The Briefing Room
General Category => Science, Technology and Knowledge => Space => Topic started by: kevindavis007 on December 27, 2016, 12:36:07 am
-
EMDrive electromagnetic drive is used in a spacecraft as an engine EMDrive works with electromagnetic radiation. The people’s Republic of China has tested the space tech in labs, and its proved successful, as reported by Dr. Chen Yue, the Director of China Academy of Space Technology on December 10, 2016.
The traditional engines expel mass to move, but the EMDrive uses electricity to produce movement. It was first built by Roger Shawyer and was a microwave cavity that has a shortened cone that has an end bigger than the second. Electromagnetic energy enters the narrow end with the microwaves that hit the cavity walls and produce electromagnetic resonance.
EMDrive has a low impulse, and because of lack of friction and gravity in deep space, it would cause EMDrive to work at high speed. Engine performance depends on cavity material as well as temperature that impacts the electromagnetic field. This shows that the EMDrive would be relatively successful in the future because they’re built with superconducting components. Satellite design has to be compatible with the EMDrive to work well. So, the test is ongoing to check the efficiency of EMDrive.
Read More: http://www.isn-news.net/2016/12/china-claims-successful-emdrive-testing.html
-
Space Ping!
@Oceander
@Sanguine
@Cripplecreek
@Freya
@EC
@Joe Wooten
@r9etb
@Just_Victor
@montanajoe
@Ghost Bear
@Free Vulcan
@Idaho_Cowboy
@geronl
@Scutter
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBtk6xWDrwY
-
I guess if it works well enough to be useful they can use different materials and shapes to see if it improves performance
-
Think this one is going to be a classic in engineering. Since it shouldn't actually work in the first place, everything is going to be trial and error.
-
Think this one is going to be a classic in engineering. Since it shouldn't actually work in the first place, everything is going to be trial and error.
It used to be scientifically "proven" that heavier than aircraft could not fly and certainly not carry people. This could be a similar breakthrough to flight itself.
-
Just as long as the optimal drive chamber shape isn't the same as a Coke bottles. :tongue2:
(Wrote a story about that once - all interstellar exploration halted because of a cease and desist copyright letter)
-
Although the propulsion system will be a real advance forward, it seems to the real trick to making it practical is going to be figuring out how to avoid hitting space debris at those speeds....
-
Although the propulsion system will be a real advance forward, it seems to the real trick to making it practical is going to be figuring out how to avoid hitting space debris at those speeds....
Yep, force equals mass times velocity squared so at light speed hitting a grain of sand could generate the force of an atomic bomb. You also get into the problem of inertia. Humans can only take so many Gs so you can only accelerate so quickly.
-
Although the propulsion system will be a real advance forward, it seems to the real trick to making it practical is going to be figuring out how to avoid hitting space debris at those speeds....
They talked about Beryllium meters thick for project Deadalus but I'm thinking it will have to be something else. I've heard suggestions that a cloud of something like aerogel be produced in front of the ship to deflect at least the smaller stuff.
-
Yep, force equals mass times velocity squared so at light speed hitting a grain of sand could generate the force of an atomic bomb. You also get into the problem of inertia. Humans can only take so many Gs so you can only accelerate so quickly.
@Idaho_Cowboy
F=MA squared, MV squared is energy. Force is only necessary to change V, a constant V does not required a force to maintain it (in the vacuum of space).
-
They talked about Beryllium meters thick for project Deadalus but I'm thinking it will have to be something else. I've heard suggestions that a cloud of something like aerogel be produced in front of the ship to deflect at least the smaller stuff.
I think it is best that we test small probes before we start sending humans on Interstellar travel..
-
I think it is best that we test small probes before we start sending humans on Interstellar travel..
I don't believe project Deadalus ever called for a manned mission. At 10 or 12 percent of light speed they would make a pass by Barnard's star or Alpha Centauri and launch smaller probes upon approach to the system.
-
I don't believe project Deadalus ever called for a manned mission. At 10 or 12 percent of light speed they would make a pass by Barnard's star or Alpha Centauri and launch smaller probes upon approach to the system.
But I think we need to find the right shielding technology so Interstellar travel can be safe for humans. We are getting close to the speed part.
-
But I think we need to find the right shielding technology so Interstellar travel can be safe for humans. We are getting close to the speed part.
In the Passengers flick they used some sort of electromagnetic shielding and a big chunk of rock getting through the shielding is the source of their problem.
-
In the Passengers flick they used some sort of electromagnetic shielding and a big chunk of rock getting through the shielding is the source of their problem.
So the shielding in Passengers failed..
-
Although the propulsion system will be a real advance forward, it seems to the real trick to making it practical is going to be figuring out how to avoid hitting space debris at those speeds....
Not just dust and debris. You are moving at a significant fraction of the speed of light, the doppler effect is going to fry you - radio waves dopplered to visible light, visible bumped into x-ray territory, everything else as high energy gamma.
-
(Wrote a story about that once - all interstellar exploration halted because of a cease and desist copyright letter)
:silly:
-
Not just dust and debris. You are moving at a significant fraction of the speed of light, the doppler effect is going to fry you - radio waves dopplered to visible light, visible bumped into x-ray territory, everything else as high energy gamma.
I hadn't thought of that. Bring your sunglasses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_Doppler_effect
-
Here's a very interesting and detailed paper about the EmDrive claims:
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=36830 (http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=36830)
-
And here's the second article about the EmDrive:
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=36890 (http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=36890)
-
It used to be scientifically "proven" that heavier than aircraft could not fly and certainly not carry people. This could be a similar breakthrough to flight itself.
You need to read up a little more on how the Wright brothers developed their aircraft. They used a wind tunnel and proper Newtonian physics to develop their 3 axis controls. Quite a few scientists/engineers back in the 1890's on knew flight was possible, but the engine and controls technology had to be developed. Sam Langley was one of them. He came very close but tried using an engine that was not up to the task and his idea of controls was not right.
-
And here's the second article about the EmDrive:
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=36890 (http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=36890)
The Centauri Dreams articles were good. It looks like the only proper test will be to put up a satellite with one in it and see if it can change orbits. The reported thrust was within the margin of measurement error.
-
Interesting technology.....but how many million miles will it take to stop a space craft...lol. You could overshoot your destination by light years.
-
You need to read up a little more on how the Wright brothers developed their aircraft. They used a wind tunnel and proper Newtonian physics to develop their 3 axis controls. Quite a few scientists/engineers back in the 1890's on knew flight was possible, but the engine and controls technology had to be developed. Sam Langley was one of them. He came very close but tried using an engine that was not up to the task and his idea of controls was not right.
Very true, the kids version of the story focuses more on the obstacles to be overcome. There were naysayers, I forget which one claimed to "prove" it wouldn't work. Even Da vinci had and idea for a hang-glider but didn't have the materials to build it, if memory serves.
-
Very true, the kids version of the story focuses more on the obstacles to be overcome. There were naysayers, I forget which one claimed to "prove" it wouldn't work. Even Da vinci had and idea for a hang-glider but didn't have the materials to build it, if memory serves.
Lots of people were in a race to create the first flying machine.