That's actually not true. Nanometer sized crystals have large surface to volume ratios than bulk crystals, creating more surface defects per unit mass. The defects within a bulk crystal can be annealed to an equilibrium number, the same as those in a nano-crystal per unit mass. Thus, since battery performance is based on unit mass, you need the name weight of nano-crystals or bulk crystals to get the same capacity (to an order of magnitude, some papers show that surface defects actually INCREASE capacity, nifty stuff).
In addition, Li(z)Ti(x)O(y) is a system that undergoes phase changes during Lithium intercalation and deintercalation (as the battery discharges the "z" goes from 1 to 0). So the crystals are being made a-new with each charge discharge cycle (increasing cycle life, but this is something that also happens in the bulk, no need for nano whatnot).
Interestingly, the energy/power density with lithium titanium oxides is actually lower than that for carbons. A battery with a lithium cobalt oxide cathode and a lithium graphite anode will have a maximum potential of 4.2 V. The battery in question in the article actually sits around 3.0 V.
Finally, the failure mechanism for lithium ion batteries is not the anode, but the area just outside the anode called the SEI layer. This is a passivation layer formed adjacent to the anode by reaction of the neutral lithium with the organic electrolyte. This layer forms initially by irreversibly consuming some lithium, but if the charge/discharge rate is moderate it becomes stable and actually protects the anode. If the charge/discharge is too high, though, the layer breaks and more lithium is consumed to repair it, thus diminishing capacity. After enough of these cycles the batter will dramatically lose capacity.
Thus, the breakthrough in question must deal with a way of maintaining a stronger SEI layer, but it is most definitely at the cost of a lower potential battery.
But it's not as if it goes through amorphous to ordered to amorphous. The hydrogen bonding creates a solid-bonding in quite a loose sense as sol-gel structures are like toothpaste physically.
Certainly not "nothing to see here," but not T-1000 either.
That's crazy stuff... I guess they're using dot matrix because there are a ton of those lying around in wait....
However, given that you can by a useable ink jet at target for around 30 bucks, maybe the project will given up the noble intentions of employing dot matrix printers and go with (what I assume would be) more efficient ink jets.
1) I did read the previous comments. 2) That is the law... it's not "black and white," but waiting 5 years to collect on a patent when it is clearly being used would probably be noted as neglect of the patent 3) Ibid 4) And I indeed read the article
Patents do require active protection as well. Until the software age it was almost a non-issue because the most value patents were around manufacturing processes which could only be used by other big companies... in short you just can't build a widget plant and distribute the widgets overnight. We all know the deal with software and how this changes.
And sir, I thank you and your comic-book-store-guy reply for further demonstrating the slashdot stereotype.
I don't know if one of the 750 posts prior to this hit on this point, so here goes.
The trick with patents is that they need to be actively enforced by the patent holder (not the police). Therefore, it is up to the patent holder to watch over the market and make sure no one is stealing the IP.
Now, like laws, patents cannot be selectively protected and prosecuted, so I cannot sue one company for using my patent without a license and not another... from what I understand is that if you want to allow a company to use your tech for free, you have to explicitly say so. If you don't, you're passive acceptance of it's use may imply a negligence to police your own patent, and it makes lawsuits around your patent that much harder.
Now, consider that this tech has been used passively by literally millions of people for years. I'm guessing that even if this patent is legit. they've essentially given up their right to enforce the patent.
The law is supposed to work this way for the very purpose of preventing ambushes. I can only hope that it works out this way.
Wow, that's dead on... my research was funded to do that.... think of this though... tungsten embedded in a matrix of this stuff, then you've got something (I can send you my thesis if you're interested)
Excellent point. However, because it lacks a crystal structure, think of it as a concrete on an atomic scale. Like concrete, it has excellent compressive stregnth (until the yield strength where it shatters) but very poor tensile strength (cracking is almost always favored over deformatation, it's extremely flaw and void sensitive)
It's far too brittle to be a pistol material... as a Materials Scientist I flinch when it is said a material is stronger than another simply because strength can be measured in so many ways, and physical strength has components which are often inversely proportinal - e.g. toughness (ability to remain useful through fatigue and past the yeild strength) v.s. hardness.
this is harder than most metals, and has a higher yield strength, but zero ductility and probably really poor fatigue properties. Imagine a glass pistol... *shivers*
This isn't going to replace structural metals any time soon. How do I know? I did dynamic planar compressive strain experiments and ABAQUS on this stuff and composites with this as the matrix for my senior thesis.
Being a metallic glass, it has all sorts of crazy properites, as mentioned in the articles, but when it reaches the yeild strength it shatters (at least in non-composite form).
Also, because it is a metallic glass, it is inherently a meta-stable solid.... metals usually have relatively simple crystal structures, and thusly crystalize quickly with relatively small undercooling. The clever trick with this stuff is that it's a mix of four or five metallic elements that have a large span of atomic radii (this stuff is Zr-Ni-Cu-Ti-Be, various weightings of each, usually the Ni=Cu=Ti). Anyhow, when it finally does crystallize, whether due to heat, fatigue or constant strain, it forms a pretty complex crystal structure (I don't recall which one offhand) that allows very little motion of dislocations. Thus, it's super brittle when in it's thermodynamically stable state. Moreover, even with this clever alloying, it still requires high cooling rates to avoid crystallization from the melt, and is thusly hard to cast into large ingots.
Thus, whether it takes too hard an impact (can never be a tooling metal or knife, in pure form) or is under strain for too long (can never ever be a structural metal - too flaw sensitive in pure form and too expensive to process and machine in composite form) it will fail catastrophically.
Basically, this means it's pretty useless for most applications metals are required for (due to lack of crystal structure it's also a poor heat conductor - sorry overclockers). And because it is opaque, it can't be used for traditional glass applications. Liquid Metal has been around for a while trying to push the golf clubs, for at least three years, more like four or five, so I'm not sure what the sudden attention is for. We ran a back of the evelope calculation in my research group: Say you're on the links, and you mis-strike the ball, and hit a large rock in the ground with a non-composite liquidmetal club... basically you'll shatter the face of the head (only the face is amorphous due to process/cost/strength issues), sending shrapnel flying into your ankle. Yum.
Still, from a physics perspective, this stuff is really interesting due to its completely artificial nature (you'll never find anything close to this in nature) and odd mechanical properties (it's the metallic version of flubber). Commericially, in bulk form, I'd say they should shy away from structural applications and perhaps try transformers, where the thin film versions of amorphous metals have significant gains over silicon.
Is anyone working on a hack that could let the DC act as an internet radio... since it runs CE couldn't some port of winamp be put on it, or is there a linux port out there....
I don't know if it is out there, seems like a good idea though
Regulon: If a tree falls
on
The Regulon
·
· Score: 1
If a tree falls in the woods, does anybody hear it..
I suppose the internet is just life support for the passing sound....
the problem with this article is, until AI is a reality, information is only such when people absorb it. I guess in this regard, we should distinguish "potential information" from "kinetic information", but enough of this philosophical waxing, this thread reeks of MCM
Slashdot Mirror
Dissolves pretty readily in water. I wonder how this is stabilized.
You just did.
That's actually not true. Nanometer sized crystals have large surface to volume ratios than bulk crystals, creating more surface defects per unit mass. The defects within a bulk crystal can be annealed to an equilibrium number, the same as those in a nano-crystal per unit mass. Thus, since battery performance is based on unit mass, you need the name weight of nano-crystals or bulk crystals to get the same capacity (to an order of magnitude, some papers show that surface defects actually INCREASE capacity, nifty stuff).
In addition, Li(z)Ti(x)O(y) is a system that undergoes phase changes during Lithium intercalation and deintercalation (as the battery discharges the "z" goes from 1 to 0). So the crystals are being made a-new with each charge discharge cycle (increasing cycle life, but this is something that also happens in the bulk, no need for nano whatnot).
Interestingly, the energy/power density with lithium titanium oxides is actually lower than that for carbons. A battery with a lithium cobalt oxide cathode and a lithium graphite anode will have a maximum potential of 4.2 V. The battery in question in the article actually sits around 3.0 V.
Finally, the failure mechanism for lithium ion batteries is not the anode, but the area just outside the anode called the SEI layer. This is a passivation layer formed adjacent to the anode by reaction of the neutral lithium with the organic electrolyte. This layer forms initially by irreversibly consuming some lithium, but if the charge/discharge rate is moderate it becomes stable and actually protects the anode. If the charge/discharge is too high, though, the layer breaks and more lithium is consumed to repair it, thus diminishing capacity. After enough of these cycles the batter will dramatically lose capacity.
Thus, the breakthrough in question must deal with a way of maintaining a stronger SEI layer, but it is most definitely at the cost of a lower potential battery.
In thirty years slashdot will still be enamored with poorly researched, jargon infused, poorly written future-bation.
Would you like some fries with that hype.
So let's say that somehow the thermal insulation and mechanical integrity are good to go.
Here are some other potential issues:
-Plumping
-Storage of fuel
-Energy Conversion (engines and low duty cycle devices are a tough match)
Batteries are still pretty good.... closed systems save a lot of grief.
But it's not as if it goes through amorphous to ordered to amorphous. The hydrogen bonding creates a solid-bonding in quite a loose sense as sol-gel structures are like toothpaste physically.
Certainly not "nothing to see here," but not T-1000 either.
just to clarify, the 12 watts is the idle state of the printer.
That's crazy stuff... I guess they're using dot matrix because there are a ton of those lying around in wait....
However, given that you can by a useable ink jet at target for around 30 bucks, maybe the project will given up the noble intentions of employing dot matrix printers and go with (what I assume would be) more efficient ink jets.
Does anyone have #'s for the ink jets?
The link provided shows these energy drains:
Computer: 5.5 Watts
Display 13 Watts
Printer (idle) 12 Watts (with inverter)
Printer (printing) 48Watts (with inverter)
Now, is this just a typo, or does a printer standing idly by truly drain twice the power consumed by the operating computer.
I'm guessing the former. I looked quickly for a link webmaster of the site but in my minute of searching found nothing.
Sigh,
1) I did read the previous comments.
2) That is the law... it's not "black and white," but waiting 5 years to collect on a patent when it is clearly being used would probably be noted as neglect of the patent
3) Ibid
4) And I indeed read the article
Patents do require active protection as well. Until the software age it was almost a non-issue because the most value patents were around manufacturing processes which could only be used by other big companies... in short you just can't build a widget plant and distribute the widgets overnight. We all know the deal with software and how this changes.
And sir, I thank you and your comic-book-store-guy reply for further demonstrating the slashdot stereotype.
I don't know if one of the 750 posts prior to this hit on this point, so here goes.
The trick with patents is that they need to be actively enforced by the patent holder (not the police). Therefore, it is up to the patent holder to watch over the market and make sure no one is stealing the IP.
Now, like laws, patents cannot be selectively protected and prosecuted, so I cannot sue one company for using my patent without a license and not another... from what I understand is that if you want to allow a company to use your tech for free, you have to explicitly say so. If you don't, you're passive acceptance of it's use may imply a negligence to police your own patent, and it makes lawsuits around your patent that much harder.
Now, consider that this tech has been used passively by literally millions of people for years. I'm guessing that even if this patent is legit. they've essentially given up their right to enforce the patent.
The law is supposed to work this way for the very purpose of preventing ambushes. I can only hope that it works out this way.
Wow, that's dead on... my research was funded to do that.... think of this though... tungsten embedded in a matrix of this stuff, then you've got something (I can send you my thesis if you're interested)
Excellent point.
However, because it lacks a crystal structure, think of it as a concrete on an atomic scale. Like concrete, it has excellent compressive stregnth (until the yield strength where it shatters) but very poor tensile strength (cracking is almost always favored over deformatation, it's extremely flaw and void sensitive)
It's far too brittle to be a pistol material...
as a Materials Scientist I flinch when it is said a material is stronger than another simply because strength can be measured in so many ways, and physical strength has components which are often inversely proportinal - e.g. toughness (ability to remain useful through fatigue and past the yeild strength) v.s. hardness.
this is harder than most metals, and has a higher yield strength, but zero ductility and probably really poor fatigue properties. Imagine a glass pistol... *shivers*
This isn't going to replace structural metals any time soon. How do I know? I did dynamic planar compressive strain experiments and ABAQUS on this stuff and composites with this as the matrix for my senior thesis.
Being a metallic glass, it has all sorts of crazy properites, as mentioned in the articles, but when it reaches the yeild strength it shatters (at least in non-composite form).
Also, because it is a metallic glass, it is inherently a meta-stable solid.... metals usually have relatively simple crystal structures, and thusly crystalize quickly with relatively small undercooling. The clever trick with this stuff is that it's a mix of four or five metallic elements that have a large span of atomic radii (this stuff is Zr-Ni-Cu-Ti-Be, various weightings of each, usually the Ni=Cu=Ti). Anyhow, when it finally does crystallize, whether due to heat, fatigue or constant strain, it forms a pretty complex crystal structure (I don't recall which one offhand) that allows very little motion of dislocations. Thus, it's super brittle when in it's thermodynamically stable state. Moreover, even with this clever alloying, it still requires high cooling rates to avoid crystallization from the melt, and is thusly hard to cast into large ingots.
Thus, whether it takes too hard an impact (can never be a tooling metal or knife, in pure form) or is under strain for too long (can never ever be a structural metal - too flaw sensitive in pure form and too expensive to process and machine in composite form) it will fail catastrophically.
Basically, this means it's pretty useless for most applications metals are required for (due to lack of crystal structure it's also a poor heat conductor - sorry overclockers). And because it is opaque, it can't be used for traditional glass applications. Liquid Metal has been around for a while trying to push the golf clubs, for at least three years, more like four or five, so I'm not sure what the sudden attention is for. We ran a back of the evelope calculation in my research group: Say you're on the links, and you mis-strike the ball, and hit a large rock in the ground with a non-composite liquidmetal club... basically you'll shatter the face of the head (only the face is amorphous due to process/cost/strength issues), sending shrapnel flying into your ankle. Yum.
Still, from a physics perspective, this stuff is really interesting due to its completely artificial nature (you'll never find anything close to this in nature) and odd mechanical properties (it's the metallic version of flubber). Commericially, in bulk form, I'd say they should shy away from structural applications and perhaps try transformers, where the thin film versions of amorphous metals have significant gains over silicon.
you act like that's a bad thing..... where do you think the money for all this stuff comes from?
It's going to cost quite a bit to start the changes, though I'm down if you're buying.
Is anyone working on a hack that could let the DC act as an internet radio... since it runs CE couldn't some port of winamp be put on it, or is there a linux port out there.... I don't know if it is out there, seems like a good idea though
If a tree falls in the woods, does anybody hear it.. I suppose the internet is just life support for the passing sound.... the problem with this article is, until AI is a reality, information is only such when people absorb it. I guess in this regard, we should distinguish "potential information" from "kinetic information", but enough of this philosophical waxing, this thread reeks of MCM