-
#2960
by
Monomorphic
on 19 Feb, 2016 18:58
-
Hello everyone! This is my first post on this forum (so I hope i'm doing it right!), but some of you may know me as a regular contributor to that other forum...
For my first post, I wanted to share some FEKO runs I did a few weeks back of a typically sized frustum but with different dipole antenna locations and orientations. The goal was to characterize the internal near fields and surface current since many say that antenna location is the "super squirrel secret sauce." Next goal is to do a frequency sweep of each of the antenna locations.
Welcome to the forum 
__________
The mesh looks very coarse, I wonder about convergence. Is the mesh this coarse because you are mesh-limited due to using a Feko size-limited version ?
Thanks for the welcome Dr. Rodal! I have the full version of FEKO so it is not mesh-limited. The coarseness you are seeing is because I only used 42 by 42 field points. This helps optimize the processing time at the expense of resolution. Once happy with the results, I'll pump up the field points to something very high and let the simulation run for several hours or over night.
EDIT: I attached an image that shows the difference in resolution. This is just aliasing from the near field vertical slice. You can see in the image that using fewer field points does not affect the overall accuracy of the solver. The left side uses 42 x 42 and the right 160 x 160.
-
#2961
by
HMXHMX
on 19 Feb, 2016 19:00
-
...Obviously the Drive is not entirely unaccelerated because there are going to be microtremors in the earth due to seismic activity, nearby highways and construction, & etc., & etc... just ask the LIGO folks. 
...
But TheTraveller could reply to you that the EM Drive experiments have not been conducted with an EM drive in space. They have been conducted in laboratory experiments on Earth with devices that to get self-accelerated need to overcome some initial static friction, etc., and he could say that the EM Drive anomalous force in null experiments may have been too small compared with the static friction, etc.
To make the point, obviously if you clamp a chemical rocket to a stand:
You need to un-clamp the chemical rocket from the stand, for the chemical rocket engine to self accelerate and move.
Completely parenthetically, that's
my engine from the AirLaunch program in 2007! So far, that's my only contribution to this fascinating thread...
-
#2962
by
X_RaY
on 19 Feb, 2016 19:28
-
Hello everyone! This is my first post on this forum (so I hope i'm doing it right!), but some of you may know me as a regular contributor to that other forum...
For my first post, I wanted to share some FEKO runs I did a few weeks back of a typically sized frustum but with different dipole antenna locations and orientations. The goal was to characterize the internal near fields and surface current since many say that antenna location is the "super squirrel secret sauce." Next goal is to do a frequency sweep of each of the antenna locations.
Welcome to the forum
__________
The mesh looks very coarse, I wonder about convergence. Is the mesh this coarse because you are mesh-limited due to using a Feko size-limited version ?
Thanks for the welcome Dr. Rodal! I have the full version of FEKO so it is not mesh-limited. The coarseness you are seeing is because I only used 42 by 42 field points. This helps optimize the processing time at the expense of resolution. Once happy with the results, I'll pump up the field points to something very high and let the simulation run for several hours or over night.
This is a result of FEKO
LITE (E-field of TE013). I am curious about the pics if you are done with increasing the number of points using the full version!
-
#2963
by
Mulletron
on 19 Feb, 2016 19:35
-
Michael Faraday, the discoverer of electromagnetic induction, was convinced that there must also be a gravitational analog of this law, and he carried out drop-tower experiments in 1849 to look for the electric current induced in a coil by changes in gravitational flux through the coil. This work, now little remembered, was in some ways the first investigation of what we would now call a unified-field theory.
http://tinyurl.com/jk8dnfj
-
#2964
by
rfmwguy
on 19 Feb, 2016 19:47
-
NSF-1701A Update -
Before I forget, I am getting quotes from local machine shops (slowly trickling in) for 0.125 copper plate machining for the top and bottom endplates of NSF-1701A. If anyone has a machine shop/equipment, I can send you a mechanical drawing of what I need. PM me...thanks!
-
#2965
by
Monomorphic
on 19 Feb, 2016 20:38
-
X_RaY, can you please post a copy of your .cfx file? I want to see how you are set up.
-
#2966
by
SeeShells
on 19 Feb, 2016 20:46
-
...
I still see DeAquino as "pushing on the windshield". I know I'm above my pay grade here and still a little foggy from the flu (great fevered dreams about the EMDrive though)....
Yes, of course, anybody and everybody that claims that any internal action by any means will move the center of mass of the EM Drive with respect to external frames of reference, is incorrect, as you say, this is just like you pushing on the windshield, or like moving the furniture to one side.
To move the center of mass one needs an external field or to eject mass or energy out of the EM Drive, that is clear.
You are quite right, sometimes if helps to drop back to review the basics. This isn't rocket science, oops it is. 
I never was clear either on what TT was saying, is it a little push or a hitting the drive to make it ring or just a loud shout, or a stick of C4.
I need to get some shopping done. Job critical items!
Back later,
Shell
Shell, very glad you're better; welcome back!
Just an odd observation. When building the lowest possible phase noise quartz oscillator, the crystal is loaded as lightly as possible to maintain the highest possible Q. Of course, this requires extraordinary amounts of gain in the oscillator feedback loop, and the gain had to be of the lowest possible noise figure.
Between the light coupling, and the low noise, there often wasn't enough flicker or shot noise to get the oscillator to start, sometimes for many minutes. Lightly tapping the circuit with a fingernail was usually enough to make the piezoelectric quartz output a tiny voltage glitch, and the oscillator would...oscillate. The output of the circuit could take several (as many as 15) seconds to slowly build to its final, stable, amplitude.
While a quartz crystal is piezoelectric, and the Emdrive most definitely is not, I hope it is helpful to point out that very high Q circuits can do strange and unexpected things. Inducing mechanical vibration or impulse on a quartz crystal to help it start "doing its thing" is rarely mentioned in the literature. The actual deflection of the crystal during the tap was on the order of nanometers (by calculation). These oscillators had absolute phase noise below -215 dBc/Hz at the floor (offset >100 KHz from a 10 MHz carrier).
I've built a few in my day and point taken, nice analogy.
Thanks for the welcome back to the living.
Shell
-
#2967
by
SeeShells
on 19 Feb, 2016 20:54
-
X_RaY, can you please post a copy of your .cfx file? I want to see how you are set up.
You got further along than I did too. Would you mind sharing here too as well?
Welcome Monomorphic and thanks for your post!
Shell
-
#2968
by
X_RaY
on 19 Feb, 2016 21:04
-
X_RaY, can you please post a copy of your .cfx file? I want to see how you are set up.
Take a look into edit-feko, not sure if cad-feko shows the requests correct.
If not call a new request, after that cad-feko shows the original requests also. At least it works on my PC.
Please contact me via PM with any questions about.
-
#2969
by
Mulletron
on 19 Feb, 2016 22:23
-
Since the Maxwell Faraday equations for EM and GEM are identical, I think I'm being over cautious in demanding proof that an induced gravitoelectric field would be nonconservative. I don't feel bad pressing the I believe button on that one.
Going through all the equations from start to finish, looking for what doesn't already exist. I'm expecting to find the need for a new equation somewhere but so far I've found none. The basics are in place.
It appears what is needed are EmDrive specific equations.
-
#2970
by
CuriousDreamer
on 19 Feb, 2016 23:45
-
I have had a thought and ran some numbers, now I am going to throw what I did out there so those with more knowledge then myself can poke holes in it and see if it can still float.
My initial thought is that the EMdrive is warping space to create a gravity well near the drives center of mass causing the drive to 'fall' into the gravity well.
From what I can figure out, in order to get 100mN of force a 1kg drive needs to form a gravity well equal to 1.5x10
-24kg of mass at a distance of 1.00x10
-12mm from the drives center of mass.
1.5x10
-24kg of matter is equal to 1.35x10
-7J of energy. Microwaves at 2.5Ghz contain 1.66x10
-24J of energy according to the equation E=hf. (Energy equals Plank's constant times frequency)
So you need 3 to 4 times as much energy as there is in a 2.5Ghz microwave to equal the mass necessary to make the gravity well. That doesn't seem like a very difficult difference to make up in a resonance cavity.
Am I completely off base?
~Dreamer
P.S. If it turns out that the numbers I posted are wrong (I used online calculators and don't fully understand the equations involved) I will not be offended in the least to have this post removed to prevent the forum from being cluttered with bad numbers.
-
#2971
by
SteveD
on 20 Feb, 2016 00:35
-
There is a reddit claim that the Eagleworks paper has been rejected for publication. Does anyone have further details? Is this a situation where it would be best let EW rectify any potential issues and resubmit or is it time to start trying to FOIA documents out of NASA?
-
#2972
by
Monomorphic
on 20 Feb, 2016 00:42
-
Apparently I can't open FEKO lite files in the full version. Get an error.
With four optimized near field requests, I was able to do a 2.0Ghz to 3.0 Ghz frequency sweep with 100 steps in as little as 30 minutes:
2.0Ghz to 3.0Ghz
Big end radius: 12.224 cm
Small end radius: 6.122
Height: 18.366
-
#2973
by
Prunesquallor
on 20 Feb, 2016 01:13
-
There is a reddit claim that the Eagleworks paper has been rejected for publication. Does anyone have further details? Is this a situation where it would be best let EW rectify any potential issues and resubmit or is it time to start trying to FOIA documents out of NASA?
Having been on the wrong end of a FOIA, I think it's safe to assume nothing will alienate you (and by extension this forum) faster from NASA.
-
#2974
by
rfmwguy
on 20 Feb, 2016 01:21
-
There is a reddit claim that the Eagleworks paper has been rejected for publication. Does anyone have further details? Is this a situation where it would be best let EW rectify any potential issues and resubmit or is it time to start trying to FOIA documents out of NASA?
As mentioned earlier, claims outside of nasa should be highly suspect. Have no reason to believe this claim. nasa is quite serious about news release protocols, as they should be. See no reason they won't make an announcement of some sort down the road, probably slower than we would all like
-
#2975
by
VAXHeadroom
on 20 Feb, 2016 01:25
-
...
Thanks for the welcome back.
I'm struggling with the notion and always have with the need to unstick the drive. Unsticky is what I'd think of in EM standing waves, like trying to corral jello in a stainless bowl with jello spoons, very slippery. As a closed frame it sees the rest of the universe as bouncing around. So this is why I was thinking of letting the portion of the EM standing wave interact with a diamagnetic material. That could mean using a diamagnetic material just at one end.
Shell
Copper is slightly diamagnetic If you use TM modes (that have an electric axial field) you could go with one end made of a more diamagnetic material than copper.
But, alternatively you could go with TE modes (that have an axial magnetic field) and use ferromagnetic materials at one end. This is probably going to be much more effective because there are very ferromagnetic materials with high magnetic permeability. This was proposed by DeAquino.
I still see DeAquino as "pushing on the windshield". I know I'm above my pay grade here and still a little foggy from the flu (great fevered dreams about the EMDrive though).
...
Shell
As Shell knows, I was pushing this idea around late last year. What if what is pushing on the windshield is the magnetron? The system is not purely closed, energy is injected. The magnetic fields, as we have seen from the simulations, are NOT symmetric with respect to the end plates; the H fields are largely parallel to the big end and largely perpendicular to the small end. The energy calculations I did showed that the magnetic field interacting with the plates had a much larger energy signature at the small end. Doesn't this mean that the diamagnetic repulsion is stronger at the small end? I have not had the time or sufficient knowledge yet to work this up, it's still basically a 'hunch' - I am working through MIT's 8.03 physics lectures by Dr Walter Lewin, I'm on 20 of 24...
-- Emory
-
#2976
by
SteveD
on 20 Feb, 2016 01:30
-
There is a reddit claim that the Eagleworks paper has been rejected for publication. Does anyone have further details? Is this a situation where it would be best let EW rectify any potential issues and resubmit or is it time to start trying to FOIA documents out of NASA?
Having been on the wrong end of a FOIA, I think it's safe to assume nothing will alienate you (and by extension this forum) faster from NASA.
Well then, I'll wait until we receive some indication that worked has stopped without publishing either affirmative or null data to make a FOIA request. Would probably be dealing with an archivist then anyway
-
#2977
by
vulture4
on 20 Feb, 2016 01:45
-
If a paper is rejected for publication the author always has the option to self-publish and let those who are interested see what they have to say.
-
#2978
by
rfmwguy
on 20 Feb, 2016 01:52
-
...
Thanks for the welcome back.
I'm struggling with the notion and always have with the need to unstick the drive. Unsticky is what I'd think of in EM standing waves, like trying to corral jello in a stainless bowl with jello spoons, very slippery. As a closed frame it sees the rest of the universe as bouncing around. So this is why I was thinking of letting the portion of the EM standing wave interact with a diamagnetic material. That could mean using a diamagnetic material just at one end.
Shell
Copper is slightly diamagnetic If you use TM modes (that have an electric axial field) you could go with one end made of a more diamagnetic material than copper.
But, alternatively you could go with TE modes (that have an axial magnetic field) and use ferromagnetic materials at one end. This is probably going to be much more effective because there are very ferromagnetic materials with high magnetic permeability. This was proposed by DeAquino.
I still see DeAquino as "pushing on the windshield". I know I'm above my pay grade here and still a little foggy from the flu (great fevered dreams about the EMDrive though).
...
Shell
As Shell knows, I was pushing this idea around late last year. What if what is pushing on the windshield is the magnetron? The system is not purely closed, energy is injected. The magnetic fields, as we have seen from the simulations, are NOT symmetric with respect to the end plates; the H fields are largely parallel to the big end and largely perpendicular to the small end. The energy calculations I did showed that the magnetic field interacting with the plates had a much larger energy signature at the small end. Doesn't this mean that the diamagnetic repulsion is stronger at the small end? I have not had the time or sufficient knowledge yet to work this up, it's still basically a 'hunch' - I am working through MIT's 8.03 physics lectures by Dr Walter Lewin, I'm on 20 of 24...
-- Emory
Hey emory, been a while...its puzzling as you are injecting energy into the cavity, but no one has cracked the code yet. Simplisticly, fill a water balloon. Ignoring the nozzles reactive force, the water baloon remains closed to the outside world until it reptures. Bigtime reaction then. A pinhole leak would supply a small force. But em isn't a fluid, leaking em will not create movement.
It must be open somehow. Mulletron and others contemplate em/gravity interractions. Em and gravity are no mass long distance forces. Gravity flows through matter. It passes thru a frustum like it wasn't there. Em, not so much.
So wave or particle? Mass or massless? Been trying to focus on mass-gap papers for guidance. Think I'll stick with building and testing...a lot of brilliant people haven't cracked the mass gap code yet.
-
#2979
by
SeeShells
on 20 Feb, 2016 01:55
-
...
Thanks for the welcome back.
I'm struggling with the notion and always have with the need to unstick the drive. Unsticky is what I'd think of in EM standing waves, like trying to corral jello in a stainless bowl with jello spoons, very slippery. As a closed frame it sees the rest of the universe as bouncing around. So this is why I was thinking of letting the portion of the EM standing wave interact with a diamagnetic material. That could mean using a diamagnetic material just at one end.
Shell
Copper is slightly diamagnetic If you use TM modes (that have an electric axial field) you could go with one end made of a more diamagnetic material than copper.
But, alternatively you could go with TE modes (that have an axial magnetic field) and use ferromagnetic materials at one end. This is probably going to be much more effective because there are very ferromagnetic materials with high magnetic permeability. This was proposed by DeAquino.
I still see DeAquino as "pushing on the windshield". I know I'm above my pay grade here and still a little foggy from the flu (great fevered dreams about the EMDrive though).
...
Shell
As Shell knows, I was pushing this idea around late last year. What if what is pushing on the windshield is the magnetron? The system is not purely closed, energy is injected. The magnetic fields, as we have seen from the simulations, are NOT symmetric with respect to the end plates; the H fields are largely parallel to the big end and largely perpendicular to the small end. The energy calculations I did showed that the magnetic field interacting with the plates had a much larger energy signature at the small end. Doesn't this mean that the diamagnetic repulsion is stronger at the small end? I have not had the time or sufficient knowledge yet to work this up, it's still basically a 'hunch' - I am working through MIT's 8.03 physics lectures by Dr Walter Lewin, I'm on 20 of 24...
-- Emory
You were Emory, you were. When this next round comes around in testing I'll be adding a diamagnetic material but more interesting I want to sandwich dielectric with diamagnetic materials.
Shell
...
