Talk:Experimental Results - Revision history

Monomorphic at 14:58, 18 December 2016

2016-12-18T14:58:57Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:58, 18 December 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:

			The Hackaday TE013 mode is not correct. I ran a frequency sweep on that frustum, with info from Paul K about antenna size and location. There were no TE01x modes excited. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIhE3PRKM6o

			__________________________________

	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)		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)

2016-01-24T12:23:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:23, 24 January 2016
Line 20:		Line 20:

	I think the date of experiment could be of interest. Regards.		I think the date of experiment could be of interest. Regards.

			---------------------------------------------------------
			I noted at the time the NASA results were published that they had not used the same design as used by EMDRIVE and China. They used a design patented by an American. The EMDRIVE seen at emdrive.com and tested by China is of a different patented design. I do not see that reflected in the page.

2015-12-09T12:50:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:50, 9 December 2015
Line 18:		Line 18:

	__________________________________		__________________________________

			I think the date of experiment could be of interest. Regards.

2015-06-14T13:43:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:43, 14 June 2015
Line 11:		Line 11:
	__________________________________		__________________________________

	I can find no data for the Brady et.al. Cannae test input power in Watts. You write that we have it. Can you please point where is the watts data ?		I can find no data for the Brady et.al. Cannae test input power in Watts. You write that we have it. Can you please point out where is the watts data ?

	No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because it has that same flying saucer strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below.		No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because it has that same flying saucer strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below.

2015-06-14T13:42:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:42, 14 June 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	__________________________________		__________________________________

			I added to the database the TE012 test that registered no thrust.

			__________________________________

	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)		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)

	__________________________________		__________________________________

			I can find no data for the Brady et.al. Cannae test input power in Watts. You write that we have it. Can you please point where is the watts data ?

	No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because it has that same flying saucer strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below.		No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because it has that same flying saucer strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below.

2015-06-14T13:29:44Z

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 __________________________________
 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)
@@ Line 25: / Line 13: @@
 __________________________________

2015-06-07T18:22:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:22, 7 June 2015
Line 23:		Line 23:

	It should be described something like this: '''"Cannae test by NASA Brady et.al."''' and placed right under the Cannae Superconducting test		It should be described something like this: '''"Cannae test by NASA Brady et.al."''' and placed right under the Cannae Superconducting test

			__________________________________

			I think that reporting the NASA tests in partial vacuum with the EM Drive turned around 180 degrees should be first priority.

2015-06-06T12:41:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:41, 6 June 2015
Line 20:		Line 20:
	__________________________________		__________________________________

	No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because it has that same flying saucer strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below		No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because it has that same flying saucer strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below.

			It should be described something like this: '''"Cannae test by NASA Brady et.al."''' and placed right under the Cannae Superconducting test

2015-06-06T03:47:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:47, 5 June 2015
Line 20:		Line 20:
	__________________________________		__________________________________

	No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because is has that same strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below		No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because it has that same flying saucer strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below

2015-06-06T03:46:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:46, 5 June 2015
Line 17:		Line 17:

	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)		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)

	__________________________________		__________________________________

	No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because is has that same strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below		No problemo with adding Brady et.al. Cannae test, but it should be done directly under the Cannae superconducting because is has that same strange shape. It is not the same shape as the rest of the data, so it should not be mixed with the data below