-
#660 by oliverio on 23 Dec, 2015 20:07
-
Because of the serial thread structure of NSF, I think we have to understand that it is difficult to extract previous formula/data/posts...especially across 6 threads and hundreds of pages. The forum here works well, but searching/cataloging across threads is not a strong suite, but it is what we have to work with.
(...)
It also seems to me that the equation in question, assuming I have the right equation, posits a certain amount of loss of mass to keep things balanced. Can you produce the equation for this so that we can all see that current ion engines (or kicking a mirror out the back of a photonic laser rocket) isn't likely to cause a violation.
Win with math and I'm gone for a month and a half.
All these arguments were previously discussed mathematically.
This was before rfmwguy was moderating these threads and a number of new posters started to post these same old arguments that have been previously addressed.
If you want to re-open these discussions, because you have a mathematical proposal that has not been previously discussed, you will need to show your new equations.
________________
(*) The mutable, degradable QV proposed by Dr. White has been addressed separately.
Perhaps it is best for those who know exactly where the data resides to please link to it in commentary. I believe this will help new readers and posters. New readers are arriving daily and few may even know where to find the old info.
I know Chris wants to provide a helpful, welcoming environment for all in this topic and I believe linking to previous, relevant posts is more aligned with the spirit of the overall forum.
It is presumptive to assume that anybody (with memory of such content) is going to know exactly on what thread and what post number a given user's comment is going to be located. Of course memory of previous discussions does not entail memory of the exact time and post number at which the discussion took place.
Anybody with a modicum of interest can do that search on their own time. The time-consuming search process, entailing having to read old comments is itself helpful to such a person unfamiliar with the old thread's content to familiarize herself with such old comment. It is unreasonable to put that burden on the shoulders of the people that graciously enough take their valuable time to help narrow the search parameters by indicating how they can narrow that search (in this case for example by indicating that they can find it under the username: WarpTech, and that the posts are located in threads prior to the ones you moderated).
It is unreasonable to place the burden of search upon the people who lack specific knowledge of what they are searching for.
As a matter of course, if it's going to be possible for another person to find the content you're referencing, it should be much more possible for you to find it. Correspondingly it will be easier for you to find it also, since you know what you're looking for.
"site:forum.nasaspaceflight.com [search parameters]" will perform a Google search for all indexed pages on this website. I suggest that until a better system is established, you shouldn't try to imply ends to conversations based solely on the content of previous threads-- instead just supply a link so we know what is being referenced. -
#661 by ThereIWas3 on 23 Dec, 2015 20:13
-
OK - I have pushed meep as far as I can on my computer (Win 8, 8GB RAM, 1TB HD, 3Ghz quad core i7). Taking aero's CE3 file for SeeShells' device, I have updated the resolution from 250 to 275. This runs with 1 thread (in VirtualBox Ubuntu) using 85% of 6GB of RAM (maxing my computer RAM without thrashing the HD).
Have you tried using mpirun and multiple threads? I found using 3 out of 4 cores on my 6GB 2.1 GHz machine I cut resonance analysis run time about in half. -
#662 by Rodal on 23 Dec, 2015 20:27
-
Because of the serial thread structure of NSF, I think we have to understand that it is difficult to extract previous formula/data/posts...especially across 6 threads and hundreds of pages. The forum here works well, but searching/cataloging across threads is not a strong suite, but it is what we have to work with.
(...)
It also seems to me that the equation in question, assuming I have the right equation, posits a certain amount of loss of mass to keep things balanced. Can you produce the equation for this so that we can all see that current ion engines (or kicking a mirror out the back of a photonic laser rocket) isn't likely to cause a violation.
Win with math and I'm gone for a month and a half.
All these arguments were previously discussed mathematically.
This was before rfmwguy was moderating these threads and a number of new posters started to post these same old arguments that have been previously addressed.
If you want to re-open these discussions, because you have a mathematical proposal that has not been previously discussed, you will need to show your new equations.
________________
(*) The mutable, degradable QV proposed by Dr. White has been addressed separately.
Perhaps it is best for those who know exactly where the data resides to please link to it in commentary. I believe this will help new readers and posters. New readers are arriving daily and few may even know where to find the old info.
I know Chris wants to provide a helpful, welcoming environment for all in this topic and I believe linking to previous, relevant posts is more aligned with the spirit of the overall forum.
It is presumptive to assume that anybody (with memory of such content) is going to know exactly on what thread and what post number a given user's comment is going to be located. Of course memory of previous discussions does not entail memory of the exact time and post number at which the discussion took place.
Anybody with a modicum of interest can do that search on their own time. The time-consuming search process, entailing having to read old comments is itself helpful to such a person unfamiliar with the old thread's content to familiarize herself with such old comment. It is unreasonable to put that burden on the shoulders of the people that graciously enough take their valuable time to help narrow the search parameters by indicating how they can narrow that search (in this case for example by indicating that they can find it under the username: WarpTech, and that the posts are located in threads prior to the ones you moderated).
It is unreasonable to place the burden of search upon the people who lack specific knowledge of what they are searching for.
As a matter of course, if it's going to be possible for another person to find the content you're referencing, it should be much more possible for you to find it. Correspondingly it will be easier for you to find it also, since you know what you're looking for.
"site:forum.nasaspaceflight.com [search parameters]" will perform a Google search for all indexed pages on this website. I suggest that until a better system is established, you shouldn't try to imply ends to conversations based solely on the content of previous threads-- instead just supply a link so we know what is being referenced.
Oliverio, concerning <<It is unreasonable to place the burden of search upon the people who lack specific knowledge of what they are searching for>> your assumption that people would not have the knowledge of what they are looking for is incorrect, particularly when you are quoting my post.
What they would be looking for was specified by me:
* discussions on NSF EM Drive threads
* discussions on: conservation of energy
* by user: WarpTech
* timeframe: in threads prior to the threads moderated by rfmwguy
Given those parameters a search can be conducted, as it was detailed by aero, for example, in another recent post. Also, people that post at NSF do know their subject matter and do know how to conduct searches.
Oliverio, it would be very productive for you to conduct this type of searches, as in the process of searching you would be reading previous comments and this would enable you to learn from previous discussions, and posts.
For example when people were discussing "CoM" and you confused this acronym with conservation-of-mass, your confusion could have been prevented if perhaps (as pointed out by someone else) (*) you would have read those previous discussions where it became commonplace to use the acronym CoM to stand for conservation-of-momentum, which is the main issue with the EM Drive (and not conservation of mass).
There are great posts in previous threads by users: Frobnicat, DeltaMass and WarpTech that are very informational concerning the topic of conservation of energy.
Oliverio, concerning your suggestion that <<until a better system is established, you shouldn't try to imply ends to conversations based solely on the content of previous threads-->> you are miss-characterizing my comments.
Reference to previous threads was made not to end conversations, but was instead made so that people with the curiosity and interest to learn (what was discussed in previous posts) could do so.
____
(*) I suggested that in order to prevent such confusions it was better to define acronyms at the beginning of a post. It was pointed out by others that CoM had been used so much in other posts that it had become commonly known in the EM Drive threads. -
#663 by VAXHeadroom on 23 Dec, 2015 21:13
-
OK - I have pushed meep as far as I can on my computer (Win 8, 8GB RAM, 1TB HD, 3Ghz quad core i7). Taking aero's CE3 file for SeeShells' device, I have updated the resolution from 250 to 275. This runs with 1 thread (in VirtualBox Ubuntu) using 85% of 6GB of RAM (maxing my computer RAM without thrashing the HD).
Have you tried using mpirun and multiple threads? I found using 3 out of 4 cores on my 6GB 2.1 GHz machine I cut resonance analysis run time about in half.
I have. By turning up the resolution it increases memory requirements. Each thread needs a bit more than the fractional part of the model apparently, so 2 threads together require 10%-20% more memory than one thread. 1 thread was all I could fit in memory at that resolution. 2 threads required the virtual memory to cut in and thrashed the hard drive. I'm not all that concerned about run-time - I just let it go overnight. I was going for max resolution and 1 thread was all I could fit in memory
-
#664 by ThereIWas3 on 23 Dec, 2015 21:56
-
I was going for max resolution and 1 thread was all I could fit in memory
Ohh. I do resonance runs at only resolution=100. It seems adequate for that. Usually completes in an hour with 3 threads. It was taking only 30 minutes until I added the PML layer, which inflates the lattice size. I have just added a second signal source, directly opposite the first one. We'll see what that does tonight. (It runs while I watch TV. "From the Earth to the Moon, Apollo 14" episode tonight.) My new code lets you specify how many evenly spaced feedpoints you want around the frustrum, plus distance down from the small end, and it does all the 3-D rotations necessary to plop them all in the right places. Or so the plan is...
One of the reasons I hesitate to model the feedlines themselves is because of the effect that has on lattice size. I do have some code in the works that automatically computes the minimum dimensions of the lattice regardless of how complex the model, but the results can get scarey. Hmm, I know a guy who is on the board of directors of the OSU supercomputer center. I have not communicated with him in over 40 years. I wonder if he remembers me? And he works on high-energy physics. -
#665 by oliverio on 23 Dec, 2015 22:05
-
Dr. Rodal, this isn't a conversation about me or you, and turning into one is questionable regarding the spirit of conversation. (I have been keeping track of this topic since thread one, so I'm not sure what you're trying to allege, considering the fact that there are five+ multi hundred page threads.)
My whole and only point is that if you want to refer to a previous post instead of reiterating the content of the post, you should link. This is standard protocol in all discussions of technical content, and if we consider the academic model to be ideal, we should go so far as discouraging mention of far-previous thread content without a direct link.
Anything else stands at risk of alienating those who don't know where to look. (Yes I understand you have limited the parameters for search by displaying the relevant info, but as you have mentioned, it is very burdensome to sift through without a recollection of the conversation. Some posters here have hundreds to thousands of posts in these threads alone.)
This is not an attack on you, it's a suggestion to everyone about how to carry on a pseudoacademic conversation and assure that new participants aren't discouraged. -
#666 by frobnicat on 23 Dec, 2015 22:09
-
.../...
(*) I suggested that in order to prevent such confusions it was better to define acronyms at the beginning of a post. It was pointed out by others that CoM had been used so much in other posts that it had become commonly known in the EM Drive threads.
By an unfortunate coincidence there is an acronym collision between two related but different concepts (both heavily used in older posts) : Center of Mass and Conservation of Momentum... so your suggestion might still be worth (especially in the context of EMdrive discussions where there is "high conceptual noise").
-
#667 by Rodal on 23 Dec, 2015 22:20
-
Dr. Rodal, this isn't a conversation about me or you, and turning into one is questionable regarding the spirit of conversation. (I have been keeping track of this topic since thread one, so I'm not sure what you're trying to allege, considering the fact that there are five+ multi hundred page threads.)
Oliverio: if you were not intending to make a comment about my post, you should not have linked to my post. (*)
My whole and only point is that if you want to refer to a previous post instead of reiterating the content of the post, you should link. This is standard protocol in all discussions of technical content, and if we consider the academic model to be ideal, we should go so far as discouraging mention of far-previous thread content without a direct link.
Anything else stands at risk of alienating those who don't know where to look. (Yes I understand you have limited the parameters for search by displaying the relevant info, but as you have mentioned, it is very burdensome to sift through without a recollection of the conversation. Some posters here have hundreds to thousands of posts in these threads alone.)
This is not an attack on you, it's a suggestion to everyone about how to carry on a pseudoacademic conversation and assure that new participants aren't discouraged.
If rfmwguy wanted to make a general point to the audience, telling people to link to posts, rfmwguy should not have linked to my post to make his moderator's comment.
________
(*) And who were you referring to by "you" (other than me) when you admonished :<<until a better system is established, you shouldn't try to imply ends to conversations based solely on the content of previous threads-->>. And if you were referring to me, what does that say about what you refer to as the "spirit of conversation"? -
#668 by SeeShells on 23 Dec, 2015 22:22
-
My goodness we are so lucky to have at out beckoned call these machines with gigabytes of ram and terabytes of storage. The very first computer system I did engineering work on was the Philco Ford 1000 with 32k of iron core memory and a asynchronous clock.OK - I have pushed meep as far as I can on my computer (Win 8, 8GB RAM, 1TB HD, 3Ghz quad core i7). Taking aero's CE3 file for SeeShells' device, I have updated the resolution from 250 to 275. This runs with 1 thread (in VirtualBox Ubuntu) using 85% of 6GB of RAM (maxing my computer RAM without thrashing the HD).
Have you tried using mpirun and multiple threads? I found using 3 out of 4 cores on my 6GB 2.1 GHz machine I cut resonance analysis run time about in half.
http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL64-0224.jpg
Times have changed, software has changed and it's allowing us to help answer a very interesting problem.
I have a question that's bothering me. I have a calculated Q somewhere around 20-80 k in a TE013 mode and it can show mode movement or it can not according to meep. How long is that mode stable for? What can cause it to decay? How does the decay resemble the build during a increase of Q? Is it a mirrored operation? Does it depend on the power supply of a switching dirty maggie or will it just sit there with a high energy mode. Do ghost modes in a cavity influence the decays and growths in the frustum?
It seems to me that the rise of the mode and Q is governed and shaped more by the RF injection and then the cavity influences the decays more than the RF feed.
Dr. Rodal mentioned this several threads back and its stayed with me causing me to wonder why would a Q buildup in mode mirror the decay I can see where the frustum would be a huge factor in this. To me it's a question that hasn't been addressed, maybe it has and I missed it.
Would love to hear thoughts on this.
Good day away from building and just kind of nesting and thinking.
Shell
-
#669 by OnlyMe on 23 Dec, 2015 22:44
-
My goodness we are so lucky to have at out beckoned call these machines with gigabytes of ram and terabytes of storage. The very first computer system I did engineering work on was the Philco Ford 1000 with 32k of iron core memory and a asynchronous clock.OK - I have pushed meep as far as I can on my computer (Win 8, 8GB RAM, 1TB HD, 3Ghz quad core i7). Taking aero's CE3 file for SeeShells' device, I have updated the resolution from 250 to 275. This runs with 1 thread (in VirtualBox Ubuntu) using 85% of 6GB of RAM (maxing my computer RAM without thrashing the HD).
Have you tried using mpirun and multiple threads? I found using 3 out of 4 cores on my 6GB 2.1 GHz machine I cut resonance analysis run time about in half.
http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL64-0224.jpg
Times have changed, software has changed and it's allowing us to help answer a very interesting problem.
I have a question that's bothering me. I have a calculated Q somewhere around 20-80 k in a TE013 mode and it can show mode movement or it can not according to meep. How long is that mode stable for? What can cause it to decay? How does the decay resemble the build during a increase of Q? Is it a mirrored operation? Does it depend on the power supply of a switching dirty maggie or will it just sit there with a high energy mode. Do ghost modes in a cavity influence the decays and growths in the frustum?
It seems to me that the rise of the mode and Q is governed and shaped more by the RF injection and then the cavity influences the decays more than the RF feed.
Dr. Rodal mentioned this several threads back and its stayed with me causing me to wonder why would a Q buildup in mode mirror the decay I can see where the frustum would be a huge factor in this. To me it's a question that hasn't been addressed, maybe it has and I missed it.
Would love to hear thoughts on this.
Good day away from building and just kind of nesting and thinking.
Shell
Shell, the knowledge base at present cannot answer your questions.., unless all observed thrust is explained by thermal effects and or systemic error.
Which means, if there is thrust clearly above systemic error and thermal effects, it will require something more than the current interpretation of the available knowledge base to answer your questions...
Right now you are our best hope for some clean data, which then may begin to lead somewhere.., that answers to your questions can be found.
I found it very interesting that your frustum walls were cool and the endplates warm....
On the idea that there may be some GR effect involved... Any alteration in Gravity, which is GR.., should be easy to test by attaching an accelerometer to both end plates and turning the thing on. If any distortion in spacetime (gravitation) occurs, it will show up on one or both accelerometers, even if the thing were bolted solid to the floor. Don't you have a raspberry something? that would work for that?, at least as a start. Or would it require something new? -
#670 by SeeShells on 23 Dec, 2015 23:10
-
It would be something other than that. IMHO
My goodness we are so lucky to have at out beckoned call these machines with gigabytes of ram and terabytes of storage. The very first computer system I did engineering work on was the Philco Ford 1000 with 32k of iron core memory and a asynchronous clock.OK - I have pushed meep as far as I can on my computer (Win 8, 8GB RAM, 1TB HD, 3Ghz quad core i7). Taking aero's CE3 file for SeeShells' device, I have updated the resolution from 250 to 275. This runs with 1 thread (in VirtualBox Ubuntu) using 85% of 6GB of RAM (maxing my computer RAM without thrashing the HD).
Have you tried using mpirun and multiple threads? I found using 3 out of 4 cores on my 6GB 2.1 GHz machine I cut resonance analysis run time about in half.
http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL64-0224.jpg
Times have changed, software has changed and it's allowing us to help answer a very interesting problem.
I have a question that's bothering me. I have a calculated Q somewhere around 20-80 k in a TE013 mode and it can show mode movement or it can not according to meep. How long is that mode stable for? What can cause it to decay? How does the decay resemble the build during a increase of Q? Is it a mirrored operation? Does it depend on the power supply of a switching dirty maggie or will it just sit there with a high energy mode. Do ghost modes in a cavity influence the decays and growths in the frustum?
It seems to me that the rise of the mode and Q is governed and shaped more by the RF injection and then the cavity influences the decays more than the RF feed.
Dr. Rodal mentioned this several threads back and its stayed with me causing me to wonder why would a Q buildup in mode mirror the decay I can see where the frustum would be a huge factor in this. To me it's a question that hasn't been addressed, maybe it has and I missed it.
Would love to hear thoughts on this.
Good day away from building and just kind of nesting and thinking.
Shell
Shell, the knowledge base at present cannot answer your questions.., unless all observed thrust is explained by thermal effects and or systemic error.
Which means, if there is thrust clearly above systemic error and thermal effects, it will require something more than the current interpretation of the available knowledge base to answer your questions...
Right now you are our best hope for some clean data, which then may begin to lead somewhere.., that answers to your questions can be found.
I found it very interesting that your frustum walls were cool and the endplates warm....
On the idea that there may be some GR effect involved... Any alteration in Gravity, which is GR.., should be easy to test by attaching an accelerometer to both end plates and turning the thing on. If any distortion in spacetime (gravitation) occurs, it will show up on one or both accelerometers, even if the thing were bolted solid to the floor. Don't you have a raspberry something? that would work for that?, at least as a start. Or would it require something new?
There have been papers on space being warped by magnetic fields, I just read one but the effect is so tiny I have a tough time relating the two ie: The actions in the frustum and the generated magnetic forces in the frustum.
A Michelson-Morley interferometer just might begin to, if run long enough show something. notsosureofit linked a new way that could show promise. http://www.laserfocusworld.com/articles/2015/12/new-type-of-optical-wavefront-sensor-is-based-on-quasiparticles.html?cmpid=EnlLFWDecember222015&eid=288380947&bid=1262120
It need some work though.
-
#671 by OnlyMe on 23 Dec, 2015 23:24
-
It would be something other than that. IMHO
My goodness we are so lucky to have at out beckoned call these machines with gigabytes of ram and terabytes of storage. The very first computer system I did engineering work on was the Philco Ford 1000 with 32k of iron core memory and a asynchronous clock.OK - I have pushed meep as far as I can on my computer (Win 8, 8GB RAM, 1TB HD, 3Ghz quad core i7). Taking aero's CE3 file for SeeShells' device, I have updated the resolution from 250 to 275. This runs with 1 thread (in VirtualBox Ubuntu) using 85% of 6GB of RAM (maxing my computer RAM without thrashing the HD).
Have you tried using mpirun and multiple threads? I found using 3 out of 4 cores on my 6GB 2.1 GHz machine I cut resonance analysis run time about in half.
http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL64-0224.jpg
Times have changed, software has changed and it's allowing us to help answer a very interesting problem.
I have a question that's bothering me. I have a calculated Q somewhere around 20-80 k in a TE013 mode and it can show mode movement or it can not according to meep. How long is that mode stable for? What can cause it to decay? How does the decay resemble the build during a increase of Q? Is it a mirrored operation? Does it depend on the power supply of a switching dirty maggie or will it just sit there with a high energy mode. Do ghost modes in a cavity influence the decays and growths in the frustum?
It seems to me that the rise of the mode and Q is governed and shaped more by the RF injection and then the cavity influences the decays more than the RF feed.
Dr. Rodal mentioned this several threads back and its stayed with me causing me to wonder why would a Q buildup in mode mirror the decay I can see where the frustum would be a huge factor in this. To me it's a question that hasn't been addressed, maybe it has and I missed it.
Would love to hear thoughts on this.
Good day away from building and just kind of nesting and thinking.
Shell
Shell, the knowledge base at present cannot answer your questions.., unless all observed thrust is explained by thermal effects and or systemic error.
Which means, if there is thrust clearly above systemic error and thermal effects, it will require something more than the current interpretation of the available knowledge base to answer your questions...
Right now you are our best hope for some clean data, which then may begin to lead somewhere.., that answers to your questions can be found.
I found it very interesting that your frustum walls were cool and the endplates warm....
On the idea that there may be some GR effect involved... Any alteration in Gravity, which is GR.., should be easy to test by attaching an accelerometer to both end plates and turning the thing on. If any distortion in spacetime (gravitation) occurs, it will show up on one or both accelerometers, even if the thing were bolted solid to the floor. Don't you have a raspberry something? that would work for that?, at least as a start. Or would it require something new?
There have been papers on space being warped by magnetic fields, I just read one but the effect is so tiny I have a tough time relating the two ie: The actions in the frustum and the generated magnetic forces in the frustum.
A Michelson-Morley interferometer just might begin to, if run long enough show something. notsosureofit linked a new way that could show promise. http://www.laserfocusworld.com/articles/2015/12/new-type-of-optical-wavefront-sensor-is-based-on-quasiparticles.html?cmpid=EnlLFWDecember222015&eid=288380947&bid=1262120
It need some work though.
There have been papers showing spacetime is warped by photons and even that a hot rock has more mass than a cold rock. You can plug all kinds of energies into Einstein's field equation and come up with a prediction. Finding some way to observe or prove it is another thing.
But if it gravitates enough to provide double digit mN, an accelerometer should measure it, no mater where the curvature comes from. Gravity may be the weakest force but it reaches out, theoretically forever. -
#672 by VAXHeadroom on 23 Dec, 2015 23:35
-
No kidding. I basically have a $Billion 4 core Cray XMP with more hard disk space than anyone could have imagined 25 years ago. Being able to throw around 100s of GB of HD space daily is a marvel!!
My goodness we are so lucky to have at out beckoned call these machines with gigabytes of ram and terabytes of storage. The very first computer system I did engineering work on was the Philco Ford 1000 with 32k of iron core memory and a asynchronous clock.
http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL64-0224.jpg
Times have changed, software has changed and it's allowing us to help answer a very interesting problem.
...
Shell
I started out a little later than you - my first machine was an 8Mhz Commodore PET 6502 processor 8K RAM (which my father marveled at - he worked on an IBM 36), then a Data General Eclipse 3000 in college and got in at the very beginning of the PC (and Mac and Amiga) era (I had a 1st gen Mac at one point!).
-------------------
I have the H field data files from which I can generate any data subset and visualization anyone wants - any requests / suggestions?
-
#673 by DnA915 on 23 Dec, 2015 23:56
-
I have 20GB of memory with two 6 core Xeon with hyper-thereading (which reads as 24 cores) running OSX if you want me to run something for you. I don't have MEEP installed, so I'd need a brief intro, but I am a Computer Engineer with come CFD training, so I don't think I'd have too much trouble. Let me know if I can be of service.
- David -
#674 by RFPlumber on 24 Dec, 2015 00:09
-
Progress update on my pendulum-based test. While I cannot yet report on whether EmDrive is producing thrust or not (congrats to Shell!), I can at least report that a 50 Ohm dummy RF load is definitely not producing any. This is a good solid start; rumor has it that the only thing one needs to change now in order to obtain thrust is to use a frustum-shaped cavity instead of a dummy load… We shall see.
Here’s the completed test pendulum with all the components illustrated. The suspended platform is self-contained with a power source, RF generator, RF pre-amp, RF power amp and even a simple RF power meter for visual conformation on whether the forward RF power is as expected. There is also a “virtual wire” link to the base via a pair of XBee modules to control RF power on and off. The base has a high voltage power supply to energize electrostatic plates used as a source of controlled force to the pendulum. It also has a laser position sensor and a DAQ board.
Here’s a 30 s idle run of the system. (This setup turned out to be sensitive not just to my HVAC furnace, but also to the fridge being on where the fridge is ~20 ft away on a concrete garage floor!). Still, the run looks pretty stable. My own DAQ software is detecting min and max points (with some applied hysteresis) and drawing a line via computed mid-points.
Here’s the actual test run. 50 s total: 10 s idle, 10 s RF power on, 10 s idle, 10 s high voltage on, 10 s idle:
This is a zoom-in on the RF on period:
This is a zoom-in on the HV on period:
From this I would infer no force being produced during the RF on cycle, while an easily recognized force can be seen during the HV cycle. Now I just need to replace the RF dummy load with a matched frustum cavity and there should be thrust during the RF cycle, right?
I will be starting with an empty cavity at ~2.35 GHz. Assuming no thrust, will then add some dielectric to it. If there is still no thrust observed then I will need to invest in another RF amplifier to move to ~1.8 GHz range and to replicate the EW design.
Happy Holidays!
P.S. This setup is capable of computer-assisted electrostatic damping. So far this turned out to be the most difficult to implement (and, frankly, a mostly useless) but a pretty cool feature. Numerically solving pendulum differential equations on the fly to arrive at a perfect damping pulse position and duration (there must be an easier way to do this )
-
#675 by aero on 24 Dec, 2015 00:38
-
I have 20GB of memory with two 6 core Xeon with hyper-thereading (which reads as 24 cores) running OSX if you want me to run something for you. I don't have MEEP installed, so I'd need a brief intro, but I am a Computer Engineer with come CFD training, so I don't think I'd have too much trouble. Let me know if I can be of service.
- David
Wow - that machine makes my mouth water.
I don't have anything at the moment that needs that much computer but VAXHeadroom may.
The quickest way to get meep up and running is to install a virtual machine with a meep image loaded. Here is one.
http://emdrive.wiki/MEEP#Virtualization:_Virtualbox_image
If you need some realtime input when starting to run meep, I use Pidgin internet messenger. (I think it will interface with whatever chat messenger you use, but it is a free download if you need it.) Anyway, send me a PM and we can get your machine running meep quickly. -
#676 by oliverio on 24 Dec, 2015 00:47
-
Dr. Rodal, this isn't a conversation about me or you, and turning into one is questionable regarding the spirit of conversation. (I have been keeping track of this topic since thread one, so I'm not sure what you're trying to allege, considering the fact that there are five+ multi hundred page threads.)
Oliverio: if you were not intending to make a comment about my post, you should not have linked to my post. (*)
My whole and only point is that if you want to refer to a previous post instead of reiterating the content of the post, you should link. This is standard protocol in all discussions of technical content, and if we consider the academic model to be ideal, we should go so far as discouraging mention of far-previous thread content without a direct link.
Anything else stands at risk of alienating those who don't know where to look. (Yes I understand you have limited the parameters for search by displaying the relevant info, but as you have mentioned, it is very burdensome to sift through without a recollection of the conversation. Some posters here have hundreds to thousands of posts in these threads alone.)
This is not an attack on you, it's a suggestion to everyone about how to carry on a pseudoacademic conversation and assure that new participants aren't discouraged.
If rfmwguy wanted to make a general point to the audience, telling people to link to posts, rfmwguy should not have linked to my post to make his moderator's comment.
________
(*) And who were you referring to by "you" (other than me) when you admonished :<<until a better system is established, you shouldn't try to imply ends to conversations based solely on the content of previous threads-->>. And if you were referring to me, what does that say about what you refer to as the "spirit of conversation"?
Just because I was addressing your stance on an issue does not mean that I was performing an ad hominem attack on you or anyone. Suggesting that we link to previous posts when mentioning them substantively is not an issue which merits the label "admonishment." -
#677 by VAXHeadroom on 24 Dec, 2015 01:05
-
I have 20GB of memory with two 6 core Xeon with hyper-thereading (which reads as 24 cores) running OSX if you want me to run something for you. I don't have MEEP installed, so I'd need a brief intro, but I am a Computer Engineer with come CFD training, so I don't think I'd have too much trouble. Let me know if I can be of service.
- David
Wow - that machine makes my mouth water.
I don't have anything at the moment that needs that much computer but VAXHeadroom may.
The quickest way to get meep up and running is to install a virtual machine with a meep image loaded. Here is one.
http://emdrive.wiki/MEEP#Virtualization:_Virtualbox_image
If you need some realtime input when starting to run meep, I use Pidgin internet messenger. (I think it will interface with whatever chat messenger you use, but it is a free download if you need it.) Anyway, send me a PM and we can get your machine running meep quickly.
That's a pretty cool machine! Problem is for the visualizations I'm trying to do I need the data files and there's no good way to transfer 100GB of data without mailing a USB stick (or 3)
I have what I need at the moment - I'm just trying to visualize what others are digging into - I'm NOT an RF guy, I'm a programmer and pretty good at generating 3D moving pictures to help understand what's going on
And aero was great at getting me up and running meep. If you're going to install VirtualBox I figured out how to create shared directories between the virtual box running Ubuntu and my Win machine (should be similar for Mac) and have written some linux scripts to gen the 360 CSV files I needed
-
#678 by aero on 24 Dec, 2015 01:46
-
I have 20GB of memory with two 6 core Xeon with hyper-thereading (which reads as 24 cores) running OSX if you want me to run something for you. I don't have MEEP installed, so I'd need a brief intro, but I am a Computer Engineer with come CFD training, so I don't think I'd have too much trouble. Let me know if I can be of service.
- David
Wow - that machine makes my mouth water.
I don't have anything at the moment that needs that much computer but VAXHeadroom may.
The quickest way to get meep up and running is to install a virtual machine with a meep image loaded. Here is one.
http://emdrive.wiki/MEEP#Virtualization:_Virtualbox_image
If you need some realtime input when starting to run meep, I use Pidgin internet messenger. (I think it will interface with whatever chat messenger you use, but it is a free download if you need it.) Anyway, send me a PM and we can get your machine running meep quickly.
That's a pretty cool machine! Problem is for the visualizations I'm trying to do I need the data files and there's no good way to transfer 100GB of data without mailing a USB stick (or 3)
I have what I need at the moment - I'm just trying to visualize what others are digging into - I'm NOT an RF guy, I'm a programmer and pretty good at generating 3D moving pictures to help understand what's going on
And aero was great at getting me up and running meep. If you're going to install VirtualBox I figured out how to create shared directories between the virtual box running Ubuntu and my Win machine (should be similar for Mac) and have written some linux scripts to gen the 360 CSV files I needed
Are your 360 csv files still 100 GB? Probably simpler to mail a DVD at that size. And cheaper, too. -
#679 by oliverio on 24 Dec, 2015 02:07
-
I have 20GB of memory with two 6 core Xeon with hyper-thereading (which reads as 24 cores) running OSX if you want me to run something for you. I don't have MEEP installed, so I'd need a brief intro, but I am a Computer Engineer with come CFD training, so I don't think I'd have too much trouble. Let me know if I can be of service.
- David
Wow - that machine makes my mouth water.
I don't have anything at the moment that needs that much computer but VAXHeadroom may.
The quickest way to get meep up and running is to install a virtual machine with a meep image loaded. Here is one.
http://emdrive.wiki/MEEP#Virtualization:_Virtualbox_image
If you need some realtime input when starting to run meep, I use Pidgin internet messenger. (I think it will interface with whatever chat messenger you use, but it is a free download if you need it.) Anyway, send me a PM and we can get your machine running meep quickly.
That's a pretty cool machine! Problem is for the visualizations I'm trying to do I need the data files and there's no good way to transfer 100GB of data without mailing a USB stick (or 3)
I have what I need at the moment - I'm just trying to visualize what others are digging into - I'm NOT an RF guy, I'm a programmer and pretty good at generating 3D moving pictures to help understand what's going on
And aero was great at getting me up and running meep. If you're going to install VirtualBox I figured out how to create shared directories between the virtual box running Ubuntu and my Win machine (should be similar for Mac) and have written some linux scripts to gen the 360 CSV files I needed
Are your 360 csv files still 100 GB? Probably simpler to mail a DVD at that size. And cheaper, too.
So is there public interest in just setting up an AWS (Amazon cloud computing) box for MEEP simulations to be done? To be honest it's not the kind of thing that person rigs usually are useful for, because you aren't going to be doing much while MEEP is running. Moreover I've heard that MEEP only multithreads well on Debian.
With a few dollars it'd be trivial to set up an AWS account that can crunch MEEP in the background. I think you can pay to use more processing power too, and the costs are pretty minimal. The last time I saw the numbers, it was mildly efficient to bruteforce SHA256 encryption (bitcoin mining) using multiple AWS instances, which involves similar amounts of processing power to what MEEP is doing.
