THE GYROSCOPIC INERTIAL THRUSTER:
BUILD A BETTER FLYING SAUCER
This document published 4 May 1997 Updated 3 August 1997
by David Eugene Cowlishaw
This document published 4 May 1997 Updated 3 August 1997
by David Eugene Cowlishaw
The following text is a selected list of improvements to the basic Gyroscopic Inertial Thruster described in GITWORKS. These devices and improvements are claimed by the author/inventor as intellectual property and publishing should not be viewed as abandonment of those claims, the intent is to serve as public notice of priority.
With that out of the way, I'll continue with the machinery needed to turn a basic thruster into useful transportation devices.
The following improvements and varients are discussed in this page:
The hollow toroidal race can be assembled from two halves that will allow a variable control of generated thrust. The internal diameter of the assembled race will be larger than the ball width. Enough of the race is relieved from the flat surfaces of both halves of the race at the splitting plane to allow a surrounding control assembly to close down on the orbital masses, forcing a contact with the balls nearer their spin poles.
A thrust control means that moves both halves of the race in such a fashion so as to allow either an equal closure of the race about it's diameter from a fully open (maximum seperation needed to allow the closest contact with the orbital balls nearest their spin equators), to fully closed, a structural design limit that will contact the orbitals nearest their spin poles without actually contacting the poles.
Such a condition would prevent forward movement in the race and spoil what could have been a nice outing. Control means can also close one point on the race while it's opposite point is opened to provide a variable thrust to be generated in a selected direction anywhere around the race.
A simple control means is comprised of a roller bearing contact with 'lips' that are machined into the great diameter of both halves of the race. A minimum of two bracketing roller means at each control contact position apply closure pressure at selected points while allowing the control assembly to rotate about the race for direction control.
Of course a stationary control means (individually controled closure means about the race mounted to the airframe), is another variant.
If the sides of the race (as opposed to the tail and nose) are permanantly bracketed at the half closed position (a teeter axis) and the nose and tail points are mechanically linked to move in opposition (close one end, open the other, and vice-versa), such a link will help balance the tremendous centrifugal force on the race from the balls, trying to push the race apart. Said link will transfer the force at one end of the race through leverage to the opposing end, reducing considerably the amount of control input force needed to alter race geometry.
The above control means is a good version for use in the GITPACK bare bones unit.
The ability to move the direction of thrust (in relation to the universe) at will, allows for very rapid manuvering, reverasal of direction and startling right angled turns. Hmm sounds familiar somehow!
^
Yes! - The application of hollow drive spheres will improve performance significantly. The inertial drive effect is directly linked to the relative amount of spin inertia to forward inertia. The more energy you can hide (in relation to forward inertia) in the spin of the drive balls, the more you can return in the proper direction.
Hollow balls are lighter, a condideration in gross vehicle weight.
Hollow balls have a greater surface area for a given mass, and thus are less likely to slide in the race, a condition that destroys efficiency.
The moment of inertia for a hollow sphere is much greater and will carry a greater spin energy for a given mass.
For you math addicted explorers, the moment of inertia for a solid disk is 1/2 mass * radius squared, and for a thin walled ring/cylinder the equasion is simply mass times the squared radius, twice the potential of angular (spin) inertia for the same mass.
A solid sphere is 2/5 m r squared, and I haven't yet found the equasion for angular inertia on a bubble, but It should be safe to extrapolate results of the disk and ring and say the hollow sphere is capable of greater inertial energy storage than an equivalent solid mass. (4/5 m r squared? If you know; please let me know).
Circular wing- a lifting body construction that best employs the shape and capabilities of the Gyroscopic Inertial Thruster. It is generally flattened on the gravity well facing portion of the craft, and rounded on it's upper surface to give a wing profile in all radial directions.
Since the gyroscopic properties of the drive stablize the overturned saucer shape in the plane of operation, yaw, pitch, and roll are handled without air control surfaces.
^
Direction control means for the circular wing adaptation of the drive is by the use of at least one wheel gyroscope mounted to the craft, positioned at a right angle to the orbital plane of the drive race. A central moveable mounting of a turning gyro will 'lock' the craft, and specifically the control assembly to a selectable single direction around the radial orbit plane.
While yaw control is superfluous (other than having a need to face a particular portion of the craft a certain direction), roll and pitch can be accomplished by moving the control gyro's axis to apply a torque to the orbital plane, forcing that plane to change as needed.
Note: Changing orbital plane is a big deal, a potential for large energy loss and expenditure. A fully open race will be the easiest to torque, as the spin component of all of those loose gyros rolling around the race will be at minimum.
If a storage device capable of reducing total velocity in the race while capable of re-establishing normal orbit velocity is used, plane change can be more economically accomplished.
One of the best methods is transfering the orbital energy into the wheel gyro, reducing the force needed to change the operating plane, while at the same time strengthening the "locking" force of the control gyro (see inertial storage below).
One problem I'll offer up for someone else to try is control of the 'flip over' that is needed as the control gyro spin plane approaches the orbit plane. Plainly, if the control gyro is spinning in the same plane as the orbit, it can't prevent the craft from spinning, or accurately apply a control direction if the race is under acceleration.
If you're fool enough to be increasing or decreasing average race velocity while changing planes, you will become very dizzy as the control gyro flips over, and the control and orbit planes coincide.
^
Part of the solution will be in the provision of a power transfer and storage means for the control gyro that will allow it to be reduced or increased in rpm's efficiently (it's called an inertial storage transmission!) which will allow a higher angular velocity needed when torquing the orbit plane, or changing the velocity of the orbitals, and efficiently 'powered down' when a simple directional stabilizer is needed.
Power down is also helpful to reposition the control gyro axis when nutation could be a problem in a large plane change, or repositioning of the torque direction is needed.
This is the use of current technology to combine alternating thin conductor and insulator layers in the form of the air craft hull.
By electrically connecting every other conducting layer to form an interleaved capacitor, the needed skin of the craft is combined with a HUGE capacitor to efficiently provide electrical energy storage.
A strong charge on the plates has the added advantage of strengthening the materials used in construction by adding the pull of the plates to ordinary material strength.
One disadvantage of this of course, is that if you should take a bullet or a meteorite, the resulting discharge of energy at the entry point in the hull would probably blow a HUGE hole in the side of your craft, not to mention the loss of all of that energy. (OK, I read a description of recovered hull material, and perhaps it was obvious what that meant, but I can try can't I?).
This concludes the list of improvements that I will discuss puplicly, save for a few additional improvements and alternate uses described in the other included documents.
I hereby declare that the contained information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and ability to extrapolate.
4 May 1997 David Eugene Cowlishaw
^ RETURN TO TOP ^ * Return to Index *