PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2023-02-01, 06:18:51
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Particle velocity in materials, a route to OU?  (Read 2731 times)

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1739
Looking back over my old work I have discovered some papers I wrote when I took part in the Steorn discussion forums.  I think they may be of interest here on this forum.  Of particular interest is something I learned about during my professional career associated with military hardware, and in particular guided weapons.  Some guided weapons are designed to explode on impact with a hard target, and I learned about experiments to investigate the optimum positions to place the impact sensors.

The study of forces with very fast rise times is a specialist subject not generally taught to electromagnetic engineers.  It is mainly of interest to scientists involved with hypervelocity impacts or detonation waves.  The important thing to realize is that the sudden application of a force at one point on a body does not immediately give rise to that force being available at another point on the body.  This is particularly noticeable in high-speed impacts.  There is a time delay between the sudden application of force on the nose of the missile and its presence at any position along the missile structure.  During this time a stress wave is propagating through the material at “particle velocity”.  Particle velocity is not the same as acoustic velocity.  Particle velocity varies with stress, the plot of this velocity against stress is known as the Hugoniot for the material.  In the case of a missile hitting a target, if the missile is traveling at a velocity greater then the particle velocity the front end of the missile gets crushed before the back end knows anything has hit it.

I think this aspect of time delay between the application of a force on one end of a structure and its appearance at the other end is something worth investigating, as it is a route to non-reciprocity and possible to OU.  To start the ball rolling I attach one of my papers written 10 years ago.  I also attach some examples of the Hugoniot for aluminum obtained from Google searches (I can't remember which papers these came from) to illustrate the relatively low values of particle velocity.

Smudge
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1739
Here is another paper that took the Steorn measured data then criticized their assumption that magnetic viscosity played its part, instead offering the possibility that NdFeB magnets could have a low particle velocity and that was the cause for the delayed force action.  Can'r remember whether I got round to publishing that paper.
Smudge
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2975
  I've  been re-visiting my old ideas (elsewhere here at OUR) about delay-times in transmission of electromagnetic forces - and came across this paper by Smudge --- very interesting!  My concepts were in the theory stage...

  Smudge - what do you think of the Steorn machine at this time?

   @all -- could these concepts apply to TinMan's buoyancy device - given that a finite time is required for water to flow?

   There may be something here...
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1739
  Smudge - what do you think of the Steorn machine at this time?
After the failure of their London demonstration it seems Steorn abandoned that particular line of investigation.  Their later ORBO demonstration in Dublin used saturating toroids with cross fields supplied by moving magnets.  Last I heard they were manufacturing small quantities of a free-running device for charging mobile phones, but I have not seen it hit the market yet.  Never did discover whether my ideas on particle velocity offering a route to OU were investigated.
Smudge
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 388
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1739
Please explain this
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1892-12-21.htm
Difficult to know exactly what the experiments were.  Tesla uses phrases like "If a disruptive discharge coil is immersed in oil" and assumes that the reader knows what a disruptive discharge coil is.  While I can make a guess it really needs in depth research to find images describing the set up.  Tesla formed the opinion that air molecules were responsible for the observed effects.  At that time electromagnetic radiation theory was still being developed so such things as radiation pressure were little known (but observable with the Crookes radiometer).  That 2 inch deep hole in the oil is interesting, I rather think it was due to electric forces and not molecular impact.
Smudge
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 388
Difficult to know exactly what the experiments were.  Tesla uses phrases like "If a disruptive discharge coil is immersed in oil" and assumes that the reader knows what a disruptive discharge coil is.  While I can make a guess it really needs in depth research to find images describing the set up.  Tesla formed the opinion that air molecules were responsible for the observed effects.  At that time electromagnetic radiation theory was still being developed so such things as radiation pressure were little known (but observable with the Crookes radiometer).  That 2 inch deep hole in the oil is interesting, I rather think it was due to electric forces and not molecular impact.
Smudge

I posted according to the thread title. This is the route to OU as shown by Kapanadze.
   
Pages: [1]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2023-02-01, 06:18:51