Ion lifter carries its power supply - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Redwards
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: July 18, 2020, 09:15:23 pm
content: Hi EEVblog forum-ers!You might remember the "MIT EAD Airframe Version 2," a glider propelled by the same mechanism as the ion lifters you might have made at home. A somewhat underwhelming video shows it 'flying' a couple hundred feet after being launched via rubber catapult. Response to this breakthrough by the media seemed kinda overhyped to me, and it looks like a lot of you guys on this forum agreed (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/flight-of-an-aeroplane-with-solid-state-propulsion/).A quick look at the wiki page for Ion-propelled aircraft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion-propelled_aircraft), however, reveals that this feat was preceded by a much more impressive vtol lifter with an onboard power supply and control electronics?!? Based on the talk page, it looks like this article has frequently been targeted by misinformation, mostly regarding claims that ion-lifters magically manipulate gravity and can work in a vacuum, but it doesn't look like this bold claim has been seriously questioned. A little more investigation, and I found that the edits regarding this claim were originally made by Ethan Krauss, the purported inventor of the device, so there's an obvious conflict of interest right off the bat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ethan_Krauss).I found Ethan's website (https://electronairllc.org/), his patent (https://patents.google.com/patent/US10119527B2/en), and his youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/user/KraussEMUS1). He has videos of his device floating a foot or so in the air tethered to a table. His patent makes several impressive claims, but a patent is not by any means proof of functionality. His website's pretty weird. He has a list of witnesses to his device working, a list of articles about him (including the wiki article he wrote), and a small section deriding the MIT airframe.I don't think I believe any of his claims, but I also struggle to find a reasoned motive for lying about his device. I don't think I have sufficient understanding of startup economics or the underlying physics to make heads or tails of this. Can you help me debunk this dodgy device?Thanks,Roger

author: Weston
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 19, 2020, 01:22:02 am
content: I used to work in the lab at MIT that made the ion propulsion RC plane. I did not personally work on the project but I sat in on enough presentations to know it works. From my understanding, testing was limited by safety concerns. EHS does not like a 40kV power supply randomly flying around....I do agree that MIT can go pretty heavy handed on the PR for projects sometimes though. That is mostly outside of the researches control, it's a whole different department.The advantage of the plane is that airfoils have a lift to drag ratio of above one, meaning that it takes less horizontal thrust to keep the plane aloft than than the force of gravity pulling it down. If I remember correctly, the airfoil had a lift to drag ratio of ~10x. You of course have added weight due to the airframe and control surfaces, but I believe the math still works out in favor of the plane. Also, something plane-like has more applications than something quad copter-like.I had not heard of Ethan Krauss' project before, and the writing on the website and the patent make me a bit leery and he seems to have no video of it flying untethered. A pure lifter is going to require more thrust than a plane. But given the plane works it seems like it could be possible.I do power electronics, and from my prospective the big advancements required to do this are on the power electronics side. I find it interesting that he talks little about the power electronics.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 19, 2020, 05:06:28 am
content: Well nowadays we have advanced transistor tech with stuff like silicon carbide FETs and IGBTs and whatnot. Getting a small, high-power, high efficiency converter is not that big of an issue (transformers and any heatsinks will add some weight though), but you still have to have batteries. Lithium batteries are high-density and powerful, but the question is how much juice you can squeeze in to get a reasonable runtime.

author: Ethan Krauss
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 11, 2021, 09:22:33 am
content: Hello Roger,This is Ethan Krauss, the inventor of the Self Contained Ion Powered (propelled) Aircraft. I don't expect anyone to just take my word for it that my ion propelled invention lifts its power supply. That is why I have put links under just about every video with independent verification that the craft does carry its power supply onboard. Here is a link to a 6 minute Explore Radio program with the host of NPR Jeff Saint Clair. He states in his news article and broadcast that he saw the craft fly with the power onboard when he came out to see the craft in person.https://radio.wosu.org/post/exploradio-oberlin-inventor-pushes-limits-ion-powered-flight#stream/0If you study the physics of it and the data that I have provided it should be clear that the craft does carry its power supply onboard solely with ion propulsion. I have been very transparent about how the craft works, and extensive verification has been provided on the website athttp://electronairllc.orgThanks at least for bringing up the subject. I hope this helps to clear things up!

author: Ethan Krauss
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 13, 2021, 10:14:14 am
content: Hi Weston,I have talked a lot about the power electronics for the craft in the patent and under the 2 dozen or so public videos that I've posted online. In the patent, the power supply is described in sufficient detail for an expert to replicate the device. There is also a 40 minute or so interview where I explain many of the specific details.In several of the comments under my videos I also give some further part numbers beyond what is in the patent. So far my invention has lifted its power supply vertically for at least 1 minute and 51 seconds continuously in 2017. A video of that flight was posted then. I think the MIT craft flew for less than about 10 seconds horizontally in 2018. Please take note of the improvement in thrust to weight ratio and efficiency that the earlier craft provides. The first vertical hop of a previous version of the craft carrying an onboard power supply, was done under a postal scale in 2006.I would have hoped that your group should have been able to discern that the physics of my craft do work out, and should have been aware of the widely published patent application that was on Google Images etc., several years before the V2 flight. Typing ion, aircraft, and onboard power, or anything of that nature into Google should have brought up my patent application or patent and information within minutes at the most. It would be nice to consider it water under the bridge however, there are still articles popping up that say your glider was the first ion propelled aircraft of any kind to carry its power supply. Anyone who really cares about this subject and reads about it daily will discover that it is an indisputable fact that my craft does lift its power supply.I did not write the current Wikipedia article. They would not allow me to post because I am the inventor, and I had to wait for them to carefully verify that my invention lifts its power supply. I did not write that MIT made the first "fixed wing" craft either, as it should be obvious that most ion propelled crafts are fixed wing. MIT did make the first traditionally shaped glider to fly across a gym, but I think the PR department should stop playing with words and look into the facts on the matter cleanly and accurately.I have been doing this full time for 21 years now and have left plenty of information on the subject for anyone who is interested. The host of NPR, Jeff Saint Clair wrote a nice article and radio program certifying that it lifts its power supply, onboard. There is also a video as well, of him watching it fly in person, on my YouTube channel. There are many other top officials also who's contact information is provided on the website.The types of witnesses that I have on my side, have left indisputable verification. Physics more importantly, can be pretty well relied upon even more so. As an example, if you look at the human powered helicopter, it has a large surface area and so can lift a lot of weight with very little relative power. That is just one principal, a large surface area with low weight, that makes a big difference in my machine. Using slower moving air is exponentially better, carefully implemented lower current small and lightweight power supplies, and at least an order of magnitude thinner emitter wires, are some more things that work surprisingly well. All of this can be found and linked to through the Ethan Krauss YouTube Channel, orhttp://electronairllc.orgI hope the future will hold a little brighter potential!