Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent.

From	jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Newsgroups	sci.electronics.design, sci.physics, rec.arts.sf.science
Subject	Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent.
Date	2016-11-08 17:53 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<a1g9fd-5e.ln1@mail.specsol.com> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <babc343b-129f-4411-aa7a-b3e56c4ba756@googlegroups.com> <nvfftc$l09$1@dont-email.me> <nvobak$14l7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nvsstv$fqp$1@dont-email.me> <nvt1b3$1n8l$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

In sci.physics Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 11/8/2016 10:03 AM, Robert Clark wrote:
>> On 11/3/2016 9:00 AM, Robert Clark wrote:
>>>> Yes, that's a good example. Electric, battery-powered airplanes and
>>>> helicopters already exist.
>>>
>>> Toys.
>>>
>>>
>>>> However, the key point is according to the
>>>> mathematics you can get even better power-to-thrust ratio with ionic
>>>> propulsion using ionizing wires at the nanoscale than helicopters
>>>> achieve.
>>>
>>> what math ? got  a url ?
>>>
>>
>> As important as is the fact that you would no longer need heavy
>> transformers to produce tens of thousands of volts, even more important
>> is the high thrust-to-power ratio you can get by only using low voltages.
>>
>> This page describes the operation of the "lifters":
>>
>> Ionocraft.
>> 3. Mechanism.
>> "A generalized one-dimensional treatment gives the equation:
>>
>> F = I*d/k,
>> where
>> F is the resulting force, measured in dimension ML/T^2
>> I is the current flow of electric current, measured in dimension I.
>> d is the air gap distance, measured in dimension L.
>> k is the ion mobility coefficient of air, measured in dimension T^2 I/M
>> (Nominal value 2·10^−4 m^2/ Vs).
>>
>> "In its basic form, the ionocraft is able to produce forces great enough
>> to lift about a gram of payload per watt,[6] so its use is restricted to
>> a tethered model. Ionocraft capable of payloads in the order of a few
>> grams usually need to be powered by power sources and high voltage
>> converters weighing a few kilograms, so although its simplistic design
>> makes it an excellent way to experiment with this technology, it is
>> unlikely that a fully autonomous ionocraft will be made with the present
>> construction methods. Further study in electrohydrodynamics, however,
>> show that different classes and construction methods of EHD thrusters
>> and hybrid technology (mixture with lighter-than-air techniques), can
>> achieve much higher payload or thrust-to-power ratios than those
>> achieved with the simple lifter design. Practical limits can be worked
>> out using well defined theory and calculations.[7] Thus, a fully
>> autonomous EHD thruster is theoretically possible."
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionocraft#Mechanism
>>
>> Since the power is P = I*V, amperage times voltage, the key thrust to
>> power ratio is F/P = d/kV. So if the air gap distance d remains the
>> same, reducing the voltage increases the thrust-power ratio. Then
>> theoretically IF the lifter is able to operate at hundreds of volts
>> instead tens of thousands of volts you could increase the thrust/power
>> ratio hundred(s) of times.
>>
>> Note that you can't just arbitrarily use a low voltage. You need
>> sufficient voltage to initiate air ionization. Experiments have
>> confirmed that for wires at the nanoscale you do get the important
>> corona inception (air ionization) for voltages in the only 100's of
>> volts range. However, it is very important to note that when you reduce
>> the voltage and wire diameter the thrust is also reduced. Indeed to get
>> thrust sufficient for large scale objects you would then need to use
>> millions to billions of the nanowires.
>>
>> Since the wires are only nanometers wide there is no problem in regards
>> to their fitting beneath a transport craft. But the large number of
>> wires required would be a consideration in regards to the wires corona
>> regions. You can't pack the wires too close together and maintain
>> maximum thrust since interaction between the separate corona's reduces
>> thrust. Among amateur experimenters that have built them, a lot of
>> experimentation has gone into the best geometry to maximize thrust.  A
>> common arrangement is the triangular shape, with larger lifters
>> constructed using this basic shape as cells to build up to larger devices.
>>
>> The reason you don't have just have a bunch of parallel wires bunched
>> close together with the lifters is because of the corona region
>> interaction at small distance. Then there would have to be a significant
>> degree of experimentation to determine how close the nanowires could be
>> packed while maintaining maximum thrust.
>>
>> In regards to the comparison of the thrust/power ratio of the lifters
>> compared to helicopters. This is a parameter known as power loading for
>> hovering transports. For helicopters it's commonly in the range of 6 to
>> 10 lb/hp:
>>
>> Helicopter Aerodynamics and Performance.
>> http://images.slideplayer.com/12/3493118/slides/slide_51.jpg
>>
>> This is about 3.6 to 6 grams-thrust/watt. The lifters currently made
>> using macroscale wires get about 1 gram-thrust per watt in thrust/power
>> ratio. So if the nanowire lifters really were able to manage a hundred
>> times better thrust/power ratio than current lifters, that would be a
>> major advance for hovering transport craft. Even if the nanowire lifters
>> only improve the thrust/power ratio over current lifters by a factor of
>> 10, that would still be an improvement over current helicopters.
>>
>>  Bob Clark
>>
> 
> A helicopter...a real one that is....can weigh as little as 1300 to 1600 
> pounds for a 2 place piston, like a Robinson R22 ( guessing the weight) 
> to a BK 117 like I fly which grosses out at 3200 Kgs to the huge Russian 
> machines that are up to over 100,000Kgs. The Mil V-12 is the largest I 
> believe. Whatever their weight they are sure to consume huge amounts of 
> fuel whatever they do.
> 
> 1300 lb = 589,670 grams  or about 589,670 watts required using your 
> conversion ratio,
> 
> assume you are using a max of 1 micro amp through your nano wires, then 
> the voltage needs to be  W = V * I  or 589,670 = V * 10^-6 or 
> 58,967,000,000 Volts
> 
> unfortunatly, this amount of voltage breaks down air insulation for 
> several thousand feet, so the explosion and arc over will wipe out the 
> wires.
 
Or if you can make it work on a reduced voltage to each wire then you
need billions of wires in parallel and a huge supply current.
 
And it is current in a power supply that necessities big heavy wires,
not voltage because of I^2*R.


-- 
Jim Pennino

Thread

Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-01 11:09 -0400
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-01 08:51 -0700
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2016-11-01 14:27 -0400
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-01 22:01 -0400
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 09:16 -0400
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-03 08:33 -0700
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-04 07:29 -0400
          Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-04 07:35 -0400
            Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-04 12:20 -0700
              Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-06 12:23 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-11-06 16:28 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 19:13 -0700
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-11-04 11:52 -0700
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-11-01 10:16 -0700
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-01 18:16 +0000
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-11-01 18:44 -0400
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-02 22:31 -0500
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-03 07:27 -0500
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-11-03 09:26 -0400
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-03 12:04 -0500
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-11-03 18:03 -0700
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-04 15:28 -0400
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-04 21:03 +0000
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-01 18:19 +0000
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-01 14:13 -0700
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-02 00:00 +0000
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-01 22:05 -0400
          Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-02 02:54 +0000
            Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-02 20:20 -0400
              Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2016-11-03 02:24 +0100
              Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 02:02 +0000
              Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-11-03 07:41 -0400
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-01 19:10 -0500
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-01 22:06 -0400
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-11-01 19:12 -0700
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-02 02:57 +0000
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-11-01 14:24 -0700
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 10:35 -0400
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 17:39 +0000
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-06 13:12 -0500
          Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-06 19:54 +0000
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-11-03 11:37 -0700
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-01 19:08 -0500
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2016-11-02 00:33 -0800
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-11-03 01:05 -0700
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 17:43 +0000
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-04 15:38 -0400
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Bill Martin <wwm@wwmartin.net> - 2016-11-02 11:47 -0700
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 09:28 -0400
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 09:48 -0400
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-03 08:41 -0700
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-03 12:22 -0500
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-04 16:09 -0400
          Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-04 21:09 +0000
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-07 07:29 -0500
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-07 18:37 +0000
          Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2016-11-07 15:31 -0500
            Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-07 21:46 +0000
              Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-11-07 18:18 -0800
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 03:39 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-11-07 20:51 -0800
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 07:13 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-08 12:28 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-11-08 13:33 -0800
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 22:05 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@somewhere.com> - 2016-11-08 18:45 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-09 00:13 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@somewhere.com> - 2016-11-08 19:46 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-09 01:05 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hpe.com> - 2016-11-09 18:26 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-09 20:03 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 19:21 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 08:40 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 02:55 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-11-14 06:02 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 11:31 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 05:54 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 13:47 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 12:35 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-15 00:04 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-11-14 13:37 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 18:52 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-11-14 14:56 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 13:17 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-14 12:53 -0600
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 19:19 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 18:57 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 11:27 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 05:52 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 13:56 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 12:47 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 23:58 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 22:07 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-11-15 20:34 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-15 21:42 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-16 09:05 +0000
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-16 02:13 -0700
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@somewhere.com> - 2016-11-16 20:32 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 16:37 -0800
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 17:49 +0000
  Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 10:00 -0400
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 17:51 +0000
    Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-06 16:37 -0600
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2016-11-07 02:28 +0100
      Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-08 11:03 -0500
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-08 11:17 -0600
          Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 17:53 +0000
          Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-13 12:09 -0500
            Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-13 12:04 -0600
              Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-13 20:34 -0500
                Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-13 20:12 -0600
        Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 17:37 +0000
          Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-13 10:53 -0500
            Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-13 12:09 -0600

csiph-web