Slashdot Mirror
Gov't Researchers Develop Wireless Car Chargers That Are Faster Than Plug-ins (computerworld.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Computerworld: The U.S. Department of Energy has demonstrated a 20,000 watt (20KW) wireless car-charging system that offers three times the efficiency of today's plug-in systems for electric vehicles (EVs). The research is the first step in creating a 50KW wireless charging system that may someday allow roadways to charge vehicles while they are being driven. The DOE's Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in Tennessee demonstrated the new system in partnership with Toyota, Cisco Systems, Evatran and the Clemson University International Center for Automotive Research. ORNL said the 20KW charging system for passenger cars is the world's highest power wireless system. It was developed in less than three years using a "unique architecture that included an ORNL-built inverter, isolation transformer, vehicle-side electronics and coupling technologies."
A Tesla charger has an efficiency of over 90%. If this charger has an efficiency three times that, then it should be above 270%. Maybe it can feed the extra 170% back into the grid.
The actual quote from the article is " achieved 90 percent efficiency at three times the rate of the plug-in systems commonly used for electric vehicles today.", not three times the efficiency. They're comparing the charger to a typical home charger. Which is meaningless since the system isn't limited by the connection to the car. And think about it. 10% loss of charging energy so you don't have to go to all the trouble of plugging it in? What a waste of our tax dollars.
Can't find any clue as to what frequency is being used for the charger. The prospect of 50 kW of power in your garage or wherever is worrying, despite being "well shielded". Even if it's a lower frequency (in the kHz range), there will be harmonics all over the spectrum, putting radio amateurs and anyone else using sensitive radio gear in a bind.
Fiat Lux.
The wireless charging system is not faster than all plug-in chargers, just the ones commonly used at home. The charge stations available commercially are faster and the article mentions this. It is also not three times more efficient, it's 3x faster than the home charging systems. It's 90% percent efficient, which is impressive but I seriously doubt any charging system is only 30% efficient.
Think globally but act within local variable scope.
There's an abundance of research showing that strong electric and magnetic fields can be hazardous.
No there isn't.
It's also been shown that too much exposure [to MRI] causes cancer.
Total BS.
I can't wait until the patent gets handed off to somebody to profit from.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Who said a MRI is dangerous? Thousands of people have them every day with no increase in cancer risk.
If you bring a large chunk of metal in to the room then sure it's dangerous but that's more to do with the metal flying physically towards a magnet rather than cancer.
Yes yes, terrible summary.
The 'fun' part is the 10% coupling waste (versus I would imagine much less than 1% for plugin charging).
Remember, we are not talking about the battery charge efficiency here, their 10% is just for the transfer of power to the car..
So, thats 'only' 2kw continuous loss. Thank god everyone is converting their houses to LED lighting, which still wont
offset the losses here.
Go Progress!
50kw, or even 20kw is extremely dangerous to couple. Outside of the leaking RF spectrum possibly interfering with electronics, the danger is something with a similar resonant field could be nearby and absorb some of that power. Even just a few tens of watts could start a fire. They probably need something akin to a gfci circuit that monitors the power in and out precisely and if something is absorbing power that shouldn't be, notice the discrepancy and terminate the charge.
The actual picture is pretty funny, with a ginormous briefcase put under the back of the vehicle, a mere 2 inches above the similar unit embedded in the floor. No way is that remotely practical, they would need to increase the air gap by at least triple, to 5x+ to properly mount it under reasonable vehicles. To keep the same coupling, the size would then have to be increased substantially. Further there is no way in hell that is working while you drive, it has to be precisely aligned which isn't going to happen period, even at stoplights. I could see it embedded into a garage stall, or even a parking stall outdoors, perhaps, but alignment would be a major issue and one that is not being addressed at this stage from anything I can gather.
I think they usually monitor the procedure in real-time, adjusting the area being scanned, etc. I can't imagine why having a computer in the same room as a 1.5T superconducting magnet would be a bad idea...
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
There's an abundance of research showing that strong electric and magnetic fields can be hazardous.
Sure, like the electric field formed between clouds and the Earth, but only if you happen to be around when the field discharges.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
You do realise that inside many DC-DC converters, and indeed inside all of the power transformers between the power station and your house, there are magnetically coupled coils that effectively transfer the energy "wirelessly".
The difference in this case is using an air cored coil at a greater distance. It's definitely harder to make them efficient but they have clearly shown great potential here, with 90% efficiency versus DC-DC converters at 95% and regular transformers at 98%.
As long as there is a properly installed quench tube to vent the boiling Helium and prevent it from filling the room, I don't see how a quench can kill or injure someone.
What would make sense is that someone went near the scanner with something magnetic, injuring/killing themselves or someone else, and resulting in an emergency shutdown of the field (i.e. a quench).
Alkaline batteries are dangerous too, if I eat them.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Why is gov doing corporate R&D?????????? Why are tax dollar being spent to improve the profit margins of a select group of companies???
Not MRIs. When I did a paediatric anaesthesia fellowship we would routinely sit in the room for the scan. Think cardiac MRIs requiring breath holds. The techs sit outside the room cause they need to use computers to run the scanner and also it's really (unpleasantly Even with quality ear protection) noisy. Plus something about pressure in the room that I never understood.
...government charges YOU!!!
20kw is nowhere near three times the efficiency of an average charger.
Home chargers for Tesla offer 20kw (22kw in EU) for usual setup.
Superchargers offer a lot more - 135kw for Tesla superchargers, 50kw for regular EU charging stations.
Tesla Model S was the best selling EV in the US last year (yes, it outsold the next best - the Leaf, in number of units, not just sales $) - source http://insideevs.com/monthly-p....
Typical home charger for a Tesla is the mobile connector which delivers 10KW charging from a dryer outlet. Owners have an option to install a 20KW Tesla plug-in charger in their garages, which many people do. Tesla plug-in "superchargers" charge up to 120KW, so 20KW wireless is not 3 times the rate of any of those plug-in chargers (it's actually only 1/6th of the most powerful one). It probably is 3x the rate of the original, discontinued a couple of years ago, RAV4 EV charger, but saying it's 3x the rate of plug-in chargers used today is incorrect. Lastly, there are public chargers limited to ~6.6KW, but their limit is not because of the fact that they are wired, it's mostly their power source (the J1772 connector used by most of those can handle up to 20KW).
Have you been reading the prospectus for my IPO?
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Of course it's faster, because with inductive charging systems you can build it in such a way that it can use a 13.2kV primary coil without putting anyone at immediate risk of electrocution.
The limiting factor in plug-in systems is the 240V supply rail, which is limited to a 30A circuit breaker (240V * 30A = 7200W). If you pipe in a higher voltage primary to a plug-and-socket, then you introduce issues of arc flashing and electrocution. However, if the primary high voltage coil is safely isolated and couples magnetically to a secondary, high current coil, then you can transfer much more energy.
So, let's say we use 7200V (typical underground MV circuit for neighborhood distribution) for the primary instead of 240V, and say 360V for the secondary (20:1 turns ratio). If our 7200V circuit is on a 10A breaker, then we have 72kW available. The primary coil is safely isolated in a panel on the floor under the car, and the secondary coil is inside the car itself. Piece of cake.
This is far from revolutionary. It's simple electromagnetics.
Often I want something and when I get it, I realize I didn't really want it after all. I think wireless charging falls into that category.
The reality is that electric vehicle owners equip the place they park their car overnight with a high capacity electrical circuit. It takes less than 30 seconds to plug in the car after you park.
Doubtless a wireless charging solution could be made safe and effective, but it would cost more. We don't need to find ways to make electric vehicles more costly.
Greed is the root of all evil.
You're confusing an MRI (Which uses magnetic fields and non-ionizing radio waves) with a CT scan, which uses ionizing x-rays. Lead shielding is used for devices that emit x-rays.
It would not need to be "magnetic" ( assuming you mean ferrous ), only conducting.
An aluminum bolt/rod/whatever in your person would still conduct, and moving thru a magnetic field, would have current induced in it.
That current, having nothing to do, would likely heat the component in question.
emt 377 emt 4
This is awesome news, but there is a threat here:
I'm fairly certain, that future technology will not allow anonymous charging. It could, but it will not — for the same gratuitous reasons you can't use and recharge a toll-paying transponder anonymously (the way you could use a phone-calling card, for example), but must associate it with both yourself and your car. (Well, New Hampshire, sort of, makes it possible to avoid providing your name, but the cars must still be listed in advance.)
And it is increasingly impossible to drive in certain places without such a transponder, which is, of course, routinely used for surveillance.
As happened with electronic toll-paying, the on-the-road charging too will go from optional to mandatory. Manufacturers will reduce the battery-sizes in many models to save weight and space — and how much of a charge do you need to get from the powered highway to your home (over unpowered streets), right? Effective tracking of your car will become possible. Worse, it may also become possible to remotely disable your car by revoking your access to these chargers.
Today's concerns over license-plate readers may then appear naively quaint...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Who said a MRI is dangerous? Thousands of people have them every day with no increase in cancer risk.
I don't know about cancer but MRIs are not harmless. People have been killed/injured by magnetic quench and RF heating of undetected foreign material.
When and where?
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
There's an abundance of research showing that strong electric and magnetic fields can be hazardous.
No there isn't.
OSHA Links to Dangers of RF radiation
High powered consumer microwave ovens output about 1kW the charging device uses 20kW. There is serious risk of getting an RF burn from this thing.
Knowledge = Power
P= W/t
t=Money
Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
Then why do radiologists always stand behind lead-lined walls/glass when they operate the machines?
Radiologist doing MRI do not stand behind lead lined glass. The reason they stand outside of the imaging room is to keep sensitive equipment (computers) out of the magnetic field and prevent random pieces of metal in their pockets from accelerating towards the patient. You must be mixing MRI (magnetic resonance imaging, which uses nuclear magnetic resonance) with CT (computer tomography, which uses relatively high intensity X-ray).
When I had my last MRI, the tech was in the control room, which was right next to the room I am in. There was nothing special about the wall or glass between us. You're confusing MRI with CAT, which uses x-rays..
The metal problem with MRI is that MRI uses extremely strong magnetic fields, which will rip metal loose from your body. That does not mean that the magnetic field is dangerous to normal tissue, just that you had metal in your body and were stupid enough to not say anything.
I should have said ferromagnetic. Anyway, the point is, the quench itself likely didn't cause the injury, but was initiated as a result of it.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
I'm avoiding electric cars ... but not because they charge slow.
I'm avoiding them because of cost and distance limits.
Another non-problem solved by tax funded research.
They should have made you pay for the damage. Did you think being under your skin made it different somehow? I know they told you to remove all metal.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
And yet none have been able to identify the powered devices in double blind studies.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Many types of stainless steel are non-magnetic.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Any loss of efficiency with an air core is not do to loss within the air itself; the problem is that the lower coupling means higher circulating currents in the coils for a given power and the lower inductance means higher frequency operation. You can get better efficiency using a traditional transformer at a lower cost and if the existing efficiency is lower, it is just because of economics.
If you're in the way of microwaves that are too powerful, you'll cook. If you're in a magnetic field that's too powerful, metallic things can be ripped from your body or thrown into you. Those things are pretty obvious, and not what people are talking about when they say those things are safe.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes