I've mentioned this before, but you need exponential spacing. You are trying to accelerate a 2.8 column of air with another 2.8 stream input. Because you want external entrainment, you might consider an exponential horn housing. Each 2.8 input would force more air into a smaller space, increasing the speed. Alternatively, each thruster could be exponentially increased in power, to use the same level of input more efficiently. So like cut the first one in half, raise the last one by double. Without external entrainment, you could change the distance between anode and cathode to accelerate the same stream successively but with increased speed each time. The first one would be closest, and the second one twice as separated, but since the air is already moving, the ions would travel much faster covering the doubled distance in the same time.

I really think you need to switch to static thrust measurement as a method of comparing efficiency rather than output velocity alone. For example, you might be seeing the same 2.8 meters per second output on two designs with the same power but one could have way more thrust than the other due to the surface area of the output. You might also have a design with lower velocity that is far more efficient than one with higher. You kinda touched on this with liters of flow but a thrust stand will provide more accurate information. Grams of static thrust per watt is the gold standard of measured efficiency. You should be making more than 1 gram per watt from what I know about ionic thrusters. 4 grams per watt is the highest I’ve ever heard of from research papers.

I think you should run a design competition and have viewers submit thruster designs and you build and test them.

Okay hear me out. If you're not going to do it, I might. Consider the following: - A wing profile is revolved radially, such that you end up with a wing profile that's disk shaped. - The disk is initially stationary with air surrounding the disk. - Underneath the disk wing, there's 'zero' radial velocity, indicating high pressure. - Above the wing, there's non-zero radial velocity of air, indicating low pressure. - The radial velocity of air above the wing is induced by plasma. - The electrodes are circular rings placed on top of the disk, where the inner ring has a smaller diameter than the outer ring, such that air flow radially from in to out. - The disk is made using CNC and is supposed to be extremely lightweight, i.e. EPS foam (non-flammable) density of about 30 kg/m3. Preferable thin-walled, perhaps with ribs if there's low stiffness. - Downward 'Wingtips' around the disk's edge could be used to properly separate the high and low pressures. - You could use a wing profile that has a very high Cl, i.e. high lift at low speed, since Cl does not rely on airspeed. - You could subdivide the disk into 4 parts, where each quarter's potential difference can be manipulated, which could help in allowing you to steer. The idea is to create a solid velocity difference between top and bottom surfaces, to create a strong lift force, where the bottom velocity is essentially zero (stand still). Relying on Bernoulli's principle we can determine the lift force. For a simple rectangular plate with area 'A' being in air with density rho, the lift force Fl = 1/2 * rho * A * (Vtop^2 - Vbot^2). I've done quick calculations. Considering your and others previous work, I think it's viable starting at ~45 kV. if we can achieve similar airflow speeds, I think we could create the first actual hovering UFO drone that doesn't rely on moving parts. Some other notes: - There should be sufficient airflow, such that a 'boundary' layer is formed between the high and low pressure zones. Such that air doesn't leak towards the low pressure zone - Use foam that is preferably fire-retardant, since the plasma may ignite the foam. EPS should be suitable, XPS possibly not. - Preferably use foam or another lightweight material for the electrodes. Paint it with graphite spray and use electroplating to make some seriously lightweight electrodes. - One conclusion I had from watching your videos, is that the air speed doesn't necessarily increase with multiple stages. But it does help in creating a more uniform flow over a larger volume or area. Using multiple electrode rings may create a very uniform flow field above the disk. Been thinking about this for quite some time, and I am thinking about doing it as a hobby project, but I think this would fit your Channel a lot better and if it works out, it's a world's first! (not considering Aliens did it before we did, lol.)

Dude, a second Channel of just you recording the process of you designing and building the prototypes in long form, like an hour or even longer, would be mad and you’d be able to get a video out sooner, less editing needed because it’s a second channel video, no music is really needed, just pure analysis and prototyping. I’d love to see how you do your process and how your brain works. I often say you can see Adam savages brain work on the outside as he builds things. And I love the rawness of the content.

"my work has paralleled MIT's attempt" is not something many people can say. Congratulations man, good work!

I love that part of the design change is you've moved from 'how fast can we push air' to the more important question 'how much air can we push'.

Awesome work! Here are some improvements i suggest: - measure grams of thrust per watt instead of airspeed - focus mainly on achieving max thrust at a certain size - use a single tube design with no holes in the sides of the design to simplify aerodynamics and testing Robust design like you did was really smart, hope you continue with the ionic thurster. Would love to see this on rc planes or even table fans in the future

Just a reality check: at 4m/s and a cross-sectional area of about 100cm2 you're putting about 0.3W of power into the air; for a 70W input. Because energy rises as velocity squared the second stage of your first prototype is actually _more_ efficient than the first. To maximize thrust efficiency you actually want to move a large volume of air slowly rather than a small volume fast, something ionic thrusters might be suited to. However, due to the nature of ionic acceleration much of the energy input is going into rotational/vibrational states of the molecules rather than velocity, so it's unlikely ionic thrusters will ever be efficient enough to compete with, say, a propeller. But still fun stuff, thanks for posting.

This series is my medication. Love it. Thanks for showing us this progress!

May you thrust yourself further into excellence. Well done sir, loving your content and brain

I have been designing air ducts recently, and one of the very important things is to not restrict the air flow rapidly. For the best results it's best to stay under 10 degrees of restriction. Keep up the good work!

Friends don't let friends get sponsored by Betterhelp

Man seeing an american engineering channel use the metric system is a breath of fresh air. Awesome project man, this has huge potential

thanks for always being so informative and thorough!

Yeah! Can't wait for OpenSauce! See you there!

Your explanations and commentary are excellent. Awesome video and project. Edit: I do agree with some of the other commentators that some of the revelations about BetterHelp's data policies deserve scrutiny and push back. Hopefully you can find more responsible sponsorship partners moving forward.

your work and rapid-prototyping inspires me so much

your insights into this topic have been invaluable, thanks!

Can’t wait to see you at Open Sauce again this year! Had a great time chatting with you at the last one.

Truly becoming closer to real life Halo every day

Super impressive!😊 Awesome work! 👌 I have been following your progress and you have come a pretty long way towards something that might end up being used in a real life application and surpass the model stage. I think you are on the right track. Can't wait to see your next video.

Love your improvements

Please drop Better Help as a sponsor man, they sell people's medical info to advertisers :(

There's really no channel I consistently follow every single video EXCEPT for this channel. I love this project and I'm here for this the whole thing. Can't wait for the next update

I never regret that I subscribed to your channel. This is a very huge improvement from your previous video about this experiment which is the first video I saw of yours. You don't realize it but I think what you do will innovate this technology to the future and will make a great impact in history.

This guy is good at what he does.. I just hope his Mr Wonderful character wont ruin it.

Maybe you could try a circular design instead of a triangular design. I feel like it might focus the air a little better.

As someone in psych, you really gotta dump BetterHelp as a sponsor. For everyone else on PC, don't forget about sponsorblock.

It's always a good day when this guy uploads something. Thanks for the knowledge dump, love your pursuit with this project.

Super cool! Can't wait to see and talk at open sauce! I need to finish my videos about my projects. I also can't believe it's been a full year since your last version of the engine. Super super cool technology and I love the progress

1) They need to still be circular. They can be segmented...1/3 or 1/4 circle for each thruster, but a round interior will create smoother airflow and offer larger internal area for objects to fit through without compromising volume. 2) You'll need to find a way to more smoothly merge the flows so that they compound one another. As it is, currently, they're slamming into each other and losing energy. They're not blending together to improve flow, and they're losing velocity in the process. My recommendation would be to find a way to offset the thrusters at an angle, laterally. Instead of merely tilting them so their exhaust is pointed inward, also tilt them so that flow is off-centered, to create a vortex. Then they shouldn't be slamming into one another, but more like merging on a highway.

Been with the channel since 800 subscribers and man how it has become better and better :)

Drop the betterhelp.

this design is also very good for stacking it ! or making a wide straight surface.. looks awesome!!

Been waiting. Nicely delievered.

So in all honesty if you have a taper after all stages are done with a reduction of 15-30% and some splines/fins to reduce turbulence towards the exit and get some better linear flow you can get a massive boost to your velocity. Love the videos best of luck.

You could take inspiration from axial compressors, and have your cross-section slowly reduce for each stage to improve and achieve a set pressure ratio by the end. One reason why in your case more stages doesn't seem to help is that all stages are identical. However, downflow stages will need more power and a different geometry since they are fighting a higher pressure. Then, your high pressure flow could go through a converging nozzle to accelerate even further (or just add more and more smaller ionic stages along the way, it might work as well).

It looks futuristic! :)

This is my favourite project on UKposts

Hi Jay. Did you measure the thrust force in newtons or grams. To check the thrust to weight ratio?

Yay more ionic thrusters!

Incredible!! Amazing work! ❤

your approach to this subject was so innovative!

you should angle each of the 3 segments in each phase to form a vortex in the middle

Cool video. Shitty sponsor

I just have to say I have been a Bill Oddman fan for years now and the fact that the chaotic menace that he is has brought people together for OS is kinda amazing. He’s like the general no one can predict.

I love seeing Excelon products in your videos. 🥰

I share my knowledge: NIM engine. (Negative-Impulsive-Magnetic) Engine. (Because you build things, so why not help a bit) Nice idea with the waves but you didnt use it yet in your thruster. You recognized some air is sucked into the thruster, although it thrust air out? What is missing is the consideration of how the air consist and what actually move the air... electrons. Electron speed is determined by the voltage. If multiple thrusters are in row, it accelerats the air with the voltage-plasma but not beyond the voltage. Also the distance of the accelerating parts could be 1 factor at your build, also try to get lower ampere with same thrust results. In SHORT: Air volume calculation, air consistance calculation, thrust calculation with air, thrust efficiency by testing the best volt to ampere ratio, Thrust Frequency. Air(A): volume x consistance, Thrustfactor(Tf): volt x ampere, ThrustOutput(TO): Tf x A x TF (Thrust-Frequency) Think of the electrons AS if its waterdrops. Always make the plasma visible once to see where its flowing (helps alot). Also a magnetic field guides the electrons, because these are negative charged.

Better Help? Really?

I haven't been here for a while and you really came far!

very impressed by your build techniques

Man - the fact that you are putting all of this R&D out there before ever getting a single patent in hand, you sir are a gentleman - or just extremely brave. Amazing work!

BetterHelp sells medical data to advertisers. Do you want to be a part of that?

I have an idea !!! Why don’t you make a hybrid ionic thruster ! One with metallic rotating blades and the blades are positively charged and also being driven by a motor and there are bunch of grounded wires at the end Airflow would be fan+ ionic thruster

the problem with Ionic thrusters is that the situations where they are better than a simple propeller are very rare. I would also love to see a thrust per watt stat.

i have been fascinated by this project. keep nerding ;)

Awesome, please continue!)

My “physics nerd common sense” is telling me that a circular shape might help with a more uniform flow, as the three streams coming from the triangles are probably converging in a pretty awkward way. Also some way of directing airflow from each peripheral thruster(like a duct or something) into a smaller output area in the center would likely help reduce turbulence and increase the velocity of the airflow (assuming you are building this for velocity and not displacement ). I am a high school senior so take this with a grain of salt lmao

Sorry but dropping my sub until better help is no longer a sponsor. Not a nice comapny that predates on peoples mental health to sell their data to third parties.

Idea: what if each stage of thruster was closer to the central stream? The pass-through benefit would be sacrificed somewhat, but it may provide significant improvements. And what if each stage had a different angular placement relative to the thruster's longitudinal axis? So the airflow would get deflected at almost 45 degrees at the first stage, narrowing down to 10 or 12 degrees at the end? Or maybe in reverse? And what if the angle and spacing was variable while in operation? You could find the most optimal placement and angle at every airspeed and automate them somehow so the thruster automatically scales thrust with speed? Like others have said, I think this design would also greatly benefit from exponential spacing.

As a product designer, my advice is to research what was already done in the "moving air business". Aka fans, vacuum cleaners, blowers, coolers... There are a vast amount of research in aerodynamics applied to those products. Just look what Dyson does by shaping the air flow and utilizing centrifugal forces. They are great source of information. It's great to see your improvement! Congratulations!

when you stack them in series, the electric fields could be interfering with one another. just as the air can be pushed forward, if you put another thruster in front it could add to an opposing force.

it would insanely cool to see a lightweight drone that can hover using these.

Amazing! You're part way to a turbine engine with no moving parts. It's possible there is turbulence happening between each stage as you're compressing air and then running the next stage at the same size. It might make sense to reduce and move the 2nd stage to the size of the covergance point of the first stage. Not sure of the 3 stage, maybe the same or go larger than the first stage, like and afterburner, with a case the diameter of the largest stage, assuming it ultimately needs to be fit as such in a plane. Also, redesigning it circular as opposed to triangular will reduce internal turbulance, adding a slight twist to the blades to create a vortex should also stabilize airflow. Just spit balling, you're doing great stuff.❤

This is an awesome project. It would be cool to see a circular (ring-shaped) wing thruster. You'd get the same hollow center you're looking for while also using the support structure to provide lift

Aero engineer here: See 3:12 E=0.5mc^2 so your % increases are being underestimated. Energy @ 2.1 ~ m*2.1^2 = m*4.41 Energy @ 3.2 ~ m*3.2^2 = m*10.24 So delta energy ~10.24-4.41=5.83. This indicates the second stage is actually more efficient than the first. AND considering you are entraining more air, the mass is probably higher so this is already underestimated. Hope this helps!

"And what yould you do if someone attacked your ionocraft with a peice of fresh fruit?" "Wot if 'e 'ad a gun?" "Wot if 'e 'ad a point-ed stick?"

i love plasma channel man. hes an amazing guy!

Love these ion thruster videos, looking forward to seeing you put them on a boat! Btw, you've probably already seen this, but you may wanna do some more research on your sponsors beforehand.

You really made the Tony stark New-Element Arc reactor of ionic thrusters.

You could change to a design similar to a Dyson Fan, with a small inlet at the front surface. Curved surface and using an aerofoil design to reduce pressure further back in the ring design would create a venturi effect allowing the air to move faster, you can then recombine the two streams of air both now traveling faster together, increasing the pressure again, as they combine with the outside air you should gain a larger net air throughput. Ensuring the outer and inner surfaces are smooth and dont cause too much air turbulance. You could also create multiple voltage points. Entrance 2xV, V, GND Any air that entered without being energised can then be energised at intermediary steps. This would keep the voltage differentail in one direction, otherwise you could end up with a second stage causing a counter effect.

if you think about it, having a hollow center has the additional advantage of using bernoulli's principle. Since there's moving air at the tail end of the thruster, surely there's a low pressure cavity in the center front section which is also contributing. Though I would think the individual thruster unit (one side of one triangle) should be a little shorter to maximize that effect.

In the first 10 seconds, you got me to dislike the video already. Betterhelp is not a doling or helpful in any way. I am disappointed that a great UKpostsr like you would *ever* accept a sponsorship from them! Do some research before accepting a sponsorship next time!

Come on better help is a really horrible company. They don’t even use real therapists

Awesome work, thank you very much!

Some Physics here is helpful. You want to optimize for the most thrust for the least power. You get thrust by accelerating air backwards. The momentum of the air moving backwards is m*v; the kinetic energy of the air moving backwards is 1/2mv^2. You want the most momentum for the least kinetic energy. Maximizing mv / (1/2 mv^2) you get 2/v. In other words, your efficiency drops the faster you move the air. However, there's also a few other considerations here! For one, you seldom will use a thruster like this while truly stationary. And if you're moving forward at 10km/h and your thruster moves air back at 5km/h... you aren't actually making any thrust. When you work out the optimum, it works out to "you want to move air back at 2x the velocity you are moving forward". This is why props work well at low speeds, then turboprops, then high-bypass turbofans, then low-bypass turbofans, then classic jets, then ramjets, then scramjets, then eventually rockets as you increase speed. It's "all" about the exhaust velocity. (Well, not entirely. But largely.) However, this then gets into the second consideration: if you want to move air back slowly, you need to move a _lot_ of air slowly. And you can only fit so much through a given, say, 10x4cm hole. Especially if the air is moving slowly. I suspect if you wanted to maximize thrust at low speeds you could do better by optimizing to improve the amount of entrainment air. Look at e.g. bladeless fans for inspiration.

Wow, such an amazing video! I love seeing new ideas. Nothing like trial and error to come up with a huge breakthrough. I'm not smart at all, but stupid ideas sometimes make great new discoveries. But just thinking out loud, you mentioned that putting them in parallel will boost the speed so much. What if instead of doing them all the same size, you do all three different sizes? You can make the first one the smallest, then make the next one about 50% bigger, and the last one 100% bigger than the first.

Great content learned alot loved the video besides the prederhelp ad

"Science is not a perfect science" -Jay Bowles Seriously enjoy watching the evolution of the BSI and I very much appreciate you sharing the entirety of your iterative process including the setbacks. Things don't always go the way we hope but thats what drives us to find new solutions and get to better outcomes. Keep up the great work!

Love the video! I think about the design differently. The first stage has to be the backbone of the structure of the cone. Think about how a black hole works and everything goes to one fixed point. you have to stretch the fixed point from the first stage past the third stage. to where stage ones maximum performance is passed the third stage. Stage 2 has to be some type of feeder system for stage 1 and stage 3. I haven't figured that out yet. After all, there's going to be a shell around everything. Nothing can be exposed to the elements. Stage 3 needs to be the torque adding the horsepower from stage 1. Maybe some vector control as well. I really enjoyed the video

A really important thing is thrust and drag coefficient. You could measure and add them to the next video. That would be useful in comparing different designs.

Love seeing the progress on this man! I think it would be interesting to try using a tapered sealed tube instead of a triangle. Then angle the thrusters in such a way where the incoming thrust creates a vortex inside the tube to draw in more air from the inlet. Pretty much create a jet engine without any blades with thrust vectored air instead Source am mechanical engineer

Way to go man! i have a inkling that you will reach 1 Million subs by the end of this year🥳🥳

I think your problem is the line of convergence-you mistakenly assume that an efficient angle of output from one will not cause interference when stacked with another. Try a version that allows you to adjust the angles of each set of 3 "blades", not just the gaps between each set of 3. AND-there will be less air interference if the entire thing is housed in some sort of casing. You can always add slits to this housing to allow strategic air input that is efficient-and cut out airflows that are not!

Glad to see you have some new ideas. I never saw it this way neither live or in my mind. I hope you will patent your results so, even if you will not reach your primary goals, you'd been able to get some profit on side-uses. Room fans, may be, or air cleaners. *Think about compression. Like in jet engines. May be you need some diameter gradient for individual thrusters. Can't see if it should be positive or negative -- experimenting needed.

Few design changes I would make 1.) less steep angle so less loss of energy when the air streams collide 2.) the sequential thrusters have diminishing returns, but are more efficient. Using multiple sets of 2 sequential thrusters converging into one stream would give a more efficient and powerful flow I believe. 3.) use a circular thruster and angle the outputs of each set of thrusters in a way to produce a vortex inside the body of the thruster. Just some ideas.

By colliding the streams of air in a column you are inducing massive turbulence and a high pressure field behind the engine. that might sound good, but it basically makes the engine need a stronger internal compression to overcome it. I suggest to either increase the size of engine intake the further to the front, or to make them exhaust parallel to each other. In other words, either brute force a large intake into a small output and compress it down with each stage, or make it all flow parallel and avoid compression and go for airspeed. To illustrate with water, laminar flow moves more water compared to chaotic flow at the same pressure and pipe diameter, but if you want to increase the pressure, its easier to just force it down the tube in chaotic flow by increasing the pressure.

I appreciate the honesty of showing your new design is not necessarily better as a trhuster, even if it has some of the other advantages you mentioned. I think you are focusing on the wrong part of this problem though. Changing the shape of the thurster might help make the use of power more efficient but the limiting factors to the flow rate, for constant mass, are going to be the voltage difference across the path along which each ion is accelerating and the charge of the ions themselves. You can't do much about the ions if you are using atmospheric air, so you're only left with addressing the electric acceleration problem. You could also use compression and heat, but it would no longer be a purely ionic engine.

I love these videos!

You make it actually understandable

You have to trade velocity for thrust, just because the velocity is high doesn’t mean you’re creating more thrust, both are good for different things. It may help if you look at optimising the accelerated fluid coming off the trailing edge of the thruster especially if you’re going to use converging flow. Inducing some vortexes to energise the flow and control the turbulence of the air streams going back together

Love your content, and I’am thrilled for the next step. Maybe additional thrusters don’t multiply the effect because they all have the same specifications. Is like you put 3 Dyson hairdryer (or fans) behind each other. They just move the same amount of air as one. If you want multiplying the effect maybe is better with different sizes and different distances to each other to direct the air like a lens the sunlight.

See about 70% of the words you used i did in fact not understand. But i love seeing stuff like this and thinking about how it can be incorporated into different stuff although i have no clue how incorporating this intio something would work. what would happen if you hollowed out a large rc planes wings and put one straight section of this in each trailing end of the wings with the aileron motor rotating the propulsion system up or down to simulate pitch and yaw, the air intake could be pulled from a makeshift hollow bomb bay in the belly of the rc plane with a mesh in the bay to act as a intake filter. Which as long as you dont crash the propulsion system should remain relatively safe. Sounds like a really good project.

The final stage that’s outputting the fastest velocity is fed by slower earlier stages, similar to a gas turbine compressor. So the earlier stages need to gather more air to not restrict the final stage(make them bigger like a jet with a large fan disc that graduates down to the smallest row of blades) With trial and error, figure what end velocity is then figure cfm’s, and expand back to the first stage and you’ll get the flare rate needed and then put the stages together in a sealed path not letting outside air in. I think you’ll figure out, at that point, how to bias the earlier gathering stages to help boost whatever is possible for the final stage, or stages.(it might look like a trombone horn, but hey?) This is the same mechanics as stacking three same sized ducted fans in a row and getting diminishing returns from that. Think, how do fans make jet propulsion, and apply it to your ionic stages, but seal off the outside air, it’s not helping.

Dude I love your channel!

Use tubes to converge the flow, then use a nozzle on the big tube to accelerate even more

A few people are mentioning measuring the thrust. Meaning measure how many pounds/grams/kilograms/newtons are pushing. Dividing by watts gives you efficiency. Or dividing by weight of motor is interesting as well. Velocity is of course important as if it is only 3m/sec and doesn't improve much in a headwind then your airplane can't go faster than 3m/sec. But I recommend concentrating on static thrust. grams of thrust per watt. You can use a kitchen scale or, better, get a load cell and build a test stand. Calibrate the load cell with a kitchen scale, suitcase scale, or similar.

My grandfather used to build model airplanes as a hobby. I used to love watching when he'd heat treat the laminate that covered the wings. Perhaps you could achieve a significant weight reduction by replacing several of the plastic "wall" segments, with some sort of laminate covered exoskeleton.

I think having the stages that close isn't allowing the streams from each stage to converge before hitting the turbulence from the next stages. May want to try spacing them farther apart, but with shielding to prevent more air coming in, but have SOME air input to prevent a low pressure / vacuum area formation between stages. That would allow each stage to fully converge before being added to or even wrapped with the next stage column. As I was typing this, I also thought that, if you alter the angles of each stage, you may get coaxial flow where the stages can "wrap" the column of the previous and allow for, maybe not more velocity, but more total mass flow, resulting in more overall power output. You can't totally think of the velocity alone, but how much air is being moved at said velocity. 2m/s for 3 L/s is going to be more power than 4m/s for 1L/s. You simply have more kinetic energy being output. Air is approx 1.2g/L, so for the above you would have 60mN vs vs 47mN, respectively.