-
#3300 by rfmwguy on 03 Mar, 2016 13:39
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a fixed target attached to an ejection system/nozzle be blowing your own sail? If it was a mass ejection system, there would be no attached target. Are my synapses firing incorrectly?....
http://preview.tinyurl.com/grv8ljj
http://www.hbartech.com/
Blowing your own sail? Hmmmmm.
It would be misleading to state "blowing your own sail?" referring to this concept. Such misleading statement may confuse people int the EM Drive thread (given Shawyer's explanation for the EM Drive as a closed system defying conservation of momentum).
This concept is not at all "blowing your own sail". This concept is conventional rocket propulsion, fully satisfying conservation of momentum.
Antiprotons induce fission in the uranium 238 layer on the sail with 100% efficiency.
The ejecta of Uranium 238 coating from the sail is what allows propulsion. Unlike the EM Drive explanation by Shawyer, which does NOT make any sense whatsoever (Shawyer proposes a closed system where no energy and no mass escapes), this concept relies on ejecting Uranium ejection for propulsion. -
#3301 by rfmwguy on 03 Mar, 2016 13:42
-
Try a model @ 2.46 GHz for now, then 2.45
Thanks! -
#3302 by Rodal on 03 Mar, 2016 13:45
-
No, it is not blowing your own sail. Please read the original papers. It relies on ejection of fission products from the Uranium 238 coating.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a fixed target attached to an ejection system/nozzle be blowing your own sail? If it was a mass ejection system, there would be no attached target. Are my synapses firing incorrectly?....
http://preview.tinyurl.com/grv8ljj
http://www.hbartech.com/
Blowing your own sail? Hmmmmm.
It would be misleading to state "blowing your own sail?" referring to this concept. Such misleading statement may confuse people int the EM Drive thread (given Shawyer's explanation for the EM Drive as a closed system defying conservation of momentum).
This concept is not at all "blowing your own sail". This concept is conventional rocket propulsion, fully satisfying conservation of momentum.
Antiprotons induce fission in the uranium 238 layer on the sail with 100% efficiency.
The ejecta of Uranium 238 coating from the sail is what allows propulsion. Unlike the EM Drive explanation by Shawyer, which does NOT make any sense whatsoever (Shawyer proposes a closed system where no energy and no mass escapes), this concept relies on ejecting Uranium ejection for propulsion.
Let's try to be technical and use some basic rocket propulsion, for example look at this
The example he gives for ΔV of 117 km/s, Vex =67 km/s=(Isp=6800s) entails:
Massfinal/Massinitial = .2
propellant ejected mass fraction as % of initial mass, for the above example for this concept is: 80%
This is an example of conventional rocket propulsion, relying on ejection of propellant (fission products originating from Uranium 238).
-
#3303 by Monomorphic on 03 Mar, 2016 13:56
-
Try a model @ 2.46 GHz for now, then 2.45
Thanks!
Here is 2.45
-
#3304 by Monomorphic on 03 Mar, 2016 14:03
-
2.46
-
#3305 by Monomorphic on 03 Mar, 2016 14:12
-
More info here:
-
#3306 by Monomorphic on 03 Mar, 2016 14:18
-
This image has the horizontal slices spaced better.
-
#3307 by rfmwguy on 03 Mar, 2016 14:25
-
This image has the horizontal slices spaced better.
Hmmm, this is rather unique...not sure I've seen a model like this. A central axis focus of radiation. Do you have an S11 plot? -
#3308 by SeeShells on 03 Mar, 2016 14:36
-
I've regularly read this thread for quite a long time, but I have been unable to read it all lately. Please humor me as I ask a question out of lack of time: What happened to Shell's test that worked before burning out? I thought she was replacing the burnt out part and retesting in a different location? Did something else go wrong? Did I just miss the results?
David,
Thanks!
David
Welcome back and ask anything you desire. Yes, I turned my antenna probe into a burnt matchstick inside of the waveguide and it did more than just that. I tore down the entire frustum - magnetron - RF - system and found the increased reflected RF coming back down the coax fried my magnetron as well.
Since the tear down I redesigned the antenna probe to have a wider bandwidth, redesigned the waveguides into the frustum, redesigned the magnetron to coax waveguide, and because the old digital meter was just a visual display I replaced it with one I could data log. I've redesigned the lab table to take the new digital logging scale as well as the system to cool the magnetron with a coil water jacket and radiator.
I built another frustum to test along with the old one on the new test stand which I'm currently rebuilding. It's hard to keep the equipment on the old table from shifting around. I now have a 3x5 ft 1"x1" 1/4-20 holes aluminum anti-vibration supported lab plate to mount everything on.
The first test was a shakedown showing me where the weaknesses were in my designs and even though they worked for me to test frustums it was not good enough for the community. I remember my dad telling me to never buy the first introductory year new model car but wait for the next because they had "workedofout the bugs". This is true for me as well as rfmyguy and even NASA's EagleWorks.
The next round of released data will be logged and videoed. No more pre-release OMG moments with no solid data to back it up.
Hope this helps in giving you a quick update.
Shell
spellling correction
-
#3309 by Monomorphic on 03 Mar, 2016 14:50
-
This image has the horizontal slices spaced better.
Hmmm, this is rather unique...not sure I've seen a model like this. A central axis focus of radiation. Do you have an S11 plot?
I would need to run a sweep to create anything with more than one data point:
-
#3310 by rfmwguy on 03 Mar, 2016 14:53
-
I'll have to study this apparent mass gap someday. Actually, would like this to move this its own topic unless it has more relevance to emdrive.
No, it is not blowing your own sail. Please read the original papers. It relies on ejection of fission products from the Uranium 238 coating.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a fixed target attached to an ejection system/nozzle be blowing your own sail? If it was a mass ejection system, there would be no attached target. Are my synapses firing incorrectly?....
http://preview.tinyurl.com/grv8ljj
http://www.hbartech.com/
Blowing your own sail? Hmmmmm.
It would be misleading to state "blowing your own sail?" referring to this concept. Such misleading statement may confuse people int the EM Drive thread (given Shawyer's explanation for the EM Drive as a closed system defying conservation of momentum).
This concept is not at all "blowing your own sail". This concept is conventional rocket propulsion, fully satisfying conservation of momentum.
Antiprotons induce fission in the uranium 238 layer on the sail with 100% efficiency.
The ejecta of Uranium 238 coating from the sail is what allows propulsion. Unlike the EM Drive explanation by Shawyer, which does NOT make any sense whatsoever (Shawyer proposes a closed system where no energy and no mass escapes), this concept relies on ejecting Uranium ejection for propulsion.
Let's try to be technical and use some basic rocket propulsion, for example look at this
The example he gives for ΔV of 117 km/s, Vex =67 km/s=(Isp=6800s) entails:
Massfinal/Massinitial = .2
propellant ejected mass fraction as % of initial mass, for the above example for this concept is: 80%
This is an example of conventional rocket propulsion, relying on ejection of propellant (fission products originating from Uranium 238).
-
#3311 by rfmwguy on 03 Mar, 2016 14:59
-
Thanks...looks promising. 2.2 to 2.7 GHz is where I usually set up my VNA. Step size can be 1 MHz/0.001 GHz, fine resolution not needed, IOW, 500 data pointsThis image has the horizontal slices spaced better.
Hmmm, this is rather unique...not sure I've seen a model like this. A central axis focus of radiation. Do you have an S11 plot?
I would need to run a sweep to create anything with more than one data point: -
#3312 by Rodal on 03 Mar, 2016 15:00
-
..
I don't understand why you write that you would need to "study a mass gap": ejecting mass from the sail results in a reduction of mass.
I'll have to study this apparent mass gap someday. Actually, would like this to move this its own topic unless it has more relevance to emdrive.
If you saw a picture of the sail and you thought that this was something that could back up all the inherent contradictions and problems involved in the EM Drive concept from Shawyer, by implying "blowing your own sail", this is not at all the case.
Rather than backing it up, this concept shows once again that to move the center of mass of the EM Drive one needs to eject mass or energy or rely on an external field.
The relevance of this example to the EM Drive thread is once again to show why Dr. White realized that the explanations from Shaywer are completely and utterly unacceptable, and if the EM Drive force is not an experimental artifact, either mass or energy has to be ejected, or it has to rely on an external field. -
#3313 by rfmwguy on 03 Mar, 2016 15:10
-
No, nothing so sinister, I was simply thinking of how advanced propulsion ideas are getting crowd funding attention, which might be the wave of the future. They are using kickstarter, which is what I used for a much more modest need. MUCH more modest...
I don't understand why you write that you would need to "study a mass gap": ejecting mass from the sail results in a reduction of mass.
I'll have to study this apparent mass gap someday. Actually, would like this to move this its own topic unless it has more relevance to emdrive.
If you saw a picture of the sail and you thought that this was something that could back up all the inherent contradictions and problems involved in the EM Drive concept from Shawyer, this is not at all the case.
Rather than backing it up, this concept shows once again that to move the center of mass of the EM Drive one needs to eject mass or energy or rely on an external field.
The relevance of this example to the EM Drive thread is once again to show why Dr. White realized that the explanations from Shaywer are completely and utterly unacceptable, and if the EM Drive force is not an experimental artifact, either mass or energy has to be ejected, or it has to rely on an external field.
At a 40K foot view, social media is potentially accelerating development of all sorts of new concepts across a wide set of disciplines. When corporate or institutional dollars are not made available nor ever get out of committees , there are now other ways to proceed. I wish them well. -
#3314 by Monomorphic on 03 Mar, 2016 15:12
-
Thanks...looks promising. 2.2 to 2.7 GHz is where I usually set up my VNA. Step size can be 1 MHz/0.001 GHz, fine resolution not needed, IOW, 500 data points
When using a monopole, since it attaches to the frustum, it increases the mesh density by about 3 times. So what would normally be an 80 triangle mesh, ends up being over 200. With 500 steps that could take up to 8 hours. I can do some optimizing and get that down some. Will have to do the run over night. -
#3315 by JaimeZX on 03 Mar, 2016 15:14
-
rfmwguy: I look at that antimatter sail proposal as very similar to a normal chemical rocket INSOFAR AS - in a standard rocket (SSME, for example) two fuels are mixed (LH2 and LOX), generating energy and high-velocity (water vapor) exhaust out the back.
With this antimatter sail, one fuel (antimatter) is combining with another fuel (the U238 coating on the carbon fiber "sail"), generating energy and high-velocity exhaust (fission products).
In the SSME the exhaust energy/products push against the rocket bell on their way aft.
In the antimatter device, the fission products of the U238 coating will either depart the system with an "aft vector" (towards the main spacecraft) generating a force forwards, or with a forward vector, subsequently slamming to a halt in the sail. I am less clear on the overall effect on "thrust" from that portion of products with a "forward" vector.
The major aesthetic difference is that in the artist's rendering, one fuel is moving in the direction of system travel before combining with the other. Seems as though the Orion concept would be less likely to irradiate a notional crew than this one, but that's just my intuition and I may well be wrong there.
In any event, concur that system is better discussed in a separate thread.
-
#3316 by rfmwguy on 03 Mar, 2016 15:23
-
I really appreciate it. If you need some processing time elsewhere, my rfdriven.com domain and Glenn's generous terabyte storage server might be able to help. Let me know. Offsite storage and perhaps processing is made available for our NSF friends at no cost.Thanks...looks promising. 2.2 to 2.7 GHz is where I usually set up my VNA. Step size can be 1 MHz/0.001 GHz, fine resolution not needed, IOW, 500 data points
When using a monopole, since it attaches to the frustum, it increases the mesh density by about 3 times. So what would normally be an 80 triangle mesh, ends up being over 200. With 500 steps that could take up to 8 hours. I can do some optimizing and get that down some. Will have to do the run over night. -
#3317 by zellerium on 03 Mar, 2016 15:28
-
I started using Eigenmode simulations because they're much faster.
Emmett Brown's dimensions were used for the first picture.
height = 26.6 cm
small diameter = 16 cm
big diameter = 28 cm
Shell's dimensions were used for the second picture
height = 9.76 in
small radius = 3.35 in
large radius = 5.81 in
I'm going to go with the latter and try to excite using monopole. I found the discussion about loop antennas being used to excite the TE013 but converting a magnetron to a loop antenna probably wouldn't be easy. Plus our VNA probe would have to be modified, which is definitely a bad idea...
-
#3318 by Rodal on 03 Mar, 2016 15:31
-
..
No, nothing so sinister, I was simply thinking of how advanced propulsion ideas are getting crowd funding attention, which might be the wave of the future. They are using kickstarter, which is what I used for a much more modest need. MUCH more modest.
At a 40K foot view, social media is potentially accelerating development of all sorts of new concepts across a wide set of disciplines. When corporate or institutional dollars are not made available nor ever get out of committees , there are now other ways to proceed. I wish them well.
It appears that when you wrote "blowing your own sail?" you had not realized that the concept relied on ejecting fission products from the layer of uranium on the sail. It is apparent from your post that you had to "study the mass gap" that you did not realize that this concept relied on ejecting mass for propulsion. -
#3319 by Monomorphic on 03 Mar, 2016 15:31
-
Hmmm, this is rather unique...not sure I've seen a model like this. A central axis focus of radiation. Do you have an S11 plot?
It looks very similar to this resonant mode I found in generation 01 frustum 01 at 2.81005Ghz. NOTE: I found it two or three times in the graph below at different frequencies for different frustum dimensions. Frank Davies' Copper Frustum Modes Overview didn't go that high, so it's hard to tell what mode this is.
