-
#3600
by
DaCunha
on 06 Jul, 2016 19:02
-
Does anyone know the status of the new paper by White and March?
-
#3601
by
Rodal
on 06 Jul, 2016 19:17
-
Does anyone know the status of the new paper by White and March?
No
-
#3602
by
zen-in
on 06 Jul, 2016 19:23
-
...
I'm in the very private email discussion group that is working with Dave. He doesn't know when the top ring magnet cracked other that it was not working when he did his last test run. The bad maggie is being replaced and a few other suggested tidy ups implemented before restarting the test series.
New items will be using a phase change substance to limit the maggie temp increase as Dave has lost 2 maggies to overheat plus better monitoring of the maggie anode voltage to see if it is possible, as I believe it is, to detect when maggie to frustum lock occurs and a better feed of the high current to the maggie that should not cause any issues with the filament current.
There is a lot of work yet to be done.
But I say again, none of the measured thermal effects with the frustum small end pointing UP has shown anything like the very rapid initial force generation when the maggie locks to the frustum.
I should add, the observed delay time with just a side flick of a pen on the side of the beam and the active power off decay time are around the same value of 5 minutes, 20 seconds, which suggests there is not much thermal in the power off decay.
I don't believe it is practical to do tests with a battery if a 1 kW magnetron is used. For that reason I believe we have learned as much as we need to about magnetron emdrive experiments. The noise and thermal affects completely swamp out any real emdrive thrust if it exists. For a battery powered, no umbilical test a solid state amplifier driven with a compact stable oscillator may be the best option. A wireless (300 MHz garage door type might work best) control for switching on the amp and oscillator could be used. If the amp was class C it would not heat up much on short runs. However class C amps are non-linear and have fixed power outputs.
-
#3603
by
TheTraveller
on 06 Jul, 2016 19:57
-
...For that reason I believe we have learned as much as we need to about magnetron emdrive experiments. The noise and thermal affects completely swamp out any real emdrive thrust if it exists...
Not everybody shares that belief.
Dave will achieve a rotary test rig, even if it is AC powered via a tightly twisted power cord dropping from the ceiling.
There are 3 builds that I know of that will demo EmDrive battery powered rotary builds in 2016.
-
#3604
by
WarpTech
on 06 Jul, 2016 20:29
-
Does anyone know the status of the new paper by White and March?
No
I just received the paper Dr. White published in September.
A Discussion on Characteristics of the Quantum Vacuum, published in Physics Essays, Sept. 2015.
http://physicsessays.org/browse-journal-2/product/1396-11-harold-sonny-white-a-discussion-on-characteristics-of-the-quantum-vacuum.htmlIt's not what you're looking for but I found it to be a very inspiring read. I'm currently working on a response to this discussion.
Last I heard, after several re-writes of their copper frustum in-vacuum paper, there is no hope in sight of getting it past the peer reviewers for the Journal in question. Not much else going on, due to budget cuts. It sounds like any work being done is on their own time.
-
#3605
by
zen-in
on 06 Jul, 2016 22:05
-
...
There are 3 builds that I know of that will demo EmDrive battery powered rotary builds in 2016.
Are those 3 the em-drive kits you shipped to customers @ $30k each? You should post photos; it will drum up more business for you and may help other em-drive enthusiasts who don't have $30k to spare. 2016 is more than halfway over. No surprises yet.
-
#3606
by
frobnicat
on 06 Jul, 2016 22:16
-
.../...
I should add, the observed delay time with just a side flick of a pen on the side of the beam and the active power off decay time are around the same value of 5 minutes, 20 seconds, which suggests there is not much thermal in the power off decay.
Excuse me but where exactly do you see that ? To me the decay time from the "side flick of a pen" appears way shorter (like 1 minute or so) than the decay times at power off, which suggests there is much thermal in the power off decay. Otherwise the natural oscillations wouldn't have time to wiggle a few times while the curve is still decaying overall (right on attached collage, side by side left pen tap, right one of the run before magnetron break and better damping).
-
#3607
by
TheTraveller
on 06 Jul, 2016 22:21
-
.../...
I should add, the observed delay time with just a side flick of a pen on the side of the beam and the active power off decay time are around the same value of 5 minutes, 20 seconds, which suggests there is not much thermal in the power off decay.
Excuse me but where exactly do you see that ? To me the decay time from the "side flick of a pen" appears way shorter (like 1 minute or so) than the decay times at power off, which suggests there is much thermal in the power off decay. Otherwise the natural oscillations wouldn't have time to wiggle a few times while the curve is still decaying overall (right on attached collage, side by side left pen tap, right one of the run before magnetron break and better damping).
That bump was to see if the displacement recorder was working.
Here are the horizontal tap test results @ 0.8 sec per tick. Starts free movement after leaving the beam horizontal displacement stop at 180 and finally settles at 580 for 400 ticks at 0.8 sec per tick = 320 sec or 5 minutes 20 seconds. Looking at the rate of change plot, is clear when the tap occurred, driving it to the stop (flat displacement line at the bottom). If you want to measure from the tap event, then around 6 minutes 10 seconds to settle.
As for your example, maybe use the displacement base line where the Force was 1st generated and the return time to that original level?
Please consider the beam is very sensitive and is sitting in Dave's unsealed garage and not in a lab somewhere with no air currents. The beam moves around by itself. What is clear is the very rapid rate of change events that happen when the maggie locks to the frustum are not driven by air currents but the return to the original displacement are probably influenced by air currents.
This was published before so apology for reposting it.
-
#3608
by
TheTraveller
on 06 Jul, 2016 22:43
-
Dave is obtaining a new maggie and will use a phase change wax to try to control and stabilise the maggie temp and thus stop maggie freq drift. This will also significantly reduce the waste heat from the maggie and reduce overall thermal energy radiation into the air and into the frustum's big end plate as it is current a heat sink for the maggie.
Changes will also alter the way filament current is delivered to the frustum, the upper -4kv 500vdc range will be monitored to try to detect maggie frustum lock or not and the maggie core temp will be monitored.
So stay tuned for the next round of improved data collection.
-
#3609
by
Rodal
on 06 Jul, 2016 22:44
-
...
There are 3 builds that I know of that will demo EmDrive battery powered rotary builds in 2016.
Are those 3 the em-drive kits you shipped to customers @ $30k each? You should post photos; it will drum up more business for you and may help other em-drive enthusiasts who don't have $30k to spare. 2016 is more than halfway over. No surprises yet.
My recollection was that it was claimed that there were 7 orders for $50,000 USD each, if my memory serves me correctly. But I don't remember whether the orders were for battery operated ones.
I remember the number 7 because it is a good luck number. There are seven days of the week, seven notes on a musical scale, seven seas and seven continents. Snow White and the seven dwarves, seven brides for seven brothers, Sinbad the Sailor had seven voyages. And of course I remember it because of James Bond (007).
-
#3610
by
FattyLumpkin
on 06 Jul, 2016 22:45
-
Two things: 1) WarpTech, can you tell us what your source of information is re multiple rewrites of the EW paper in now in peer review. To suggest that the paper will probably be denied publication in
? Journal after XXX amounts of rewrites would be a huge revelation. Please tell us the source of your information.
2) Dave intends to use a 250 Watt solid state signal generator/power pack....perhaps the same one that (if memory serves) Monomorphic was speaking of?
TBMK Dave is taking a break for a sort while after countless sixteen-hour build and test days. I'm hoping to see something from him soon...(He did mention a time frame, but it escapes me).
-
#3611
by
frobnicat
on 06 Jul, 2016 22:47
-
.../...
That bump was to see if the displacement recorder was working.
Here are the horizontal tap test results @ 0.8 sec per tick. Starts free movement after leaving the beam horizontal displacement stop at 180 and finally settles at 580 for 400 ticks at 0.8 sec per tick = 320 sec or 5 minutes 20 seconds. Looking at the rate of change plot, is clear when the tap occurred, driving it to the stop (flat displacement line at the bottom). If you want to measure from the tap event, then around 6 minutes 10 seconds to settle.
As for your example, maybe use the displacement base line where the Force was 1st generated and the return time to that original level?
This was published before so apology for reposting it.
Ok, thanks for the repost. This again illustrate the point I make : it's not a matter of time to "settle" understood as "stop oscillating". It's the matter than on this plot when a forcing excitation is suddenly relieved (clear cut step down) there is
no oscillation while decaying overall. All the oscillations during the 5 minutes time to "settle" are taking place around the baseline. This is an under-damped 2nd order oscillator ringing in response to a step down. But for the recorded behavior at magnetron power-off, there is no way to explain the observed oscillation
on top of an exp. decay
of much longer time constant (than the oscillations) other than a slowly decaying 1st order forcing excitation with its own longer time constant. You can make all the arguments you want about steepness or whatnot at power-on, observed behavior at power-off puts a major part of magnitude of excitation in the long term decay effects, hence thermal in nature (whatever the precise mechanisms of thermal).
-
#3612
by
TheTraveller
on 06 Jul, 2016 22:54
-
...
There are 3 builds that I know of that will demo EmDrive battery powered rotary builds in 2016.
Are those 3 the em-drive kits you shipped to customers @ $30k each? You should post photos; it will drum up more business for you and may help other em-drive enthusiasts who don't have $30k to spare. 2016 is more than halfway over. No surprises yet.
My recollection was that it was claimed that there were 7 orders for $50,000 USD each, if my memory serves me correctly. But I don't remember whether the orders were for battery operated ones.
The 1st 2 spherical end plate, Al machined, multi layer plated thrusters are in manufacture. So far this is all my money on the line.
-
#3613
by
Rodal
on 06 Jul, 2016 22:57
-
...
There are 3 builds that I know of that will demo EmDrive battery powered rotary builds in 2016.
Are those 3 the em-drive kits you shipped to customers @ $30k each? You should post photos; it will drum up more business for you and may help other em-drive enthusiasts who don't have $30k to spare. 2016 is more than halfway over. No surprises yet.
My recollection was that it was claimed that there were 7 orders for $50,000 USD each, if my memory serves me correctly. But I don't remember whether the orders were for battery operated ones.
The 1st 2 spherical end plate, Al machined, multi layer plated thrusters are in manufacture. So far this is all my money on the line.
Although I am skeptical of whether this thing works, I have to tip my hat in admiration for somebody that puts their own money on the line like this.
-
#3614
by
TheTraveller
on 06 Jul, 2016 23:01
-
.../...
That bump was to see if the displacement recorder was working.
Here are the horizontal tap test results @ 0.8 sec per tick. Starts free movement after leaving the beam horizontal displacement stop at 180 and finally settles at 580 for 400 ticks at 0.8 sec per tick = 320 sec or 5 minutes 20 seconds. Looking at the rate of change plot, is clear when the tap occurred, driving it to the stop (flat displacement line at the bottom). If you want to measure from the tap event, then around 6 minutes 10 seconds to settle.
As for your example, maybe use the displacement base line where the Force was 1st generated and the return time to that original level?
This was published before so apology for reposting it.
Ok, thanks for the repost. This again illustrate the point I make : it's not a matter of time to "settle" understood as "stop oscillating". It's the matter than on this plot when a forcing excitation is suddenly relieved (clear cut step down) there is no oscillation while decaying overall. All the oscillations during the 5 minutes time to "settle" are taking place around the baseline. This is an under-damped 2nd order oscillator ringing in response to a step down. But for the recorded behavior at magnetron power-off, there is no way to explain the observed oscillation on top of an exp. decay of much longer time constant (than the oscillations) other than a slowly decaying 1st order forcing excitation with its own longer time constant. You can make all the arguments you want about steepness or whatnot at power-on, observed behavior at power-off puts a major part of magnitude of excitation in the long term decay effects, hence thermal in nature (whatever the precise mechanisms of thermal).
My point was the decay displacement return to level to use is the level just before the Rf was applied.
We are investigating why the levels move around and how to eliminate them as much as possible. There is a lot of work to do and we (myself and 3 other EmDrive builders, 3 with good thrust data) are working with Dave to get it done.
As Dave's test rig gets better, we all learn how to make our test rigs better.
-
#3615
by
Monomorphic
on 06 Jul, 2016 23:05
-
More thanks to Dave for helping me through the installation of the laser displacement sensor. I made a couple of novice mistakes that cost me hours of frustration. It's working now!
The only problem i'm seeing now is in the chart below. The little squiggles is from when I tapped the beam, but you will notice a slow rise across the span and a sudden periodic drop. That is not from the beam moving. I think that may be the cheap resistor i'm using. It is 270 Ohm with 5% tolerance. Dataq recommends a Precision 250 Ω resistor, 0.1% tolerance - which I have on the way.
-
#3616
by
TheTraveller
on 06 Jul, 2016 23:09
-
More thanks to Dave for helping me through the installation of the laser displacement sensor. I made a couple of novice mistakes that cost me hours of frustration. It's working now!
The only problem i'm seeing now is in the chart below. The little squiggles is from when I tapped the the beam, but you will notice a slow rise across the span and a sudden periodic drop. That is not from the beam moving. I think that may be the cheap resistor i'm using. It is 270 Ohm with 5% tolerance. Dataq recommends a Precision 250 Ω resistor, 0.1% tolerance - which I have on the way.
You can convert the displacement voltage to mm = displacement Vdc / 0.216 that is assuming you and Dave have the same Amplifier unit with a current output. Dave has the upper left unit with 8ma current change for a 10mm displacement change.
Data sheet attached
-
#3617
by
frobnicat
on 06 Jul, 2016 23:37
-
My point was the decay displacement return to level to use is the level just before the Rf was applied.
.../...
Either I don't understand this phrase or I fail to see how this invalidates my point (that a major part of reported forces are thermal). I know that EagleWorks liked to play around with "floating" baselines but at least they managed to get some pretty decent
overshoots at power-off : the first inversion of velocity occurring
after crossing the baseline, baseline understood as being the straight line averaging the remaining oscillations until settling. See for instance the negative overshoot here, baseline is at 0V (not because this is 0V but because this is the observed level around which the oscillations settle after the excitation step down at t=1)
Such overshoot is nowhere to be seen with the observed magnetron-off decays, but as expected is clearly visible with horizontal "tap test" when a forcing excitation is actually stepped down. Magnetron-off is not a step down in excitation, it is a slowly decayed excitation with a time constant > natural period of pendulum. Are you seriously objecting that (most of) the excitation decays slowly on the order of minutes ? Are you not seeing that we have something like 50% of whatever made the pendulum deviate in the first place still forcing (in the same direction) about 2 minutes after power was interrupted ?
-
#3618
by
Tellmeagain
on 06 Jul, 2016 23:48
-
Ok, thanks for the repost. This again illustrate the point I make : it's not a matter of time to "settle" understood as "stop oscillating". It's the matter than on this plot when a forcing excitation is suddenly relieved (clear cut step down) there is no oscillation while decaying overall. All the oscillations during the 5 minutes time to "settle" are taking place around the baseline. This is an under-damped 2nd order oscillator ringing in response to a step down. But for the recorded behavior at magnetron power-off, there is no way to explain the observed oscillation on top of an exp. decay of much longer time constant (than the oscillations) other than a slowly decaying 1st order forcing excitation with its own longer time constant. You can make all the arguments you want about steepness or whatnot at power-on, observed behavior at power-off puts a major part of magnitude of excitation in the long term decay effects, hence thermal in nature (whatever the precise mechanisms of thermal).
The "observed oscillation
on top of an exp" actually can be explained. If you have seen my experiment https:
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsOee729YBM you will observe an oscillation on top of the exp too. The explanation is that, the sudden force or the sudden removing of the force is applied to the side of the balance. It is more than a pure rotary torque. The balance's hanging wire, the supposed pivot, is not fixed in position. The force or the removing of the force will introduce a pendulum swing on top of the rotary swing. The instant pivot is probably near the oil damper (of his) and near the magnet damper (of mine). The pendulum swing period is shorter thus you see the faster oscillation on top of the exponential decay.
-
#3619
by
WarpTech
on 06 Jul, 2016 23:57
-
Two things: 1) WarpTech, can you tell us what your source of information is re multiple rewrites of the EW paper in now in peer review. To suggest that the paper will probably be denied publication in ? Journal after XXX amounts of rewrites would be a huge revelation. Please tell us the source of your information.
2) Dave intends to use a 250 Watt solid state signal generator/power pack....perhaps the same one that (if memory serves) Monomorphic was speaking of?
TBMK Dave is taking a break for a sort while after countless sixteen-hour build and test days. I'm hoping to see something from him soon...(He did mention a time frame, but it escapes me).
I inquired and Paul sent me an update by email. There were no details beyond what I said. I don't like to read minds, but IMO, it sounds to me like the referee wants more data and they don't have the budget to do more testing. Personally, I was more interested in the COMSOL simulations of the quantum vacuum, but it appears nothing is being done on that topic at all. I think if there is any "real" propulsion from a sealed frustum, after all external variances have been taken into account, that push will be due to modifying the quantum vacuum. So understanding how the EM Drive might work, is paramount to understanding how to push/pull against a quantum vacuum.
Unfortunately, without an accepted theory of quantum gravity, Dr. White is practically on his own. Lucky for me, I don't need an accepted theory. I have my own engineering model that works very well, thank you!
Todd
? Journal after XXX amounts of rewrites would be a huge revelation. Please tell us the source of your information.