-
#2340
by
Mr. Peter
on 22 Oct, 2017 22:15
-
-
#2341
by
TheTraveller
on 23 Oct, 2017 00:39
-
Hi TheTraveller. I think I recall someone or Roger himself saying Roger thinks that before the end of 2017 he expects to have a superconducting Emdrive to demonstrate. If that recollection was right, have you heard any news relating to it?
Hi Mark,
I know Roger is working with Gilo Industries on a wingless and propless drone. Have confirmed with Gilo Cardozo that Roger is working with Gilo Industries. Gilo Industries now owns a controlling shareholding in Universal Propulsion, the JV created by Roger and Gilo. Roger has been working with Gilo Industries since 2015. Plus there is a world patent application on the cryo thruster with Gilo Cardozo as the co-inventor.
So there is movement at the station.
-
#2342
by
TheTraveller
on 23 Oct, 2017 00:41
-
https://www.crazynauka.pl/explory-2017-znamy-juz-zwyciezcow-tego-konkursu-naukowego/
Jakub Jędrzejewski and Michał Zwierz , pupils from the Technical School Complex in Ostrów Wielkopolski, who built a microwave powered electric motor, won this year's E (x) competition.
This innovative machine can operate in a vacuum and is powered exclusively by electricity.
The engine is supposed to produce a string of hundreds of millinewtons mN), which on Earth is not a significant value, but in space can be successfully used to correct the motion of the satellites.
If the measured thrust was +100mN, this is going to be very interesting.
Unfortunately we don't even know whether they got any thrust or no thrust whatsoever. What the video description reads is "The thruster will generate a thrust of the order of hundreds of millinewtons" Maybe they got something, but that's not what description implies.
edit:
and BTW 18-year-old microwave engine
No, this is not about 18-year-old engine, it's actually about 18 y.o. GUYS, which is kind of amazing
Hi Peter,
Have made contact with Jakub.
-
#2343
by
Mr. Peter
on 23 Oct, 2017 00:52
-
https://www.crazynauka.pl/explory-2017-znamy-juz-zwyciezcow-tego-konkursu-naukowego/
Jakub Jędrzejewski and Michał Zwierz , pupils from the Technical School Complex in Ostrów Wielkopolski, who built a microwave powered electric motor, won this year's E (x) competition.
This innovative machine can operate in a vacuum and is powered exclusively by electricity.
The engine is supposed to produce a string of hundreds of millinewtons mN), which on Earth is not a significant value, but in space can be successfully used to correct the motion of the satellites.
If the measured thrust was +100mN, this is going to be very interesting.
Unfortunately we don't even know whether they got any thrust or no thrust whatsoever. What the video description reads is "The thruster will generate a thrust of the order of hundreds of millinewtons" Maybe they got something, but that's not what description implies.
edit:
and BTW 18-year-old microwave engine
No, this is not about 18-year-old engine, it's actually about 18 y.o. GUYS, which is kind of amazing
Hi Peter,
Have made contact with Jakub.
That's great!
Please let me know of any updates.
-
#2344
by
sanman
on 23 Oct, 2017 00:54
-
Hi,
Regarding the Bell-shaped cavities - their geometry should be producing a diffractive effect - is there any way to plot the 3D interference pattern from that diffraction?
-
#2345
by
TheTraveller
on 23 Oct, 2017 04:30
-
Some info to share and consider.
Work done by EmDrive to accelerate mass does not depend on frame dependent initial velocity. Ie work done during the say 1st second of acceleration is the same.
Work done by EmDrive to accelerate mass can be frame invarient by using dV to calc KE change and via work/energy equivalence, the work done to cause the dV.
Work done by EmDrive to accelerate mass increases by the square of the time of acceleration. Work = (N^2 * t^2) / (2 * m).
EmDrive generated force decreases as acceleration continues. Generated force returns to initial value after acceleration stops and restarts.
Nothing new to physics here. Just a viewpoint based on the accelerating mass, which has no idea of it's velocity.
-
#2346
by
ThatOtherGuy
on 23 Oct, 2017 07:04
-
I was informed earlier that Jakub Jedrezejewski's emdrive group from Poland has won the E(x)plory competition yesterday. In May next year they will go to Intel Isef in Pittsburgh. I'm not sure exactly of their results but he tells me he will be posting to NSF soon. I have been advising them on their RF equipment, so they are using the same amplifier, circulator, attenuator, and signal generator I use. Here is a picture of their experiment.
If that "
generate a thrust of the order of hundreds of millinewtons" is true, then given that they're using your same stuff, the thrust was obtained with a
cavity input power around 30W (
probably less); now this may be very interesting although, at the moment, it's just speculation since apparently there are no official papers nor data related to their tests
Getting back to your rig, Jamie; sounds like you successfully dealt with noise, so... what's the plan now
?
[edit]
@SeeShells
First of all, hope you're ok now, then ... what about your lab setup
?
-
#2347
by
TheTraveller
on 23 Oct, 2017 07:15
-
I was informed earlier that Jakub Jedrezejewski's emdrive group from Poland has won the E(x)plory competition yesterday. In May next year they will go to Intel Isef in Pittsburgh. I'm not sure exactly of their results but he tells me he will be posting to NSF soon. I have been advising them on their RF equipment, so they are using the same amplifier, circulator, attenuator, and signal generator I use. Here is a picture of their experiment.
If that "generate a thrust of the order of hundreds of millinewtons" is true, then given that they're using your same stuff, the thrust was obtained with a cavity input power around 30W (probably less); now this may be very interesting although, at the moment, it's just speculation since apparently there are no official papers nor data related to their tests
Getting back to your rig, Jamie; sounds like you successfully dealt with noise, so... what's the plan now ?
Hi TOG,
Assuming their Ql is 10,000 and cavity Df is 0.6, thrust would be (2 * 20,000 * 0.6 * 30) / c = 2.4mN. So no way is 100mN possible other than as specific force, which based on the above is 80mN/kW.
-
#2348
by
RERT
on 23 Oct, 2017 09:16
-
Meberbs - questions of how and why are tough, and can border on the metaphysical. I have to agree that the suggestion that if you mess with the rate of time, you can generate forces produces an immediate reaction of 'Whut?!'.
However, it's right, not just correlation. That's how GR says that things move under those conditions. And if all you know is the 'time dilation gradient' in a gravity field, then you know the Newtonian gravitational force exactly.
The only contribution I'm really making here is to point out that the usual inferences also run backwards. You can use GR to create models of central field gravity and then see that you have created varying time dilation. But you can also turn it on its head and observe that any variable time dilation/g00 will produce gravity like forces. I think that observation is useful. I'm afraid I don't have anything useful to add on the why or how.
-
#2349
by
Peter Lauwer
on 23 Oct, 2017 10:07
-
I was informed earlier that Jakub Jedrezejewski's emdrive group from Poland has won the E(x)plory competition yesterday. In May next year they will go to Intel Isef in Pittsburgh. I'm not sure exactly of their results but he tells me he will be posting to NSF soon. I have been advising them on their RF equipment, so they are using the same amplifier, circulator, attenuator, and signal generator I use. Here is a picture of their experiment.
Looks like an impressive setup at first sight. But we haven't seen any results yet. It doesn't seem that they have been measuring yet and there are no specifications, drawings etc. from which we can judge how good their setup is. Only that they expect to measure '100's of millinewtons'. Sure.
With the setup in the picture, they have to come with a decent report of cleverly performed experiments, will I believe anything of it.
Until now, the only decent (published) work is that by White et al. (2016) and Tajmar & Fiedler (2015). All the rest is vague, wishful thinking, amateuristic.
Peter
-
#2350
by
TheTraveller
on 23 Oct, 2017 10:53
-
I was informed earlier that Jakub Jedrezejewski's emdrive group from Poland has won the E(x)plory competition yesterday. In May next year they will go to Intel Isef in Pittsburgh. I'm not sure exactly of their results but he tells me he will be posting to NSF soon. I have been advising them on their RF equipment, so they are using the same amplifier, circulator, attenuator, and signal generator I use. Here is a picture of their experiment.
Looks like an impressive setup at first sight. But we haven't seen any results yet. It doesn't seem that they have been measuring yet and there are no specifications, drawings etc. from which we can judge how good their setup is. Only that they expect to measure '100's of milinewtons'. Sure.
With the setup in the picture, they have to come with a decent report of cleverly performed experiments, will I believe anything of it.
Until now, the only decent (published) work is that by White et al. (2016) and Tajmar & Fiedler (2015). All the rest is vague, wishful thinking, amateuristic.
Peter
Hi Peter,
I'm told there is data. But yes it needs to be presented to a very tough crowd. I suggest the 100mN is specific force and not 10g of thrust. My calc, presented above, suggests around 2mN as they used the same 30W rf amp as Jamie is using.
Why do you reject Roger's very detailed reports and independent reviews on his Experimental and Demonstrator EmDrives?
Feasibility study technical report. Issue 2
http://www.emdrive.com/FeasibilityStudytechnicalreportissue2.pdfReview of experimental thruster report
http://www.emdrive.com/reviewofexperimentalthrusterreport.pdfDemonstrator technical report. Issue 2
http://www.emdrive.com/DemonstratorTechnicalReportIssue2.pdfReview of DM tech report
http://www.emdrive.com/ReviewofDMtechreport.pdfBTW Tajmar's results have not been subjected to any independent review. Review here suggests his EmDrive build was about a bad as it can get.
So far the only EmDrive engineering reports, AFAIK. that were subjected to hands on review are those of SPR. While the NASA vac report was peer reviewed, AFAIK the peer reviewers did not do hands on verification.
-
#2351
by
Peter Lauwer
on 23 Oct, 2017 11:29
-
I was informed earlier that Jakub Jedrezejewski's emdrive group from Poland has won the E(x)plory competition yesterday. In May next year they will go to Intel Isef in Pittsburgh. I'm not sure exactly of their results but he tells me he will be posting to NSF soon. I have been advising them on their RF equipment, so they are using the same amplifier, circulator, attenuator, and signal generator I use. Here is a picture of their experiment.
Looks like an impressive setup at first sight. But we haven't seen any results yet. It doesn't seem that they have been measuring yet and there are no specifications, drawings etc. from which we can judge how good their setup is. Only that they expect to measure '100's of milinewtons'. Sure.
With the setup in the picture, they have to come with a decent report of cleverly performed experiments, will I believe anything of it.
Until now, the only decent (published) work is that by White et al. (2016) and Tajmar & Fiedler (2015). All the rest is vague, wishful thinking, amateuristic.
Peter
Hi Peter,
I'm told there is data. But yes it needs to be presented to a very tough crowd. I suggest the 100mN is specific force and not 10g of thrust. My calc, presented above, suggests around 2mN as they used the same 30W rf amp as Jamie is using.
Why do you reject Roger's very detailed reports and independent reviews on his Experimental and Demonstrator EmDrives?
Feasibility study technical report. Issue 2
http://www.emdrive.com/FeasibilityStudytechnicalreportissue2.pdf
Hi Phil,
You are right. These reports by Shawyer, at least the one above,which I just browsed through again, is of sufficient quality and detail to be taken seriously. I can not judge completely the influence of heath and electrical currents (measuring B-fields and simultaneously displaying them with measured thrust would be interesting, e.g.). I have to study them again. Later.
...
...
So far the only EmDrive engineering reports, AFAIK. that were subjected to hands on review are those of SPR. While the NASA vac report was peer reviewed, AFAIK the peer reviewers did not do hands on verification.
One can also have critique on the White et al. (2016) study. I think it would not have been published in a physics journal. Still, it is the best we have now, I think.
Cheers, Peter
-
#2352
by
Peter Lauwer
on 23 Oct, 2017 11:47
-
EmDrive in major Dutch newspaperLast Saturday, an extensive article (1400 words + 4 pics) was published in a major newspaper (NRC) in the Netherlands. It was titled (my translation): 'Mysterious spacedrive raises hope for Star Trek-like travel'.
https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2017/10/20/naar-de-final-frontier-en-verder-13593597-a1578054[yes, paywall, sorry]
Marc Millis was interviewed and Martin Tajmar (Mike Mcculloch as well, but everything about possible theoretical background has been skipped) and a Dutch aerospace engineer (Erik Laan).
Marc Millis admitted: 'I have a negative prejudice against the EmDrive.'
For the rest, the usual stuff: Shawyer, the Eagleworks study (White et al, 2016), conflict with conservation of momentum, ...
-
#2353
by
Monomorphic
on 23 Oct, 2017 12:15
-
Assuming their Ql is 10,000 and cavity Df is 0.6, thrust would be (2 * 20,000 * 0.6 * 30) / c = 2.4mN. So no way is 100mN possible other than as specific force, which based on the above is 80mN/kW.
Their Ql was measured at ~2000 with the windfreak signal generator VNA using the -3dB method. With the good return loss of -41dB, that could be doubled to 4,000. As a comparison, Ql for my cavity is 6,000 and 12,000 respectively with the -40dB boost. Here is the RL trace Jakub shared with me.
-
#2354
by
Dagger
on 23 Oct, 2017 12:19
-
-
#2355
by
TheTraveller
on 23 Oct, 2017 13:14
-
Assuming their Ql is 10,000 and cavity Df is 0.6, thrust would be (2 * 20,000 * 0.6 * 30) / c = 2.4mN. So no way is 100mN possible other than as specific force, which based on the above is 80mN/kW.
Their Ql was measured at ~2000 with the windfreak signal generator VNA using the -3dB method. With the good return loss of -41dB, that could be doubled to 4,000. As a comparison, Ql for my cavity is 6,000 and 12,000 respectively with the -40dB boost. Here is the RL trace Jakub shared with me.
Hi Jamie,
Thanks for the data.
A rtn loss of -41dB is very difficult to believe. It implies an almost perfect coupler match with a VSWR of 1.018:1.
Likewise the resolution of the VNA at +-1dB is very rough and probably not very accurate. So the measured loaded Q could be higher than indicated.
While these low cost VNAs are useful to find resonance, I would not trust them much further.
This is where a proper in line forward and reflected power sensor is highly valuable as from the 2 values you can obtain VSWR, rtn loss and reflection coefficient, which can be used to tune the coupler design & position plus tune freq for lowest rtn loss, lowest VSWR, lowest reflected power.
If you can share the thruster internal dimensions, plus the effective length of the tuned constant diameter section I can do an analysis of the Df and potential Q. Plus the effective length of the tuned constant diameter section will assist the excited mode analysis.
-
#2356
by
ThatOtherGuy
on 23 Oct, 2017 13:37
-
While these low cost VNAs are useful to find resonance, I would not trust them much further.
True, but then, given the absence of further informations we don't and can't know if they ONLY used that VNA or if they used other instruments too; I think that drawing conclusions without having enough data isn't exactly a good idea
-
#2357
by
TheTraveller
on 23 Oct, 2017 14:00
-
While these low cost VNAs are useful to find resonance, I would not trust them much further.
True, but then, given the absence of further informations we don't and can't know if they ONLY used that VNA or if they used other instruments too; I think that drawing conclusions without having enough data isn't exactly a good idea
Hi TOG,
My statement was based on the data Jamie supplied, which was from a Wintech VNA, indicating a -41dB rtn loss plus the indicated Ql of 2k.
I did suggest to not give the indicated data a lot of credibility.
-
#2358
by
Peter Lauwer
on 23 Oct, 2017 14:05
-
While these low cost VNAs are useful to find resonance, I would not trust them much further.
True, but then, given the absence of further informations we don't and can't know if they ONLY used that VNA or if they used other instruments too; I think that drawing conclusions without having enough data isn't exactly a good idea
I observed only ~10% differences in the Q determined with the -3 dB method between the Windfreak SynthNV and a professional Agilent VNA.
-
#2359
by
ThatOtherGuy
on 23 Oct, 2017 14:07
-
Hi TheTraveller. I think I recall someone or Roger himself saying Roger thinks that before the end of 2017 he expects to have a superconducting Emdrive to demonstrate. If that recollection was right, have you heard any news relating to it?
Hi Mark,
I know Roger is working with Gilo Industries on a wingless and propless drone. Have confirmed with Gilo Cardozo that Roger is working with Gilo Industries. Gilo Industries now owns a controlling shareholding in Universal Propulsion, the JV created by Roger and Gilo. Roger has been working with Gilo Industries since 2015. Plus there is a world patent application on the cryo thruster with Gilo Cardozo as the co-inventor.
So there is movement at the station.
Uh, now I'm wondering how, a document dating
back to February 2017 (I mean
THIS document) may indicate that as of
today there's "
movement at the station"
?