
End to end transits per TC: 17,1777, per 5 TC: 85,885
BIG FRUSTUM!
That could be a car engine. There are satellites that big.
Put in 100 kW and get 43 N out.
That would accelerate a 10 tonne satellite at 43/10000 = 0.0043 m/s/s
At 33% efficiency on the 100kW Rf amp, will need 300kW dc to power it. That is a lot of solar panels!
4 such drives will need 1.2MWs of solar panels to gen 172Ns of thrust, with almost 1.2MWs of heat to get rid of in a vacuum.
So a few support system issues that need engineering optimal solutions.
The robotic ARRM mission will have 50 kW of solar panels for its ion thrusters, so that is a simple buy.
NASA is considering SEP vehicles with 190 kW solar arrays and investigation 200-400 kW arrays.
The size of radiators needed to dump 1.2MW into a vacuum at shirt sleeves temperature (about 300 K) I will leave to someone else to calculate. -
#1239 by glennfish on 04 Jan, 2016 18:02
-
Anyone here familiar enough with topology and computer animation who can show if one can morph two hollow tori which are connected..into a cylinder? More specifically, are two whispering gallery resonators of different diameters (connected by a fiber optic channel), equivalent to a frustum?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genus_%28mathematics%29
A cylinder is a genus 1 torus. Your object is a genus 2 torus. You can't morph one into the other.