Slashdot Mirror


DC Power Saves 15% Energy and Cost @ Data Center

Krishna Dagli writes "Engineers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and about 20 technology vendors this month will wrap up a demonstration that they said shows DC power distribution in the data center can save up to 15 percent or more on energy consumption and cost. The proof-of-concept program, set up at Sun Microsystems' Newark, Calif., facility, offered a side-by-side comparison of a traditional AC power system and a 380-volt DC distribution system, running on both Intel-based servers and Sun systems."

22 of 371 comments (clear)

  1. Safety by TimeTrav · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I, for one, would not be comfortable working around high power DC. Call me paranoid, but I rather enjoy my heart beating with its current interval. You can take all the precautions you want, but accidents do happen.

    --
    [sig]you really dont want the answers, trust me[/sig]
    1. Re:Safety by Engineering_bully · · Score: 5, Informative
      You probably don't realize that most of the lighting and mechanical systems in your data center are already 277/480 VAC. That is the standard power configuration for a new commercial building (cuts down on conductor sizes). There is a dedicated transformer to create 120 VAC for all the plug loads.

      In a properly designed DC system, your no more/less safe than your already are.

      (Sorry for the repost - I finally remembered my login)

    2. Re:Safety by drgonzo59 · · Score: 4, Funny

      But we wouldn't know...As soon as one dies he gets shredded and a replacement takes his place. Thousands of IT workers die everyday and most people don't even know it.

    3. Re:Safety by andrewman327 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Quiet you, and back to the data mines!

      --
      Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    4. Re:Safety by peragrin · · Score: 5, Informative

      So you also failed electrical theory, as well.

      DC is harmless unless it has a path to carry it. You can grab a 380 volt DC line and not feel a thing. now if you then touch a grounded object, or the return path you are dead. But you have to make the connection. AC is lethal at 220v. As others posted it does have the advantage of forcing the mucsles to spasm so you can let go of the wire, But still zaps you every time you touch the cable.

      Go look up the history of Edison vs Westinghouse. Edison wanted DC power all around because it is inherently safer. a Broken AC wire can zap you, were as a broken DC wire can be touched with bare hands.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    5. Re:Safety by CaptainPuppydog · · Score: 5, Informative
      If you happen to grab a DC power line this is especially dangerous, as an AC line with throw you off while a DC line will cause you to simply grab harder and you can't let go.

      From http://www.andamooka.org/reader.pl?pgid=liecDCDC_3 , AC will tend to induce fibrillation of the heart, while DC will tend to 'freeze' it. A 'frozen' heart is more likely to regain a normal beat than a fibrillating (rapid, irregular beat) heart. Either way, not a 'Good Thing'.

      Note to the wise: Wherever possible, always approach a circuit with the back of your hand. If it is DC, the muscle reaction in case of contact/shock will tend to pull your arm away. If it is AC, same thing will happen. Depending on the voltage present on the conductor, you may even feel the hairs on the back of your hand react to the field produced, i.e., they will 'stand up'.

      CPD.
    6. Re:Safety by cswiger2005 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Obviously, you don't work on live circuits if you have a choice of working with them off instead, but good habits mean you treat even dead circuits as if they were live until fully isolated & disconnected, just as you should treat a gun as being loaded until you've confirmed that it is not.

      Well-designed power supplies often have a bleeder resistor across the primary filter caps to drain them of juice, but note that the vaccuum tube in a CRT makes an excellent capacitor as well (it's being charged to 20 kilovolts or more), and it's dangerous to try to dead-short it to drain the residual current. 120VAC current shock can be fatal but that is very uncommon; however, the voltages inside a CRT are probably the most dangerous level of current most people have around in their homes or work environments.

      --
      "The human race's favorite method for being in control of the facts is to ignore them." -Celia Green
    7. Re:Safety by Unique2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I recommend this website especially the section on Health and Safety before someone gets killed from following electrical safety advice from Slashdot. Some really good advice about lockouts, measuring supposedly dead points 3 times (once to see if its live, once against a known source, and once to make sure your meter wasn't faulty the first time) and making first contact using the back of your hand.

      --
      No trees were harmed in the posting of this message. However, a great number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
    8. Re:Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >So you also failed electrical theory, as well.

      Yourself also?

      ANY electrical path must be joined from source to drain or no power will flow. It doesn't matter if it is DC or AC. Period.

      An AC path, however, has an easier to isolate ground because it works with simple transformers. A 1:1 transformer will allow you to grab a 220 volt line without being shocked, assuming you do not touch any path that leads back to the other side of the transformer. This is why in the ICU in hospitals you will find them being used: If a patients equipment shorts in a manner that the electricity reaches the patient, it will not shock the patient unless the patient grabs ahold of the equipment.

      Unfortunately DC does not offer this sort of simplicity of isolation.

      Edison was a sadistic nutbag that actually enjoyed electrocuting animals like cats, dogs, and elephants by joining them to an AC power path. His DC power was no less dangerous, the only reason it never electrocuted the animals was that the voltage was low enough skin (or fur) resistance did not allow enough current to pass through the animal's body to kill them. Furthermore, due to the low voltage/high current nature of his system, the amount of energy wasted through heating the conductors limited electricity runs to less than about 2 km.

      The exact same ridiculousness in power cable AWG requirements can be seen in "modern" car stereo upgrades. People will run a 4 AWG cable to their subwoofer amplifier to power an "800 watt" 12 VDC amplifier. The same 800 watts can be generated from a 16 AWG cable hooked into a 120 VAC amplifier. The difference being that the car amplifiers are often unfused because fuses in the 100 - 200 Amp range are expensive, and circuit breaks even more so, and that 15 amp fuses and circuit breakers for home electricity are incredibly cheap. The unfused car system when shorted will burn the car down in no time. The fused circuit in houses when shorted will burn nothing down, and, when repaired, the wiring can even be reused.

      Edison created a useless power system that never worked properly for anyone at all. He also enjoyed electrocuting animals for no apparent reason other than to hookwink customers. He also helped develop one of today's most popular capital punishments: The electric chair. Oh, and he stole credit for several inventions (not the least of which is the light bulb). All around, he's just not a cool guy.

      So, basically, for Edison's idea to have worked, we'd all have 0000 AWG cables running to our homes, and we'd probably be melting several of them causing fires, not to mention that the DC power will cause the conductors to be damaged through electroplating. But, we wouldn't get shocked. Of course, the exact same benefits, along with the additional benefit of no electroplating, could be had by running the same conductors with the same voltage AC current at a frequency outside of 50 - 60 Hz.

      Of course, at 50 - 60 Hz AC power is most dangerous. But then again, at the voltage levels required for modern electricity, the frequency makes very little difference.

  2. The Telcos have known this for years by RotateLeftByte · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Telephone Companies had known this for years. This is why you can get 48vDC versions of most systems.
    In a telephon e exchange 48v DC is the norm.
    They have huge batteries and standy generators to keep the phone syste, running.

    --
    I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
  3. I've always liked ... by jc42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... those claims of saving "up to 15 percent or more".

    That pretty much covers the entire range of possibilities.

    I often wonder why they didn't say something like "up to 50 percent or more" or "up to 99 percent or more". Those would be every bit as meaningful.

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  4. Deadly DC? by drgonzo59 · · Score: 4, Informative
    DC will kill you much quicker than AC of the same voltage/amperage. .
    I always thought the opposite was true. Here is a wiki quote that also supports that:
    Low frequency (50 - 60 Hz) AC currents can be more dangerous than similar levels of DC current since the alternating fluctuations can cause the heart to lose coordination, inducing ventricular fibrillation,...
    Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Currents/
  5. What's new about this? by Flying+pig · · Score: 5, Informative
    DC buses have been used in military and industrial equipment since DC/DC converters were invented. (In fact, other former Cambridge undergraduates may remember the old 200V DC bus in the Cavendish labs, exposed contacts to the motors and all. Nostalgia...)

    You can also store DC whereas you cannot store AC, meaning UPS always need an AC-DC followed by a DC-AC stage. Since we have had large FET power transistors it has been possible to make DC/DC conversion very efficient - especially since, if you were beginning again, you would not choose 50 or 60 Hz for best efficiency.

    In fact, already the PC is using a DC bus to power small peripherals (USB) and it works surprisingly well.

    I may be wrong about this, but it was Edison who accused DC power of being more dangerous ("Westinghoused") only to have AC adopted for the pleasant US custom of humanely frying criminals.

    --
    Pining for the fjords
  6. dc / dc converter by wwwillem · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Would be interesting to know what the efficiency is of a 380 -> 12/5 DC-DC converter, compared to a traditional 110 AC -> 12/5 DC converter. This is of course only just a part of the total picture, but in the past this has often been mentioned as the reason for _not_ going DC. Maybe with modern switching power supplies, that problem has disappeared.

    --
    Browsers shouldn't have a back button!! It's all about going forward...
  7. Re:Edison by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Tesla was right about AC for many applications but DC has its merits and any useful
    > application of DC is a credit to Edison's scientific achievements.

    For 19th and early twentieth century technology Tesla and Westinghouse were entirely right. They had no practical method of changing voltage.

    BTW you don't want to look too closely at Edison's scientific achievements. You might find that there is less there than meets the eye.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  8. Re:Old time rivals at it again... by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Funny

    While it has been rumored that Mr. Nikola Tesla is spinning in his grave

    At 60 revolutions per second.

  9. "Larger power cables" - WRONG by wowbagger · · Score: 4, Informative
    The assertion that DC requires larget cables is WRONG.

    From the article:
    The proof-of-concept program, set up at Sun Microsystems' Newark, Calif., facility, offered a side-by-side comparison of a traditional AC power system and a 380-volt DC distribution system, running on both Intel-based servers and Sun systems.
    (emphasis mine)
    A DC system also would mean having to bring in larger cables than now exist with AC power.


    The power lost in the cables varies as the resistance of the cable and the current in the cable.

    The power delivered to the equipment varies as the current in the cable and the voltage on the cable.

    A 380 volt DC system can deliver as much power per unit current in the cables as a 380 volt AC system (assuming a near-unity power factor).

    Ergo, the size of the cables for a 380VDC system will be the same as the size of cables for a 380VAC system.

    So, if the comparison is against a 240VAC system, then a 380VDC system will have SMALLER cables, not larger. Only if the system being compared against is a 440VAC system will the cables be larger.

    Also - a 380VRMS AC system will have a peak voltage of about 540 volts (two significant digits in, two significant digits out), and thus will require MORE insulation than a 380VDC system.

    Also - the first things a switching power supply does is rectify the AC into DC and dump it into a capacitor (and usually do power factor correction): so a power supply designed to run from DC needs neither the power factor correction nor the big capacitor (a smaller cap will still be needed, but not one that can carry the system through the bulk of the AC cycle when the voltage is below peak). This makes the power supply simpler, and removes switching losses from the rectifier (granted, a modern synchronous rectifier based on IGBJTs will have a very low loss - but it still is a loss.)

    Also - creating a backup for 380VDC is pretty easy - you use a battery bank floated at the 380VDC level. No need to "switch" from mains power to battery - you are ALWAYS running on battery, and the mains power is just charging the battery. This is how the phone company does it - the central office has a bank of batteries providing 48VDC, which is float charged from the mains. Lose mains power, and the system doesn't even blink.

    (Yes, you need to have fusing to prevent those batteries from going nuclear if shorted, but that is a much simpler problem to solve than the issues of switching to backup power for an AC system.).

    Yes, you have to design the equipment to run off the 380VDC - so you need different power supply front ends: most power supplies are split into 2 parts - the front end that takes mains power and makes about 300VDC on a cap, and the back end that makes the lower voltages from that - so the back end of the power supply does not need to be redesigned. Moreover, most power supplies use an off-the-shelf front end module, and any "magic" is in the back end - so this is NOT a major issue.
  10. Re:Edison by Svartalf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Edison didn't have all that many scientific acheivements.

    The record player was really the only truely unique thing he did. Everything else was a duplication of someone else's efforts where he succeeded and the others failed- or was something one of his employees came up with. Did you know that he'd "Westinghouse" a cat "to show the dangers of AC power" during the time where he was trying to compete with AC power versus his DC system (From which ConEd initially came from...)? This would entail hooking up a grid of alternating plates with some small amount of insulating gap to an AC power connection, place them inside a cage that one's keeping a cat and then plug it in. Edison's NOT someone to be holding up as an example of scientific achievement- unless you want to hold Mengele up as well. Sure, we got a lot further in medical science because of that "Doctor", but how he got his information, I'd rather he didn't do what he did- and it's not a good example of a scientific achievement.

    DC and AC both have their place. DC is good for short-haul power distribution, but if you short out the lines you'll destroy the entire power run. AC doesn't do that anywhere near as bad- which is why electric power is distributed as AC- it doesn't have the same safety issues and it can be transmitted long distances without major losses as it's being transmitted down the wire, not conducted.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  11. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  12. Re:Here, here! by saider · · Score: 5, Informative

    Copper losses are created by current and are described by the equation I^2 * R. So as you double your current, you quadruple your power losses.

    Conversely, if you halve your current by boosting the voltage, you can reduce your transmission losses by 75%. Thats a pretty good reason to go with higher voltage. And since this is in the datacenter, you can train your people not to pee on the red wire.

    --


    Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
  13. Speaking of conductor sizes.... by Phreakiture · · Score: 4, Informative

    Speaking of conductor sizes, the article said this:

    A DC system also would mean having to bring in larger cables than now exist with AC power.

    I challenge this notion. Conductor size is not related to whether the power is AC or DC or what frequency of AC it might be; it is related to current.

    Larger cables are needed when more current is passed. Traditionally, you need larger cables for DC, because traditionally, DC power systems were lower voltages (12, 24, 48) than AC systems, and these lower voltages required larger currents for same power (e.g. 100W= 830mA at 120V, but 8.3A at 12V). Running at 380V, however, you get to lower the current (excluding the reduced current caused by the 15% power savings) versus a 120V system.

    Expanding on that, the reduced conductor size is proportional to the square of the reduced current. Simply by going from 120V to 380V (a factor of 3.17), you change the current flow downward by a factor of .32. This means you can change the cable cross-section area to by a factor of .1; you reduce the cable to one-tenth its original size; one tenth the copper.

    --
    www.wavefront-av.com
  14. Re:Here, here! by quoll · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's true for transmission over longer distances, but what about those short distances in the data room? Or for that matter, in my home office?

    Almost every device I own uses 4.7V or 12V. I look around at work here, and I can see power strips full of transformers, all of which are knocking back the AC power to one of a couple of DC voltage levels. Every one of those transformers has its own losses, most of which dissipates as heat. They're also large, making it difficult to fit them all into a strip, and their heavy, making it difficult to balance or hang the strip where it's most needed. At home I have DC transformers for the monitor, the switch, the firewall/router, the WiFi, the PDA recharger, the BT mouse recharging dock, the USB hub, the TV tuner box, etc, etc. It's got to be a safety hazard.

    Then we have the PCs, which are also using 2 (OK, 4) predefined levels of DC voltage, and have their own transformers and rectifiers to do it. These get so hot they even need their own fans!

    Why isn't this stuff standardized, and power strips can instead contain one single transformer/recitifer package, with DC sockets, or retractable DC wires coming out of them? Even if we ignored PCs and only did the external peripherals for now, we'd still get a big saving in power just by having fewer transformers.