I hate to spell all this out, but I have to admit there's really not much out there. I'm fairly comfortable discussing the lifters and discs. We're not going to discuss the solid units Mikado mentioned, which are an entirely different beast.
One of the problems in understanding Brown's work was that the Beifeld-Brown Effect is described as a coupling between electricity (electromagnetic force) and gravity.
However, let's first talk about the coupling between electrostatic and magnetic forces (electromagnetic force). How many apparatuses use the electromagnetic force? Everything that uses or produces electricity. All of the millions and millions of apparatuses use the coupling in a different manner for a different effect, but they all have a common denominator - that they work due to electromagnetic force.
SO, let's talk about the coupling between electromagnetic and gravitational forces. How many apparatuses do you think could be designed based on that coupling. Billions? Sure, but they would all work on the basis of electromagnetic-gravitational force.
Brown worked on a number of apparatuses, and they all share a common denominator. They are like the bloodlines we have been discussing. One apparatus won't necessarily do the same thing as another - for example, a generator and a cell phone both put out energy, but they serve entirely different functions and are modified to maximize a certain electromagnetic effect.
For arguement's sake, the electrostatic fan is probably the closest thing to a lifter. It is designed to maximize the flow of air (as the oil pump is designed to maximize the movement of oil, etc.). It is not designed to maximize the effects that would allow it to work in a vacuum. Period.
The discoid apparatuses used the same, basic denominator, but even though they work well in air, they were specifically designed to work most efficiently in a vacuum. While the lifters use ionized air molecules to produce the thrust, the discs use ionized wind at higher pressures and move into a
plasma thrust-based situation as the vacuum increases at an
increased effieciency. i.e. without the air, the discs functioned more efficiently. Hence the use of the term, Plasmahydrodynamics.
Here are a few snippets from a document written at Rahway, N.J. on September 5, 1962. Is that proof enough?
"Extensive tests were performed with various media...at various pressures from 1 atmosphere down to 10-6 mm Hg"
And,
"Vacuum tests conducted between 1955 and 1960 confirmed the dependence of thrust upon positive ion density"
And,
"...While such expression usually applies to material dielectric media (such as air or oil), it must be understood that the mechanical forces are present even in the dielectric of space (K=1), with the mechanical forces acting upon the charges which terminate the lines-of-force. The result is a "lever arm" repulsion causing opposite acceleration of the dipole structure and the ions."
The second and third quotes may seem contradictory at first, but they are not upon closer inspection. Then the document discusses the functioning of the disc in a vaccum environment.
"Current requirements in vacuum are greatly reduced because of the reduction of charge transport. Ohmic losses present at atmospheric pressure, and extending through the glow discharge region down to approximately 10-3 Hg, are not present in higher vacuum...The increase of efficiency is substantial. Current requirements drop to 10% or less of the value at 1 atmosphere..."
The discs are designed to work in a vacuum - they increase in efficiency in a vacuum.
"The role of...became apparent. In a vacuum of 10-6 mm Hg (the limit of the equipment used), the dipole thrust without...is readily measurable. Although the steady state (...) thrust at 10-6 is surprisingly great, it is still explained as due to positive ions in the residual gas..."
Followed by a brief discussion of the nature and cause of the vacuum sparking we have been talking about.
So you can see, the difference is like a cell phone to a generator. You can't use a generator to call your friends any more than you can power your house with a cell phone. They are each specifically designed to maximize the effect for which they are designed.
So do the lifters use the Biefeld-Brown Effect - a departure from the Coloumb Law of Electrostatic Attration in that opposite charges are not equal? Yes and no. No, because they work on the maximization of ionic wind. Yes, because there is always some minimal electromagnetic-gravitational effect associated with any electrical system. In that light a cell phone or toaster oven could also be claimed to work on the priciples of the B-B Effect.
In the purest sense, do the discs use the Biefeld-Brown Effect - a departure from the Coloumb Law of Electrostatic Attration in that opposite charges are not equal? Interesting question. Yes, because:
"Tests in air show that the integrated pressure derived from any profile does not account, however, for all the observed static thrust acting on the dipole system as a whole."
And no, in another sense, because it uses plasma to derive some thrust. So, plasma-hydrodynamics is an effect associated with the B-B Effect in some apparatuses, as ionic wind is in another,
but it is the mass factor in the B-B Effect that links it to the coupling between electromagnetism and gravity.
What is the nature of gravity. Didin't Brown state that the B-B Effect is a secondary effect and can be difficult to study due to interference from the naturally larger electrostatic forces. Perhaps there is another aspect to the apparatus which we have not discussed, or another apparatus of similar nature which maximizes
that aspect.
Qualight can build a prototype for you, wouldn't it be wiser to build a Model-T first ?