Slashdot Mirror

I don't know why you have an issue with this.

I have an issues with this because, by all my research, you are wrong on this. You have failed to provide a citation proving this, I have failed to find a citation proving this. The math is NOT "right above". You have posted no math that I can see. Indeed, I keep encountering statements in documents that air core transformers can sometimes be preferred in order to prevent Hysteresis and Eddy loses, otherwise known as "iron losses". Air core works better at higher frequencies, Hmm.. I wonder what EV inductive chargers use... Ah yes, high frequencies. 85 kHz seems common, though some are much higher.

2. Coupling factor, as shown by my and your sources, is somewhat independent from the core material used. An iron core transformer CAN be less efficient than an air core transformer. YOUR citations show this.

You will never be as efficient when you terminate your charging system with a transformer (air core or iron core, although iron is more efficient) as compared to a hard-wired connector. Just not going to happen.

What do you meant terminate? The transformer is necessary regardless of connector -whether inductive or hard wired. You're going to need to match wall voltage to what the battery needs, and the best way to do that is with a transformer. It's also hardly the "end" of the circuit. You're still going to need to transform the power from AC to DC, for example, and likely are going to want to smooth it out.

Combined with your insistence that iron-core transformers are always more efficient than Air Core and other issues like seemingly being totally ignorant of the effects of frequency on transformer design, the general necessity to match wall voltage to battery voltage through the use of a transformer, etc... I don't believe that you are actually an EE. You're making too many basic mistakes about physics. If you are an EE, you're probably a very specialized one that doesn't deal with the same issues that will come up in designing an inductive charger for EVs.

I've also told you a couple times what you need to do to convince me.
1. Citations, Sources. I'm not taking your word on this stuff. Note that most of my posts are littered with citations. The one time you tried, you linked to sources that agreed with me!
2. Reasoning that goes beyond the transformer/inductive loop. As I've said, I'm looking at the complete system, not just the loop.

For example, what is your response to this?
Vermont Energy Investment Corporation, Transportation Efficiency Group
Average efficiency, level 2(240V) charge: 86.4%, level 1(120V): 83.7%.
Interestingly, temperature can change the charge efficiency by more than 2%!
Then the DOE chimes in, with a wireless charging system that is 90% efficient.
Plugless power, is getting 84-90%

The quoted official, Momentum Dynamics, it might be important to note that they've been targeting bus charging - 200kW. So, if the technology scales well, that could be part of their claiming high efficiency.

What's up with wireless EV charging - has an interesting writeup of what's going on under the hood. Though it mostly focuses on the cost, which can be cheaper for wireless? Interesting.

One reason f

To expand a bit on the motor: it should be clarified that it's not a normal switched reluctance motor (SRM), but rather a PMSRM (permanent magnet switched reluctance motor).

Reluctance is used to some extent in many hybrid EV motors, in the form of "IPM" - interior permanent magnet motors. These are a hybrid of a conventional surface permanent magnet motor (SPM) and a SRM, allowing for high power at high speeds that SPMs don't allow for, as well as reducing magnet sizes (and thus rare earth consumption). By contrast, a PMSRM is a SPM that incorporates permanent magnets into the stator; they don't move and are readily cooled, while sculpting and enhancing the field to increase torque density and help control torque ripple.

It's a new type of motor, combining extreme efficiency, high torque density, and reliability over that offered by an IPM. Getting a PMSRM to work smoothly is an impressive job.

"Make up your mind, cables or connectors."

Both are pretty much one and the same. It's like you've never done any basic electronics work in your life, son. Given your high UID, you've probably never touched an iron in your life let alone have to do basic fucking goddamned calculations for appropriate wire or connector size on a daily basis wiring things to STRICT CALIFORNIA CODE.

Please come back when you are a licensed electrician. Or even a two-year journeyman with at least one year of working experience.

You've obviously never done any real electrical work in your life.

And I DID read the spec, that's how I determined that the fucking pins on the USB-C connector alone can't handle fucking 5 amps safely over a distance greater than two meters and aren't even equivalent to 20AWG wire. USB-PRE-C had larger pins that COULD handle that up to 30 fucking feet. USB-C can not unless both the cables AND connector pins are made of gold or silver.

If they wanted to deliver high power, the world's shittiest wire can take 600V and an easy 250mA - there's fucking 150 watts and you can send that HUNDREDS of feet down a USB-C cable (assuming they'd ever make one that long) thanks to the very low losses incurred in HVDC.

You're sorely equipped for this fight. Go back to school, child.

And in fact, it's likely that you have several in your home, in various electronic devices. Aerogel capacitors, (sometimes known as 'supercaps'), have been around for years:

http://powerelectronics.com/portable_power_management/batteries/power_aerogel_capacitors_support/

Take a look at http://powerelectronics.com/power_management/led_drivers/Fig-3-color-gamut.jpg. I can't vouch for that diagram, but if you take it as accurate then it is obvious you are better getting an RGB LED TV rather than extra yellow pixels and that if you did add another pixel colour then something around Cyan would be far more useful for increasing the colors that can be represented.

You make a fair point about the conspiracy stories. Too much sensationalism also puts people off.
There was some real stuff buried in there, for example #5 and #13 were interesting to me.
I thought niobium was a new better alternative to tantalum http://powerelectronics.com/mag/power_solidelectro lyte_niobium_capacitors/ as its supply was more secure, but it seems it is mined in the same region.

I also thought Roundup was really safe, I didn't know it was toxic in a marine environment, especially to ampibians. http://www.pitt.edu/~relyea/Roundup.html

I got a variety of them for my house, some look like regular light bulbs, for those lamps that have shades that require them.
I am putting some CFL's in the refrigerator, replacing the 40 watt bulbs there.
I found that the refrigerator had three 40 watt bulbs in the refrigerator section, and two in the freezer. Replaced with 9 watt CFL's, and they seem fine. No, they are not the same color, but I will get used to them.
If I want to, when the electric bill comes in, I can go outside in the daylight and read it. I like to imagine that it will be cheaper.
Now, If I can replace all these CRT monitors with LCD ones. I really want one of those new 19 inch monitors like this one. I find it strange that they light those monitors with florescent bulbs, apparently because LED's are too expensive. Sony makes one laptop computer that uses LED's to light the LCD display, here is some background on the technology.
One thing to remember about replacing regular light bulbs with CFL's:
Don't wait. The savings start when you replace an incandescent bulb with a CFL. For those of you that require high light levels, they make some that run at 23 watts, a couple of those in a double ceiling fixture does very well.
First thing in the morning, you'll wish they were not so bright.