Why Doesn't NASA Use the Biefeld-Brown Effect for Space Propulsion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter speso72
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the Biefeld-Brown effect and its potential application for space propulsion systems, particularly in the context of NASA's choices regarding propulsion technologies for satellites and space probes. Participants explore theoretical and practical aspects of the effect, including its feasibility and limitations in space environments.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why NASA does not use the Biefeld-Brown effect, citing a response from NASA indicating it does not produce sufficient torque.
  • Another participant suggests that the Biefeld-Brown effect may not provide enough thrust for lifting vehicles and notes the necessity of fuel in space due to the lack of a surrounding medium to ionize.
  • A different participant mentions that the Biefeld-Brown effect involves ionization and manipulation of ionized gas, similar to existing electric propulsion technologies, which can be categorized into electrostatic and electromagnetic thrusters.
  • One contribution explains the mechanism of the Biefeld-Brown effect, describing how charge differentials create movement but emphasizes the small lifting capacity and high energy requirements.
  • Another participant expresses interest in "ElectroGravitic" systems and shares that they have compiled information on the topic.
  • A reply clarifies that the Biefeld-Brown effect does not relate to gravity but rather produces thrust in a medium.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the Biefeld-Brown effect, with no consensus reached regarding its viability or effectiveness for space propulsion. Some participants highlight its limitations, while others suggest it merits further study.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the lack of theoretical specific impulse or thrust-to-weight ratios for the Biefeld-Brown effect, indicating a gap in available data. There is also mention of the need for further testing to determine its functionality in a vacuum.

speso72
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Hi Guys,

I'm just currious why Nasa doesn't utilize the Biefeld-Brown effect for space satalite / space probe propulsion systems?

I had emailed Nasa a while back asking them, and they replied saying that it does not produce the torque needed. Could someone please explain?

Thanks
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Welcome to the forums, Speso

I'm shooting from the hip here:

The reasons I can think of are
1) It wouldn't be able to provide enough thrust for use in a lifting vehicle

and

2) You still need fuel to operate in space (no surrounding medium to ionize), and there are other forms of electric propulsion which are able to operate with voltages MUCH lower than 20kV

In my quick google search, I wasn't able to find anything on theoretical specific impulse or thrust/weight ratios for such devices, so I can't be sure.

Do you know of any sites which go into specific details on the construction of such a device?
 
Greetings !

Intresting that I haven't heard of that one before.
But, if I understood the general explanation
correctly it's just about ionisation and manipulation
of an ionised gas - something done today in many
types of electric space propulsion technologies.
There are two main types of such thrusters which involve
ionisation - electrostatic and electromagnetic - depending
on what they do with the plasma once its ionised.

Live long and prosper.
 
The basic crux behind the B-B effect is in creating an electrical charge differential between the "top" and "bottom" of the device with one important differance:
The "top" charge is expelled into the surounding environment while the "bottom" charge is maintained within the device, but the "bottom" charge force-fields extend into the external environment, pulling the device "up"
Under these conditions the device moves forward, or "up", as leading atmospheric charges are continually supplied.
There is nothing wrong with this rather novel approach, and can easily be demonstrated.
However, the lifting capacity is very small and the energy requirements are quite high.
There are those who suggest that this device, an "asymetric capacitor" will produce the effect in a vacuum. If this is true, than it is worthy of further sutdy. I have heard of no evidence that it works in a vacuum, but look forward to the tests.
 
I've been collecting a lot of information on different theoried "ElectroGravitic" systems and uploaded them onto my site, if you're interested in reading about them...

Just FYI. :)
 
Reply to Arctic Fox

It hasn't really got anything to do with gravity. It just produces a thrust in a medium.
 

Similar threads

Replies
49
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K