http://emdrive.echothis.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=SfrankEM Drive - User contributions [en]2026-09-10T03:36:28ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.41.1http://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Experimental_Results&diff=1139Experimental Results2015-07-26T18:17:33Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Forces, Power, Frequency, Mode shapes, Testing Conditions (ambient or partial vacuum) and Dimensions ==<br />
<br />
The current best estimates for the parameters of various test articles run by public research institutions ([[NASA Eagleworks]]), universities (California State Univ., Physics Dept., Fullerton, USA; Northwestern Polytechnical University, College of Aeronautics, Xi'an, China), very small private companies ([[SPR Ltd.]], Cannae LLC.), and independent engineers/researchers, is here, along with the reported forces. Note that complete dimensions are not known in most cases, and some had to be determined via indirect methods (e.g., for Shawyer's Exp. and Demo, from the big diameter and the Design Factor, scaling from photographs, from Yang's frequency vs. dimension figures, etc.). See [[Building]] for details on drives built by do-it-yourselfers.<br />
<br />
Credit to Dr. Rodal and others for the great effort in [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376840#msg1376840 compiling these]. Please note some caveats for this data, at that link.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! style="text-align:left;"| Description|| Mode Shape<ref name="mode shape definition">Mode shapes for the EM Drive truncated cone geometry are given according to the closest mode shape for a cylindrical geometry, instead of given by the eigenparameters of the truncated cone eigensolution (for example, using the wavenumber). The reason for this is two fold: 1) There is no standard convention on how to number mode shapes for a truncated cone, and 2) the truncated cone geometry used by the EM Drive researchers has been close to a cylinder: the cone angles have been relatively small. Therefore the mode shapes resemble those of a cylinder. TM means "transverse magnetic": a mode shape where the magnetic field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the electric field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. TE stands for "transverse electric": a mode shape where the electric field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the magnetic field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. The subscripts m,n,p in TMmnp and TEmnp, stand for the mode shape quantum numbers in the azimuthal (m), transverse (n) and longitudinal (p) directions respectively.</ref> ||Pressure (Torr)<ref name="ambient pressure">This field denotes whether the test was performed in ambient conditions (hence the field labeled as "Ambient") or in a partial vacuum. When the researcher has provided the pressure in the partial vacuum condition, this is given in the units of Torrs.</ref> || Cavity Length (m) || big diameter (m) || small diameter (m) || sphrcl. r1 (m)<ref name="Spherical geometry">The cavity dimensions in a spherical coordinate system as shown here:<br />
<br/><br />
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/SCIENCE/Cavity/CavityShape.gif<br />
<br/><br />
The bases of the truncated cone used in the experiments are flat, so in the spherical geometry the flat base is described by the secant to the circular arcs joining the intersections between the circular arcs and the lateral walls of the cone. </ref> || sphrcl. r2 (m) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref>||cone 1/2 angle (deg) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref> ||Shawyer Design Factor<ref name="design factor">Shawyer's Design Factor, when not provided independently (for example by Shawyer in his pubblications) was calculated for cavities without dielectric inserts with TM010 as the cutoff frequency for TM01p modes, with TE010 for TE01p modes and TM210 for TM21p modes. For cavities with a dielectric insert it is not calculated.</ref> || Dielectric || Frequency (GHz) || Input Power (W) || Q <ref name="Q">Quality factor of resonance: a dimensionless measure inverse to damping: the higher the Q, the lower the damping. Infinite Q corresponds to zero damping. Critical damping occurs for a value of Q = 1/2.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor]</ref> || Force (mN) || Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) ||Force/Power Multiple of Photon Rocket<br />
|-<br />
|Cannae LLC, G. Fetta, Superconducting<ref name="Cannae">Test conducted in January 2011 by G. Fetta, with a completely different shape from the other EM Drives: this is not a truncated cone, but instead it is shaped like a pillbox with a circular cross-section. Results were posted in the Cannae webpages. Page is no longer available, but an archived version as of 2 November 2012 is available at archive.org:[http://web.archive.org/web/20121102082714/http://www.cannae.com/proof-of-concept/experimental-results]. A better description is available in this US Patent Application [http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US20140013724.pdf]</ref>|| ||Ambient|| 0.03 || 0.220 || 0.200 ||0.316 ||0.348 ||18.43 ||n/a || None || 1.047 || 10.5 || 1.1*10^7 || 8-10 || 761.9 - 952.4 || 228400 - 285500<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Experimental||TM01p <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Based on Shawyer's patent applications and papers at the time or prior to the time of this Experimental test, and the fact that it used a dielectric that could benefit from an axial electric field, it looks like the mode shape for this test may have been TM01p where the value of p is unknown. This is also supported by the Design Factor reported by Shawyer as only 0.497 which appears to be based on TM010 cut-off, as a TE010 cutoff would result in a higher Design Factor based on the published photographs and therefore the relative dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive. Depending on the size and location of the dielectric, but most likely p was either 2 or 3 based on the dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive</ref> ||Ambient|| 0.156 || 0.16 || 0.1025|| 0.2828||0.4414 ||10.44 || 0.497 ||<ref name="Shawyer Dielectric">UK Patent Application GB 2 334 761 A, date of publication 01.09.1999, application No 9809035.0, date of filing 29.04.1998</ref> relative permittivity =38 || 2.45 || 850 || 5900 || 16 || 18.82 ||5640<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Demonstration||TE012 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Nearest possible mode shape according to NASA's COMSOL analysis[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327467#msg1327467]. Also, @TheTraveller reported that Shawyer recommended a TE01p mode for the Flight Thruster. (Where p=3 for the Flight Thruster because it is excited at a higher frequency). Also Prof. Yang reports using TE01p modes, and @TheTraveller reports that Shawyer was an initial advisor. </ref> ||Ambient||0.317 to 0.187 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator Length">The cavity length is estimated as 0.317 to 0.187. The larger number takes into account the full length of the cylindrical part of the EM Drive Demo and the smaller number corresponds only to the length of the truncated cone section. Please notice that the Demo has a variable length actuated by a gear mechanism, in order to tune the cavity to achieve resonance<br />
<br/> <br />
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/images/2008/09/24/emdrive_2.jpg </ref> || 0.28 || 0.14921 ||0.2260 ||0.4241 ||19.28 || 0.844 || None || 2.45 || 421-1200|| 45000 || 102.30 || 80-243 || 23980 - 72830<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Flight Thruster (Boeing project)||TE013<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions">See these posts by TheTraveller on dimensions of the Flight Thruster[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381241#msg1381241] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388018#msg1388018] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388238#msg1388238]. </ref>||Ambient||0.1386 <ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"></ref>||0.2314<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || 0.1257<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> ||0.1764 ||0.3247 ||20.87 || 0.635<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || None || 3.85 ||426 (for Max. Force) ||50,000 to 60,000<ref name="Shawyer Flight Q">Second-hand information: TheTraveller reports that Roger Shawyer communicated this value of Q to him in personal exchanges[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1390437#msg1390437]</ref> || Max=174 ||235-408, Mean=326 ||Mean=97700 <br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, a <ref name="Brady et.al">"Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum" AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, July 28-30, 2014,[[http://libertariannews.org//wp-content//uploads//2014//07//AnomalousThrustProductionFromanRFTestDevice-BradyEtAl.pdf]</ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady">Mode shape is noted as TM211 in Brady et.al.'s report. However, calculations show that TM211 should take place at a significant lower frequency and that this mode must have been TM212. Notice that Brady et.al. b took place practically at the same frequency as [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327177#msg1327177 March TM212 test in vacuum]</ref>||Ambient || 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9326 || 16.9||7320 || 0.0912|| 5.40 || 1620<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, b <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady"/>||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9367 || 16.7|| 18100 || 0.0501|| 3.00 || 899<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, c <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.8804 || 2.6|| 22000 || 0.0554|| 21.3 || 6390<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, p.18, Section IV.F<ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> <ref name="Brady et.al 2"> The Brady et.al. report reads: <<We performed some very early evaluations without the dielectric resonator (TE012 mode at 2168 MHz, with power levels up to ~30 watts) and measured no significant net thrust.>>. The test was performed at the very earliest in Brady et.al.'s testing program. The test was performed without a magnetron, only using the 25W Mini-Circuit Amp, since at the time of this particular test, NASA Eagleworks did not have the PLL circuit running for this data run. Brady et.al. do not provide the Q quality factor of resonance for this test. @TheTraveller made an argument that the test may have been conducted at the wrong (too low) frequency for resonance [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382477#msg1382477] [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1389608#msg1389608].</ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || ||None|| 2.168 || 30|| || 0|| 0 || 0<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. ||TM212 <ref name="Mode Shape verification">This test is the only reported test that has verified the mode shape with experimental measurements. A thermal camera was used that showed the same temperature profile as predicted from induction heating resulting from mode shape TM212</ref> ||5*10^(-6)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9371 || 50|| 6726 || 0.055|| 1.10 || 330<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. reversed 180 degrees [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327012#msg1327012]||TM212 ||5*10^(-4)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9372 || 35|| || 0.0099|| 0.283 || 84<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24 ||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 150||1531<ref name="Q Yang">Q calculated from Fig.5 "frustum microwave cavity actual resonance curve"of "Net thrust measurement of propellantless microwave thrusters", 2011, where Frequency Bandwidth=0.0016GHz, Frequency=2.45 GHz, hence Q=2.45/0.0016=1531. This is the value of Q calculated according to the convention in the West. See definition of quality factor Q [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor#Definition_of_the_quality_factor]. Notice that Prof. Yang reports different values in her tables because of her different convention.</ref>|| 160|| 1070 || 320000<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 300||1531<ref name="Q Yang"></ref>|| 270|| 900|| 270000<br />
|-<br />
|[[Iulian_Berca|Iulian Berca]] Tests 3 & 3.1 (averaged w/up/down directional effects subtracted) <ref>See http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/. Because of the high profile nature of the tests, they are included here merely to give a rough comparison to the more scientifically rigorous tests. The measured thrust in this table is an average of multiple runs in tests 3 and 3.1, subtracting out the likely effects of hot air. @deltaMass calculated the net thrust for the EmDrive across both test. See [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384709#msg1384709].</ref> ||TM212<ref name="Iulian Mode Shape">Iulian Berca used the same dimensions as NASA's truncated cone, but without a dielectric. Mode shape is predicted to be TM 212 according to NASA's COMSOL FEA analysis 2/6/2014 by Frank Davies NASA/JSC/EP5 (2.458 GHz) and to Rodal's exact solution calculation (2.423 GHz). Actual mode participation depends on the spectrum of frequencies excited by the magnetron, the geometrical placement of the RF source in the EM Drive, and the number of eigenfrequencies in and near the magnetron's spectrum </ref> ||Ambient ||0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.1588 ||0.3113 ||0.5477 ||14.78 || 0.515 || None || 2.45 || 800 || || 2.3 || 2.8 || 850<br />
|-<br />
|Baby EM Drive, [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]] ||TE013 ||Ambient||0.02437||0.0296 ||0.01612 ||0.03024 ||0.05552 ||15.46 || 0.7311 ||None|| 24.1 ||0.04 || ||~ 0 ||~ 0 || ~ 0<br />
|-<br />
|Tajmar & Fiedler, Inst. of Aerospace Engineering, T-Uni. Dresden (2015) (torsion test)|| unk ||4*10^(-6)||0.0686||0.0451||0.0385|| || || || ||none||2.44||700||20||0.02||0.0285 || 8.54<br />
|-<br />
|Tajmar & Fiedler, Inst. of Aerospace Engineering, T-Uni. Dresden (2015) (balance beam test)|| unk || ambient ||0.0686||0.0451||0.0385|| || || || ||none||2.44||700||48||0.229||0.32715 || 111<br />
|-<br />
|California State Univ., Fullerton, Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser - piezoelectric MET thruster<ref>[http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Heidi_Fearn/publication/269207998_Theory_of_a_Mach_Effect_Thruster/links/549b72bf0cf2fedbc30e3d66.pdf][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>||n/a ||Partial Vacuum ? ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a|| n/a|| ||3.93*10^(-5) || 170|| 22000 || 0.002|| 0.01176 || 3.526<br />
|-<br />
|Ad Astra VASIMR VX-200 with argon propellant <ref>Ad Astra VASIMR is not a propellant less rocket, it is a magnetoplasma engine that uses argon propellant, but it is included here for comparison purposes, See:[http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/research-and-development]</ref> ||n/a||Partial Vacuum ?||n/a||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a ||n/a|| n/a ||200,000 ||n/a ||5700 ||28.5 || 8500<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
n/a = Not applicable<br />
<br />
Environmental pressure unit: 1 Torr = <math>\cfrac{1}{760} </math> of a standard atmosphere. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torr]<br />
<br />
Atmospheric pressure in low Earth orbit ("LEO") = 5x10^(-8) to 10^(-10) Torr [http://standards.nasa.gov/documents/viewdoc/3315626/3315626]<br />
<br />
Pressure in outer space between stars in the Milky Way = 10^(-17) Torr [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28pressure%29]<br />
<br />
=== Comparison to a Photon Rocket ===<br />
For a perfectly-collimated beam photon rocket, without the benefits of a resonant optical cavity [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photonic_laser_thruster], for example a military searchlight acting as a photon rocket (see: [http://history.nasa.gov/conghand/propulsn.htm#REF5-29], [http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a473498.pdf] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_photonic_rocket]), the force per power input is as follows:<br />
<br />
'''Photon Rocket Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) = 0.003337'''<br />
<br />
This represents the force/PowerInput exerted by the radiation pressure of light in free space, which is not the same as the forces and momentum imparted to a massive object [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=37642.0;attach=838352]. If the results above are validated, the EM Drive would greatly exceed that ratio. However, this does not imply that an EM Drive could achieve steady constant acceleration for constant power input, as this is prevented by energy conservation (see: [http://emdrive.wiki/Energy_Conservation])<br />
<br />
== Notes and references==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Experimental_Results&diff=1138Experimental Results2015-07-26T18:17:14Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Forces, Power, Frequency, Mode shapes, Testing Conditions (ambient or partial vacuum) and Dimensions ==<br />
<br />
The current best estimates for the parameters of various test articles run by public research institutions ([[NASA Eagleworks]]), universities (California State Univ., Physics Dept., Fullerton, USA; Northwestern Polytechnical University, College of Aeronautics, Xi'an, China), very small private companies ([[SPR Ltd.]], Cannae LLC.), and independent engineers/researchers, is here, along with the reported forces. Note that complete dimensions are not known in most cases, and some had to be determined via indirect methods (e.g., for Shawyer's Exp. and Demo, from the big diameter and the Design Factor, scaling from photographs, from Yang's frequency vs. dimension figures, etc.). See [[Building]] for details on drives built by do-it-yourselfers.<br />
<br />
Credit to Dr. Rodal and others for the great effort in [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376840#msg1376840 compiling these]. Please note some caveats for this data, at that link.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! style="text-align:left;"| Description|| Mode Shape<ref name="mode shape definition">Mode shapes for the EM Drive truncated cone geometry are given according to the closest mode shape for a cylindrical geometry, instead of given by the eigenparameters of the truncated cone eigensolution (for example, using the wavenumber). The reason for this is two fold: 1) There is no standard convention on how to number mode shapes for a truncated cone, and 2) the truncated cone geometry used by the EM Drive researchers has been close to a cylinder: the cone angles have been relatively small. Therefore the mode shapes resemble those of a cylinder. TM means "transverse magnetic": a mode shape where the magnetic field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the electric field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. TE stands for "transverse electric": a mode shape where the electric field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the magnetic field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. The subscripts m,n,p in TMmnp and TEmnp, stand for the mode shape quantum numbers in the azimuthal (m), transverse (n) and longitudinal (p) directions respectively.</ref> ||Pressure (Torr)<ref name="ambient pressure">This field denotes whether the test was performed in ambient conditions (hence the field labeled as "Ambient") or in a partial vacuum. When the researcher has provided the pressure in the partial vacuum condition, this is given in the units of Torrs.</ref> || Cavity Length (m) || big diameter (m) || small diameter (m) || sphrcl. r1 (m)<ref name="Spherical geometry">The cavity dimensions in a spherical coordinate system as shown here:<br />
<br/><br />
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/SCIENCE/Cavity/CavityShape.gif<br />
<br/><br />
The bases of the truncated cone used in the experiments are flat, so in the spherical geometry the flat base is described by the secant to the circular arcs joining the intersections between the circular arcs and the lateral walls of the cone. </ref> || sphrcl. r2 (m) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref>||cone 1/2 angle (deg) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref> ||Shawyer Design Factor<ref name="design factor">Shawyer's Design Factor, when not provided independently (for example by Shawyer in his pubblications) was calculated for cavities without dielectric inserts with TM010 as the cutoff frequency for TM01p modes, with TE010 for TE01p modes and TM210 for TM21p modes. For cavities with a dielectric insert it is not calculated.</ref> || Dielectric || Frequency (GHz) || Input Power (W) || Q <ref name="Q">Quality factor of resonance: a dimensionless measure inverse to damping: the higher the Q, the lower the damping. Infinite Q corresponds to zero damping. Critical damping occurs for a value of Q = 1/2.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor]</ref> || Force (mN) || Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) ||Force/Power Multiple of Photon Rocket<br />
|-<br />
|Cannae LLC, G. Fetta, Superconducting<ref name="Cannae">Test conducted in January 2011 by G. Fetta, with a completely different shape from the other EM Drives: this is not a truncated cone, but instead it is shaped like a pillbox with a circular cross-section. Results were posted in the Cannae webpages. Page is no longer available, but an archived version as of 2 November 2012 is available at archive.org:[http://web.archive.org/web/20121102082714/http://www.cannae.com/proof-of-concept/experimental-results]. A better description is available in this US Patent Application [http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US20140013724.pdf]</ref>|| ||Ambient|| 0.03 || 0.220 || 0.200 ||0.316 ||0.348 ||18.43 ||n/a || None || 1.047 || 10.5 || 1.1*10^7 || 8-10 || 761.9 - 952.4 || 228400 - 285500<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Experimental||TM01p <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Based on Shawyer's patent applications and papers at the time or prior to the time of this Experimental test, and the fact that it used a dielectric that could benefit from an axial electric field, it looks like the mode shape for this test may have been TM01p where the value of p is unknown. This is also supported by the Design Factor reported by Shawyer as only 0.497 which appears to be based on TM010 cut-off, as a TE010 cutoff would result in a higher Design Factor based on the published photographs and therefore the relative dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive. Depending on the size and location of the dielectric, but most likely p was either 2 or 3 based on the dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive</ref> ||Ambient|| 0.156 || 0.16 || 0.1025|| 0.2828||0.4414 ||10.44 || 0.497 ||<ref name="Shawyer Dielectric">UK Patent Application GB 2 334 761 A, date of publication 01.09.1999, application No 9809035.0, date of filing 29.04.1998</ref> relative permittivity =38 || 2.45 || 850 || 5900 || 16 || 18.82 ||5640<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Demonstration||TE012 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Nearest possible mode shape according to NASA's COMSOL analysis[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327467#msg1327467]. Also, @TheTraveller reported that Shawyer recommended a TE01p mode for the Flight Thruster. (Where p=3 for the Flight Thruster because it is excited at a higher frequency). Also Prof. Yang reports using TE01p modes, and @TheTraveller reports that Shawyer was an initial advisor. </ref> ||Ambient||0.317 to 0.187 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator Length">The cavity length is estimated as 0.317 to 0.187. The larger number takes into account the full length of the cylindrical part of the EM Drive Demo and the smaller number corresponds only to the length of the truncated cone section. Please notice that the Demo has a variable length actuated by a gear mechanism, in order to tune the cavity to achieve resonance<br />
<br/> <br />
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/images/2008/09/24/emdrive_2.jpg </ref> || 0.28 || 0.14921 ||0.2260 ||0.4241 ||19.28 || 0.844 || None || 2.45 || 421-1200|| 45000 || 102.30 || 80-243 || 23980 - 72830<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Flight Thruster (Boeing project)||TE013<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions">See these posts by TheTraveller on dimensions of the Flight Thruster[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381241#msg1381241] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388018#msg1388018] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388238#msg1388238]. </ref>||Ambient||0.1386 <ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"></ref>||0.2314<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || 0.1257<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> ||0.1764 ||0.3247 ||20.87 || 0.635<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || None || 3.85 ||426 (for Max. Force) ||50,000 to 60,000<ref name="Shawyer Flight Q">Second-hand information: TheTraveller reports that Roger Shawyer communicated this value of Q to him in personal exchanges[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1390437#msg1390437]</ref> || Max=174 ||235-408, Mean=326 ||Mean=97700 <br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, a <ref name="Brady et.al">"Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum" AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, July 28-30, 2014,[[http://libertariannews.org//wp-content//uploads//2014//07//AnomalousThrustProductionFromanRFTestDevice-BradyEtAl.pdf]</ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady">Mode shape is noted as TM211 in Brady et.al.'s report. However, calculations show that TM211 should take place at a significant lower frequency and that this mode must have been TM212. Notice that Brady et.al. b took place practically at the same frequency as [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327177#msg1327177 March TM212 test in vacuum]</ref>||Ambient || 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9326 || 16.9||7320 || 0.0912|| 5.40 || 1620<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, b <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady"/>||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9367 || 16.7|| 18100 || 0.0501|| 3.00 || 899<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, c <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.8804 || 2.6|| 22000 || 0.0554|| 21.3 || 6390<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, p.18, Section IV.F<ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> <ref name="Brady et.al 2"> The Brady et.al. report reads: <<We performed some very early evaluations without the dielectric resonator (TE012 mode at 2168 MHz, with power levels up to ~30 watts) and measured no significant net thrust.>>. The test was performed at the very earliest in Brady et.al.'s testing program. The test was performed without a magnetron, only using the 25W Mini-Circuit Amp, since at the time of this particular test, NASA Eagleworks did not have the PLL circuit running for this data run. Brady et.al. do not provide the Q quality factor of resonance for this test. @TheTraveller made an argument that the test may have been conducted at the wrong (too low) frequency for resonance [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382477#msg1382477] [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1389608#msg1389608].</ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || ||None|| 2.168 || 30|| || 0|| 0 || 0<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. ||TM212 <ref name="Mode Shape verification">This test is the only reported test that has verified the mode shape with experimental measurements. A thermal camera was used that showed the same temperature profile as predicted from induction heating resulting from mode shape TM212</ref> ||5*10^(-6)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9371 || 50|| 6726 || 0.055|| 1.10 || 330<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. reversed 180 degrees [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327012#msg1327012]||TM212 ||5*10^(-4)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9372 || 35|| || 0.0099|| 0.283 || 84<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24 ||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 150||1531<ref name="Q Yang">Q calculated from Fig.5 "frustum microwave cavity actual resonance curve"of "Net thrust measurement of propellantless microwave thrusters", 2011, where Frequency Bandwidth=0.0016GHz, Frequency=2.45 GHz, hence Q=2.45/0.0016=1531. This is the value of Q calculated according to the convention in the West. See definition of quality factor Q [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor#Definition_of_the_quality_factor]. Notice that Prof. Yang reports different values in her tables because of her different convention.</ref>|| 160|| 1070 || 320000<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 300||1531<ref name="Q Yang"></ref>|| 270|| 900|| 270000<br />
|-<br />
|[[Iulian_Berca|Iulian Berca]] Tests 3 & 3.1 (averaged w/up/down directional effects subtracted) <ref>See http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/. Because of the high profile nature of the tests, they are included here merely to give a rough comparison to the more scientifically rigorous tests. The measured thrust in this table is an average of multiple runs in tests 3 and 3.1, subtracting out the likely effects of hot air. @deltaMass calculated the net thrust for the EmDrive across both test. See [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384709#msg1384709].</ref> ||TM212<ref name="Iulian Mode Shape">Iulian Berca used the same dimensions as NASA's truncated cone, but without a dielectric. Mode shape is predicted to be TM 212 according to NASA's COMSOL FEA analysis 2/6/2014 by Frank Davies NASA/JSC/EP5 (2.458 GHz) and to Rodal's exact solution calculation (2.423 GHz). Actual mode participation depends on the spectrum of frequencies excited by the magnetron, the geometrical placement of the RF source in the EM Drive, and the number of eigenfrequencies in and near the magnetron's spectrum </ref> ||Ambient ||0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.1588 ||0.3113 ||0.5477 ||14.78 || 0.515 || None || 2.45 || 800 || || 2.3 || 2.8 || 850<br />
|-<br />
|Baby EM Drive, [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]] ||TE013 ||Ambient||0.02437||0.0296 ||0.01612 ||0.03024 ||0.05552 ||15.46 || 0.7311 ||None|| 24.1 ||0.04 || ||~ 0 ||~ 0 || ~ 0<br />
|-<br />
|Tajmar & Fiedler, Inst. of Aerospace Engineering, T-Uni. Dresden (2015) (torsion test)|| unk ||4*10^(-6)||0.0686||0.0451||0.0385|| || || || ||none||2.44||700||20||0.02||0.0285 || 8.54<br />
|-<br />
|Tajmar & Fiedler, Inst. of Aerospace Engineering, T-Uni. Dresden (2015) (balance beam test)|| unk || ambient ||0.0686||0.0451||0.0385|| || || ||none||2.44||700||48||0.229||0.32715 || 111<br />
|-<br />
|California State Univ., Fullerton, Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser - piezoelectric MET thruster<ref>[http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Heidi_Fearn/publication/269207998_Theory_of_a_Mach_Effect_Thruster/links/549b72bf0cf2fedbc30e3d66.pdf][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>||n/a ||Partial Vacuum ? ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a|| n/a|| ||3.93*10^(-5) || 170|| 22000 || 0.002|| 0.01176 || 3.526<br />
|-<br />
|Ad Astra VASIMR VX-200 with argon propellant <ref>Ad Astra VASIMR is not a propellant less rocket, it is a magnetoplasma engine that uses argon propellant, but it is included here for comparison purposes, See:[http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/research-and-development]</ref> ||n/a||Partial Vacuum ?||n/a||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a ||n/a|| n/a ||200,000 ||n/a ||5700 ||28.5 || 8500<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
n/a = Not applicable<br />
<br />
Environmental pressure unit: 1 Torr = <math>\cfrac{1}{760} </math> of a standard atmosphere. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torr]<br />
<br />
Atmospheric pressure in low Earth orbit ("LEO") = 5x10^(-8) to 10^(-10) Torr [http://standards.nasa.gov/documents/viewdoc/3315626/3315626]<br />
<br />
Pressure in outer space between stars in the Milky Way = 10^(-17) Torr [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28pressure%29]<br />
<br />
=== Comparison to a Photon Rocket ===<br />
For a perfectly-collimated beam photon rocket, without the benefits of a resonant optical cavity [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photonic_laser_thruster], for example a military searchlight acting as a photon rocket (see: [http://history.nasa.gov/conghand/propulsn.htm#REF5-29], [http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a473498.pdf] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_photonic_rocket]), the force per power input is as follows:<br />
<br />
'''Photon Rocket Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) = 0.003337'''<br />
<br />
This represents the force/PowerInput exerted by the radiation pressure of light in free space, which is not the same as the forces and momentum imparted to a massive object [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=37642.0;attach=838352]. If the results above are validated, the EM Drive would greatly exceed that ratio. However, this does not imply that an EM Drive could achieve steady constant acceleration for constant power input, as this is prevented by energy conservation (see: [http://emdrive.wiki/Energy_Conservation])<br />
<br />
== Notes and references==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Experimental_Results&diff=1137Experimental Results2015-07-26T18:15:33Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Forces, Power, Frequency, Mode shapes, Testing Conditions (ambient or partial vacuum) and Dimensions ==<br />
<br />
The current best estimates for the parameters of various test articles run by public research institutions ([[NASA Eagleworks]]), universities (California State Univ., Physics Dept., Fullerton, USA; Northwestern Polytechnical University, College of Aeronautics, Xi'an, China), very small private companies ([[SPR Ltd.]], Cannae LLC.), and independent engineers/researchers, is here, along with the reported forces. Note that complete dimensions are not known in most cases, and some had to be determined via indirect methods (e.g., for Shawyer's Exp. and Demo, from the big diameter and the Design Factor, scaling from photographs, from Yang's frequency vs. dimension figures, etc.). See [[Building]] for details on drives built by do-it-yourselfers.<br />
<br />
Credit to Dr. Rodal and others for the great effort in [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376840#msg1376840 compiling these]. Please note some caveats for this data, at that link.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! style="text-align:left;"| Description|| Mode Shape<ref name="mode shape definition">Mode shapes for the EM Drive truncated cone geometry are given according to the closest mode shape for a cylindrical geometry, instead of given by the eigenparameters of the truncated cone eigensolution (for example, using the wavenumber). The reason for this is two fold: 1) There is no standard convention on how to number mode shapes for a truncated cone, and 2) the truncated cone geometry used by the EM Drive researchers has been close to a cylinder: the cone angles have been relatively small. Therefore the mode shapes resemble those of a cylinder. TM means "transverse magnetic": a mode shape where the magnetic field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the electric field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. TE stands for "transverse electric": a mode shape where the electric field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the magnetic field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. The subscripts m,n,p in TMmnp and TEmnp, stand for the mode shape quantum numbers in the azimuthal (m), transverse (n) and longitudinal (p) directions respectively.</ref> ||Pressure (Torr)<ref name="ambient pressure">This field denotes whether the test was performed in ambient conditions (hence the field labeled as "Ambient") or in a partial vacuum. When the researcher has provided the pressure in the partial vacuum condition, this is given in the units of Torrs.</ref> || Cavity Length (m) || big diameter (m) || small diameter (m) || sphrcl. r1 (m)<ref name="Spherical geometry">The cavity dimensions in a spherical coordinate system as shown here:<br />
<br/><br />
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/SCIENCE/Cavity/CavityShape.gif<br />
<br/><br />
The bases of the truncated cone used in the experiments are flat, so in the spherical geometry the flat base is described by the secant to the circular arcs joining the intersections between the circular arcs and the lateral walls of the cone. </ref> || sphrcl. r2 (m) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref>||cone 1/2 angle (deg) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref> ||Shawyer Design Factor<ref name="design factor">Shawyer's Design Factor, when not provided independently (for example by Shawyer in his pubblications) was calculated for cavities without dielectric inserts with TM010 as the cutoff frequency for TM01p modes, with TE010 for TE01p modes and TM210 for TM21p modes. For cavities with a dielectric insert it is not calculated.</ref> || Dielectric || Frequency (GHz) || Input Power (W) || Q <ref name="Q">Quality factor of resonance: a dimensionless measure inverse to damping: the higher the Q, the lower the damping. Infinite Q corresponds to zero damping. Critical damping occurs for a value of Q = 1/2.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor]</ref> || Force (mN) || Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) ||Force/Power Multiple of Photon Rocket<br />
|-<br />
|Cannae LLC, G. Fetta, Superconducting<ref name="Cannae">Test conducted in January 2011 by G. Fetta, with a completely different shape from the other EM Drives: this is not a truncated cone, but instead it is shaped like a pillbox with a circular cross-section. Results were posted in the Cannae webpages. Page is no longer available, but an archived version as of 2 November 2012 is available at archive.org:[http://web.archive.org/web/20121102082714/http://www.cannae.com/proof-of-concept/experimental-results]. A better description is available in this US Patent Application [http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US20140013724.pdf]</ref>|| ||Ambient|| 0.03 || 0.220 || 0.200 ||0.316 ||0.348 ||18.43 ||n/a || None || 1.047 || 10.5 || 1.1*10^7 || 8-10 || 761.9 - 952.4 || 228400 - 285500<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Experimental||TM01p <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Based on Shawyer's patent applications and papers at the time or prior to the time of this Experimental test, and the fact that it used a dielectric that could benefit from an axial electric field, it looks like the mode shape for this test may have been TM01p where the value of p is unknown. This is also supported by the Design Factor reported by Shawyer as only 0.497 which appears to be based on TM010 cut-off, as a TE010 cutoff would result in a higher Design Factor based on the published photographs and therefore the relative dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive. Depending on the size and location of the dielectric, but most likely p was either 2 or 3 based on the dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive</ref> ||Ambient|| 0.156 || 0.16 || 0.1025|| 0.2828||0.4414 ||10.44 || 0.497 ||<ref name="Shawyer Dielectric">UK Patent Application GB 2 334 761 A, date of publication 01.09.1999, application No 9809035.0, date of filing 29.04.1998</ref> relative permittivity =38 || 2.45 || 850 || 5900 || 16 || 18.82 ||5640<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Demonstration||TE012 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Nearest possible mode shape according to NASA's COMSOL analysis[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327467#msg1327467]. Also, @TheTraveller reported that Shawyer recommended a TE01p mode for the Flight Thruster. (Where p=3 for the Flight Thruster because it is excited at a higher frequency). Also Prof. Yang reports using TE01p modes, and @TheTraveller reports that Shawyer was an initial advisor. </ref> ||Ambient||0.317 to 0.187 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator Length">The cavity length is estimated as 0.317 to 0.187. The larger number takes into account the full length of the cylindrical part of the EM Drive Demo and the smaller number corresponds only to the length of the truncated cone section. Please notice that the Demo has a variable length actuated by a gear mechanism, in order to tune the cavity to achieve resonance<br />
<br/> <br />
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/images/2008/09/24/emdrive_2.jpg </ref> || 0.28 || 0.14921 ||0.2260 ||0.4241 ||19.28 || 0.844 || None || 2.45 || 421-1200|| 45000 || 102.30 || 80-243 || 23980 - 72830<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Flight Thruster (Boeing project)||TE013<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions">See these posts by TheTraveller on dimensions of the Flight Thruster[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381241#msg1381241] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388018#msg1388018] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388238#msg1388238]. </ref>||Ambient||0.1386 <ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"></ref>||0.2314<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || 0.1257<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> ||0.1764 ||0.3247 ||20.87 || 0.635<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || None || 3.85 ||426 (for Max. Force) ||50,000 to 60,000<ref name="Shawyer Flight Q">Second-hand information: TheTraveller reports that Roger Shawyer communicated this value of Q to him in personal exchanges[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1390437#msg1390437]</ref> || Max=174 ||235-408, Mean=326 ||Mean=97700 <br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, a <ref name="Brady et.al">"Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum" AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, July 28-30, 2014,[[http://libertariannews.org//wp-content//uploads//2014//07//AnomalousThrustProductionFromanRFTestDevice-BradyEtAl.pdf]</ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady">Mode shape is noted as TM211 in Brady et.al.'s report. However, calculations show that TM211 should take place at a significant lower frequency and that this mode must have been TM212. Notice that Brady et.al. b took place practically at the same frequency as [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327177#msg1327177 March TM212 test in vacuum]</ref>||Ambient || 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9326 || 16.9||7320 || 0.0912|| 5.40 || 1620<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, b <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady"/>||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9367 || 16.7|| 18100 || 0.0501|| 3.00 || 899<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, c <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.8804 || 2.6|| 22000 || 0.0554|| 21.3 || 6390<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, p.18, Section IV.F<ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> <ref name="Brady et.al 2"> The Brady et.al. report reads: <<We performed some very early evaluations without the dielectric resonator (TE012 mode at 2168 MHz, with power levels up to ~30 watts) and measured no significant net thrust.>>. The test was performed at the very earliest in Brady et.al.'s testing program. The test was performed without a magnetron, only using the 25W Mini-Circuit Amp, since at the time of this particular test, NASA Eagleworks did not have the PLL circuit running for this data run. Brady et.al. do not provide the Q quality factor of resonance for this test. @TheTraveller made an argument that the test may have been conducted at the wrong (too low) frequency for resonance [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382477#msg1382477] [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1389608#msg1389608].</ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || ||None|| 2.168 || 30|| || 0|| 0 || 0<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. ||TM212 <ref name="Mode Shape verification">This test is the only reported test that has verified the mode shape with experimental measurements. A thermal camera was used that showed the same temperature profile as predicted from induction heating resulting from mode shape TM212</ref> ||5*10^(-6)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9371 || 50|| 6726 || 0.055|| 1.10 || 330<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. reversed 180 degrees [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327012#msg1327012]||TM212 ||5*10^(-4)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9372 || 35|| || 0.0099|| 0.283 || 84<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24 ||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 150||1531<ref name="Q Yang">Q calculated from Fig.5 "frustum microwave cavity actual resonance curve"of "Net thrust measurement of propellantless microwave thrusters", 2011, where Frequency Bandwidth=0.0016GHz, Frequency=2.45 GHz, hence Q=2.45/0.0016=1531. This is the value of Q calculated according to the convention in the West. See definition of quality factor Q [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor#Definition_of_the_quality_factor]. Notice that Prof. Yang reports different values in her tables because of her different convention.</ref>|| 160|| 1070 || 320000<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 300||1531<ref name="Q Yang"></ref>|| 270|| 900|| 270000<br />
|-<br />
|[[Iulian_Berca|Iulian Berca]] Tests 3 & 3.1 (averaged w/up/down directional effects subtracted) <ref>See http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/. Because of the high profile nature of the tests, they are included here merely to give a rough comparison to the more scientifically rigorous tests. The measured thrust in this table is an average of multiple runs in tests 3 and 3.1, subtracting out the likely effects of hot air. @deltaMass calculated the net thrust for the EmDrive across both test. See [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384709#msg1384709].</ref> ||TM212<ref name="Iulian Mode Shape">Iulian Berca used the same dimensions as NASA's truncated cone, but without a dielectric. Mode shape is predicted to be TM 212 according to NASA's COMSOL FEA analysis 2/6/2014 by Frank Davies NASA/JSC/EP5 (2.458 GHz) and to Rodal's exact solution calculation (2.423 GHz). Actual mode participation depends on the spectrum of frequencies excited by the magnetron, the geometrical placement of the RF source in the EM Drive, and the number of eigenfrequencies in and near the magnetron's spectrum </ref> ||Ambient ||0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.1588 ||0.3113 ||0.5477 ||14.78 || 0.515 || None || 2.45 || 800 || || 2.3 || 2.8 || 850<br />
|-<br />
|Baby EM Drive, [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]] ||TE013 ||Ambient||0.02437||0.0296 ||0.01612 ||0.03024 ||0.05552 ||15.46 || 0.7311 ||None|| 24.1 ||0.04 || ||~ 0 ||~ 0 || ~ 0<br />
|-<br />
|Tajmar & Fiedler, Inst. of Aerospace Engineering, T-Uni. Dresden (2015) (torsion test)|| unk ||4*10^(-6)||0.0686||0.0451||0.0385|| || || || ||none||2.44||700||20||0.02||0.0285 || 8.54<br />
|-<br />
|Tajmar & Fiedler, Inst. of Aerospace Engineering, T-Uni. Dresden (2015) (balance beam test)|| unk || ambient ||0.0686||||0.0451||0.0385|| || || || ||none||2.44||700||48||0.229||0.32715 || 111<br />
|-<br />
|California State Univ., Fullerton, Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser - piezoelectric MET thruster<ref>[http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Heidi_Fearn/publication/269207998_Theory_of_a_Mach_Effect_Thruster/links/549b72bf0cf2fedbc30e3d66.pdf][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>||n/a ||Partial Vacuum ? ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a|| n/a|| ||3.93*10^(-5) || 170|| 22000 || 0.002|| 0.01176 || 3.526<br />
|-<br />
|Ad Astra VASIMR VX-200 with argon propellant <ref>Ad Astra VASIMR is not a propellant less rocket, it is a magnetoplasma engine that uses argon propellant, but it is included here for comparison purposes, See:[http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/research-and-development]</ref> ||n/a||Partial Vacuum ?||n/a||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a ||n/a|| n/a ||200,000 ||n/a ||5700 ||28.5 || 8500<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
n/a = Not applicable<br />
<br />
Environmental pressure unit: 1 Torr = <math>\cfrac{1}{760} </math> of a standard atmosphere. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torr]<br />
<br />
Atmospheric pressure in low Earth orbit ("LEO") = 5x10^(-8) to 10^(-10) Torr [http://standards.nasa.gov/documents/viewdoc/3315626/3315626]<br />
<br />
Pressure in outer space between stars in the Milky Way = 10^(-17) Torr [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28pressure%29]<br />
<br />
=== Comparison to a Photon Rocket ===<br />
For a perfectly-collimated beam photon rocket, without the benefits of a resonant optical cavity [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photonic_laser_thruster], for example a military searchlight acting as a photon rocket (see: [http://history.nasa.gov/conghand/propulsn.htm#REF5-29], [http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a473498.pdf] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_photonic_rocket]), the force per power input is as follows:<br />
<br />
'''Photon Rocket Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) = 0.003337'''<br />
<br />
This represents the force/PowerInput exerted by the radiation pressure of light in free space, which is not the same as the forces and momentum imparted to a massive object [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=37642.0;attach=838352]. If the results above are validated, the EM Drive would greatly exceed that ratio. However, this does not imply that an EM Drive could achieve steady constant acceleration for constant power input, as this is prevented by energy conservation (see: [http://emdrive.wiki/Energy_Conservation])<br />
<br />
== Notes and references==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Experimental_Results&diff=1136Experimental Results2015-07-26T17:07:47Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Forces, Power, Frequency, Mode shapes, Testing Conditions (ambient or partial vacuum) and Dimensions ==<br />
<br />
The current best estimates for the parameters of various test articles run by public research institutions ([[NASA Eagleworks]]), universities (California State Univ., Physics Dept., Fullerton, USA; Northwestern Polytechnical University, College of Aeronautics, Xi'an, China), very small private companies ([[SPR Ltd.]], Cannae LLC.), and independent engineers/researchers, is here, along with the reported forces. Note that complete dimensions are not known in most cases, and some had to be determined via indirect methods (e.g., for Shawyer's Exp. and Demo, from the big diameter and the Design Factor, scaling from photographs, from Yang's frequency vs. dimension figures, etc.). See [[Building]] for details on drives built by do-it-yourselfers.<br />
<br />
Credit to Dr. Rodal and others for the great effort in [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376840#msg1376840 compiling these]. Please note some caveats for this data, at that link.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! style="text-align:left;"| Description|| Mode Shape<ref name="mode shape definition">Mode shapes for the EM Drive truncated cone geometry are given according to the closest mode shape for a cylindrical geometry, instead of given by the eigenparameters of the truncated cone eigensolution (for example, using the wavenumber). The reason for this is two fold: 1) There is no standard convention on how to number mode shapes for a truncated cone, and 2) the truncated cone geometry used by the EM Drive researchers has been close to a cylinder: the cone angles have been relatively small. Therefore the mode shapes resemble those of a cylinder. TM means "transverse magnetic": a mode shape where the magnetic field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the electric field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. TE stands for "transverse electric": a mode shape where the electric field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the magnetic field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. The subscripts m,n,p in TMmnp and TEmnp, stand for the mode shape quantum numbers in the azimuthal (m), transverse (n) and longitudinal (p) directions respectively.</ref> ||Pressure (Torr)<ref name="ambient pressure">This field denotes whether the test was performed in ambient conditions (hence the field labeled as "Ambient") or in a partial vacuum. When the researcher has provided the pressure in the partial vacuum condition, this is given in the units of Torrs.</ref> || Cavity Length (m) || big diameter (m) || small diameter (m) || sphrcl. r1 (m)<ref name="Spherical geometry">The cavity dimensions in a spherical coordinate system as shown here:<br />
<br/><br />
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/SCIENCE/Cavity/CavityShape.gif<br />
<br/><br />
The bases of the truncated cone used in the experiments are flat, so in the spherical geometry the flat base is described by the secant to the circular arcs joining the intersections between the circular arcs and the lateral walls of the cone. </ref> || sphrcl. r2 (m) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref>||cone 1/2 angle (deg) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref> ||Shawyer Design Factor<ref name="design factor">Shawyer's Design Factor, when not provided independently (for example by Shawyer in his pubblications) was calculated for cavities without dielectric inserts with TM010 as the cutoff frequency for TM01p modes, with TE010 for TE01p modes and TM210 for TM21p modes. For cavities with a dielectric insert it is not calculated.</ref> || Dielectric || Frequency (GHz) || Input Power (W) || Q <ref name="Q">Quality factor of resonance: a dimensionless measure inverse to damping: the higher the Q, the lower the damping. Infinite Q corresponds to zero damping. Critical damping occurs for a value of Q = 1/2.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor]</ref> || Force (mN) || Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) ||Force/Power Multiple of Photon Rocket<br />
|-<br />
|Cannae LLC, G. Fetta, Superconducting<ref name="Cannae">Test conducted in January 2011 by G. Fetta, with a completely different shape from the other EM Drives: this is not a truncated cone, but instead it is shaped like a pillbox with a circular cross-section. Results were posted in the Cannae webpages. Page is no longer available, but an archived version as of 2 November 2012 is available at archive.org:[http://web.archive.org/web/20121102082714/http://www.cannae.com/proof-of-concept/experimental-results]. A better description is available in this US Patent Application [http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US20140013724.pdf]</ref>|| ||Ambient|| 0.03 || 0.220 || 0.200 ||0.316 ||0.348 ||18.43 ||n/a || None || 1.047 || 10.5 || 1.1*10^7 || 8-10 || 761.9 - 952.4 || 228400 - 285500<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Experimental||TM01p <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Based on Shawyer's patent applications and papers at the time or prior to the time of this Experimental test, and the fact that it used a dielectric that could benefit from an axial electric field, it looks like the mode shape for this test may have been TM01p where the value of p is unknown. This is also supported by the Design Factor reported by Shawyer as only 0.497 which appears to be based on TM010 cut-off, as a TE010 cutoff would result in a higher Design Factor based on the published photographs and therefore the relative dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive. Depending on the size and location of the dielectric, but most likely p was either 2 or 3 based on the dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive</ref> ||Ambient|| 0.156 || 0.16 || 0.1025|| 0.2828||0.4414 ||10.44 || 0.497 ||<ref name="Shawyer Dielectric">UK Patent Application GB 2 334 761 A, date of publication 01.09.1999, application No 9809035.0, date of filing 29.04.1998</ref> relative permittivity =38 || 2.45 || 850 || 5900 || 16 || 18.82 ||5640<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Demonstration||TE012 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Nearest possible mode shape according to NASA's COMSOL analysis[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327467#msg1327467]. Also, @TheTraveller reported that Shawyer recommended a TE01p mode for the Flight Thruster. (Where p=3 for the Flight Thruster because it is excited at a higher frequency). Also Prof. Yang reports using TE01p modes, and @TheTraveller reports that Shawyer was an initial advisor. </ref> ||Ambient||0.317 to 0.187 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator Length">The cavity length is estimated as 0.317 to 0.187. The larger number takes into account the full length of the cylindrical part of the EM Drive Demo and the smaller number corresponds only to the length of the truncated cone section. Please notice that the Demo has a variable length actuated by a gear mechanism, in order to tune the cavity to achieve resonance<br />
<br/> <br />
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/images/2008/09/24/emdrive_2.jpg </ref> || 0.28 || 0.14921 ||0.2260 ||0.4241 ||19.28 || 0.844 || None || 2.45 || 421-1200|| 45000 || 102.30 || 80-243 || 23980 - 72830<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Flight Thruster (Boeing project)||TE013<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions">See these posts by TheTraveller on dimensions of the Flight Thruster[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381241#msg1381241] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388018#msg1388018] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388238#msg1388238]. </ref>||Ambient||0.1386 <ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"></ref>||0.2314<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || 0.1257<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> ||0.1764 ||0.3247 ||20.87 || 0.635<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || None || 3.85 ||426 (for Max. Force) ||50,000 to 60,000<ref name="Shawyer Flight Q">Second-hand information: TheTraveller reports that Roger Shawyer communicated this value of Q to him in personal exchanges[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1390437#msg1390437]</ref> || Max=174 ||235-408, Mean=326 ||Mean=97700 <br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, a <ref name="Brady et.al">"Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum" AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, July 28-30, 2014,[[http://libertariannews.org//wp-content//uploads//2014//07//AnomalousThrustProductionFromanRFTestDevice-BradyEtAl.pdf]</ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady">Mode shape is noted as TM211 in Brady et.al.'s report. However, calculations show that TM211 should take place at a significant lower frequency and that this mode must have been TM212. Notice that Brady et.al. b took place practically at the same frequency as [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327177#msg1327177 March TM212 test in vacuum]</ref>||Ambient || 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9326 || 16.9||7320 || 0.0912|| 5.40 || 1620<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, b <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady"/>||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9367 || 16.7|| 18100 || 0.0501|| 3.00 || 899<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, c <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.8804 || 2.6|| 22000 || 0.0554|| 21.3 || 6390<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, p.18, Section IV.F<ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> <ref name="Brady et.al 2"> The Brady et.al. report reads: <<We performed some very early evaluations without the dielectric resonator (TE012 mode at 2168 MHz, with power levels up to ~30 watts) and measured no significant net thrust.>>. The test was performed at the very earliest in Brady et.al.'s testing program. The test was performed without a magnetron, only using the 25W Mini-Circuit Amp, since at the time of this particular test, NASA Eagleworks did not have the PLL circuit running for this data run. Brady et.al. do not provide the Q quality factor of resonance for this test. @TheTraveller made an argument that the test may have been conducted at the wrong (too low) frequency for resonance [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382477#msg1382477] [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1389608#msg1389608].</ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || ||None|| 2.168 || 30|| || 0|| 0 || 0<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. ||TM212 <ref name="Mode Shape verification">This test is the only reported test that has verified the mode shape with experimental measurements. A thermal camera was used that showed the same temperature profile as predicted from induction heating resulting from mode shape TM212</ref> ||5*10^(-6)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9371 || 50|| 6726 || 0.055|| 1.10 || 330<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. reversed 180 degrees [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327012#msg1327012]||TM212 ||5*10^(-4)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9372 || 35|| || 0.0099|| 0.283 || 84<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24 ||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 150||1531<ref name="Q Yang">Q calculated from Fig.5 "frustum microwave cavity actual resonance curve"of "Net thrust measurement of propellantless microwave thrusters", 2011, where Frequency Bandwidth=0.0016GHz, Frequency=2.45 GHz, hence Q=2.45/0.0016=1531. This is the value of Q calculated according to the convention in the West. See definition of quality factor Q [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor#Definition_of_the_quality_factor]. Notice that Prof. Yang reports different values in her tables because of her different convention.</ref>|| 160|| 1070 || 320000<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 300||1531<ref name="Q Yang"></ref>|| 270|| 900|| 270000<br />
|-<br />
|[[Iulian_Berca|Iulian Berca]] Tests 3 & 3.1 (averaged w/up/down directional effects subtracted) <ref>See http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/. Because of the high profile nature of the tests, they are included here merely to give a rough comparison to the more scientifically rigorous tests. The measured thrust in this table is an average of multiple runs in tests 3 and 3.1, subtracting out the likely effects of hot air. @deltaMass calculated the net thrust for the EmDrive across both test. See [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384709#msg1384709].</ref> ||TM212<ref name="Iulian Mode Shape">Iulian Berca used the same dimensions as NASA's truncated cone, but without a dielectric. Mode shape is predicted to be TM 212 according to NASA's COMSOL FEA analysis 2/6/2014 by Frank Davies NASA/JSC/EP5 (2.458 GHz) and to Rodal's exact solution calculation (2.423 GHz). Actual mode participation depends on the spectrum of frequencies excited by the magnetron, the geometrical placement of the RF source in the EM Drive, and the number of eigenfrequencies in and near the magnetron's spectrum </ref> ||Ambient ||0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.1588 ||0.3113 ||0.5477 ||14.78 || 0.515 || None || 2.45 || 800 || || 2.3 || 2.8 || 850<br />
|-<br />
|Baby EM Drive, [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]] ||TE013 ||Ambient||0.02437||0.0296 ||0.01612 ||0.03024 ||0.05552 ||15.46 || 0.7311 ||None|| 24.1 ||0.04 || ||~ 0 ||~ 0 || ~ 0<br />
|-<br />
|Tajmar & Fiedler, Institute of Aerospace Engineering, T. Univ. Dresden (2015)|| unk ||4*10^(-6)||0.0686||0.0451||0.0385|| || || || ||none||2.44||700||50||0.02||0.0285 || 8.54<br />
|-<br />
|California State Univ., Fullerton, Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser - piezoelectric MET thruster<ref>[http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Heidi_Fearn/publication/269207998_Theory_of_a_Mach_Effect_Thruster/links/549b72bf0cf2fedbc30e3d66.pdf][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>||n/a ||Partial Vacuum ? ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a|| n/a|| ||3.93*10^(-5) || 170|| 22000 || 0.002|| 0.01176 || 3.526<br />
|-<br />
|Ad Astra VASIMR VX-200 with argon propellant <ref>Ad Astra VASIMR is not a propellant less rocket, it is a magnetoplasma engine that uses argon propellant, but it is included here for comparison purposes, See:[http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/research-and-development]</ref> ||n/a||Partial Vacuum ?||n/a||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a ||n/a|| n/a ||200,000 ||n/a ||5700 ||28.5 || 8500<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
n/a = Not applicable<br />
<br />
Environmental pressure unit: 1 Torr = <math>\cfrac{1}{760} </math> of a standard atmosphere. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torr]<br />
<br />
Atmospheric pressure in low Earth orbit ("LEO") = 5x10^(-8) to 10^(-10) Torr [http://standards.nasa.gov/documents/viewdoc/3315626/3315626]<br />
<br />
Pressure in outer space between stars in the Milky Way = 10^(-17) Torr [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28pressure%29]<br />
<br />
=== Comparison to a Photon Rocket ===<br />
For a perfectly-collimated beam photon rocket, without the benefits of a resonant optical cavity [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photonic_laser_thruster], for example a military searchlight acting as a photon rocket (see: [http://history.nasa.gov/conghand/propulsn.htm#REF5-29], [http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a473498.pdf] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_photonic_rocket]), the force per power input is as follows:<br />
<br />
'''Photon Rocket Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) = 0.003337'''<br />
<br />
This represents the force/PowerInput exerted by the radiation pressure of light in free space, which is not the same as the forces and momentum imparted to a massive object [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=37642.0;attach=838352]. If the results above are validated, the EM Drive would greatly exceed that ratio. However, this does not imply that an EM Drive could achieve steady constant acceleration for constant power input, as this is prevented by energy conservation (see: [http://emdrive.wiki/Energy_Conservation])<br />
<br />
== Notes and references==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Experimental_Results&diff=1135Experimental Results2015-07-26T17:04:40Z<p>Sfrank: Added data from Tajmar's paper</p>
<hr />
<div>== Forces, Power, Frequency, Mode shapes, Testing Conditions (ambient or partial vacuum) and Dimensions ==<br />
<br />
The current best estimates for the parameters of various test articles run by public research institutions ([[NASA Eagleworks]]), universities (California State Univ., Physics Dept., Fullerton, USA; Northwestern Polytechnical University, College of Aeronautics, Xi'an, China), very small private companies ([[SPR Ltd.]], Cannae LLC.), and independent engineers/researchers, is here, along with the reported forces. Note that complete dimensions are not known in most cases, and some had to be determined via indirect methods (e.g., for Shawyer's Exp. and Demo, from the big diameter and the Design Factor, scaling from photographs, from Yang's frequency vs. dimension figures, etc.). See [[Building]] for details on drives built by do-it-yourselfers.<br />
<br />
Credit to Dr. Rodal and others for the great effort in [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376840#msg1376840 compiling these]. Please note some caveats for this data, at that link.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! style="text-align:left;"| Description|| Mode Shape<ref name="mode shape definition">Mode shapes for the EM Drive truncated cone geometry are given according to the closest mode shape for a cylindrical geometry, instead of given by the eigenparameters of the truncated cone eigensolution (for example, using the wavenumber). The reason for this is two fold: 1) There is no standard convention on how to number mode shapes for a truncated cone, and 2) the truncated cone geometry used by the EM Drive researchers has been close to a cylinder: the cone angles have been relatively small. Therefore the mode shapes resemble those of a cylinder. TM means "transverse magnetic": a mode shape where the magnetic field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the electric field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. TE stands for "transverse electric": a mode shape where the electric field is in the azimuthal, solenoidal direction and the magnetic field is in the transverse and longitudinal direction. The subscripts m,n,p in TMmnp and TEmnp, stand for the mode shape quantum numbers in the azimuthal (m), transverse (n) and longitudinal (p) directions respectively.</ref> ||Pressure (Torr)<ref name="ambient pressure">This field denotes whether the test was performed in ambient conditions (hence the field labeled as "Ambient") or in a partial vacuum. When the researcher has provided the pressure in the partial vacuum condition, this is given in the units of Torrs.</ref> || Cavity Length (m) || big diameter (m) || small diameter (m) || sphrcl. r1 (m)<ref name="Spherical geometry">The cavity dimensions in a spherical coordinate system as shown here:<br />
<br/><br />
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/SCIENCE/Cavity/CavityShape.gif<br />
<br/><br />
The bases of the truncated cone used in the experiments are flat, so in the spherical geometry the flat base is described by the secant to the circular arcs joining the intersections between the circular arcs and the lateral walls of the cone. </ref> || sphrcl. r2 (m) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref>||cone 1/2 angle (deg) <ref name="Spherical geometry"></ref> ||Shawyer Design Factor<ref name="design factor">Shawyer's Design Factor, when not provided independently (for example by Shawyer in his pubblications) was calculated for cavities without dielectric inserts with TM010 as the cutoff frequency for TM01p modes, with TE010 for TE01p modes and TM210 for TM21p modes. For cavities with a dielectric insert it is not calculated.</ref> || Dielectric || Frequency (GHz) || Input Power (W) || Q <ref name="Q">Quality factor of resonance: a dimensionless measure inverse to damping: the higher the Q, the lower the damping. Infinite Q corresponds to zero damping. Critical damping occurs for a value of Q = 1/2.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor]</ref> || Force (mN) || Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) ||Force/Power Multiple of Photon Rocket<br />
|-<br />
|Cannae LLC, G. Fetta, Superconducting<ref name="Cannae">Test conducted in January 2011 by G. Fetta, with a completely different shape from the other EM Drives: this is not a truncated cone, but instead it is shaped like a pillbox with a circular cross-section. Results were posted in the Cannae webpages. Page is no longer available, but an archived version as of 2 November 2012 is available at archive.org:[http://web.archive.org/web/20121102082714/http://www.cannae.com/proof-of-concept/experimental-results]. A better description is available in this US Patent Application [http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US20140013724.pdf]</ref>|| ||Ambient|| 0.03 || 0.220 || 0.200 ||0.316 ||0.348 ||18.43 ||n/a || None || 1.047 || 10.5 || 1.1*10^7 || 8-10 || 761.9 - 952.4 || 228400 - 285500<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Experimental||TM01p <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Based on Shawyer's patent applications and papers at the time or prior to the time of this Experimental test, and the fact that it used a dielectric that could benefit from an axial electric field, it looks like the mode shape for this test may have been TM01p where the value of p is unknown. This is also supported by the Design Factor reported by Shawyer as only 0.497 which appears to be based on TM010 cut-off, as a TE010 cutoff would result in a higher Design Factor based on the published photographs and therefore the relative dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive. Depending on the size and location of the dielectric, but most likely p was either 2 or 3 based on the dimensions of the Experimental EM Drive</ref> ||Ambient|| 0.156 || 0.16 || 0.1025|| 0.2828||0.4414 ||10.44 || 0.497 ||<ref name="Shawyer Dielectric">UK Patent Application GB 2 334 761 A, date of publication 01.09.1999, application No 9809035.0, date of filing 29.04.1998</ref> relative permittivity =38 || 2.45 || 850 || 5900 || 16 || 18.82 ||5640<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Demonstration||TE012 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator">Nearest possible mode shape according to NASA's COMSOL analysis[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327467#msg1327467]. Also, @TheTraveller reported that Shawyer recommended a TE01p mode for the Flight Thruster. (Where p=3 for the Flight Thruster because it is excited at a higher frequency). Also Prof. Yang reports using TE01p modes, and @TheTraveller reports that Shawyer was an initial advisor. </ref> ||Ambient||0.317 to 0.187 <ref name="Shawyer Demonstrator Length">The cavity length is estimated as 0.317 to 0.187. The larger number takes into account the full length of the cylindrical part of the EM Drive Demo and the smaller number corresponds only to the length of the truncated cone section. Please notice that the Demo has a variable length actuated by a gear mechanism, in order to tune the cavity to achieve resonance<br />
<br/> <br />
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/images/2008/09/24/emdrive_2.jpg </ref> || 0.28 || 0.14921 ||0.2260 ||0.4241 ||19.28 || 0.844 || None || 2.45 || 421-1200|| 45000 || 102.30 || 80-243 || 23980 - 72830<br />
|-<br />
|SPR Ltd, R. Shawyer, Flight Thruster (Boeing project)||TE013<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions">See these posts by TheTraveller on dimensions of the Flight Thruster[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381241#msg1381241] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388018#msg1388018] and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1388238#msg1388238]. </ref>||Ambient||0.1386 <ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"></ref>||0.2314<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || 0.1257<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> ||0.1764 ||0.3247 ||20.87 || 0.635<ref name="Shawyer Flight Thruster Dimensions"> </ref> || None || 3.85 ||426 (for Max. Force) ||50,000 to 60,000<ref name="Shawyer Flight Q">Second-hand information: TheTraveller reports that Roger Shawyer communicated this value of Q to him in personal exchanges[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1390437#msg1390437]</ref> || Max=174 ||235-408, Mean=326 ||Mean=97700 <br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, a <ref name="Brady et.al">"Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum" AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, July 28-30, 2014,[[http://libertariannews.org//wp-content//uploads//2014//07//AnomalousThrustProductionFromanRFTestDevice-BradyEtAl.pdf]</ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady">Mode shape is noted as TM211 in Brady et.al.'s report. However, calculations show that TM211 should take place at a significant lower frequency and that this mode must have been TM212. Notice that Brady et.al. b took place practically at the same frequency as [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327177#msg1327177 March TM212 test in vacuum]</ref>||Ambient || 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9326 || 16.9||7320 || 0.0912|| 5.40 || 1620<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, b <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> ||TM212 <ref name="brady"/>||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9367 || 16.7|| 18100 || 0.0501|| 3.00 || 899<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, c <ref name="Brady et.al"></ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.8804 || 2.6|| 22000 || 0.0554|| 21.3 || 6390<br />
|-<br />
|NASA Brady, White, March, Lawrence, and Davies, p.18, Section IV.F<ref name="Brady et.al"></ref> <ref name="Brady et.al 2"> The Brady et.al. report reads: <<We performed some very early evaluations without the dielectric resonator (TE012 mode at 2168 MHz, with power levels up to ~30 watts) and measured no significant net thrust.>>. The test was performed at the very earliest in Brady et.al.'s testing program. The test was performed without a magnetron, only using the 25W Mini-Circuit Amp, since at the time of this particular test, NASA Eagleworks did not have the PLL circuit running for this data run. Brady et.al. do not provide the Q quality factor of resonance for this test. @TheTraveller made an argument that the test may have been conducted at the wrong (too low) frequency for resonance [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382477#msg1382477] [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1389608#msg1389608].</ref>||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || ||None|| 2.168 || 30|| || 0|| 0 || 0<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. ||TM212 <ref name="Mode Shape verification">This test is the only reported test that has verified the mode shape with experimental measurements. A thermal camera was used that showed the same temperature profile as predicted from induction heating resulting from mode shape TM212</ref> ||5*10^(-6)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9371 || 50|| 6726 || 0.055|| 1.10 || 330<br />
|-<br />
|NASA March et.al. reversed 180 degrees [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327012#msg1327012]||TM212 ||5*10^(-4)|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 ||0.3111 || 0.5475||14.78 || || extruded HDPE relative permitt. =2.26@1-3GHz|| 1.9372 || 35|| || 0.0099|| 0.283 || 84<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24 ||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 150||1531<ref name="Q Yang">Q calculated from Fig.5 "frustum microwave cavity actual resonance curve"of "Net thrust measurement of propellantless microwave thrusters", 2011, where Frequency Bandwidth=0.0016GHz, Frequency=2.45 GHz, hence Q=2.45/0.0016=1531. This is the value of Q calculated according to the convention in the West. See definition of quality factor Q [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor#Definition_of_the_quality_factor]. Notice that Prof. Yang reports different values in her tables because of her different convention.</ref>|| 160|| 1070 || 320000<br />
|-<br />
|NWPU Prof. Juan Yang et.al.[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1331771#msg1331771]||TE012 ||Ambient|| 0.24||0.201 ||0.1492 ||0.6953 ||0.9367 ||6.159 || 0.664 ||None|| 2.45 || 300||1531<ref name="Q Yang"></ref>|| 270|| 900|| 270000<br />
|-<br />
|[[Iulian_Berca|Iulian Berca]] Tests 3 & 3.1 (averaged w/up/down directional effects subtracted) <ref>See http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/. Because of the high profile nature of the tests, they are included here merely to give a rough comparison to the more scientifically rigorous tests. The measured thrust in this table is an average of multiple runs in tests 3 and 3.1, subtracting out the likely effects of hot air. @deltaMass calculated the net thrust for the EmDrive across both test. See [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384709#msg1384709].</ref> ||TM212<ref name="Iulian Mode Shape">Iulian Berca used the same dimensions as NASA's truncated cone, but without a dielectric. Mode shape is predicted to be TM 212 according to NASA's COMSOL FEA analysis 2/6/2014 by Frank Davies NASA/JSC/EP5 (2.458 GHz) and to Rodal's exact solution calculation (2.423 GHz). Actual mode participation depends on the spectrum of frequencies excited by the magnetron, the geometrical placement of the RF source in the EM Drive, and the number of eigenfrequencies in and near the magnetron's spectrum </ref> ||Ambient ||0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.1588 ||0.3113 ||0.5477 ||14.78 || 0.515 || None || 2.45 || 800 || || 2.3 || 2.8 || 850<br />
|-<br />
|Baby EM Drive, [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]] ||TE013 ||Ambient||0.02437||0.0296 ||0.01612 ||0.03024 ||0.05552 ||15.46 || 0.7311 ||None|| 24.1 ||0.04 || ||~ 0 ||~ 0 || ~ 0<br />
|-<br />
|Tajmar & Fiedler, Institute of Aerospace Engineering, T. Univ. Dresden (2015)|| unk ||4*10^(-6)||0.0686||0.0451||0.0385|| || || || ||none||2.44||700||50||0.02||0.0285 ||<br />
|-<br />
|California State Univ., Fullerton, Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser - piezoelectric MET thruster<ref>[http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Heidi_Fearn/publication/269207998_Theory_of_a_Mach_Effect_Thruster/links/549b72bf0cf2fedbc30e3d66.pdf][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>||n/a ||Partial Vacuum ? ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a|| n/a|| ||3.93*10^(-5) || 170|| 22000 || 0.002|| 0.01176 || 3.526<br />
|-<br />
|Ad Astra VASIMR VX-200 with argon propellant <ref>Ad Astra VASIMR is not a propellant less rocket, it is a magnetoplasma engine that uses argon propellant, but it is included here for comparison purposes, See:[http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/research-and-development]</ref> ||n/a||Partial Vacuum ?||n/a||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a ||n/a || n/a ||n/a|| n/a ||200,000 ||n/a ||5700 ||28.5 || 8500<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
n/a = Not applicable<br />
<br />
Environmental pressure unit: 1 Torr = <math>\cfrac{1}{760} </math> of a standard atmosphere. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torr]<br />
<br />
Atmospheric pressure in low Earth orbit ("LEO") = 5x10^(-8) to 10^(-10) Torr [http://standards.nasa.gov/documents/viewdoc/3315626/3315626]<br />
<br />
Pressure in outer space between stars in the Milky Way = 10^(-17) Torr [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28pressure%29]<br />
<br />
=== Comparison to a Photon Rocket ===<br />
For a perfectly-collimated beam photon rocket, without the benefits of a resonant optical cavity [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photonic_laser_thruster], for example a military searchlight acting as a photon rocket (see: [http://history.nasa.gov/conghand/propulsn.htm#REF5-29], [http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a473498.pdf] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_photonic_rocket]), the force per power input is as follows:<br />
<br />
'''Photon Rocket Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) = 0.003337'''<br />
<br />
This represents the force/PowerInput exerted by the radiation pressure of light in free space, which is not the same as the forces and momentum imparted to a massive object [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=37642.0;attach=838352]. If the results above are validated, the EM Drive would greatly exceed that ratio. However, this does not imply that an EM Drive could achieve steady constant acceleration for constant power input, as this is prevented by energy conservation (see: [http://emdrive.wiki/Energy_Conservation])<br />
<br />
== Notes and references==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=List_of_Suggested_Experiments&diff=1014List of Suggested Experiments2015-07-08T13:42:37Z<p>Sfrank: /* Design/Shape Modifications */</p>
<hr />
<div>This page compiles suggestions for as-yet untested variations in experiment designs for EmDrive testing. When possible, links to the original suggestion and a brief description of the justification for this test are provided.<br />
<br />
Note: For purposes of this list, the baseline for experimentation is considered to be a copper frustum with either a magnetron or coaxial RF feed operated at approximately 2.45Ghz, similar to Shawyer's Feasability Study<br />
<br />
== Design/Shape Modifications == <br />
# Replace solid endplates with a circular grid design similar to the endplates used by Cullen in his 1950's waveguide experiments,<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370479#msg1370479 Forum post by Rodal]</ref> or a mesh as the one used for the glass windows in home-microwave-ovens, having a spacing between mesh or grids small enough such that only wavelengths smaller than that can get through.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376108#msg1376108 Forum post by demofsky]</ref> Purpose: to allow convection through the frustum, eliminate buoyancy, thermal jet effects, natural thermal convection currents, and other gas effects.<br />
# Place [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet) ferrite beads] in the frustum, either one large one next to an endplate or a pattern of them along a line in the longitudinal direction. Purpose: to increase attenuation gradient in TE modes, having an axial magnetic field.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380265#msg1380265 Forum post by Rodal] summarizing several prior posts.</ref><br />
# Build Large end plate out of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29#Values_for_some_common_materials Metglas] or a similar material with high magnetic permeability like cast iron or any ferrite.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381091#msg1381091 Forum post by Flyby] referencing earlier posts.</ref> Purpose: to test de Aquino's conjecture regarding the effect of power dissipation at the end faces of the truncated cone.<br />
# Place a ruby inside near one of the ends to emit at 2.4 GHz as used in solid state Masers.<br />
# Fill the frustum with ammonia gas to emit at 24GHz. Purpose: To produce maser-like amplification inside the frustum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379801#msg1379801 Forum post by aero], in response to [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379763#msg1379763 Rodal's explanation of the history of maser development].</ref> '''Warning:''' If using ammonia, please follow [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#Safety_precautions appropriate safety procedures][https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/emergency/chemical_terrorism/ammonia_tech.htm][http://chemm.nlm.nih.gov/ammonia_hospital_mmg.htm].<br />
# Place a dielectric next to the Small end, as done by NASA Eagleworks, who found extruded HDPE to be slightly better than extruded PTFE. Do not use molded (instead of extruded) polymers. NASA Eagleworks found that Neoprene rubber performed poorly as a dielectric in the EM Drive, as it resulted in considerably less thrust.<br />
# Separate resonance and attenuation chambers. Purpose: Proposed by WarpTech as a test of [[Todd Desiato (@WarpTech)'s PV Model Theory| his theory]].<br />
# Apply a silver or gold coating to the inside of a copper frustum. Purpose: The increase microwave reflectivity, and therefore increase Q factor.<br />
# Measure the force on two cylindrical resonant wave guides (lowest transverse electric mode) tuned to resonate at the same frequency (one is adjustable) with their flat plates separated by a quarter wavelength. The current in cavity one is out of phase with cavity two by 90 degrees. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1375365#msg1375365 Forum post by dustinthewind], A suggested experiment.</ref><br />
# Test a pillbox-shaped cavity similar to the Cannae drive and compare results to an EmDrive frustum tested with the same experimental setup.<br />
# Place two vent tubes for heated expanding air that bisect equal volumes on the resonating cavity. When air heats up it is exhausted perpendicular to thrust and displaces air volume equally so as to eliminate thrust from pressure gradients. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1385064#msg1385064 Forum post by dustinthewind], A suggested experiment modification</ref><br />
# Test the EmDrive's inertial reaction to an outside force by using a known mass on to pull agains the EmDrive while it is powered.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1387190#msg1387190 Forum post by arc]</ref><br />
# Test the EmDrive at both 50hz and 60Hz duty cycles for the Rf input, as well as a 100% on duty cycle.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1401341#msg1401341 Forum post by TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# Link two magnetrons together in a "slaved" configuration to amplify the Rf signal to an EmDrive.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1401433#msg1401433 Forum post by ElizabethGreene]</ref><br />
<br />
== Experimental Measurement Setups ==<br />
# Use smokesticks to test for out-gassing and hot air jets from the frustum<ref>Credit to @Seeshells</ref><br />
# Test on a zero-g simulator flight.<br />
# Cavendish Pendulum<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20080508011932/http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2005/2005-07-01/feature1/index.html</ref><br />
# At a set power measure the force at resonance, then vary the frequency slightly and see if force rises as resonance drops. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382660#msg1382660 Forum post by dustinthewind] Stated as a question.</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=List_of_Suggested_Experiments&diff=710List of Suggested Experiments2015-06-10T15:18:32Z<p>Sfrank: /* Design/Shape Modifications */</p>
<hr />
<div>This page compiles suggestions for as-yet untested variations in experiment designs for EmDrive testing. When possible, links to the original suggestion and a brief description of the justification for this test are provided.<br />
<br />
Note: For purposes of this list, the baseline for experimentation is considered to be a copper frustum with either a magnetron or coaxial RF feed operated at approximately 2.45Ghz, similar to Shawyer's Feasability Study<br />
<br />
== Design/Shape Modifications == <br />
# Replace solid endplates with a circular grid design similar to the endplates used by Cullen in his 1950's waveguide experiments,<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370479#msg1370479 Forum post by Rodal]</ref> or a mesh as the one used for the glass windows in home-microwave-ovens, having a spacing between mesh or grids small enough such that only wavelengths smaller than that can get through.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376108#msg1376108 Forum post by demofsky]</ref> Purpose: to allow convection through the frustum, eliminate buoyancy, thermal jet effects, natural thermal convection currents, and other gas effects.<br />
# Place [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet) ferrite beads] in the frustum, either one large one next to an endplate or a pattern of them along a line in the longitudinal direction. Purpose: to increase attenuation gradient in TE modes, having an axial magnetic field.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380265#msg1380265 Forum post by Rodal] summarizing several prior posts.</ref><br />
# Build Large end plate out of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29#Values_for_some_common_materials Metglas] or a similar material with high magnetic permeability like cast iron or any ferrite.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381091#msg1381091 Forum post by Flyby] referencing earlier posts.</ref> Purpose: to test de Aquino's conjecture regarding the effect of power dissipation at the end faces of the truncated cone.<br />
# Place a ruby inside near one of the ends to emit at 2.4 GHz as used in solid state Masers.<br />
# Fill the frustum with ammonia gas to emit at 24GHz. Purpose: To produce maser-like amplification inside the frustum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379801#msg1379801 Forum post by aero], in response to [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379763#msg1379763 Rodal's explanation of the history of maser development].</ref> '''Warning:''' If using ammonia, please follow [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#Safety_precautions appropriate safety procedures][https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/emergency/chemical_terrorism/ammonia_tech.htm][http://chemm.nlm.nih.gov/ammonia_hospital_mmg.htm].<br />
# Place a dielectric next to the Small end, as done by NASA Eagleworks, who found extruded HDPE to be slightly better than extruded PTFE. Do not use molded (instead of extruded) polymers. NASA Eagleworks found that Neoprene rubber performed poorly as a dielectric in the EM Drive, as it resulted in considerably less thrust.<br />
# Separate resonance and attenuation chambers. Purpose: Proposed by WarpTech as a test of [[Todd Desiato (@WarpTech)'s PV Model Theory| his theory]].<br />
# Apply a silver or gold coating to the inside of a copper frustum. Purpose: The increase microwave reflectivity, and therefore increase Q factor.<br />
# Measure the force on two cylindrical resonant wave guides (lowest transverse electric mode) tuned to resonate at the same frequency (one is adjustable) with their flat plates separated by a quarter wavelength. The current in cavity one is out of phase with cavity two by 90 degrees. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1375365#msg1375365 Forum post by dustinthewind], A suggested experiment.</ref><br />
# Test a pillbox-shaped cavity similar to the Cannae drive and compare results to an EmDrive frustum tested with the same experimental setup.<br />
# Place two vent tubes for heated expanding air that bisect equal volumes on the resonating cavity. When air heats up it is exhausted perpendicular to thrust and displaces air volume equally so as to eliminate thrust from pressure gradients. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1385064#msg1385064 Forum post by dustinthewind], A suggested experiment modification</ref><br />
# Test the EmDrive's inertial reaction to an outside force by using a known mass on to pull agains the EmDrive while it is powered.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1387190#msg1387190 Forum post by arc]</ref><br />
<br />
== Experimental Measurement Setups ==<br />
# Use smokesticks to test for out-gassing and hot air jets from the frustum<ref>Credit to @Seeshells</ref><br />
# Test on a zero-g simulator flight.<br />
# Cavendish Pendulum<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20080508011932/http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2005/2005-07-01/feature1/index.html</ref><br />
# At a set power measure the force at resonance, then vary the frequency slightly and see if force rises as resonance drops. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382660#msg1382660 Forum post by dustinthewind] Stated as a question.</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Iulian_Berca&diff=669Iulian Berca2015-06-08T19:33:33Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>Romanian electrical engineer Iulian Berca began EmDrive experiments in May, 2015. After the invention of the EM Drive by Roger Shawyer, Iulan Berca was the first independent engineer to fabricate a working EmDrive and successfully record force from the device.<br />
<br />
== Experimental Setup ==<br />
Iulian Berca built a copper frustum with dimensions similar to the device tested by NASA Eagleworks in 2014 and 2015. He powered this device with a 800-1200W magnetron directly inserted into the frustum. He originally tested this in a horizontal orientation suspended from fishing line, hoping to visually detect thrust. He then changed his testing setup to hang the frustum from a balance arm resting on a microgram scale. Thrust was then detected based on changes in the weight measured by the scale.<br />
<br />
== Test Results ==<br />
<br />
Berca's first two tests were inconclusive, as thrust was not visually detectable. In test #3, thrust was detected with the frustum's direction of motion oriented up (small end up). In test 3.1 he reversed the orientation (small end down) and again detected thrust.<br />
<br />
On the forum a number of [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384716#msg1384716 possible error sources] have been mentioned, that could affect these results. They include:<br />
<br />
* Material ablation/ejection<br />
* Thermal convection outside of the cavity from heated walls<br />
* The force of the spring on Iulian's torque arm<br />
* Accumulating errors in the digital scale from rf exposure<br />
* Thermal buckling causing a shift in the COM<br />
* Forces between wires connected to the frustum and wires that are not<br />
<br />
<br />
Also see [[Possible_Error_Sources]] for general EM Drive discussion of error sources, not specific to this particular setup.<br />
<br />
== Future Plans ==<br />
<br />
Berca is currently modifying the frustum to include an adjustable plate on the small end similar to Shawyer's demonstration unit (though without the motor; adjustments will be made manually). He will then retest multiple times to find what length provides optimal thrust.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Todd_Desiato_(@WarpTech)%27s_Evanescent_Wave_Theory&diff=668Todd Desiato (@WarpTech)'s Evanescent Wave Theory2015-06-08T19:32:42Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Summary == <br />
Todd Desiato (@WarpTech on Nasaspaceflight forums) has put forth a theory that explains the EMDrive's thrust as a result of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizable_vacuum Polzarizable Vacuum] model of General Relativity. <br />
<br />
== Explanation of the Polarizable Vaccuum Model ==<br />
The PV Model was developed by Harold Puthoff as an alternative explanation of gravity and electromagnetism. It is a scalar theory of gravity, which posits that spacetime has a refractive index, much like glass, and that the presence of mass causes spacetime to refract energy, resulting in gravity.<br />
<br />
== Application of Theory to the EmDrive ==<br />
According to @WarpTech, the EMDrive function mimics this refraction, but only across the specific wavelengths that correspond to its internal geometry. As microwave energy builds within the frustum, the energy becomes concentrated at the larger end. Because the energy density is not evenly distributed, the refractive index has a gradient from the big end to the small end. This mimics gravity at the wavelength of microwaves. As the microwaves "fall" towards the small end, their wavelengths are attenuated and momentum is absorbed by the frustum as the group velocity goes to zero near the small end. The result is propultion in the direction of the small end of the frustum.<br />
<br />
On 6/6/15 @WarpTech published the following papers to the NSF forum<ref>http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1385719#msg1385719</ref>:<br />
* [[File:Desiato-EM_Drive_Mechanism-v2.pdf]] which proposes an explanation of the underlying mechanism.<br />
* [[File:Desiato-Energy Paradox Resolution.pdf]] which deals with the [[Energy Conservation]] objections.<br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
There is not yet enough experimental data to validate @WarpTech's theory. Additional data, particularly from superconducting EmDrive experiements, may result in data that is relevant to validating or disproving this theory.<br />
<br />
== Predictions and Evidence ==<br />
Notably, it is solely the geometry of the frustum that is relevant to this effect under @WarpTech's theory. A higher power level or higher Q would not result in higher thrust. The Q factor is only relevant as a measure of the stored amount of energy. The frustum itself does not need to resonate, and to this end, @WarpTech has proposed decoupling the resonance chamber from the attenuation chamber. He suggests a design where resonance is induced in a long cylindrical waveguide, then energy is periodically dumped into a frustum to attenuate. So far this design has not been tested. See [[List of Suggested Experiments]]<br />
<br />
Another interesting consequence of @WarpTech's theory is that the EmDrive must be considered a Warp Drive. However, because the warp effect is limited to a portion of the EM spectrum (with frequency corresponding to the size of the frustum), the effect would not be detectable via the laser warp interferometer employed by NASA EagleWorks, as the distortion would occur at microwave wavelengths. This prediction appears to be in conflict with the report of a positive distortion by the laser interferometer at EagleWorks. However, it remains to be seen if the interferometer test can be reproduced, especially in a vacuum. Also, it is unclear if according to @WarpTech's theory the EmDrive could theoretically be used for faster than light travel.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=List_of_Suggested_Experiments&diff=667List of Suggested Experiments2015-06-08T19:31:24Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page compiles suggestions for as-yet untested variations in experiment designs for EmDrive testing. When possible, links to the original suggestion and a brief description of the justification for this test are provided.<br />
<br />
Note: For purposes of this list, the baseline for experimentation is considered to be a copper frustum with either a magnetron or coaxial RF feed operated at approximately 2.45Ghz, similar to Shawyer's Feasability Study<br />
<br />
== Design/Shape Modifications == <br />
# Replace solid endplates with a circular grid design similar to the endplates used by Cullen in his 1950's waveguide experiments,<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370479#msg1370479 Forum post by Rodal]</ref> or a mesh as the one used for the glass windows in home-microwave-ovens, having a spacing between mesh or grids small enough such that only wavelengths smaller than that can get through.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376108#msg1376108 Forum post by demofsky]</ref> Purpose: to allow convection through the frustum, eliminate buoyancy, thermal jet effects, natural thermal convection currents, and other gas effects.<br />
# Place [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet) ferrite beads] in the frustum, either one large one next to an endplate or a pattern of them along a line in the longitudinal direction. Purpose: to increase attenuation gradient in TE modes, having an axial magnetic field.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380265#msg1380265 Forum post by Rodal] summarizing several prior posts.</ref><br />
# Build Large end plate out of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29#Values_for_some_common_materials Metglas] or a similar material with high magnetic permeability like cast iron or any ferrite.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381091#msg1381091 Forum post by Flyby] referencing earlier posts.</ref> Purpose: to test de Aquino's conjecture regarding the effect of power dissipation at the end faces of the truncated cone.<br />
# Place a ruby inside near one of the ends to emit at 2.4 GHz as used in solid state Masers.<br />
# Fill the frustum with ammonia gas to emit at 24GHz. Purpose: To produce maser-like amplification inside the frustum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379801#msg1379801 Forum post by aero], in response to [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379763#msg1379763 Rodal's explanation of the history of maser development].</ref> '''Warning:''' If using ammonia, please follow [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#Safety_precautions appropriate safety procedures][https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/emergency/chemical_terrorism/ammonia_tech.htm][http://chemm.nlm.nih.gov/ammonia_hospital_mmg.htm].<br />
# Place a dielectric next to the Small end, as done by NASA Eagleworks, who found extruded HDPE to be slightly better than extruded PTFE. Do not use molded (instead of extruded) polymers. NASA Eagleworks found that Neoprene rubber performed poorly as a dielectric in the EM Drive, as it resulted in considerably less thrust.<br />
# Separate resonance and attenuation chambers. Purpose: Proposed by WarpTech as a test of [[Todd Desiato (@WarpTech)'s PV Model Theory| his theory]].<br />
# Apply a silver or gold coating to the inside of a copper frustum. Purpose: The increase microwave reflectivity, and therefore increase Q factor.<br />
# Measure the force on two cylindrical resonant wave guides (lowest transverse electric mode) tuned to resonate at the same frequency (one is adjustable) with their flat plates separated by a quarter wavelength. The current in cavity one is out of phase with cavity two by 90 degrees. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1375365#msg1375365 Forum post by dustinthewind], A suggested experiment.</ref><br />
# Test a pillbox-shaped cavity similar to the Cannae drive and compare results to an EmDrive frustum tested with the same experimental setup.<br />
# Place two vent tubes for heated expanding air that bisect equal volumes on the resonating cavity. When air heats up it is exhausted perpendicular to thrust and displaces air volume equally so as to eliminate thrust from pressure gradients. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1385064#msg1385064 Forum post by dustinthewind], A suggested experiment modification</ref><br />
<br />
== Experimental Measurement Setups ==<br />
# Use smokesticks to test for out-gassing and hot air jets from the frustum<ref>Credit to @Seeshells</ref><br />
# Test on a zero-g simulator flight.<br />
# Cavendish Pendulum<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20080508011932/http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2005/2005-07-01/feature1/index.html</ref><br />
# At a set power measure the force at resonance, then vary the frequency slightly and see if force rises as resonance drops. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382660#msg1382660 Forum post by dustinthewind] Stated as a question.</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Mike_McCulloch%27s_MiHsC_Theory&diff=666Mike McCulloch's MiHsC Theory2015-06-08T19:30:34Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>Mike McCulloch's theory is that the EmDrive thrust results from an internal pressure differential in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_effect Unruh Radiation.]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1319944#msg1319944 Rodal on McCulloch's theory.]</ref><ref>[http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-3d.html 13/2/15 post by Mike McCulloch, MiHsC vs Emdrive: 3d]</ref><ref>[http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2015/PP-40-15.PDF McCulloch, M.E., 2015. Can the emdrive be explained by quantised inertia? Progress in Physics, 11, 1, 78-80]</ref> See also: http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/<br />
<br />
== Explanation of MiHsC Theory ==<br />
<br />
Modification of inertia by a Hubble-scale Casimir effect, or MiHsC, is a theory developed by Mike McCulloch, a physicist at Plymouth University in Plymouth, England. The theory attempts to explain the cause of inertia, which is not completely explained by general and special relativity. MiHsC theory relies on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach%27s_principle Mach's Principle], which states that distant objects can influence inertial mass. But there is a boundary as to how far away the objects influencing inertia can be. This boundary is the point at which light (and therefore any information) will never be able to reach an object because universal expansion outpaces the speed of light. Anything beyond this point (called the Rindler event horizon) is outside the observable universe and therefore can't effect the object at the center of the Rindler space. MiHsC further posits that the Rindler event horizon is effectively the same as a black hole's event horizon. At a black hole's event horizon, quantum virtual particle pairs are occasionally separated by gravity resulting in particle emissions known as Hawking Radiation. For a Rindler horizon, a similar radiation is suspected to exist called [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_effect Unruh radiation]. MiHsC posts that Unruh radiation causes inertia. As a particle accelerates, the Rindler information horizon expands in the direction of acceleration, and contracts behind it. This results in a pressure differential in the Unruh radiation experienced by the accelerating object. More Unruh radiation hits the object from the direction of acceleration, resulting in the effect we observe as inertia. In addition to explaining the EmDrive's motion without violating Conservation of Momentum, MiHsC theory also notably resolves the observed discrepancies in galactic rotation and cosmological expansion without the need for dark matter or dark energy.<br />
<br />
== Application to EmDrive == <br />
<br />
In the case of the EmDrive, the metal walls act as the event horizon for Unruh radiation created within the cavity. The wavelengths of this radiation are normally light-years across, but inside the EmDrive they are compressed to roughly the size of the EmDrive. Fewer Unruh waves will fit at the small end of the frustum, resulting in a pressure differential. Photons at the larger end therefore have a higher inertial mass, and to conserve momentum in our reference frame, its frame, the cavity, must move towards the narrow end. The predicted thrust is, approximately, for a truncated cone cavity:<br />
<br />
F = P Q L/c * (1/Ds - 1/Db)<br />
<br />
where c is the speed of light in the medium inside the cavity (m/s), P is input power (Watts), Q is the quality factor of the resonance, L is the cavity length (meters), Ds is the small end diameter (meters) and Db the big end diameter (meters).<br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
<br />
Dr. McCulloch is still refining his theory with respect to the EmDrive and intends to publish additional papers which may include testable predictions for the EmDrive.<br />
<br />
== Predictions & Evidence ==<br />
<br />
The derivation & comparisons with the data are given in this paper: [http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2015/PP-40-15.PDF Can the Emdrive Be Explained by Quantised Inertia?] The predictions are in rough agreement with the observed thrust of various experiments. Further testing is necessary to exclude environmental artifacts.<br />
<br />
MiHsC predicts that thrust can be increased by increasing either the input power, Q factor, taper of the cone, or use of a dielectric. In addition, by changing the cavity's aspect ratio (and the input Rf frequency to maintain resonance) it should be possible to cause the Unruh radiation to better fit in the small end than the large. This would result in thrust in the opposite direction.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Building&diff=665Building2015-06-08T17:21:55Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page will collect any photos, plans, and instructions for do-it-yourselfers. Efforts with enough documentation will be provided their own pages.<br />
<br />
# [[Mulletron's Build]]<br />
# Kurt Zeller (@zellerium) and Brian Kraft from Cal Poly are starting a build as well, using a constant cross-section cavity containing a polymer dielectric.<ref>[https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1368153#msg1368153 Forum post by @zellerium]</ref><br />
# @DIYFan - TBD<br />
# [[@Notsosureofit is planning testing with a Gunn diode]].<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370647#msg1370647 Later forum post by @Rodal, can't find original post]</ref><br />
# @TheTraveller<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370597#msg1370597 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# [[Iulian Berca|@Iulian Berca]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371164#msg1371164 Forum post by @Iulian Berca]</ref> - Fabricated a drive in May 2015 and was posting videos at [http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/ his website]. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ Test 3] he reported a force measurement toward "the small end" and later a smaller measurement in the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI reverse orientation in test 3.1]. As of 5/21/15 the magnitude and significance of these measurements were being debated on the [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377695#msg1377695 NSF forum].<br />
# @SeeShells plans to build a hexagonal frustum out of copper mesh. The small end plate will be adjustable via a stepper motor.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1385165#msg1385165 Forum post by @SeeShells]</ref><br />
# @R. W. Keyes / Andromeda Research - high power, 1-20KW magnetron, superconductor Magnesium diboride on silicon carbide, to start summer 2015<br />
# [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1372073#msg1372073 Forum post by Hackaday.io]</ref> - Building the original 2.45 GHz thruster according to the Chinese paper and their own 24 GHz design simultaneously, with estimated completion date of July 2015. See [https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive Hackaday project] for more details, as well as [http://n-o-d-e.net/post/119343131451/building-a-diy-emdrive an interview with Paul].<br />
# Dave Distler (@rmfwguy) plans to use a wifi router as Rf source, copper mesh for the frustum body, and no dielectric in the frustum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1383098#msg1383098 Initial forum post by rmfwguy], with a later update on 6/3/13 and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384292#msg1384292 link to a PDF overview].</ref><br />
# @DrBagelBites posted on reddit that he was planning on starting a build.<ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/comments/38q7m9/going_to_build_an_emdrive_update/ Post by @DrBagelBites on reddit]</ref><br />
# @kml Testing a non-tapered rectangular waveguide with various dielectrics inserted at one end.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380174#msg1380174 post by @kml]</ref><br />
# Others?<br />
<br />
== Modelling ==<br />
@phaseshift has built a SketchUp model<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380107#msg1380107 post by @phaseshift]</ref> ([[File:EM_Thruster.skp]]) of a frustum based on the estimated Shawyer Flight Thruster dimensions.<br />
<br />
@TheTraveller constructed a [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MyR1I2TzlOBXV7xnsxw32UGm7-JxbDIkNViC5F09rGU/edit#gid=1647834149 spreadsheet] to model thrust given various design parameters.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382349#msg1382349 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref> This model was built with some input from Roger Shawyer directly.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Building&diff=656Building2015-06-08T13:41:43Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page will collect any photos, plans, and instructions for do-it-yourselfers. Efforts with enough documentation will be provided their own pages.<br />
<br />
# [[Mulletron's Build]]<br />
# Kurt Zeller (@zellerium) and Brian Kraft from Cal Poly are starting a build as well, using a constant cross-section cavity containing a polymer dielectric.<ref>[https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1368153#msg1368153 Forum post by @zellerium]</ref><br />
# @DIYFan - TBD<br />
# [[@Notsosureofit is planning testing with a Gunn diode]].<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370647#msg1370647 Later forum post by @Rodal, can't find original post]</ref><br />
# @TheTraveller<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370597#msg1370597 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# [[Iulian Berca|@Iulian Berca]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371164#msg1371164 Forum post by @Iulian Berca]</ref> - Fabricated a drive in May 2015 and was posting videos at [http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/ his website]. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ Test 3] he reported a force measurement toward "the small end" and later a smaller measurement in the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI reverse orientation in test 3.1]. As of 5/21/15 the magnitude and significance of these measurements were being debated on the [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377695#msg1377695 NSF forum].<br />
# @SeeShells plans to build a hexagonal fustrum out of copper mesh. The small end plate will be adjustable via a stepper motor.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1385165#msg1385165 Forum post by @SeeShells]</ref><br />
# @R. W. Keyes / Andromeda Research - high power, 1-20KW magnetron, superconductor Magnesium diboride on silicon carbide, to start summer 2015<br />
# [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1372073#msg1372073 Forum post by Hackaday.io]</ref> - Building the original 2.45 GHz thruster according to the Chinese paper and their own 24 GHz design simultaneously, with estimated completion date of July 2015. See [https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive Hackaday project] for more details, as well as [http://n-o-d-e.net/post/119343131451/building-a-diy-emdrive an interview with Paul].<br />
# Dave Distler (@rmfwguy) plans to use a wifi router as Rf source, copper mesh for the fustrum body, and no dielectric in the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1383098#msg1383098 Initial forum post by rmfwguy], with a later update on 6/3/13 and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384292#msg1384292 link to a PDF overview].</ref><br />
# @DrBagelBites posted on reddit that he was planning on starting a build.<ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/comments/38q7m9/going_to_build_an_emdrive_update/ Post by @DrBagelBites on reddit]</ref><br />
# @kml Testing a non-tapered rectangular waveguide with various dielectrics inserted at one end.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380174#msg1380174 post by @kml]</ref><br />
# Others?<br />
<br />
== Modelling ==<br />
@phaseshift has built a SketchUp model<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380107#msg1380107 post by @phaseshift]</ref> ([[File:EM_Thruster.skp]]) of a frustrum based on the estimated Shawyer Flight Thruster dimensions.<br />
<br />
@TheTraveller constructed a [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MyR1I2TzlOBXV7xnsxw32UGm7-JxbDIkNViC5F09rGU/edit#gid=1647834149 spreadsheet] to model thrust given various design parameters.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382349#msg1382349 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref> This model was built with some input from Roger Shawyer directly.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Building&diff=655Building2015-06-08T13:41:28Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page will collect any photos, plans, and instructions for do-it-yourselfers. Efforts with enough documentation will be provided their own pages.<br />
<br />
# [[Mulletron's Build]]<br />
# Kurt Zeller (@zellerium) and Brian Kraft from Cal Poly are starting a build as well, using a constant cross-section cavity containing a polymer dielectric.<ref>[https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1368153#msg1368153 Forum post by @zellerium]</ref><br />
# @DIYFan - TBD<br />
# [[@Notsosureofit is planning testing with a Gunn diode]].<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370647#msg1370647 Later forum post by @Rodal, can't find original post]</ref><br />
# @TheTraveller<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370597#msg1370597 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# [[Iulian Berca|@Iulian Berca]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371164#msg1371164 Forum post by @Iulian Berca]</ref> - Fabricated a drive in May 2015 and was posting videos at [http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/ his website]. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ Test 3] he reported a force measurement toward "the small end" and later a smaller measurement in the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI reverse orientation in test 3.1]. As of 5/21/15 the magnitude and significance of these measurements were being debated on the [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377695#msg1377695 NSF forum].<br />
# @SeeShells plans to build a hexagonal fustrum out of copper mesh. The small end plate will be adjustable via a stepper motor.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1385165#msg1385165 Forum post by @SeeShells]</ref><br />
# @R. W. Keyes / Andromeda Research - high power, 1-20KW magnetron, superconductor Magnesium diboride on silicon carbide, to start summer 2015<br />
# [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1372073#msg1372073 Forum post by Hackaday.io]</ref> - Building the original 2.45 GHz thruster according to the Chinese paper and their own 24 GHz design simultaneously, with estimated completion date of July 2015. See [https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive Hackaday project] for more details, as well as [http://n-o-d-e.net/post/119343131451/building-a-diy-emdrive an interview with Paul].<br />
# Dave Distler (@rmfwguy) plans to use a wifi router as Rf source, copper mesh for the fustrum body, and no dielectric in the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1383098#msg1383098 Initial forum post by rmfwguy], with a later update on 6/3/13 and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384292#msg1384292 link to a PDF overview].</ref><br />
# @DrBagelBites posted on reddit that he was planning on starting a build.<ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/comments/38q7m9/going_to_build_an_emdrive_update/ Post by @DrBagelBites on reddit]</ref><br />
# @kml Testing a non-tapered rectangular waveguide with various dielectrics inserted at one end.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380174#msg1380174 post by @knl]</ref><br />
# Others?<br />
<br />
== Modelling ==<br />
@phaseshift has built a SketchUp model<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380107#msg1380107 post by @phaseshift]</ref> ([[File:EM_Thruster.skp]]) of a frustrum based on the estimated Shawyer Flight Thruster dimensions.<br />
<br />
@TheTraveller constructed a [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MyR1I2TzlOBXV7xnsxw32UGm7-JxbDIkNViC5F09rGU/edit#gid=1647834149 spreadsheet] to model thrust given various design parameters.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382349#msg1382349 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref> This model was built with some input from Roger Shawyer directly.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Talk:Experimental_Results&diff=615Talk:Experimental Results2015-06-06T01:50:21Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>Any objections to adding the TE012 test where no thrust was measured as a line in the chart? See the Brady et.al paper page 18. --[[User:Sfrank|Sfrank]] ([[User talk:Sfrank|talk]]) 13:16, 5 June 2015 (PDT)<br />
<br />
__________________________________<br />
<br />
The Brady et.al. report reads:<br />
<br />
<<We performed some very early evaluations without the dielectric resonator (TE012 mode at 2168 MHz, with power levels up to ~30 watts) and measured no significant net thrust.>><br />
<br />
Yes several objections, noted in the thread. It was performed at the very earliest in NASA's testing program, @TheTraveller made an argument that it was conducted at the wrong frequency, not enough details are given in the Brady report to resolve this. Brady et.al. did not even include that test on their table of results. Suggest to wait until NASA conducts the tests without a dielectric this summer (with a magnetron).<br />
<br />
Notice that Brady et.al. doesn't provide the Q quality factor of resonance. If they would have provided the Q, I would be in favor of including it, since it would constitute a proof that a test was conducted at high Q giving no thrust. But unfortunately they didn't provide the Q. If the Q was near zero, it would be no surprise that they registered no thrust force, because the EM Drive is supposed to register a thrust measure only when the cavity is excited at resonance. Essentially if a Q is not provided , and they register no thrust, one doesn't know what the reason is for this. <br />
<br />
We should start filling the table with Prof. Yang's results (even though it is not possible to fill the whole table, they are merited because they were published in a peer-reviewed journal, and they were conducted at a University. They have a different way to measure the Q - it should be noted-<br />
<br />
<br />
__________________________________<br />
<br />
OK, adding Yang's results. How about Brady et.al's Cannae tests? There's no Q or Mode data but we have Freq, Watts and measured thrust.--[[User:Sfrank|Sfrank]] ([[User talk:Sfrank|talk]]) 18:50, 5 June 2015 (PDT)</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Building&diff=614Building2015-06-06T01:15:37Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page will collect any photos, plans, and instructions for do-it-yourselfers. Efforts with enough documentation will be provided their own pages.<br />
<br />
# [[Mulletron's Build]]<br />
# Kurt Zeller (@zellerium) and Brian Kraft from Cal Poly are starting a build as well, using a constant cross-section cavity containing a polymer dielectric.<ref>[https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1368153#msg1368153 Forum post by @zellerium]</ref><br />
# @DIYFan - TBD<br />
# [[@Notsosureofit is planning testing with a Gunn diode]].<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370647#msg1370647 Later forum post by @Rodal, can't find original post]</ref><br />
# @TheTraveller<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370597#msg1370597 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# [[Iulian Berca|@Iulian Berca]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371164#msg1371164 Forum post by @Iulian Berca]</ref> - Fabricated a drive in May 2015 and was posting videos at [http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/ his website]. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ Test 3] he reported a force measurement toward "the small end" and later a smaller measurement in the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI reverse orientation in test 3.1]. As of 5/21/15 the magnitude and significance of these measurements were being debated on the [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377695#msg1377695 NSF forum].<br />
# @SeeShells plans to build a hexagonal fustrum out of copper mesh. The small end plate will be adjustable via a stepper motor.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1385165#msg1385165 Forum post by @SeeShells]</ref><br />
# @R. W. Keyes / Andromeda Research - high power, 1-20KW magnetron, superconductor Magnesium diboride on silicon carbide, to start summer 2015<br />
# [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1372073#msg1372073 Forum post by Hackaday.io]</ref> - Building the original 2.45 GHz thruster according to the Chinese paper and their own 24 GHz design simultaneously, with estimated completion date of July 2015. See [https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive Hackaday project] for more details, as well as [http://n-o-d-e.net/post/119343131451/building-a-diy-emdrive an interview with Paul].<br />
# Dave Distler (@rmfwguy) plans to use a wifi router as Rf source, copper mesh for the fustrum body, and no dielectric in the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1383098#msg1383098 Initial forum post by rmfwguy], with a later update on 6/3/13 and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384292#msg1384292 link to a PDF overview].</ref><br />
# @DrBagelBites posted on reddit that he was planning on starting a build.<ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/comments/38q7m9/going_to_build_an_emdrive_update/ Post by @DrBagelBites on reddit]</ref><br />
# Others?<br />
<br />
== Modelling ==<br />
@phaseshift has built a SketchUp model<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380107#msg1380107 post by @phaseshift]</ref> ([[File:EM_Thruster.skp]]) of a frustrum based on the estimated Shawyer Flight Thruster dimensions.<br />
<br />
@TheTraveller constructed a [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MyR1I2TzlOBXV7xnsxw32UGm7-JxbDIkNViC5F09rGU/edit#gid=1647834149 spreadsheet] to model thrust given various design parameters.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382349#msg1382349 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref> This model was built with some input from Roger Shawyer directly.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Building&diff=613Building2015-06-06T01:14:38Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page will collect any photos, plans, and instructions for do-it-yourselfers. Efforts with enough documentation will be provided their own pages.<br />
<br />
# [[Mulletron's Build]]<br />
# Kurt Zeller (@zellerium) and Brian Kraft from Cal Poly are starting a build as well, using a constant cross-section cavity containing a polymer dielectric.<ref>[https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1368153#msg1368153 Forum post by @zellerium]</ref><br />
# @DIYFan - TBD<br />
# [[@Notsosureofit is planning testing with a Gunn diode]].<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370647#msg1370647 Later forum post by @Rodal, can't find original post]</ref><br />
# @TheTraveller<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370597#msg1370597 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# [[Iulian Berca|@Iulian Berca]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371164#msg1371164 Forum post by @Iulian Berca]</ref> - Fabricated a drive in May 2015 and was posting videos at [http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/ his website]. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ Test 3] he reported a force measurement toward "the small end" and later a smaller measurement in the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI reverse orientation in test 3.1]. As of 5/21/15 the magnitude and significance of these measurements were being debated on the [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377695#msg1377695 NSF forum].<br />
# @SeeShells plans to build a hexagonal fustrum out of copper mesh. The small end plate will be adjustable via a stepper motor.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1385165#msg1385165 Forum post by @SeeShells]</ref><br />
# @R. W. Keyes / Andromeda Research - high power, 1-20KW magnetron, superconductor Magnesium diboride on silicon carbide, to start summer 2015<br />
# [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1372073#msg1372073 Forum post by Hackaday.io]</ref> - Building the original 2.45 GHz thruster according to the Chinese paper and their own 24 GHz design simultaneously, with estimated completion date of July 2015. See [https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive Hackaday project] for more details, as well as [http://n-o-d-e.net/post/119343131451/building-a-diy-emdrive an interview with Paul]. As of 5/31/15, some related projects were also posted by Paul to Hackaday.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382129#msg1382129 Forum post by @Rodal]</ref><br />
# Dave Distler (@rmfwguy) plans to use a wifi router as Rf source, copper mesh for the fustrum body, and no dielectric in the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1383098#msg1383098 Initial forum post by rmfwguy], with a later update on 6/3/13 and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1384292#msg1384292 link to a PDF overview].</ref><br />
# @DrBagelBites posted on reddit that he was planning on starting a build.<ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/comments/38q7m9/going_to_build_an_emdrive_update/ Post by @DrBagelBites on reddit]</ref><br />
# Others?<br />
<br />
== Modelling ==<br />
@phaseshift has built a SketchUp model<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380107#msg1380107 post by @phaseshift]</ref> ([[File:EM_Thruster.skp]]) of a frustrum based on the estimated Shawyer Flight Thruster dimensions.<br />
<br />
@TheTraveller constructed a [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MyR1I2TzlOBXV7xnsxw32UGm7-JxbDIkNViC5F09rGU/edit#gid=1647834149 spreadsheet] to model thrust given various design parameters.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382349#msg1382349 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref> This model was built with some input from Roger Shawyer directly.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=List_of_Suggested_Experiments&diff=612List of Suggested Experiments2015-06-06T00:12:50Z<p>Sfrank: /* Design/Shape Modifications */</p>
<hr />
<div>This page compiles suggestions for as-yet untested variations in experiment designs for EmDrive testing. When possible, links to the original suggestion and a brief description of the justification for this test are provided.<br />
<br />
Note: For purposes of this list, the baseline for experimentation is considered to be a copper fustrum with either a magnetron or coaxial RF feed operated at approximately 2.45Ghz, similar to Shawyer's Feasability Study<br />
<br />
== Design/Shape Modifications == <br />
# Replace solid endplates with a circular grid design similar to the endplates used by Cullen in his 1950's waveguide experiments,<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370479#msg1370479 Forum post by Rodal]</ref> or a mesh as the one used for the glass windows in home-microwave-ovens, having a spacing between mesh or grids small enough such that only wavelengths smaller than that can get through.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376108#msg1376108 Forum post by demofsky]</ref> Purpose: to allow convection through the fustrum, eliminate buoyancy, thermal jet effects, natural thermal convection currents, and other gas effects.<br />
# Place [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet) ferrite beads] in the fustrum, either one large one next to an endplate or a pattern of them along a line in the longitudinal direction. Purpose: to increase attenuation gradient in TE modes, having an axial magnetic field.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380265#msg1380265 Forum post by Rodal] summarizing several prior posts.</ref><br />
# Build Large end plate out of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29#Values_for_some_common_materials Metglas] or a similar material with high magnetic permeability like cast iron or any ferrite.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381091#msg1381091 Forum post by Flyby] referencing earlier posts.</ref> Purpose: to test de Aquino's conjecture regarding the effect of power dissipation at the end faces of the truncated cone.<br />
# Place a ruby inside near one of the ends to emit at 2.4 GHz as used in solid state Masers.<br />
# Fill the fustrum with ammonia gas to emit at 24GHz. Purpose: To produce maser-like amplification inside the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379801#msg1379801 Forum post by aero], in response to [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379763#msg1379763 Rodal's explanation of the history of maser development].</ref> '''Warning:''' If using ammonia, please follow [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#Safety_precautions appropriate safety procedures][https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/emergency/chemical_terrorism/ammonia_tech.htm][http://chemm.nlm.nih.gov/ammonia_hospital_mmg.htm].<br />
# Place a dielectric next to the Small end, as done by NASA Eagleworks, who found extruded HDPE to be slightly better than extruded PTFE. Do not use molded (instead of extruded) polymers. NASA Eagleworks found that Neoprene rubber performed poorly as a dielectric in the EM Drive, as it resulted in considerably less thrust.<br />
# Separate resonance and attenuation chambers. Purpose: Proposed by WarpTech as a test of [[Todd Desiato (@WarpTech)'s PV Model Theory| his theory]].<br />
# Apply a silver or gold coating to the inside of a copper fustrum. Purpose: The increase microwave reflectivity, and therefore increase Q factor.<br />
# Measure the force on two cylindrical resonant wave guides (lowest transverse electric mode) tuned to resonate at the same frequency (one is adjustable) with their flat plates separated by a quarter wavelength. The current in cavity one is out of phase with cavity two by 90 degrees. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1375365#msg1375365 Forum post by dustinthewind], A suggested experiment.</ref><br />
# Test a pillbox-shaped cavity similar to the Cannae drive and compare results to an EmDrive fustrum tested with the same experimental setup.<br />
<br />
== Experimental Measurement Setups ==<br />
# Use smokesticks to test for out-gassing and hot air jets from the fustrum<ref>Credit to @Seeshells</ref><br />
# Test on a zero-g simulator flight.<br />
# Cavendish Pendulum<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20080508011932/http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2005/2005-07-01/feature1/index.html</ref><br />
# At a set power measure the force at resonance, then vary the frequency slightly and see if force rises as resonance drops. <ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382660#msg1382660 Forum post by dustinthewind] Stated as a question.</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Talk:Experimental_Results&diff=597Talk:Experimental Results2015-06-05T20:16:37Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>Any objections to adding the TE012 test where no thrust was measured as a line in the chart? See the Brady et.al paper page 18. --[[User:Sfrank|Sfrank]] ([[User talk:Sfrank|talk]]) 13:16, 5 June 2015 (PDT)</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Possible_Error_Sources&diff=528Possible Error Sources2015-06-03T18:02:05Z<p>Sfrank: /* References */</p>
<hr />
<div>Things like thermal buckling, atmospheric effects, etc. will be discussed here.<br />
<br />
NOTE: As efforts to catch up from page 1 of the presently 147 page thread progress, items may shift from Open to Closed and thus at this time may be incomplete or incorrectly categorized.<br />
<br />
== Open ==<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Drive]] - Heating of the structure or components of the drive.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Atmospheric]] - Heating of the surroundings of the drive, causing air currents which generate forces on the drive.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Hot air balloon]] - Heating of the air inside the drive causes lift. The lift varies with orientation, depending upon where venting holes are located on the drive.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Expansion]] - Heating of the air inside the drive causes it to expand and push out of holes in the drive, until the drive reaches equilibrium temperature.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Jet]] - Heating of the air inside the pushes it out. Fresh air is drawn in to replace it, resulting in a continuous jet, like a microwave driven pulse jet.<br />
<br />
[[Dean Drive Effects|Vibration of the device (Dean Drive Effects)]] when power is applied causing a ratchet-type rotation effect, due to differences in the static friction.<br />
<br />
Heating, magnetic or electrical effects causing the device to alter shape and weight distribution.<br />
<br />
Induction of magnetic or electric fields in the apparatus and surroundings, causing repulsion/attraction with surroundings.<br />
<br />
Induced magnetic fields pushing against the Earth's magnetic field.<br />
<br />
== Closed ==<br />
<br />
[[Photon Rocket Interpretation]] - The theory that in some way the EM Drive is simply a strange Photon Rocket.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Building&diff=502Building2015-06-02T18:23:24Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page will collect any photos, plans, and instructions for do-it-yourselfers. Efforts with enough documentation will be provided their own pages.<br />
<br />
# [[Mulletron's Build]]<br />
# Kurt Zeller (@zellerium) and Brian Kraft from Cal Poly are starting a build as well, using a constant cross-section cavity containing a polymer dielectric.<ref>[https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1368153#msg1368153 Forum post by @zellerium]</ref><br />
# @DIYFan - TBD<br />
# [[@Notsosureofit is planning testing with a Gunn diode]].<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370647#msg1370647 Later forum post by @Rodal, can't find original post]</ref><br />
# @TheTraveller<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370597#msg1370597 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# [[Iulian Berca|@Iulian Berca]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371164#msg1371164 Forum post by @Iulian Berca]</ref> - Fabricated a drive in May 2015 and was posting videos at [http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/ his website]. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ Test 3] he reported a force measurement toward "the small end" and later a smaller measurement in the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI reverse orientation in test 3.1]. As of 5/21/15 the magnitude and significance of these measurements were being debated on the [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377695#msg1377695 NSF forum].<br />
# @SeeShells<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371206#msg1371206 Forum post by @SeeShells]</ref><br />
# @R. W. Keyes / Andromeda Research - high power, 1-20KW magnetron, superconductor Magnesium diboride on silicon carbide, to start summer 2015<br />
# [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1372073#msg1372073 Forum post by Hackaday.io]</ref> - Building the original 2.45 GHz thruster according to the Chinese paper and their own 24 GHz design simultaneously, with estimated completion date of July 2015. See [https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive Hackaday project] for more details, as well as [http://n-o-d-e.net/post/119343131451/building-a-diy-emdrive an interview with Paul]. As of 5/31/15, some related projects were also posted by Paul to Hackaday.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382129#msg1382129 Forum post by @Rodal]</ref><br />
# @rmfwguy plans to use a wifi router as Rf source, with no dielectric in the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1383098#msg1383098 forum post by rmfwguy]</ref><br />
# Others?<br />
<br />
== Modelling ==<br />
@phaseshift has built a SketchUp model<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380107#msg1380107 post by @phaseshift]</ref> ([[File:EM_Thruster.skp]]) of a frustrum based on the estimated Shawyer Flight Thruster dimensions.<br />
<br />
@TheTraveller constructed a [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MyR1I2TzlOBXV7xnsxw32UGm7-JxbDIkNViC5F09rGU/edit#gid=1647834149 spreadsheet] to model thrust given various design parameters.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382349#msg1382349 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref> This model was built with some input from Roger Shawyer directly.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=List_of_Suggested_Experiments&diff=458List of Suggested Experiments2015-06-01T20:27:04Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page compiles suggestions for as-yet untested variations in experiment designs for EmDrive testing. When possible, links to the original suggestion and a brief description of the justification for this test are provided.<br />
<br />
Note: For purposes of this list, the baseline for experimentation is considered to be a copper fustrum with either a magnetron or coaxial RF feed operated at approximately 2.45Ghz, similar to Shawyer's Feasability Study<br />
<br />
== Design/Shape Modifications == <br />
# Replace solid endplates with a circular grid design similar to the endplates used by Cullen in his 1950's waveguide experiments,<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370479#msg1370479 Forum post by Rodal]</ref> or a mesh as the one used for the glass windows in home-microwave-ovens, having a spacing between mesh or grids small enough such that only wavelengths smaller than that can get through.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376108#msg1376108 Forum post by demofsky]</ref> Purpose: to allow convection through the fustrum, eliminate buoyancy, thermal jet effects, natural thermal convection currents, and other gas effects.<br />
# Place [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet) ferrite beads] in the fustrum, either one large one next to an endplate or a pattern of them along a line in the longitudinal direction. Purpose: to increase attenuation gradient in TE modes, having an axial magnetic field.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380265#msg1380265 Forum post by Rodal] summarizing several prior posts.</ref><br />
# Build Large end plate out of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29#Values_for_some_common_materials Metglas] or a similar material with high magnetic permeability like cast iron or any ferrite.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381091#msg1381091 Forum post by Flyby] referencing earlier posts.</ref> Purpose: to test de Aquino's conjecture regarding the effect of power dissipation at the end faces of the truncated cone.<br />
# Place a ruby inside near one of the ends to emit at 2.4 GHz as used in solid state Masers.<br />
# Fill the fustrum with ammonia gas to emit at 24GHz. Purpose: To produce maser-like amplification inside the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379801#msg1379801 Forum post by aero], in response to [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379763#msg1379763 Rodal's explanation of the history of maser development].</ref> '''Warning:''' Ammonia gas is toxic. If using ammonia, please follow [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#Safety_precautions appropriate safety procedures].<br />
# Place a dielectric next to the Small end, as done by NASA Eagleworks, who found extruded HDPE to be slightly better than extruded PTFE. Do not use molded (instead of extruded) polymers. NASA Eagleworks found that Neoprene rubber performed poorly as a dielectric in the EM Drive, as it resulted in considerably less thrust.<br />
# Separate resonance and attenuation chambers. Purpose: Proposed by WarpTech as a test of [[Todd Desiato (@WarpTech)'s PV Model Theory| his theory]].<br />
# Apply a silver or gold coating to the inside of a copper fustrum. Purpose: The increase microwave reflectivity, and therefore increase Q factor.<br />
<br />
== Experimental Measurement Setups ==<br />
# Use smokesticks to test for out-gassing and hot air jets from the fustrum<ref>Credit to @Seeshells</ref><br />
# Test on a zero-g simulator flight.<br />
# Cavendish Pendulum<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20080508011932/http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2005/2005-07-01/feature1/index.html</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=List_of_Suggested_Experiments&diff=457List of Suggested Experiments2015-06-01T20:25:23Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page compiles suggestions for as-yet untested variations in experiment designs for EmDrive testing. When possible, links to the original suggestion and a brief description of the justification for this test are provided.<br />
<br />
Note: For purposes of this list, the baseline for experimentation is considered to be a copper fustrum with either a magnetron or coaxial RF feed operated at approximately 2.45Ghz, similar to Shawyer's Feasability Study<br />
<br />
== Design/Shape Modifications == <br />
# Replace solid endplates with a circular grid design similar to the endplates used by Cullen in his 1950's waveguide experiments,<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370479#msg1370479 Forum post by Rodal]</ref> or a mesh as the one used for the glass windows in home-microwave-ovens, having a spacing between mesh or grids small enough such that only wavelengths smaller than that can get through.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376108#msg1376108 Forum post by demofsky]</ref> Purpose: to allow convection through the fustrum, eliminate buoyancy, thermal jet effects, natural thermal convection currents, and other gas effects.<br />
# Place [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet) ferrite beads] in the fustrum, either one large one next to an endplate or a pattern of them along a line in the longitudinal direction. Purpose: to increase attenuation gradient in TE modes, having an axial magnetic field.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380265#msg1380265 Forum post by Rodal] summarizing several prior posts.</ref><br />
# Build Large end plate out of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29#Values_for_some_common_materials Metglas] or a similar material with high magnetic permeability like cast iron or any ferrite.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381091#msg1381091 Forum post by Flyby] referencing earlier posts.</ref> Purpose: to test de Aquino's conjecture regarding the effect of power dissipation at the end faces of the truncated cone.<br />
# Place a ruby inside near one of the ends to emit at 2.4 GHz as used in solid state Masers.<br />
# Fill the fustrum with ammonia gas to emit at 24GHz. Purpose: To produce maser-like amplification inside the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379801#msg1379801 Forum post by aero], in response to [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379763#msg1379763 Rodal's explanation of the history of maser development].</ref> '''Warning:''' Ammonia gas is toxic. If using ammonia, please follow [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#Safety_precautions appropriate safety procedures].<br />
# Place a dielectric next to the Small end, as done by NASA Eagleworks, who found extruded HDPE to be slightly better than extruded PTFE. Do not use molded (instead of extruded) polymers. NASA Eagleworks found that Neoprene rubber performed poorly as a dielectric in the EM Drive, as it resulted in considerably less thrust.<br />
# Separate resonance and attenuation chambers (proposed by WarpTech)<br />
# Apply a silver or gold coating to the inside of a copper fustrum. Purpose: The increase microwave reflectivity, and therefore increase Q factor.<br />
<br />
== Experimental Measurement Setups ==<br />
# Use smokesticks to test for out-gassing and hot air jets from the fustrum<ref>Credit to @Seeshells</ref><br />
# Test on a zero-g simulator flight.<br />
# Cavendish Pendulum<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20080508011932/http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2005/2005-07-01/feature1/index.html</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=List_of_Suggested_Experiments&diff=456List of Suggested Experiments2015-06-01T20:24:51Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page compiles suggestions for as-yet untested variations in experiment designs for EmDrive testing. When possible, links to the original suggestion and a brief description of the justification for this test are provided.<br />
<br />
Note: For purposes of this list, the baseline for experimentation is considered to be a copper fustrum with either a magnetron or coaxial RF feed operated at approximately 2.45Ghz, similar to Shawyer's Feasability Study<br />
<br />
== Design/Shape Modifications == <br />
# Replace solid endplates with a circular grid design similar to the endplates used by Cullen in his 1950's waveguide experiments,<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370479#msg1370479 Forum post by Rodal]</ref> or a mesh as the one used for the glass windows in home-microwave-ovens, having a spacing between mesh or grids small enough such that only wavelengths smaller than that can get through.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376108#msg1376108 Forum post by demofsky]</ref> Purpose: to allow convection through the fustrum, eliminate buoyancy, thermal jet effects, natural thermal convection currents, and other gas effects.<br />
# Place [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet) ferrite beads] in the fustrum, either one large one next to an endplate or a pattern of them along a line in the longitudinal direction. Purpose: to increase attenuation gradient in TE modes, having an axial magnetic field.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380265#msg1380265 Forum post by Rodal] summarizing several prior posts.</ref><br />
# Build Large end plate out of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29#Values_for_some_common_materials Metglas] or a similar material with high magnetic permeability like cast iron or any ferrite.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381091#msg1381091 Forum post by Flyby] referencing earlier posts.</ref> Purpose: to test de Aquino's conjecture regarding the effect of power dissipation at the end faces of the truncated cone.<br />
# Place a ruby inside near one of the ends to emit at 2.4 GHz as used in solid state Masers.<br />
# Fill the fustrum with ammonia gas to emit at 24GHz. Purpose: To produce maser-like amplification inside the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379801#msg1379801 Forum post by aero], in response to [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379763#msg1379763 Rodal's explanation of the history of maser development].</ref> Warning! Ammonia gas is toxic. If using ammonia, please follow [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#Safety_precautions appropriate safety procedures].<br />
# Place a dielectric next to the Small end, as done by NASA Eagleworks, who found extruded HDPE to be slightly better than extruded PTFE. Do not use molded (instead of extruded) polymers. NASA Eagleworks found that Neoprene rubber performed poorly as a dielectric in the EM Drive, as it resulted in considerably less thrust.<br />
# Separate resonance and attenuation chambers (proposed by WarpTech)<br />
# Apply a silver or gold coating to the inside of a copper fustrum. Purpose: The increase microwave reflectivity, and therefore increase Q factor.<br />
<br />
== Experimental Measurement Setups ==<br />
# Use smokesticks to test for out-gassing and hot air jets from the fustrum<ref>Credit to @Seeshells</ref><br />
# Test on a zero-g simulator flight.<br />
# Cavendish Pendulum<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20080508011932/http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2005/2005-07-01/feature1/index.html</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Evanescent_waves&diff=455Evanescent waves2015-06-01T20:19:07Z<p>Sfrank: Updated to reflect Rodal's latest on this theory. Need to add more details & reconcile with Aero's theory.</p>
<hr />
<div>As first proposed by Aero and later refined by Rodal on the NSF forums, this theory proposes the EmDrive's tapered conical design causes a gradient in the electric field generated by the Rf source. As the EM waves inside the fustrum travel toward the small end, they are attenuated by the constricting geometry, producing evanescent waves that carry momentum. The device must then move to preserve conservation of momentum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382031#msg1382031 Forum post by Rodal]</ref><br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Evidence ==<br />
<br />
Initial calculations by Aero were showing an efficiency rating 2-3 times that of a perfect photon drive, which is beneath the observed ratings of Q-thruster test articles.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1313876#msg1313876 Initial calculations by aero.]</ref><br />
<br />
Utilizing [http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep MEEP], the conclusion was that due to rapid dropoff at the frustum surface, evanescent waves were of insufficient magnitude to explain the observed thrust.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1330521#msg1330521 this post by @aero on modeled evanescent waves]</ref>. See details about @aero's [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382078#msg1382078 MEEP control file].<br />
<br />
== Relevant Papers ==<br />
<br />
* "Electromagnetic fields and transmission properties in tapered hollow metallic waveguides" by Xiahui Zeng and Dianyuan Fan. Optics Express Vol. 17, Issue 1, pp. 34-45 (2009) •doi: 10.1364/OE.17.0<br />
* [http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0547.pdf "Extraordinary momentum and spin in evanescent waves"] by Konstantin Y. Bliokh, Aleksandr Y. Bekshaev, and Franco Nori - See Supplementary Table 1.<br />
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mie_scattering<br />
* http://thermopedia.com/content/137/<br />
* http://www.orc.soton.ac.uk/publications/theses/1460T_lnn/1460T_lnn_03.pdf<br />
* [http://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.0347.pdf "Superluminal propagation of evanescent modes as a quantum effect"] by Zhi-Yong Wang, Cai-Dong Xiong, Bing He.<br />
* http://wwwsis.lnf.infn.it/pub/INFN-FM-00-04.pdf - I like Appendix B<br />
* http://arxiv.org/pdf/1211.0530v2.pdf - This one just hints at our situation.<br />
* http://bit.ly/1Ja6QLV - Again, hints<br />
* http://tuttle.merc.iastate.edu/ee439/topics/tunneling.pdf - Tunneling and evanescent wave math are very similar.<br />
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_stress_tensor - Not quite sure why this is here, maybe the stress-energy tensor derivation?<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Evanescent_waves&diff=453Evanescent waves2015-06-01T19:48:50Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>As proposed by Aero on the NSF forums, the possibility that the thrust is occurring as a result of the generation/leakage of evanescent waves.<br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
<br />
No longer considered a viable source of thrust.<br />
<br />
== Evidence ==<br />
<br />
Initial calculations by Aero were showing an efficiency rating 2-3 times that of a perfect photon drive, which is beneath the observed ratings of Q-thruster test articles.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1313876#msg1313876 Initial calculations by aero.]</ref><br />
<br />
Utilizing [http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep MEEP], the conclusion was that due to rapid dropoff at the frustum surface, evanescent waves were of insufficient magnitude to explain the observed thrust.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1330521#msg1330521 this post by @aero on modeled evanescent waves]</ref>. See details about @aero's [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382078#msg1382078 MEEP control file].<br />
<br />
== Relevant Papers ==<br />
<br />
* "Electromagnetic fields and transmission properties in tapered hollow metallic waveguides" by Xiahui Zeng and Dianyuan Fan. Optics Express Vol. 17, Issue 1, pp. 34-45 (2009) •doi: 10.1364/OE.17.0<br />
* [http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0547.pdf "Extraordinary momentum and spin in evanescent waves"] by Konstantin Y. Bliokh, Aleksandr Y. Bekshaev, and Franco Nori - See Supplementary Table 1.<br />
* [http://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.0347.pdf "Superluminal propagation of evanescent modes as a quantum effect"] by Zhi-Yong Wang, Cai-Dong Xiong, Bing He.<br />
* http://wwwsis.lnf.infn.it/pub/INFN-FM-00-04.pdf - I like Appendix B<br />
* http://arxiv.org/pdf/1211.0530v2.pdf - This one just hints at our situation.<br />
* http://bit.ly/1Ja6QLV - Again, hints<br />
* http://tuttle.merc.iastate.edu/ee439/topics/tunneling.pdf - Tunneling and evanescent wave math are very similar.<br />
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_stress_tensor - Not quite sure why this is here, maybe the stress-energy tensor derivation?<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Evanescent_waves&diff=452Evanescent waves2015-06-01T19:48:11Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>As proposed by Aero on the NSF forums, the possibility that the thrust is occurring as a result of the generation/leakage of evanescent waves.<br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
<br />
No longer considered a viable source of thrust.<br />
<br />
== Evidence ==<br />
<br />
Initial calculations by Aero were showing an efficiency rating 2-3 times that of a perfect photon drive, which is beneath the observed ratings of Q-thruster test articles.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1313876#msg1313876 Initial calculations by aero.]</ref><br />
<br />
Utilizing [http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep MEEP], the conclusion was that due to rapid dropoff at the frustum surface, evanescent waves were of insufficient magnitude to explain the observed thrust.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1330521#msg1330521 this post by @aero on modeled evanescent waves]</ref>. See details about @aero's [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382078#msg1382078 MEEP control file].<br />
<br />
== Relevant Papers ==<br />
<br />
* Electromagnetic fields and transmission properties in tapered hollow metallic waveguides<br />
Xiahui Zeng and Dianyuan Fan. Optics Express Vol. 17, Issue 1, pp. 34-45 (2009) •doi: 10.1364/OE.17.0<br />
* [http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0547.pdf "Extraordinary momentum and spin in evanescent waves"] by Konstantin Y. Bliokh, Aleksandr Y. Bekshaev, and Franco Nori - See Supplementary Table 1.<br />
* [http://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.0347.pdf "Superluminal propagation of evanescent modes as a quantum effect"] by Zhi-Yong Wang, Cai-Dong Xiong, Bing He.<br />
* http://wwwsis.lnf.infn.it/pub/INFN-FM-00-04.pdf - I like Appendix B<br />
* http://arxiv.org/pdf/1211.0530v2.pdf - This one just hints at our situation.<br />
* http://bit.ly/1Ja6QLV - Again, hints<br />
* http://tuttle.merc.iastate.edu/ee439/topics/tunneling.pdf - Tunneling and evanescent wave math are very similar.<br />
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_stress_tensor - Not quite sure why this is here, maybe the stress-energy tensor derivation?<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Evanescent_waves&diff=451Evanescent waves2015-06-01T19:45:19Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>As proposed by Aero on the NSF forums, the possibility that the thrust is occurring as a result of the generation/leakage of evanescent waves.<br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
<br />
No longer considered a viable source of thrust.<br />
<br />
== Evidence ==<br />
<br />
Initial calculations by Aero were showing an efficiency rating 2-3 times that of a perfect photon drive, which is beneath the observed ratings of Q-thruster test articles.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1313876#msg1313876 Initial calculations by aero.]</ref><br />
<br />
Utilizing [http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep MEEP], the conclusion was that due to rapid dropoff at the frustum surface, evanescent waves were of insufficient magnitude to explain the observed thrust.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1330521#msg1330521 this post by @aero on modeled evanescent waves]</ref>. See details about @aero's [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382078#msg1382078 MEEP control file].<br />
<br />
== Relevant Papers ==<br />
This list was assembled by Aero<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382092#msg1382092 Forum post by @aero]</ref><br />
<br />
* [http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0547.pdf "Extraordinary momentum and spin in evanescent waves"] by Konstantin Y. Bliokh, Aleksandr Y. Bekshaev, and Franco Nori - See Supplementary Table 1.<br />
* http://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.0347.pdf<br />
* http://wwwsis.lnf.infn.it/pub/INFN-FM-00-04.pdf - I like Appendix B<br />
* http://arxiv.org/pdf/1211.0530v2.pdf - This one just hints at our situation.<br />
* http://bit.ly/1Ja6QLV - Again, hints<br />
* http://tuttle.merc.iastate.edu/ee439/topics/tunneling.pdf - Tunneling and evanescent wave math are very similar.<br />
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_stress_tensor - Not quite sure why this is here, maybe the stress-energy tensor derivation?<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Talk:Experimental_Results&diff=447Talk:Experimental Results2015-06-01T17:29:33Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>I'm added Iulian's test to the page. I realize that it is just approximate numbers and there are a lot of unknowns, but I think its useful to add as a rough comparison, as people can actually watch Iulian's test and this table helps put that measurement in relation to the other tests.<br />
<br />
Anyone want to take a stab at adding Juan Yang's published results? Also, are there more EW results to add?<br />
<br />
Also is it worthwhile adding a column for Mode? We don't have this for all, but it seems to be a particularly useful bit of data to include.</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Experimental_Results&diff=445Experimental Results2015-06-01T17:27:49Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Forces, Power, Frequency and Dimensions ==<br />
<br />
The current best estimates for the parameters of various test articles run by public and private research labs ([[NASA Eagleworks]], [[SPR Ltd.]], and [[NWPU]]) is here, along with the 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). See [[Building]] for details on drives built by do-it-yourselfers.<br />
<br />
Credit to Dr. Rodal and others for the great effort in [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376840#msg1376840 compiling these]. Please note some caveats for this data, at that link.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! style="text-align:left;"| Description || Cavity Length (m) || bigDiameter (m) || smallDiameter (m) ||Shawyer Design Factor || Dielectric || Frequency (Hertz) || Power (W) || Q || Force (mN) || Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) ||Force/Power Multiple of Photon Rocket<br />
|-<br />
|Cannae Superconducting Ambient|| 0.03 || 0.220 || 0.200 || || None || 1.047*10^9 || 10.5 || 1.1*10^7 || 8-10 || 761.9 - 952.4 || 228400 - 285500<br />
|-<br />
|Shawyer Experimental Ambient|| 0.156 || 0.16 || 0.1025 || 0.497 || Yes || 2.45*10^9 || 850 || 5900 || 16 || 18.82 ||5640<br />
|-<br />
|Shawyer Demo Ambient||0.317 to 0.187 || 0.28 || 0.17027 || 0.484<ref>Forum posts by [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377281#msg1377281 @phaseshift], [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377650#msg1377650 @Rodal], and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377697#msg1377697 @Rodal] - The Design Factor is reported as 0.844 in at least three of Shawyer's references; however using a Design Factor = 0.844 gives a much smaller diameter in conflict with the ratio of the small diameter to the big diameter shown in the picture of the Demonstrator in Shawyer's publications, so it is assumed that was an unintentional typo (0.844 instead of 0.484, which results in a small diameter that agrees with the published image). The smallDiameter shown here was recalculated from the revised Design Factor (0.484).<br />
The cavity length is estimated as 0.317 to 0.187. The larger number takes into account the full length of the cylindrical part of the EM Drive Demo and the smaller number corresponds only to the length of the truncated cone section. Please notice that the Demo has a variable length actuated by a gear mechanism, in order to tune the cavity to achieve resonance http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/images/2008/09/24/emdrive_2.jpg .</ref> || None || 2.45*10^9 || 421-1200|| 45000 || 102.30 || 80-243 || 23980 - 72830<br />
|-<br />
|Brady a (TM212) Ambient<ref name="brady">Mode shape is noted as TM211 in Brady et.al.'s report. However, calculations show that TM211 should take place at a significant lower frequency and that this mode must have been TM212. Notice that Brady b took place practically at the same frequency as [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327177#msg1327177 March TM212 test in vacuum]</ref>|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.9326*10^9 || 16.9||7320 || 0.0912|| 5.396 || 1617.2<br />
|-<br />
|Brady b (TM212) Ambient<ref name="brady"/>|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.9367*10^9 || 16.7|| 18100 || 0.0501|| 3.000 || 899.12<br />
|-<br />
|Brady c (TE012) Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.8804*10^9 || 2.6|| 22000 || 0.05541|| 21.310 || 6386.7<br />
|-<br />
|March (TM212) Vacuum 5*10^(-6) Torr|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.9371*10^9 || 50|| 6726 || 0.055|| 1.100 || 329.64<br />
|-<br />
|Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser Ambient - 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 || 3.526<br />
|-<br />
|Iulian Berca Tests 3 & 3.1 (averaged w/up/down directional effects subtracted)<ref>The tests by Iulian Berca were not logged in a scientifically rigorous manner. See http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/. However, because of the high profile nature of the tests, they are included here merely to give a rough comparison to the more scientifically rigorous tests. The measured thrust in this table is an average of multiple runs in tests 3 and 3.1, subtracting out the likely effects of hot air. @deltaMass calculated the net thrust for the EmDrive across both tests to be 0.29gf effective thrust, which is 2.84mN. See [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377713#msg1377713 here].</ref> || 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.1588 || || None || 2.45*10^9 (magnetron) || 800 || n/a || 2.84 || 3.55 || 1063.82<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Photon Rocket Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) = 0.003337<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Todd_Desiato_(@WarpTech)%27s_Evanescent_Wave_Theory&diff=443Todd Desiato (@WarpTech)'s Evanescent Wave Theory2015-06-01T17:20:09Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Summary == <br />
Todd Desiato (@WarpTech on Nasaspaceflight forums) has put forth a theory that explains the EMDrive's thrust as a result of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizable_vacuum Polzarizable Vacuum] model of General Relativity. <br />
<br />
== Explanation of the Polarizable Vaccuum Model ==<br />
The PV Model was developed by Harold Puthoff as an alternative explanation of gravity and electromagnetism. It is a scalar theory of gravity, which posits that spacetime has a refractive index, much like glass, and that the presence of mass causes spacetime to refract energy, resulting in gravity.<br />
<br />
== Application of Theory to the EmDrive ==<br />
According to @WarpTech, the EMDrive function mimics this refraction, but only across the specific wavelengths that correspond to its internal geometry. As microwave energy builds within the fustrum, the energy becomes concentrated at the larger end. Because the energy density is not evenly distributed, the refractive index has a gradient from the big end to the small end. This mimics gravity at the wavelength of microwaves. As the microwaves "fall" towards the small end, their wavelengths are attenuated and momentum is absorbed by the fustrum as the group velocity goes to zero near the small end. The result is propultion in the direction of the small end of the fustrum. <br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
There is not yet enough experimental data to validate @WarpTech's theory. Additional data, particularly from superconducting EmDrive experiements, may result in data that is relevant to validating or disproving this theory.<br />
<br />
== Predictions and Evidence ==<br />
Notably, it is solely the geometry of the fustrum that is relevant to this effect under @WarpTech's theory. A higher power level or higher Q would not result in higher thrust. The Q factor is only relevant as a measure of the stored amount of energy. The fustrum itself does not need to resonate, and to this end, @WarpTech has proposed decoupling the resonance chamber from the attenuation chamber. He suggests a design where resonance is induced in a long cylindrical waveguide, then energy is periodically dumped into a fustrum to attenuate. So far this design has not been tested. See [[List of Suggested Experiments]]<br />
<br />
Another interesting consequence of @WarpTech's theory is that the EmDrive must be considered a Warp Drive. However, because the warp effect is limited to a portion of the EM spectrum (with frequency corresponding to the size of the fustrum), the effect would not be detectable via the laser warp interferometer employed by NASA EagleWorks, as the distortion would occur at microwave wavelengths. This prediction appears to be in conflict with the report of a positive distortion by the laser interferometer at EagleWorks. However, it remains to be seen if the interferometer test can be reproduced, especially in a vacuum. Also, it is unclear if according to @WarpTech's theory the EmDrive could theoretically be used for faster than light travel.</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Dean_Drive_Effects&diff=442Dean Drive Effects2015-06-01T17:08:27Z<p>Sfrank: Created page with "One possible explanation for the thrust effect measured in the EmDrive a combination of vibrations, friction, and resonance with the attached measuring equipment causing appar..."</p>
<hr />
<div>One possible explanation for the thrust effect measured in the EmDrive a combination of vibrations, friction, and resonance with the attached measuring equipment causing apparent motion in the device. This effect is commonly referred to as the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_drive Dean Drive Effect], after a supposed reactionless drive invented by Norman Dean in the 1950's. It was eventually determined that the Dean Drive's apparent motion resulted from a combination of friction and vibrational effects, all of which depended on the experimental setup and meant the drive would be useless as a space drive (since there would be no surface against which friction could occur). <br />
<br />
Unlike the Dean Drive, whose function was kept secret by its creator, the EmDrive has been independently tested in various orientations and experimental setups. It is unlikely that Dean Drive effects could account for the thrust measured across all these tests. Ultimately, the question of whether thrust is in part created by Dean Drive effects would be conclusively answered by a space test.</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Possible_Error_Sources&diff=441Possible Error Sources2015-06-01T16:58:54Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>Things like thermal buckling, atmospheric effects, etc. will be discussed here.<br />
<br />
NOTE: As efforts to catch up from page 1 of the presently 147 page thread progress, items may shift from Open to Closed and thus at this time may be incomplete or incorrectly categorized.<br />
<br />
== Open ==<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Drive]] - Heating of the structure or components of the drive.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Atmospheric]] - Heating of the surroundings of the drive, causing air currents which generate forces on the drive.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Hot air balloon]] - Heating of the air inside the drive causes lift. The lift varies with orientation, depending upon where venting holes are located on the drive.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Expansion]] - Heating of the air inside the drive causes it to expand and push out of holes in the drive, until the drive reaches equilibrium temperature.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Jet]] - Heating of the air inside the pushes it out. Fresh air is drawn in to replace it, resulting in a continuous jet, like a microwave driven pulse jet.<br />
<br />
[[Dean Drive Effects|Vibration of the device (Dean Drive Effects)]] when power is applied causing a ratchet-type rotation effect, due to differences in the static friction.<br />
<br />
Heating, magnetic or electrical effects causing the device to alter shape and weight distribution.<br />
<br />
Induction of magnetic or electric fields in the apparatus and surroundings, causing repulsion/attraction with surroundings.<br />
<br />
Induced magnetic fields pushing against the Earth's magnetic field.<br />
<br />
== Closed ==<br />
<br />
[[Photon Rocket Interpretation]] - The theory that in some way the EM Drive is simply a strange Photon Rocket.<br />
<br />
Quantum Tunnelling<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370487#msg1370487 Post by Rodal]</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Possible_Error_Sources&diff=440Possible Error Sources2015-06-01T16:58:38Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>Things like thermal buckling, atmospheric effects, etc. will be discussed here.<br />
<br />
NOTE: As efforts to catch up from page 1 of the presently 147 page thread progress, items may shift from Open to Closed and thus at this time may be incomplete or incorrectly categorized.<br />
<br />
== Open ==<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Drive]] - Heating of the structure or components of the drive.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Atmospheric]] - Heating of the surroundings of the drive, causing air currents which generate forces on the drive.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Hot air balloon]] - Heating of the air inside the drive causes lift. The lift varies with orientation, depending upon where venting holes are located on the drive.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Expansion]] - Heating of the air inside the drive causes it to expand and push out of holes in the drive, until the drive reaches equilibrium temperature.<br />
<br />
[[Thermal Effects - Jet]] - Heating of the air inside the pushes it out. Fresh air is drawn in to replace it, resulting in a continuous jet, like a microwave driven pulse jet.<br />
<br />
[[Vibration of the device (Dean Drive Effects)|Dean Drive Effects]] when power is applied causing a ratchet-type rotation effect, due to differences in the static friction.<br />
<br />
Heating, magnetic or electrical effects causing the device to alter shape and weight distribution.<br />
<br />
Induction of magnetic or electric fields in the apparatus and surroundings, causing repulsion/attraction with surroundings.<br />
<br />
Induced magnetic fields pushing against the Earth's magnetic field.<br />
<br />
== Closed ==<br />
<br />
[[Photon Rocket Interpretation]] - The theory that in some way the EM Drive is simply a strange Photon Rocket.<br />
<br />
Quantum Tunnelling<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370487#msg1370487 Post by Rodal]</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Frequently_Asked_Questions&diff=439Frequently Asked Questions2015-06-01T16:56:04Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>; What are the experimental results regarding the EM Drives?<br />
: See [[Experimental Results]].<br />
<br />
; Does the EM Drive violate momentum- or energy-conservation?<br />
: See [[Energy Conservation]] and [[Momentum Conservation]].<br />
<br />
; How does an EM Drive work?<br />
: This a graph showing how R. Shawyer describes the operation of the EM Drive. The EM Drive researchers at NASA Eagleworks and Prof. Yang's team at Northwestern Polytechnical University (NWPU) in Xi'anin, China, have different theories of its operation:<br />
<br />
<img src="http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=36313.0;attach=629593;image" style="width:25%"><br />
<br />
[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1309818#msg1309818 Image of EmDrive thrust direction in posts attachment.]<br />
<br />
See the [[Theory]] page for a list of additional theories purporting to explain how the EmDrive works.<br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
<br />
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EmDrive Wikipedia] has a lot of technical background.<br />
* On Reddit, [http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/ this page] has a summary.</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Talk:Experimental_Results&diff=438Talk:Experimental Results2015-06-01T16:41:03Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>I'm added Iulian's test to the page. I realize that it is just approximate numbers and there are a lot of unknowns, but I think its useful to add as a rough comparison, as people can actually watch Iulian's test and this table helps put that measurement in relation to the other tests.<br />
<br />
Anyone want to take a stab at adding Juan Yang's published results? Also, are there more EW results to add?</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Hackaday.io_project&diff=437Hackaday.io project2015-06-01T16:40:10Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>The Hackaday.io EmDrive Project is an attempt by users Motolization, concretedog56, and movax to replicate Shawyer's Flight Thruster, as well as create a 25ghz version of the EmDrive that would be suitable for a spacelaunch on a micro satellite. The two tests are being conducted concurrently. <br />
<br />
== Current Status ==<br />
<br />
The test platform for the 25Ghz version has been completed, and testing is expected to begin in June, 2015<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Hackaday.io_project&diff=436Hackaday.io project2015-06-01T16:38:30Z<p>Sfrank: Created page with "== Summary == The Hackaday.io EmDrive Project is an attempt by users Motolization, concretedog56, and movax to replicate Shawyer's Flight Thruster, as well as create a 25ghz..."</p>
<hr />
<div>== Summary ==<br />
<br />
The Hackaday.io EmDrive Project is an attempt by users Motolization, concretedog56, and movax to replicate Shawyer's Flight Thruster, as well as create a 25ghz version of the EmDrive that would be suitable for a spacelaunch on a micro satellite. The two tests are being conducted concurrently. <br />
<br />
== Current Status ==<br />
<br />
The test platform for the 25Ghz version has been completed, and testing is expected to begin in June, 2015</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Building&diff=435Building2015-06-01T16:32:21Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page will collect any photos, plans, and instructions for do-it-yourselfers. Efforts with enough documentation will be provided their own pages.<br />
<br />
# [[Mulletron's Build]]<br />
# Kurt Zeller (@zellerium) and Brian Kraft from Cal Poly are starting a build as well, using a constant cross-section cavity containing a polymer dielectric.<ref>[https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1368153#msg1368153 Forum post by @zellerium]</ref><br />
# @DIYFan - TBD<br />
# [[@Notsosureofit is planning testing with a Gunn diode]].<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370647#msg1370647 Later forum post by @Rodal, can't find original post]</ref><br />
# @TheTraveller<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370597#msg1370597 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# [[Iulian Berca|@Iulian Berca]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371164#msg1371164 Forum post by @Iulian Berca]</ref> - Fabricated a drive in May 2015 and was posting videos at [http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/ his website]. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ Test 3] he reported a force measurement toward "the small end" and later a smaller measurement in the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI reverse orientation in test 3.1]. As of 5/21/15 the magnitude and significance of these measurements were being debated on the [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377695#msg1377695 NSF forum].<br />
# @SeeShells<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371206#msg1371206 Forum post by @SeeShells]</ref><br />
# @R. W. Keyes / Andromeda Research - high power, 1-20KW magnetron, superconductor Magnesium diboride on silicon carbide, to start summer 2015<br />
# [[hackaday.io project|@movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1372073#msg1372073 Forum post by Hackaday.io]</ref> - Building the original 2.45 GHz thruster according to the Chinese paper and their own 25 GHz design simultaneously, with estimated completion date of July 2015. See [https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive Hackaday project] for more details, as well as [http://n-o-d-e.net/post/119343131451/building-a-diy-emdrive an interview with Paul]. As of 5/31/15, some related projects were also posted by Paul to Hackaday.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382129#msg1382129 Forum post by @Rodal]</ref><br />
# Others?<br />
<br />
== Modelling ==<br />
@phaseshift has built a SketchUp model<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380107#msg1380107 post by @phaseshift]</ref> ([[File:EM_Thruster.skp]]) of a frustrum based on the estimated Shawyer Flight Thruster dimensions.<br />
<br />
@TheTraveller constructed a [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MyR1I2TzlOBXV7xnsxw32UGm7-JxbDIkNViC5F09rGU/edit#gid=1647834149 spreadsheet] to model thrust given various design parameters.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382349#msg1382349 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref> This model was built with some input from Roger Shawyer directly.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Building&diff=434Building2015-06-01T16:29:08Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page will collect any photos, plans, and instructions for do-it-yourselfers. Efforts with enough documentation will be provided their own pages.<br />
<br />
# [[Mulletron's Build]]<br />
# Kurt Zeller (@zellerium) and Brian Kraft from Cal Poly are starting a build as well, using a constant cross-section cavity containing a polymer dielectric.<ref>[https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1368153#msg1368153 Forum post by @zellerium]</ref><br />
# @DIYFan - TBD<br />
# [[@Notsosureofit is planning testing with a Gunn diode]].<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370647#msg1370647 Later forum post by @Rodal, can't find original post]</ref><br />
# @TheTraveller<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370597#msg1370597 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# @[[Iulian Berca]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371164#msg1371164 Forum post by @Iulian Berca]</ref> - Fabricated a drive in May 2015 and was posting videos at [http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/ his website]. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ Test 3] he reported a force measurement toward "the small end" and later a smaller measurement in the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI reverse orientation in test 3.1]. As of 5/21/15 the magnitude and significance of these measurements were being debated on the [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377695#msg1377695 NSF forum].<br />
# @SeeShells<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371206#msg1371206 Forum post by @SeeShells]</ref><br />
# @R. W. Keyes / Andromeda Research - high power, 1-20KW magnetron, superconductor Magnesium diboride on silicon carbide, to start summer 2015<br />
# @movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1372073#msg1372073 Forum post by Hackaday.io]</ref> - Building the original 2.45 GHz thruster according to the Chinese paper and their own 25 GHz design simultaneously, with estimated completion date of July 2015. See [https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive Hackaday project] for more details, as well as [http://n-o-d-e.net/post/119343131451/building-a-diy-emdrive an interview with Paul]. As of 5/31/15, some related projects were also posted by Paul to Hackaday.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382129#msg1382129 Forum post by @Rodal]</ref><br />
# Others?<br />
<br />
== Modelling ==<br />
@phaseshift has built a SketchUp model<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380107#msg1380107 post by @phaseshift]</ref> ([[File:EM_Thruster.skp]]) of a frustrum based on the estimated Shawyer Flight Thruster dimensions.<br />
<br />
@TheTraveller constructed a [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MyR1I2TzlOBXV7xnsxw32UGm7-JxbDIkNViC5F09rGU/edit#gid=1647834149 spreadsheet] to model thrust given various design parameters.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382349#msg1382349 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref> This model was built with some input from Roger Shawyer directly.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Iulian_Berca&diff=433Iulian Berca2015-06-01T16:27:05Z<p>Sfrank: Added basic info on Iulian's tests. Will add more concrete data later.</p>
<hr />
<div>Romanian engineer Iulian Berca began EmDrive experiments in May, 2015. He was the first amateur experimenter to fabricate a working EmDrive and sucessfully record thrust from the device.<br />
<br />
== Experimental Setup ==<br />
Iulian Berca built a copper fustrum with dimensions similar to the device tested by NASA Eagleworks in 2014 and 2015. He powered this device with a 800-1200W magnetron directly inserted into the fustrum. He originally tested this in a horizontal orientation suspended from fishing line, hoping to visually detect thrust. He then changed his testing setup to hang the fustrum from a balance arm resting on a microgram scale. Thrust was then detected based on changes in the weight measured by the scale.<br />
<br />
== Test Results ==<br />
<br />
Berca's first two tests were inconclusive, as thrust was not visually detectable. In test #3, thrust was detected with the fustrum's direction of motion oriented up (small end up). In test 3.1 he reversed the orientation (small end down) and again detected thrust.<br />
<br />
== Future Plans ==<br />
<br />
Berca is currently modifying the fustrum to include an adjustable plate on the small end similar to Shawyer's demonstration unit (though without the motor; adjustments will be made manually). He will then retest multiple times to find what length provides optimal thrust.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Building&diff=431Building2015-06-01T16:14:42Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page will collect any photos, plans, and instructions for do-it-yourselfers. Efforts with enough documentation will be provided their own pages.<br />
<br />
# [[Mulletron's Build]]<br />
# Kurt Zeller (@zellerium) and Brian Kraft from Cal Poly are starting a build as well, using a constant cross-section cavity containing a polymer dielectric.<ref>[https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1368153#msg1368153 Forum post by @zellerium]</ref><br />
# @DIYFan - TBD<br />
# [[@Notsosureofit is planning testing with a Gunn diode]].<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370647#msg1370647 Later forum post by @Rodal, can't find original post]</ref><br />
# @TheTraveller<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370597#msg1370597 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref><br />
# @[[Iulian Berca]]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371164#msg1371164 Forum post by @Iulian Berca]</ref> - Fabricated a drive in May 2015 and was posting videos at [http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/ his website]. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ Test 3.1] he reported a force measurement toward "the small end" and later a smaller measurement in the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI reverse orientation]. As of 5/21/15 the magnitude and significance of these measurements were being debated on the [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377695#msg1377695 NSF forum].<br />
# @SeeShells<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1371206#msg1371206 Forum post by @SeeShells]</ref><br />
# @R. W. Keyes / Andromeda Research - high power, 1-20KW magnetron, superconductor Magnesium diboride on silicon carbide, to start summer 2015<br />
# @movax (Paul Kocyla) and Jo Hinchliffe<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1372073#msg1372073 Forum post by Hackaday.io]</ref> - Building the original 2.45 GHz thruster according to the Chinese paper and their own 25 GHz design simultaneously, with estimated completion date of July 2015. See [https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive Hackaday project] for more details, as well as [http://n-o-d-e.net/post/119343131451/building-a-diy-emdrive an interview with Paul]. As of 5/31/15, some related projects were also posted by Paul to Hackaday.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382129#msg1382129 Forum post by @Rodal]</ref><br />
# Others?<br />
<br />
== Modelling ==<br />
@phaseshift has built a SketchUp model<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380107#msg1380107 post by @phaseshift]</ref> ([[File:EM_Thruster.skp]]) of a frustrum based on the estimated Shawyer Flight Thruster dimensions.<br />
<br />
@TheTraveller constructed a [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MyR1I2TzlOBXV7xnsxw32UGm7-JxbDIkNViC5F09rGU/edit#gid=1647834149 spreadsheet] to model thrust given various design parameters.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382349#msg1382349 Forum post by @TheTraveller]</ref> This model was built with some input from Roger Shawyer directly.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Todd_Desiato_(@WarpTech)%27s_Evanescent_Wave_Theory&diff=430Todd Desiato (@WarpTech)'s Evanescent Wave Theory2015-06-01T15:03:21Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Summary == <br />
Todd Desiato (@WarpTech on Nasaspaceflight forums) has put forth a theory that explains the EMDrive's thrust as a result of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizable_vacuum Polzarizable Vacuum] model of General Relativity. <br />
<br />
== Explanation of the Polarizable Vaccuum Model ==<br />
The PV Model was developed by Harold Puthoff as an alternative explanation of gravity and electromagnetism. It is a scalar theory of gravity, which posits that spacetime has a refractive index, much like glass, and that the presence of mass causes spacetime to refract energy, resulting in gravity.<br />
<br />
== Application of Theory to the EmDrive ==<br />
According to @WarpTech, the EMDrive function mimics this refraction, but only across the specific wavelengths that correspond to its internal geometry. As microwave energy builds within the fustrum, the energy becomes concentrated at the larger end. Because the energy density is not evenly distributed, the refractive index has a gradient from the big end to the small end. This mimics gravity at the wavelength of microwaves. As the microwaves "fall" towards the small end, their wavelengths are attenuated and momentum is absorbed by the fustrum as the group velocity goes to zero near the small end. The result is propultion in the direction of the small end of the fustrum. <br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
There is not yet enough experiemental data to validate @WarpTech's theory. Additional data, particularly from superconducting EmDrive experiements, may result in data that is relevant to validating or disproving this theory.<br />
<br />
== Predictions and Evidence ==<br />
Notably, it is solely the geometry of the fustrum that is relevant to this effect under @WarpTech's theory. A higher power level or higher Q would not result in higher thrust. The Q factor is only relevant as a measure of the stored amount of energy. The fustrum itself does not need to resonate, and to this end, @WarpTech has proposed decoupling the resonance chamber from the attenuation chamber. He suggests a design where resonance is induced in a long cylindrical waveguide, then energy is periodically dumped into a fustrum to attenuate. So far this design has not been tested. See [[List of Suggested Experiments]]</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Todd_Desiato_(@WarpTech)%27s_Evanescent_Wave_Theory&diff=429Todd Desiato (@WarpTech)'s Evanescent Wave Theory2015-06-01T15:03:06Z<p>Sfrank: Formatted to match Mike McCullough's theory page</p>
<hr />
<div>=== Summary === <br />
Todd Desiato (@WarpTech on Nasaspaceflight forums) has put forth a theory that explains the EMDrive's thrust as a result of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizable_vacuum Polzarizable Vacuum] model of General Relativity. <br />
<br />
== Explanation of the Polarizable Vaccuum Model ==<br />
The PV Model was developed by Harold Puthoff as an alternative explanation of gravity and electromagnetism. It is a scalar theory of gravity, which posits that spacetime has a refractive index, much like glass, and that the presence of mass causes spacetime to refract energy, resulting in gravity.<br />
<br />
== Application of Theory to the EmDrive ==<br />
According to @WarpTech, the EMDrive function mimics this refraction, but only across the specific wavelengths that correspond to its internal geometry. As microwave energy builds within the fustrum, the energy becomes concentrated at the larger end. Because the energy density is not evenly distributed, the refractive index has a gradient from the big end to the small end. This mimics gravity at the wavelength of microwaves. As the microwaves "fall" towards the small end, their wavelengths are attenuated and momentum is absorbed by the fustrum as the group velocity goes to zero near the small end. The result is propultion in the direction of the small end of the fustrum. <br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
There is not yet enough experiemental data to validate @WarpTech's theory. Additional data, particularly from superconducting EmDrive experiements, may result in data that is relevant to validating or disproving this theory.<br />
<br />
== Predictions and Evidence ==<br />
Notably, it is solely the geometry of the fustrum that is relevant to this effect under @WarpTech's theory. A higher power level or higher Q would not result in higher thrust. The Q factor is only relevant as a measure of the stored amount of energy. The fustrum itself does not need to resonate, and to this end, @WarpTech has proposed decoupling the resonance chamber from the attenuation chamber. He suggests a design where resonance is induced in a long cylindrical waveguide, then energy is periodically dumped into a fustrum to attenuate. So far this design has not been tested. See [[List of Suggested Experiments]]</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Mike_McCulloch%27s_MiHsC_Theory&diff=428Mike McCulloch's MiHsC Theory2015-06-01T14:57:30Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>Mike McCulloch's theory is that the EmDrive thrust results from an internal pressure differential in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_effect Unruh Radiation.]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1319944#msg1319944 Rodal on McCulloch's theory.]</ref><ref>[http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-3d.html 13/2/15 post by Mike McCulloch, MiHsC vs Emdrive: 3d]</ref><ref>[http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2015/PP-40-15.PDF McCulloch, M.E., 2015. Can the emdrive be explained by quantised inertia? Progress in Physics, 11, 1, 78-80]</ref> See also: http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/<br />
<br />
== Explanation of MiHsC Theory ==<br />
<br />
Modified Hubble-scale Casimir Effect Theory, or MiHsC, is a theory developed by Mike McCullough, a physicist at Plymouth University in Plymouth, England. The theory attempts to explain the cause of inertia, which is not completely explained by general and special relativity. MiHsC theory relies on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach%27s_principle Mach's Principle], which states that distant objects can influence inertia of mass. But there is a boundary as to how far away the objects influencing intertia can be. This boundary is the point at which light (and therefore any information) will never be able to reach an object because universal expansion outpaces the speed of light. Anything beyond this point (called the Rindler event horizon) is outside the observable universe and therefore can't effect the object at the center of the Rindler space. MiHsC further posits that the Rindler event horizon is effectively the same as a black hole's event horizon. At a black hole's event horizon, quantum virtual particle pairs are occaisionally separated by gravity resulting in particle emissions known as Hawking Radiation. For a Rindler horizon, a similar radiation is suspected to exist called [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_effect Unruh radiation]. MiHsC posts that Unruh radiation causes inertia. As a particle moves, the Rindler information horizon expands in the direction of travel, and contracts behind it. This results in a pressure differential in the Unruh radiation experienced by the moving object. More Unruh radiation hits the object from the direction of travel, resulting in the effect we observe as inertia. In addition to explaining EmDrive motion witout violating Conservation of Momentum, MiHsC theory also notably resolves the observed discrepancies in galactic spin and cosmological expansion without the need for dark matter or dark energy.<br />
<br />
== Application to EmDrive == <br />
<br />
In the case of the EmDrive, the metal walls act as the event horizon for Unruh radiation created within the cavity. The wavelengths of this radiation are normally light-years across, but inside the EmDrive they are compressed to roughly the size of the EmDrive. Fewer Unruh waves will fit at the small end of the fustrum, resulting in a pressure differential. Photons at the larger end therefore have a higher inertial mass, and to conserve momentum in our reference frame, its frame, the cavity, must move towards the narrow end. The predicted thrust is, approximately, for a truncated cone cavity:<br />
<br />
F = P Q L/c * (1/Ds - 1/Db)<br />
<br />
where c is the speed of light in the medium inside the cavity, P is input power (watt), Q is the quality factor of resonance, L is the cavity length (meter), Ds is the small end diameter (meter) and Db the big end diameter (meter).<br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
<br />
Dr. McCullough is still refining his theory with respect to the EmDrive and intends to publish additional papers which may include testable predictions for the EmDrive.<br />
<br />
== Predictions & Evidence ==<br />
The derivation & comparisons with the data are given in this paper: [http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2015/PP-40-15.PDF Can the Emdrive Be Explained by Quantised Inertia?] The predictions are in rough agreement with the observed thrust of various experiements. Further testing is necessary to exclude enironmental artifacts.<br />
<br />
MiHsC predicts that thrust can be increased by increasing either input power, Q factor, taper of the cone, or use of a dielectric. In addition, by changing the input Rf frequency, it should be possible to cause the Unruh radiation to better fit in the small end than the large. This would result in thrust in the opposite direction.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=List_of_Suggested_Experiments&diff=425List of Suggested Experiments2015-06-01T14:55:17Z<p>Sfrank: Good comments but please use the discussion page so as not to clutter the wiki.</p>
<hr />
<div>This page compiles suggestions for as-yet untested variations in experiment designs for EmDrive testing. When possible, links to the original suggestion and a brief description of the justification for this test are provided.<br />
<br />
Note: For purposes of this list, the baseline for experimentation is considered to be a copper fustrum with either a magnetron or coaxial RF feed operated at approximately 2.45Ghz, similar to Shawyer's Feasability Study<br />
<br />
== Design/Shape Modifications == <br />
# Replace solid endplates with a circular grid design similar to the endplates used by Cullen in his 1950's waveguide experiments,<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1370479#msg1370479 Forum post by Rodal]</ref> or a mesh as the one used for the glass windows in home-microwave-ovens, having a spacing between mesh or grids small enough such that only wavelengths smaller than that can get through.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376108#msg1376108 Forum post by demofsky]</ref> Purpose: to allow convection through the fustrum, eliminate buoyancy, thermal jet effects, natural thermal convection currents, and other gas effects.<br />
# Place [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet) ferrite beads] in the fustrum, either one large one next to an endplate or a pattern of them along a line in the longitudinal direction. Purpose: to increase attenuation gradient in TE modes, having an axial magnetic field.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1380265#msg1380265 Forum post by Rodal] summarizing several prior posts.</ref><br />
# Build Large end plate out of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29#Values_for_some_common_materials Metglas] or a similar material with high magnetic permeability like cast iron or any ferrite.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1381091#msg1381091 Forum post by Flyby] referencing earlier posts.</ref> Purpose: to test de Aquino's conjecture regarding the effect of power dissipation at the end faces of the truncated cone.<br />
# Place a ruby inside near one of the ends to emit at 2.4 GHz as used in solid state Masers.<br />
# Fill the fustrum with ammonia gas to emit at 24GHz. Purpose: To produce maser-like amplification inside the fustrum.<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379801#msg1379801 Forum post by aero], in response to [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1379763#msg1379763 Rodal's explanation of the history of maser development].</ref><br />
# Place a dielectric next to the Small end, as done by NASA Eagleworks, who found extruded HDPE to be slightly better than extruded PTFE. Do not use molded (instead of extruded) polymers. NASA Eagleworks found that Neoprene rubber performed poorly as a dielectric in the EM Drive, as it resulted in considerably less thrust.<br />
# Separate resonance and attenuation chambers (proposed by WarpTech)<br />
# Apply a silver or gold coating to the inside of a copper fustrum. Purpose: The increase microwave reflectivity, and therefore increase Q factor.<br />
<br />
== Experimental Measurement Setups ==<br />
# Use smokesticks to test for out-gassing and hot air jets from the fustrum<ref>Credit to @Seeshells</ref><br />
# Test on a zero-g simulator flight.<br />
# Cavendish Pendulum<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20080508011932/http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2005/2005-07-01/feature1/index.html</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=420Talk:Main Page2015-06-01T14:52:17Z<p>Sfrank: Created page with "I've noticed there's no standard formatting set up across the pages. Is there a design template we can use for creating pages? If not, it would at least be nice to try and h..."</p>
<hr />
<div>I've noticed there's no standard formatting set up across the pages. Is there a design template we can use for creating pages? If not, it would at least be nice to try and have a consistent use of the term EM Drive vs emdrive, EmDrive, etc. I would note that EmDrive is Shawyer's preferred convention.</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Mike_McCulloch%27s_MiHsC_Theory&diff=418Mike McCulloch's MiHsC Theory2015-06-01T14:49:56Z<p>Sfrank: Added preface explaining basics of MiHsC, added predictions of theory, other minor edits for clarity.</p>
<hr />
<div>Mike McCulloch's theory is that the EmDrive thrust results from an internal pressure differential in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_effect Unruh Radiation.]<ref>[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1319944#msg1319944 Rodal on McCulloch's theory.]</ref><ref>[http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-3d.html 13/2/15 post by Mike McCulloch, MiHsC vs Emdrive: 3d]</ref><ref>[http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2015/PP-40-15.PDF McCulloch, M.E., 2015. Can the emdrive be explained by quantised inertia? Progress in Physics, 11, 1, 78-80]</ref> See also: http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/<br />
<br />
== Explanation of MiHsC Theory ==<br />
<br />
Modified Hubble-scale Casimir Effect Theory, or MiHsC, is a theory developed by Mike McCullough, a physicist at Plymouth University in Plymouth, England. The theory attempts to explain the cause of inertia, which is not completely explained by general and special relativity. MiHsC theory relies on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach%27s_principle Mach's Principle], which states that distant objects can influence inertia of mass. But there is a boundary as to how far away the objects influencing intertia can be. This boundary is the point at which light (and therefore any information) will never be able to reach an object because universal expansion outpaces the speed of light. Anything beyond this point (called the Rindler event horizon) is outside the observable universe and therefore can't effect the object at the center of the Rindler space. MiHsC further posits that the Rindler event horizon is effectively the same as a black hole's event horizon. At a black hole's event horizon, quantum virtual particle pairs are occaisionally separated by gravity resulting in particle emissions known as Hawking Radiation. For a Rindler horizon, a similar radiation is suspected to exist called [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_effect Unruh radiation]. MiHsC posts that Unruh radiation causes inertia. As a particle moves, the Rindler information horizon expands in the direction of travel, and contracts behind it. This results in a pressure differential in the Unruh radiation experienced by the moving object. More Unruh radiation hits the object from the direction of travel, resulting in the effect we observe as inertia. In addition to explaining EmDrive motion witout violating Conservation of Momentum, MiHsC theory also notably resolves the observed discrepancies in galactic spin and cosmological expansion without the need for dark matter or dark energy.<br />
<br />
== Application to EmDrive == <br />
<br />
In the case of the EmDrive, the metal walls act as the event horizon for Unruh radiation created within the cavity. The wavelengths of this radiation are normally light-years across, but inside the EmDrive they are compressed to roughly the size of the EmDrive. Fewer Unruh waves will fit at the small end of the fustrum, resulting in a pressure differential. Photons at the larger end therefore have a higher inertial mass, and to conserve momentum in our reference frame, its frame, the cavity, must move towards the narrow end. The predicted thrust is, approximately, for a truncated cone cavity:<br />
<br />
F = P Q L/c * (1/Ds - 1/Db)<br />
<br />
where c is the speed of light in the medium inside the cavity, P is input power (watt), Q is the quality factor of resonance, L is the cavity length (meter), Ds is the small end diameter (meter) and Db the big end diameter (meter).<br />
<br />
== Status ==<br />
<br />
Dr. McCullough is still refining his theory with respect to the EmDrive and intends to publish additional papers which may include testable predictions for the EmDrive.<br />
<br />
== Predictions & Evidence ==<br />
The derivation & comparisons with the data are given in this paper: [http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2015/PP-40-15.PDF Can the Emdrive Be Explained by Quantised Inertia?] The predictions are in rough agreement with the observed thrust of various experiements. Further testing is necessary to exclude enironmental artifacts.<br />
<br />
MiHsC predicts that increasing either input power and Q factor (or both) will result in greater thrust. Thrust is also inversely proportional to the speed of light. By introducing a dielectric medium such as water to the interior, the microwaves would be slowed resulting in greater thrust. In addition, by changing the input Rf frequency, it should be possible to cause the Unruh radiation to better fit in the small end than the large. This would result in thrust in the opposite direction.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Talk:Experimental_Results&diff=417Talk:Experimental Results2015-06-01T13:58:28Z<p>Sfrank: </p>
<hr />
<div>I'm added Iulian's test to the page. I realize that it is just approximate numbers and there are a lot of unknowns, but I think its useful to add as a rough comparison, as people can actually watch Iulian's test and this table helps put that measurement in relation to the other tests.</div>Sfrankhttp://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php?title=Experimental_Results&diff=416Experimental Results2015-06-01T13:56:58Z<p>Sfrank: Added Iulian tests 3/3.1 with caveat that thrust and input are extremely approximate. Will create a page dedicated to his tests to explain results in detaiil.</p>
<hr />
<div>== Forces, Power, Frequency and Dimensions ==<br />
<br />
The current best estimates for the parameters of various test articles run by public and private research labs ([[NASA Eagleworks]], [[SPR Ltd.]], and [[NWPU]]) is here, along with the 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). See [[Building]] for details on drives built by do-it-yourselfers.<br />
<br />
Credit to Dr. Rodal and others for the great effort in [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1376840#msg1376840 compiling these]. Please note some caveats for this data, at that link.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! style="text-align:left;"| Description || Cavity Length (m) || bigDiameter (m) || smallDiameter (m) ||Shawyer Design Factor || Dielectric || Frequency (Hertz) || Power (W) || Q || Force (mN) || Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) ||Force/Power Multiple of Photon Rocket<br />
|-<br />
|Cannae Superconducting Ambient|| 0.03 || 0.220 || 0.200 || || None || 1.047*10^9 || 10.5 || 1.1*10^7 || 8-10 || 761.9 - 952.4 || 228400 - 285500<br />
|-<br />
|Shawyer Experimental Ambient|| 0.156 || 0.16 || 0.1025 || 0.497 || Yes || 2.45*10^9 || 850 || 5900 || 16 || 18.82 ||5640<br />
|-<br />
|Shawyer Demo Ambient||0.317 to 0.187 || 0.28 || 0.17027 || 0.484<ref>Forum posts by [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377281#msg1377281 @phaseshift], [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377650#msg1377650 @Rodal], and [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377697#msg1377697 @Rodal] - The Design Factor is reported as 0.844 in at least three of Shawyer's references; however using a Design Factor = 0.844 gives a much smaller diameter in conflict with the ratio of the small diameter to the big diameter shown in the picture of the Demonstrator in Shawyer's publications, so it is assumed that was an unintentional typo (0.844 instead of 0.484, which results in a small diameter that agrees with the published image). The smallDiameter shown here was recalculated from the revised Design Factor (0.484).<br />
The cavity length is estimated as 0.317 to 0.187. The larger number takes into account the full length of the cylindrical part of the EM Drive Demo and the smaller number corresponds only to the length of the truncated cone section. Please notice that the Demo has a variable length actuated by a gear mechanism, in order to tune the cavity to achieve resonance http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/images/2008/09/24/emdrive_2.jpg .</ref> || None || 2.45*10^9 || 421-1200|| 45000 || 102.30 || 80-243 || 23980 - 72830<br />
|-<br />
|Brady a (TM212) Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.9326*10^9 || 16.9||7320 || 0.0912|| 5.396 || 1617.2<br />
|-<br />
|Brady b (TM212) Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.9367*10^9 || 16.7|| 18100 || 0.0501|| 3.000 || 899.12<br />
|-<br />
|Brady c (TE012) Ambient|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.8804*10^9 || 2.6|| 22000 || 0.05541|| 21.310 || 6386.7<br />
|-<br />
|March (TM212) Vacuum 5*10^(-6) Torr|| 0.2286 || 0.2794 || 0.15875 || || HDPE || 1.9371*10^9 || 50|| 6726 || 0.055|| 1.100 || 329.64<br />
|-<br />
|Fearn, Zachar, Woodward & Wanser Ambient - 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 || 3.526<br />
|-<br />
|Iulian Berca Tests 3 & 3.1 (averaged w/ air effects subtracted)<ref>The tests by Iulian Berca were not logged in a scientifically rigorous manner. However, because of the high profile nature of the tests, they are included here merely to give a rough comparison to the more scientifically rigorous tests. The measured thrust in this table is an average of multiple runs in tests 3 and 3.1, subtracting out the likely effects of hot air. @deltaMass calculated the net thrust for the EmDrive across both tests to be 0.29gf effective thrust, which is 2.84mN. See [http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1377713#msg1377713 here].</ref> || 0.02286 || 0.02794 || 0.01588 || || None || 2.463Ghz (magnetron) || 800 || n/a || 2.84 || 3.55 || 1063.82<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Photon Rocket Force / PowerInput (mN/kW) = 0.003337<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
Brady tests a & b : mode shape is noted as TM211 in Brady et.al.'s report. However, calculations show that TM211 should take place at a significant lower frequency and that this mode must have been TM212. Notice that Brady b took place practically at the same frequency as March TM212 test in vacuum<br />
<br />
March TM 212 test in vacuum: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327177#msg1327177</div>Sfrank