-
#3260 by Mulletron on 20 Jun, 2016 04:15
-
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39004.msg1473107#msg1473107
I understand how this works now and others like it. All these guys are doing the same thing to bring about the effect. They're shorting out coils and creating loops and then a feedback loop. It's because the induced emf (and back emf) in the loop isn't equal and it's of opposite polarity, it is non-conservative and path dependent. There's still no free lunch, just better efficiency. There's no way to get free energy out of this. It's only an apparent violation of COE. Entropy always wins. Every one of these videos show the apparatus plugged in or running on battery. As soon as they unplug them, they'll stop.
A different phenomenon but the same principle:
http://www.loopslooth.com/Ground%20loops%20-intro.html -
#3261 by zen-in on 20 Jun, 2016 07:32
-
Same kind of experiment as the last video but with a cylindrical coil. As expected there's no linear movement.
Inventor D. S. Charrier with links to his publications. We've talked about his micronewton electromagnetic thruster before. Doesn't look like it works. Maybe it should be a cone.
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/101/3/10.1063/1.4737940
http://dscharrier.free.fr/publications.html
Fascinating video. It's always fun to see what an experimenter has come up with. I agree with what rq3 and Mullertron have said. This is a compass on a pendulum. No linear force can be generated with this kind of apparatus.
If my supposition is correct, the coil will rotate if its rest axis is oriented east-west. If the rest axis is north-south, the coil should swing north and south. North and south being defined by the Earth's local magnetic field. There's also magnetic dip to take into account. In my location, the Earth's field lines are not parallel to the ground, but inclined about 17 degrees down towards north. So yes, you can generate a linear force with this get-up, but only if there is an already existing external magnetic field. But putting a bar magnet in a boat won't make it head to the north pole, since it's also trying to go to the south pole.
No linear force can be generated with a device like this. If it was already oriented with the geomagnetic field the torque generated when the coil is energized would be changed by 90 degrees due to the magnetic inclination. There is no measurable gradiant or curl in the geomagnetic field unless you are close to a magnetic pole. The geomagnetic field is uniform and just has an intensity and a direction. A magnet that is already aligned with the geomagnetic field does not have a position of lower potential energy; ie: the geomagnetic field can't "tug" on the magnet or exchange momentum with it, except as a torque. There are methods of exchanging momentum with the geomagnetic field and thereby producing a linear thrust. However the force produced is very small, even when superconductors are used. See USPTO 8575790.
The pendulum will oscillate if a torque is applied to the mass at the end of the string. That torque is produced when the coil is energized and it aligns with the declination of the geomagnetic field. The torque is coupled to the pendulum, causing it to swing. If the coil is energized repeatedly and in synch with the pendulum's period, the swing amplitude will grow. -
#3262 by rq3 on 20 Jun, 2016 14:03
-
Same kind of experiment as the last video but with a cylindrical coil. As expected there's no linear movement.
Inventor D. S. Charrier with links to his publications. We've talked about his micronewton electromagnetic thruster before. Doesn't look like it works. Maybe it should be a cone.
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/101/3/10.1063/1.4737940
http://dscharrier.free.fr/publications.html
Fascinating video. It's always fun to see what an experimenter has come up with. I agree with what rq3 and Mullertron have said. This is a compass on a pendulum. No linear force can be generated with this kind of apparatus.
If my supposition is correct, the coil will rotate if its rest axis is oriented east-west. If the rest axis is north-south, the coil should swing north and south. North and south being defined by the Earth's local magnetic field. There's also magnetic dip to take into account. In my location, the Earth's field lines are not parallel to the ground, but inclined about 17 degrees down towards north. So yes, you can generate a linear force with this get-up, but only if there is an already existing external magnetic field. But putting a bar magnet in a boat won't make it head to the north pole, since it's also trying to go to the south pole.
No linear force can be generated with a device like this. If it was already oriented with the geomagnetic field the torque generated when the coil is energized would be changed by 90 degrees due to the magnetic inclination. There is no measurable gradiant or curl in the geomagnetic field unless you are close to a magnetic pole. The geomagnetic field is uniform and just has an intensity and a direction. A magnet that is already aligned with the geomagnetic field does not have a position of lower potential energy; ie: the geomagnetic field can't "tug" on the magnet or exchange momentum with it, except as a torque. There are methods of exchanging momentum with the geomagnetic field and thereby producing a linear thrust. However the force produced is very small, even when superconductors are used. See USPTO 8575790.
The pendulum will oscillate if a torque is applied to the mass at the end of the string. That torque is produced when the coil is energized and it aligns with the declination of the geomagnetic field. The torque is coupled to the pendulum, causing it to swing. If the coil is energized repeatedly and in synch with the pendulum's period, the swing amplitude will grow.
I think I already said that.
"But putting a bar magnet in a boat won't make it head to the north pole, since it's also trying to go to the south pole."
There is linear force, it's just pulling in equal and opposite directions, hence worthless. All you need to make this work is a magnetic monopole. -
#3263 by Mulletron on 20 Jun, 2016 15:13
-
We all can see and we agree that the cylindrical coil doesn't do anything interesting. What about this one?
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39772.msg1551199#msg1551199 -
#3264 by X_RaY on 20 Jun, 2016 18:29
-
X_Ray, for the HDPE dielectric resonator I calculate a diameter of 21.07 cm and a depth of 2.99 cm for a total volume of 1.042.5 cm cubed. I'm not sure about what frequency or power you may wish to try. As you know the best response with the NASA frustum in it's original configuration/dimensions was with a frequency of 1.8804 GHz and 2.8 Watts, TE012 mode.(You recall preceding discussions about why no more than 2.8 Watts was attempted). Thank you for your time! , FL
I have calculated the resonant frequency of TE012 using your suggested dimensions, however of an empty cavity as a fist step. I get 5,36985GHz which is fare away from the 2.1795GHz of the empty Brady cone! Therefor and for other reasons I think its less helpful to do a FEM using this design until I am sure thats not just wasted time. I am pretty sure with the dielectric the resonant frequency of TE012 is not around 1.8GHz.
Therefor please share your thoughts and calculations.
At the moment I think you may have general problems in understanding the relevant parameters of such a cavity and its resonant frequency for several reasons.
The relevant parameter is NOT the volume of the cavity alone. Its the distance between the reflecting boundaries in all directions and the number of half waves whats have to fit this distances. The volume follows from the overall dimensions, its not the govern factor.
Light dont like it to be squeezed very much.
In general electromagnetic fields tend to satisfy lowest possible energy conditions, that means when the cavity is large in one or two directions while the third is much smaller compared to its wavelength, the lowest energy conditions is not really satisfied for a strong squeezed lobe, at a critical point* it is more likely to get less squeezed and form a additional lobe (node/antinode of the field), i.e. the field tends to form a higher order mode. For a simple cylindrical pillbox resonator an important thing is the diameter/length ratio , in the conical case with flat end plates its a good approximation to use the integral over all diameters along the central axis. This ratio is terrible high for your current cavity design.
EDIT:
I will do this FEM now just for fun. I will be back with the results soon.
Done! It is not TE012, based on the pattern as because on the field vectors.
I used a magnetic source for this run, placed at the central axis, just above the large base plate with a magnetic field into z-direction. Its almost the best choice to excite TE0 modes using feko (not the only one). Its equal to a circular E-field around the central axis of symmetry. All sims shows the E-component of the field. Seems to be TM130
* I think exactly at this point there may exist both possible quantum states in a superposition for a very narrow bandwidth.
Sorry guys, please excuse my rough english.
-
#3265 by X_RaY on 20 Jun, 2016 21:13
-
E-field into z direction means TM130 not a TE mode. Sometimes it's hard to identify the mode of interest based on the field pattern. While look to the E-field vectors it cant be the TE version.
Just rechecked, the H fields are circular in the xy-plane.
Line means E-field, dashed is the H-hield.
-
#3266 by Monomorphic on 20 Jun, 2016 21:28
-
E-field into z direction means TM130 not a TE mode. Sometimes it's hard to identify the mode of interest based on the field pattern. While look to the E-field vectors it cant be the TE version.
Just rechecked, the H fields are circular in the xy-plane.
Line means E-field, dashed is the H-hield.
I saw very similar resonance patterns in the cannae drive I simulated.
-
#3267 by Monomorphic on 20 Jun, 2016 21:34
-
Build Update: I've been on vacation and just got back yesterday. Worked on a new paddle for the oil dampening and rearranged the counterweight so it works better with the dampening. I also switched to 140 weight gear oil.
I had to add a switch to my wireless laser switch as the wireless switch requires a trickle of electricity to make it work. As such, the battery would drain in about 2 or 3 days. Now I simply power the wireless switch before testing and turn it off after i'm finished to preserve the battery.
I hope to have new data from additional powered runs, with the improved dampening system very soon - possibly tonight.
-
#3268 by zen-in on 20 Jun, 2016 22:36
-
We all can see and we agree that the cylindrical coil doesn't do anything interesting. What about this one?
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39772.msg1551199#msg1551199
The shape of the windings does not change anything. It is still a compass. -
#3269 by keithpickering on 20 Jun, 2016 22:38
-
Hi Dr. Rodal, not a take on Cannae. Am interested to see how the NASA frustum might resonate if flattened---The volume of this cavity is identical to the NASA frustum top and bottom lengths determined by adding the original height to the bottom lengths. The height is that which achieves the same volume. The HDPE disks are taller/higher than the frustum itself as drawn and were therefore placed where you see them in the diagram (facing the inside). Does placing the disks in this location pose a problem? If so, do you have a suggestion as to what should I do to rectify it/this? Thanks, FL
PS: since this is a given quantity in it's original form, it might indeed be telling if "good" resonance were noted in the flattened form (similar to Cannae in the flatness, but the asymmetric components are located in the periphery) ,K
1. Generally the Q of a resonator is roughly proportional to its volume-to-surface ratio. Going to a flatter shape should reduce Q.
2. In Mike's theory, thrust is (again, generally) maximized by increasing the big-to-small diameter ratio. That would imply that this frustum should give less thrust than NASA's for the same PQ value. Caution must be used in making the small end smaller, however, otherwise you risk crossing the threshold for the cutoff wavelength of the resonator.
-
#3270 by keithpickering on 20 Jun, 2016 22:47
-
If my supposition is correct, the coil will rotate if its rest axis is oriented east-west. If the rest axis is north-south, the coil should swing north and south. North and south being defined by the Earth's local magnetic field. There's also magnetic dip to take into account. In my location, the Earth's field lines are not parallel to the ground, but inclined about 17 degrees down towards north. So yes, you can generate a linear force with this get-up, but only if there is an already existing external magnetic field. But putting a bar magnet in a boat won't make it head to the north pole, since it's also trying to go to the south pole.
You can't generate a linear force, but you can generate a torque. And if you're using a torsion balance that torque would give the appearance of being linear even though it's not.
Another reason to use a parallel pendulum instead of a torsion balance to measure thrust: torques in the test article will not move the pendulum. -
#3271 by rq3 on 21 Jun, 2016 00:09
-
If my supposition is correct, the coil will rotate if its rest axis is oriented east-west. If the rest axis is north-south, the coil should swing north and south. North and south being defined by the Earth's local magnetic field. There's also magnetic dip to take into account. In my location, the Earth's field lines are not parallel to the ground, but inclined about 17 degrees down towards north. So yes, you can generate a linear force with this get-up, but only if there is an already existing external magnetic field. But putting a bar magnet in a boat won't make it head to the north pole, since it's also trying to go to the south pole.
You can't generate a linear force, but you can generate a torque. And if you're using a torsion balance that torque would give the appearance of being linear even though it's not.
Another reason to use a parallel pendulum instead of a torsion balance to measure thrust: torques in the test article will not move the pendulum.
That is incorrect. -
#3272 by keithpickering on 21 Jun, 2016 01:49
-
If my supposition is correct, the coil will rotate if its rest axis is oriented east-west. If the rest axis is north-south, the coil should swing north and south. North and south being defined by the Earth's local magnetic field. There's also magnetic dip to take into account. In my location, the Earth's field lines are not parallel to the ground, but inclined about 17 degrees down towards north. So yes, you can generate a linear force with this get-up, but only if there is an already existing external magnetic field. But putting a bar magnet in a boat won't make it head to the north pole, since it's also trying to go to the south pole.
You can't generate a linear force, but you can generate a torque. And if you're using a torsion balance that torque would give the appearance of being linear even though it's not.
Another reason to use a parallel pendulum instead of a torsion balance to measure thrust: torques in the test article will not move the pendulum.
That is incorrect.
Would you care to explain why you think it is incorrect? -
#3273 by FattyLumpkin on 21 Jun, 2016 02:49
-
Hi X_Ray, thank you for your hard work. If you read back, you will see that I only reported the original best frequency , power and mode for force detected. I didn't think that these would work in this flattened frustum. The only two things that remained constant in this was volume of the resonant cavity and the HDPE dielectric. I did not know what to expect where frequency and mode are concerned. This might be a opportunity to experiment with different antennae, but whether this cavity is a good resonator or not is a unknown. As Monomorphic indicated, he attempted some simulation on a Cannae like RC, but if memory serves he did not have access to the actual dimensions of the cavity and did his best to estimate them.
I'm doing a study of Cannae right now, and attempting to discover all of their approaches from the onset. A friend on mine was asking about investment opportunities where EM tech is concerned. I dropped a note (email) at the Cannae, and surprisingly received a response from Mr. Fetta himself. He stated "Cannae will be making an announcement in the next 4-6 weeks regarding a new project to demonstrate our tech and, if you are still interested, we should talk then"... I'll continue with the study of the them and wait the 4-6 weeks to see what transpires. Thank you once again for the sim and data you provided. FL
edit add: going with keithpickering's statement that flattening the cavity reduces Q, I wonder why Cannae is still sticking with more of a disk shape, and there publications indicate an even "flatter" design? Confusion raineth -
#3274 by Mulletron on 21 Jun, 2016 07:53
-
We all can see and we agree that the cylindrical coil doesn't do anything interesting. What about this one?
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39772.msg1551199#msg1551199
The shape of the windings does not change anything. It is still a compass.
But you can see the difference with your eyes, it did change something (that is if the test was a good one).
I view this simple circuit, the cone coil, and the EMdrive to be functionally equivalent. They are all the same when it comes to Maxwell, Faraday, and Ohm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGQbA2jwkWI&feature=youtu.be&t=50m30s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz's_law#Conservation_of_momentum
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/350/6259/420
-
#3275 by Mulletron on 21 Jun, 2016 10:34
-
The resistivity of copper isn't only affected by the length of the wire, also the temperature:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/restmp.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/tables/rstiv.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity#Metals
Hitting this problem from two different angles gives the same answer. It looks like the small end should be held cold and the large end hot.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1391449#msg1391449
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39004.msg1495024#msg1495024
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1402112#msg1402112
-
#3276 by JaimeZX on 21 Jun, 2016 16:46
-
I also switched to 140 weight gear oil.
Certain to improve the smell in your room, too. lol
-
#3277 by SeeShells on 21 Jun, 2016 17:30
-
Was planning to have a lot done this week on my tests, but yesterday we got hit by golf ball (and larger) size hail. I lost the driveway (washed away), cars beat up and glass shattered, the roof is beat all up and leaking. So I'll be picking up the pieces for the next few days... sigh.
My Drive build is going to have to wait, I'll be back after a few days away.
Shell -
#3278 by RotoSequence on 21 Jun, 2016 17:33
-
Was planning to have a lot done this week on my tests, but yesterday we got hit by golf ball (and larger) size hail. I lost the driveway (washed away), cars beat up and glass shattered, the roof is beat all up and leaking. So I'll be picking up the pieces for the next few days... sigh.
My Drive build is going to have to wait, I'll be back after a few days away.
Shell
Ouch!
-
#3279 by Monomorphic on 21 Jun, 2016 18:13
-
I also switched to 140 weight gear oil.
Certain to improve the smell in your room, too. lol
That was the first thing I noticed! The 140 weight oil stinks. But with the 1 quart i'm using, the smell seems to have mostly gone away after about 2 days.
