Difference between revisions of "Dimensions"
From EM Drive
(Added Dielectric column, fix typo on Brady c TE Mode) |
(Fix typo in link to post by Rodal) |
||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
|Brady c TE Mode|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.8804*10^9 || 2.6|| 22000 || 0.05541|| 21.31 || 0.003337 || 6386.7 | |Brady c TE Mode|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.8804*10^9 || 2.6|| 22000 || 0.05541|| 21.31 || 0.003337 || 6386.7 | ||
|- | |- | ||
− | |Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser - piezoelectric MET thruster<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313. | + | |Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser - piezoelectric MET thruster<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377061#msg1377061 Forum post by @Rodal] - Included here because Prof. Woodward's device is also a propellant-less concept, and because Paul March (NASA) maintains that Prof. Woodward's Mach Effect theory might also be, in his opinion, an explanation for thrust for the EM Drive.</ref>|| || || || || || 39300 || 170|| 22000 || 0.002|| 0.01176 || 0.003337 || 3.526 |
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} |
Revision as of 11:10, 20 May 2015
The current best-estimates for the dimensions of various test articles is here, along with the relevant experimental parameters and reported forces. Note that complete dimensions are not known in most cases, and some had to be determined via indirect methods (e.g., estimation from photographs).
Credit to Dr. Rodal and others for the great effort in compiling these. Please note some caveats for this data, at that link.
Description | Cavity Length (m) | bigDiameter (m) | smallDiameter (m) | Design Factor (Shawyer Only) | Dielectric | rfFrequency (1/s) | Power (W) | Q | Force (mN) | Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) | Photon Rocket Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) | Force Multiple of Photon Rocket |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cannae Superconducting | 0.03 | 0.220 | 0.200 | None | 1.047*10^9 | 10.5 | 1.1*10^7 | 8-10 | 761.9 - 952.4 | 0.003336 | 228400 - 285500 | |
Shawyer Experimental | 0.156 | 0.16 | 0.1025 | 0.497 | None | 2.45*10^9 | 850 | 5900 | 16 | 18.82 | 0.003337 | 5640 |
Shawyer Demo | 0.345 | 0.28 | 0.09613 | 0.844 | None | 2.45*10^9 | 421-1200 | 45000 | 102.30 | 80-243 | 0.003337 | 23980 - 72830 |
Brady a TM Mode | 0.2286 | 0.2794 | 0.15875 | HDPE | 1.9326*10^9 | 16.9 | 7320 | 0.0912 | 5.396 | 0.003337 | 1617.2 | |
Brady b TM Mode | 0.2286 | 0.2794 | 0.15875 | HDPE | 1.9367*10^9 | 16.7 | 18100 | 0.0501 | 3.000 | 0.003337 | 899.12 | |
Brady c TE Mode | 0.2286 | 0.2794 | 0.15875 | HDPE | 1.8804*10^9 | 2.6 | 22000 | 0.05541 | 21.31 | 0.003337 | 6386.7 | |
Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser - piezoelectric MET thruster[1] | 39300 | 170 | 22000 | 0.002 | 0.01176 | 0.003337 | 3.526 |
References
- ↑ Forum post by @Rodal - Included here because Prof. Woodward's device is also a propellant-less concept, and because Paul March (NASA) maintains that Prof. Woodward's Mach Effect theory might also be, in his opinion, an explanation for thrust for the EM Drive.