Based on earlier threads and discussions, I have done a few VERY primitive experiments in vacuum exploring the Crookes radiometer effect. It is possible to maintain a force on a vane at 10 milliTorr under infrared excitation. The effect is immediately visible to the naked eye. It is not rotation (aka, a Crookes radiometer). It is a unidirectional force, in other words, it provides thrust without the loss of mass. In essence, it is an infrared driven Emdrive.
But even a Solar Sail can travel without using onboard propellant, because it's using an external "wind"(light) to propel it. The whole point of EMdrive is that, like other rockets, it's supposed to be a motorboat and not a sailboat. EMdrive is not supposed to rely on any external means to propel it.
But even a Solar Sail can travel without using onboard propellant, because it's using an external "wind"(light) to propel it. The whole point of EMdrive is that, like other rockets, it's supposed to be a motorboat and not a sailboat. EMdrive is not supposed to rely on any external means to propel it.
I believe you have some basic misconceptions.
EM Drive is not a rocket.
RQ3 and Warp Tech have proposed a sort of 'thermal imbalance engine' that *might* work (waiting for others to weigh in on this) BUT only until thermal equilibrium is reached (maybe a few minutes). Continuous 'thrust' would require multiple units operating in a timed cycle. The cavity, in this scheme, would have to be pressurized.
Other EM Drive theories have the device interacting with something outside the cavity (usually gravity).
I believe you have some basic misconceptions.
EM Drive is not a rocket.
RQ3 and Warp Tech have proposed a sort of 'thermal imbalance engine' that *might* work (waiting for others to weigh in on this) BUT only until thermal equilibrium is reached (maybe a few minutes). Continuous 'thrust' would require multiple units operating in a timed cycle. The cavity, in this scheme, would have to be pressurized.
Other EM Drive theories have the device interacting with something outside the cavity (usually gravity).
Apologies - you're right, EMdrive is not a rocket - at least it's not supposed to be, unless it turns out that measurements taken are erroneous, in which case it could turn out to be a Photon Rocket, or something similar.
My only point was that EMdrive is supposed to move under its own power, and not under the power of some external influence, like a wind or an ocean current. I would compare EMdrive more to a propeller-plane or propeller-boat, which is pushing off some sort of medium, but is doing so under its own power. The Crookes Radiometer is relying on the external light source which is not part of the Radiometer itself.
EDIT: Oh, wait - turns out it uses black-body radiation after all, which does seem related to Quantum Vacuum stuff:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_radiometer#Explanations_for_the_force_on_the_vanesSo I guess I see your point now.
Centauri Dreams has posted a part two to the previous post on analyzing the EM Drive papers. This is written by George Hathaway
Forward:
The concluding part of the Tau Zero Foundation’s examination of what is being called the ‘EmDrive’ appears today. It’s a close analysis of the recent paper by Harold ‘Sonny’ White and Paul March in the Journal of Propulsion and Power. Electrical engineer George Hathaway runs Hathaway Consulting Services, which has worked with inventors and investors since 1979 via an experimental physics laboratory near Toronto, Canada. Hathaway’s concentration is on novel propulsion and energy technologies. He has authored dozens of technical papers as well as a book, is a patent-holder and has hosted and lectured at various international symposia.
Introduction:
White et al are to be congratulated for attempting to measure the small thrusts allegedly produced by a novel thruster whose operating mechanism is not only not understood but purportedly violates fundamental physical laws. They have made considerable effort to reduce the possibility of measurement artifact. However it appears that there are some fundamental problems with the interpretation of the measurement data produced by their thrust balance. This document will analyse the measurement procedure and comment on the interpretation.
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=36890
Since some readers may not have heard of George Hathaway before, here's a talk he gave way back, in relation to Zero Point Energy and the possibility of coupling with the Quantum Vacuum for achieving propulsion:
Since some readers may not have heard of George Hathaway before, here's a talk he gave way back, in relation to Zero Point Energy and the possibility of coupling with the Quantum Vacuum for achieving propulsion:
George is a veteran in the measurement of anomalous forces. An outstanding scientist and engineer.
But does anyone have an idea why I see TWO peaks, at 2905 and 2909 MHz in the resonance spectrum (S11 measurement) as described in https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41732.msg1625271#msg1625271 ?
With a simple loop positioned as you indicated, I see only one peak, at 2.90266Ghz. It looks like TE112, but I need to check the H-fields to make sure.
I built out your full antenna and am running another sweep. Will let you know if I see the second peak.
Btw, the peaks in the graph I've posted, are with the E-field antenna, as in attached pics.
Since some readers may not have heard of George Hathaway before, here's a talk he gave way back, in relation to Zero Point Energy and the possibility of coupling with the Quantum Vacuum for achieving propulsion:
George is a veteran in the measurement of anomalous forces. An outstanding scientist and engineer.
And George Hathaway is also one of the three independent researchers that have very recently successfully replicated Woodward's Mach-Effect Gravity Assist (MEGA) drive (the little device using stacks of vibrating piezoelectric discs also known as a Mach-Effect Thruster or MET) besides Martin Tajmar at TU Dresden and Nembo Buldrini at FOTEC. They presented their work at the Estes Park workshop and the papers should be available on the SSI website soon.
I was wondering at your antenna simulation. Is it just me or does your antenna look to be 90 degrees of in rotation from his antenna? Here is one of his old images and the link to the posting of the image: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40959.msg1608034#msg1608034
My understanding is the latest configuration is as illustrated below. I am also running a sweep with the monopole on one end, as Peter indicated above.
Guys,
I'm willing to fund the cost of the tooling to get the KISS thruster parts spun, skim machined, electropolished and gold flashed. Plus I'm willing to ship, to those that ask nicely and are in the 1st 12 repliers, a complete thruster system, including ALL the electronics, including the Arduino based freq tracker, so NO laptop required. All at my cost.
With the testers approval, their names will be posted.
All I ask of you is to build the rotary torsion balance (all you will need to buy is the white laminex 1.2m x 0.2m x 0.012m bookshelf) and post on NSF and Reddit your test results, positive or negative.
OK?
Why?
Because it is time to get our asses off this rock by causing a propulsion revolution.
I'm sure some very smart folks, after all this happens, will figure out how to make 1g crewed ships that can lift off from Earth and land on Pluto in 16 days. Mars is just a 3 day journey. 5 days if on the other side of the sun.
Any takers?
BTW the only Qu value that matters is the time it takes for a forward power pulse to increase from zero to 63.2% of the final value and sorry to say but that is not what many equations and simulations predicts. It is time to get real world and move away from failed simulations and onto actual experimental data.
Those that are doing cavity experiments, please move away from S11 or S21 methods to calculate the Ql and move to doing real Qu by pulsing your cavities and measure directly the cavity fill time and the Qu via the 1 x TC forward power rise time.
I've been playing around with the loop geometry and location and found a moderately good match seen below. This resonance is much more sensitive to antenna z axis location than I would have expected. This particular resonance also has a slight asymmetry from the antenna which causes a higher field strength on the top surface across from the loop compared to above the loop.
The Q is ~30,000 for the curve of minimum S11 but ~80,000 for the blue curve that has a ~ -5 dB min.
I was always under the impression that minimizing S11 (perfectly impedance matching) is always best, but clearly a higher unloaded quality can be obtained when the cavity is
not perfectly matched. However this isn't the same for all resonant cavities, I've seen many waveguide aperture-coupled cavities with S11 curves that widen as the degrade.
Is this the result of the mode shape? Or perhaps the geometry of the antenna?
Could a more complex antenna structure be created to act as another bandpass filter, improving the unloaded quality?
edit: I agree with TT ^ using the -3dB bandwidth is probably only good as an estimation of Q and real unloaded quality should be calculated using stored/dissipated energy
I assume all our resident microwave experts have examined and understand the function of the tuning port that was engineered into the SPR Flight Thruster as attached?
Nice common screwdriver slot in the end of the shaft plus securing nut. Wonder why the shaft seems to points at the internal mode excitation coupler / antenna?
Guys,
I'm willing to fund the cost of the tooling to get the KISS thruster parts spun, skim machined, electropolished and gold flashed. Plus I'm willing to ship, to those that ask nicely and are in the 1st 12 repliers, a complete thruster system, including ALL the electronics, including the Arduino based freq tracker, so NO laptop required. All at my cost.
With the testers approval, their names will be posted.
All I ask of you is to build the rotary torsion balance (all you will need to buy is the white laminex 1.2m x 0.2m x 0.012m bookshelf) and post on NSF and Reddit your test results, positive or negative.
OK?
Why?
Because it is time to get our asses off this rock by causing a propulsion revolution.
I'm sure some very smart folks, after all this happens, will figure out how to make 1g crewed ships that can lift off from Earth and land on Pluto in 16 days. Mars is just a 3 day journey. 5 days if on the other side of the sun.
Any takers?
Phil, I'm always willing to test a frustum designed by you. I appreciate your efforts.
I like to keep my RF system a bit more flexible, though.
Why? Because I am not taking anything for granted what considers the EmDrive. Not even from Shawyer (OK, I will start with a frustum with more or less 'the usual dimensions. And in TE012 or TE013 mode. But just to start with.).
Please keep me informed what the dimensions, etc. of the frustum will be (and gold-covered on the inside will be good).
Peter
I assume all our resident microwave experts have examined and understand the function of the tuning port that was engineered into the SPR Flight Thruster as attached?
Nice common screwdriver slot in the end of the shaft plus securing nut. Wonder why the shaft seems to points at the internal mode excitation coupler / antenna?
Ha! So Shawyer doesn't tell you everything!
Guys,
I'm willing to fund the cost of the tooling to get the KISS thruster parts spun, skim machined, electropolished and gold flashed. Plus I'm willing to ship, to those that ask nicely and are in the 1st 12 repliers, a complete thruster system, including ALL the electronics, including the Arduino based freq tracker, so NO laptop required. All at my cost.
With the testers approval, their names will be posted.
All I ask of you is to build the rotary torsion balance (all you will need to buy is the white laminex 1.2m x 0.2m x 0.012m bookshelf) and post on NSF and Reddit your test results, positive or negative.
OK?
Why?
Because it is time to get our asses off this rock by causing a propulsion revolution.
I'm sure some very smart folks, after all this happens, will figure out how to make 1g crewed ships that can lift off from Earth and land on Pluto in 16 days. Mars is just a 3 day journey. 5 days if on the other side of the sun.
Any takers?
Phil, I'm always willing to test a frustum designed by you. I appreciate your efforts.
I like to keep my RF system a bit more flexible, though.
Why? Because I am not taking anything for granted what considers the EmDrive. Not even from Shawyer (OK, I will start with a frustum with more or less 'the usual dimensions. And in TE012 or TE013 mode. But just to start with.).
Please keep me informed what the dimensions, etc. of the frustum will be (and gold-covered on the inside will be good).
Peter
Your offer to test is accepted.
Please also accept I have been doing this for quite some time and have direct access to the inventor, even though all that I get is a breadcrumb trail to follow.
I assume all our resident microwave experts have examined and understand the function of the tuning port that was engineered into the SPR Flight Thruster as attached?
Nice common screwdriver slot in the end of the shaft plus securing nut. Wonder why the shaft seems to points at the internal mode excitation coupler / antenna?
Ha! So Shawyer doesn't tell you everything!
Peter,
I don't / can't share everything.
Ask any microwave engineer what the attachment is doing? It replaces an inline 2 or 3 port tuner.
I was advised every successful EmDrive had a method to
internally tune the thruster. External L/C tuning just makes the load look resistive to the Rf amp but it is not internally. In reality the load need to be internally made to look like a resistor.
Secret squirrel stuff.
... even though all that I get is a breadcrumb trail to follow.
Yes... actually these kind of things make me a bit suspicious. You must know I have a history of a few decades already, since I was a student, in studying all kind of anomalous forces, energy devices, etc. Starting with the Biefeld-Brown effect.
And the 'Masters', the inventors, often had such habits, throwing breadcrumbs at their disciples. There often is a pattern in this and also this time it doesn't completely feel fine.
I hope I'm wrong. But, to cite Michael Martin Nieto: 'Of course I hope it is due to new physics – how stupendous that would be. But once a physicist starts working on the basis of hope he is heading for a fall'. (in New Scientist, 19 March 2005, p. 35, speaking about the Pioneer Anomaly)
... even though all that I get is a breadcrumb trail to follow.
Yes... actually these kind of things make me a bit suspicious. You must know I have a history of a few decades already, since I was a student, in studying all kind of anomalous forces, energy devices, etc. Starting with the Biefeld-Brown effect.
And the 'Masters', the inventors, often had such habits, throwing breadcrumbs at their disciples. There often is a pattern in this and also this time it doesn't completely feel fine.
I hope I'm wrong. But, to cite Michael Martin Nieto: 'Of course I hope it is due to new physics – how stupendous that would be. But once a physicist starts working on the basis of hope he is heading for a fall'. (in New Scientist, 19 March 2005, p. 35, speaking about the Pioneer Anomaly)
Peter,
Roger is under multiple NDA and "Zip Your Lip" contract conditions. What he shares needs a LOT of research to make use of. He has never given me direct dimensions nor direct answers to questions, only "you are going in the right direction" breadcrumbs
from data I submitted to him, which I respect.
You and the rest of the world will shortly know the "Shawyer Effect" is real.
BTW you should be able to "Feel" when the thruster is pulsed with 8W of Rf and generates 2mN or 0.2g of force against you hand.
I could "Feel" the 8mN or 0.8g of force with my 2nd test thruster. It caused a spine tingle that I will remember as long as I live.
As I said before, it is important to directly measure cavity fill time (Qu) by measuring the time it takes forward power to climb to 63.2%. Any other Q measurement or calculations, as far as I'm concerned are of no interest as only the real world cavity fill time measurement is real and can be used to predict force generation.
Another lesson in EmDrive Engineering 101.
The diameter of cufoff for a cylindrically WG is not equal to the diameter where you added the orange line in this pic!
Point being there is a place to put the small end plate that optimises lowest photon reflection losses off the side walls and small end plate vs lowest radiation pressure on the small end plate.The Orange line was a gut feel for where the end place should be placed. Looking at Dr. Rodal's other images, it should be higher up the cone as where I drew the line, it will not probably not compress the small end lobe enough.
Monomorphic did a FEKO run that models the ideal end plate position, based on 0.82 cutoff diameter, showing reduced end plate eddy currents vs a small end plate closer to the big end plate.
If the end plate is made smaller in diameter, the end plate eddy currents very quickly die out as the small end plate moves to the other side of Cut-Off diameter.
So to me, cutoff means the small end plate is showing no eddy currents and the optimal position for the end plate is just before that happens. It is a critical position and there is a very small build tolerance gap as shown by this plot of the guide wavelength vs axial position vs radiation pressure. The difference between optimal and bad is very small.
According to my model, the thrust will depend on which direction most of the magnetic flux is escaping into the copper. In that regard, this design should outperform the pointier cones. Just my gut instinct, assuming it will accelerate with the big end leading.
Guys,
I'm willing to fund the cost of the tooling to get the KISS thruster parts spun, skim machined, electropolished and gold flashed. Plus I'm willing to ship, to those that ask nicely and are in the 1st 12 repliers, a complete thruster system, including ALL the electronics, including the Arduino based freq tracker, so NO laptop required. All at my cost.
....
Those that are doing cavity experiments, please move away from S11 or S21 methods to calculate the Ql and move to doing real Qu by pulsing your cavities and measure directly the cavity fill time and the Qu via the 1 x TC forward power rise time.
Thank you for your kind offer to fund other people's testing. It is an admirable offer.
I agree with you and Zellerium that using the -3dB bandwidth
(an arbitrary convention) is just an
estimation of Q.
An engineering estimate, particularly an arbitrary convention (like the 3db bandwidth), to measure a physical quantity is never the same as the physical quantity. It is just an estimate. The physical meaning of Q is:
...
According to my model, the thrust will depend on which direction most of the magnetic flux is escaping into the copper. In that regard, this design should outperform the pointier cones. Just my gut instinct, assuming it will accelerate with the big end leading.
Why the "gut instinct" instead of a
calculation based on your model ?
