Energy capacitance and safety for vehicles?
Stringer
vehicles and the associated charge/ re-charge time/ weight limitations...
Anyone done any feasibility studies of using Capacitors and its potential as
a storage mechanism for propulsion?
If the potential can be utilised, considering all safety aspects, technology
barriers etc. How could the energy be discharged minimilistically (partly)
and steadily over a particular driving distance without fully discharging or
would this method (if feasible) be used in a charge/discharge/recharge
rapid-response probability?
News
"Stringer" <stri...@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:gxgEk.92042$KV1....@newsfe25.ams2...
There is lots going on in this field - utracapacitors or supercapacitors.
Ultracapacitors combined with a battery is the answer to hybrids until
batteries get developed even further. The capacitors take in nearly all the
kinetic energy of braking and slowing down and can immediately give it back
off. They will immediately take all of a charge and give the lot back off
immediately too. They do not go wrong, deteriorate and will outlast the car.
But existing Ultracapacitors hold 25 times less charge than a battery of
similar physical size. There are breakthroughs that mean the will be about
equal in this respect.
Advances are so good that it is feasible that ultracapacitors can just
replace the battery set on a hybrid altogether. They can charge up in
seconds from the grid.
They have great potential for use in elevators where the downward energy is
stored to push the elevator back up. This would make a huge impact in the
energy running of millions of elevators.
"China is experimenting with a new form of electric bus (capabus) that runs
without powerlines using power stored in large onboard electric double-layer
capacitors, which are quickly recharged whenever the electric bus stops at
any bus stop (under so-called electric umbrellas), and fully charged in the
terminus. A few prototypes were being tested in Shanghai in early 2005. In
2006, two commercial bus routes began to use electric double-layer capacitor
buses; one of them is route 11 in Shanghai.
In 2001 and 2002, VAG, the public transport operator in Nuremberg, Germany
tested a hybrid bus which uses a diesel-electric drive system with electric
double-layer capacitors.
Since 2003 Mannheim Stadtbahn in Mannheim, Germany has operated an LRV
(light-rail vehicle) which uses electric double-layer capacitors to store
braking energy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercapacitor
MIT Builds Efficient Nanowire Storage to Replace Car Batteries
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4252623.html
Why Ultracapacitors Will Be Your Hybrid's New Best Friend
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4252628.html
"The Zenn Motor Company is waiting until a new power storage technology is
ready before it releases the vehicle, called the cityZENN, which will
achieve 80mph speeds and have a range of 250 miles.
Rechargeable in five minutes, the vehicle will use ultracapacitors from
Texas-based EEStor instead of conventional lithium or lead acid batteries."
http://www.zenncars.com/
"Based on these claims, a full charge should give the capacitor sufficient
energy to drive a small car 300 miles (480 km). Although the technology
should allow very fast charging (e.g., 5 minutes), "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEstor
EEstor have not come up with the goods yet - we shall see.
http://www.ultracapacitors.org/
Things are looking good indeed.
Larry Caldwell
(Stringer) says...
> Anyone done any feasibility studies of using Capacitors and its potential as
> a storage mechanism for propulsion?
Unfortunately, the physics of capacitance precludes their use for
anything but brief high voltage pulses. Starting capacitors are used in
AC motors to balance the starting power factor of the inductive load.
--
For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
with my first name and last initial.
News
"Larry Caldwell" <firstnamel...@peaksky.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.234bcca59...@news.peaksky.com...
> In article <gxgEk.92042$KV1....@newsfe25.ams2>, stri...@virgin.net
> (Stringer) says...
>
>> Anyone done any feasibility studies of using Capacitors and its potential
>> as
>> a storage mechanism for propulsion?
>
> Unfortunately, the physics of capacitance precludes their use for
> anything but brief high voltage pulses. Starting capacitors are used in
> AC motors to balance the starting power factor of the inductive load.
I don't think you got my post in time.
Ray King
What's the discussion concerning batteries vs.caps? I thought they were the
same except for the activation of electrolyte and the plate thickness to
keep the electrolyte from destroying the plates. I should think the
batteries/caps should be examined at high voltage because of the energy
formula says E = 1/2 C VV.
The energy capacity of a cell increases more rapidly at high voltage.
Ray
"Stringer" <stri...@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:gxgEk.92042$KV1....@newsfe25.ams2...
You
"Stringer" <stri...@virgin.net> wrote:
Not until someone make a GIANT Break thru in Power Density for
Capacitors......
David Williams
-> same except for the activation of electrolyte and the plate thickness to
-> keep the electrolyte from destroying the plates.
No. The voltage across a capacitor is proportional to the charge in it.
The voltage across a cell (or battery) is almost constant unless the
cell is almost completely discharged. This makes cells essentially
easier to use. The motor or generator has to work at a definite
voltage. With capacitors, it has to handle voltages that vary
greatly.
dow
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> Considering energy storage capacity in batteries for electrically powered
> vehicles and the associated charge/ re-charge time/ weight limitations...
> Anyone done any feasibility studies of using Capacitors and its potential as
> a storage mechanism for propulsion?
Totally lousy compared to batteries.
Do your own research and you'll see why.
Graham
Eeyore
News wrote:
> "Stringer" <stri...@virgin.net> wrote
>
> > Considering energy storage capacity in batteries for electrically powered
> > vehicles and the associated charge/ re-charge time/ weight limitations...
> > Anyone done any feasibility studies of using Capacitors and its potential
> > as a storage mechanism for propulsion?
> >
> > If the potential can be utilised, considering all safety aspects,
> > technology barriers etc. How could the energy be discharged
> > minimilistically (partly) and steadily over a particular driving distance
> > without fully discharging or would this method (if feasible) be used in a
> > charge/discharge/recharge rapid-response probability?
>
> There is lots going on in this field - utracapacitors or supercapacitors.
IDIOT
Eeyore
News wrote:
> "Larry Caldwell" <firstnamel...@peaksky.com> wrote in message
> > In article <gxgEk.92042$KV1....@newsfe25.ams2>, stri...@virgin.net
> > (Stringer) says...
> >
> >> Anyone done any feasibility studies of using Capacitors and its potential
> >> as
> >> a storage mechanism for propulsion?
> >
> > Unfortunately, the physics of capacitance precludes their use for
> > anything but brief high voltage pulses. Starting capacitors are used in
> > AC motors to balance the starting power factor of the inductive load.
>
> I don't think you got my post in time.
IDIOT
Eeyore
Ray King wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What's the discussion concerning batteries vs.caps? I thought they were the
> same except for the activation of electrolyte and the plate thickness to
> keep the electrolyte from destroying the plates.
In that case you should take a science course.
Graham
Eeyore
You wrote:
What was that company that making grreat claims a year or two ago ?
They seem to have disappeared off the radar. Maybe they never learnt the
fundamentals of physics ?
Graham
Eeyore
David Williams wrote:
Not to mention the VASTLY lower energy density.
A trunk full of ultra-caps would probably get you to the end of the road.
Graham
Larry Caldwell
kill...@invalid.invalid (News) says...
I saw your article, I just disregarded it. You seem to lack a reality
filter, and believe anything you can find on the web. You need to
realize that you are doing nothing but parroting scam artists who are
making wild claims in an effort to separate suckers from their money.
Get a grip.
Larry Caldwell
rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com (Eeyore) says...
Not to speak of the unfortunate consequences of rear ending a vehicle
like that. If people think lithium is explosive, wait until they
crumple a cap big enough to run a car.
News
> In article <48E325BF...@hotmail.com>,
> rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com (Eeyore) says...
>>
>>
>> David Williams wrote:
>>
>> > -> What's the discussion concerning batteries vs.caps? I thought they
>> > were the
>> > -> same except for the activation of electrolyte and the plate
>> > thickness to
>> > -> keep the electrolyte from destroying the plates.
>> >
>> > No. The voltage across a capacitor is proportional to the charge in it.
>> > The voltage across a cell (or battery) is almost constant unless the
>> > cell is almost completely discharged. This makes cells essentially
>> > easier to use. The motor or generator has to work at a definite
>> > voltage. With capacitors, it has to handle voltages that vary
>> > greatly.
>>
>> Not to mention the VASTLY lower energy density.
>>
>> A trunk full of ultra-caps would probably get you to the end of the road.
They can get you a little further than that now. And in a light bodied car
even further. There are experiments to have supercapacitors buried
underground near rail stations. They are attached to the electric overhead
wires or third rail . They absorb braking energy of the train and assist in
acceleration and not stored on the vehicle at all. So they can be very big
and heavy.
News
> In article <gxgEk.92042$KV1....@newsfe25.ams2>, stri...@virgin.net
> (Stringer) says...
>
>> Anyone done any feasibility studies of using Capacitors and its potential
>> as
>> a storage mechanism for propulsion?
>
> Unfortunately, the physics of capacitance
> precludes their use for anything but brief
> high voltage pulses.
You really should read the links I gave you. It is not 1966 anymore.
News
You are clearly in cloud cuckoo land. Read what I wrote and also the links.
It appears many large organisations are stupid and scammers to you. Not
only that supercapacitors are used in buses and trains in China and Germany
right now. Maybe they are all making it up. You never know.
Eeyore
News wrote:
> "Larry Caldwell" <firstnamel...@peaksky.com> wrote in message
> > rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com (Eeyore) says...
> >> David Williams wrote:
> >>
> >> > -> What's the discussion concerning batteries vs.caps? I thought they
> >> > were the
> >> > -> same except for the activation of electrolyte and the plate
> >> > thickness to
> >> > -> keep the electrolyte from destroying the plates.
> >> >
> >> > No. The voltage across a capacitor is proportional to the charge in it.
> >> > The voltage across a cell (or battery) is almost constant unless the
> >> > cell is almost completely discharged. This makes cells essentially
> >> > easier to use. The motor or generator has to work at a definite
> >> > voltage. With capacitors, it has to handle voltages that vary
> >> > greatly.
> >>
> >> Not to mention the VASTLY lower energy density.
> >>
> >> A trunk full of ultra-caps would probably get you to the end of the road.
>
> They can get you a little further than that now.
IDIOT
Eeyore
News wrote:
> You are clearly in cloud cuckoo land.
No, that would be you AS EVER !
Eeyore
News wrote:
> Not only that supercapacitors are used in buses and trains in China and
> Germany
> right now.
Not for primary traction power. They're used for regenative braking due to their
ability to accept large amounts of charge quickly (batteriees tend not to like
that).
So you're an IDIOT again. Nothing new. You haven't a clue about anything because
your 'brain' is defective.
Graham
Stringer
I concluded some time ago that the outcome would be "lousy" already and I
already knew the regenerative braking was a useful cap system but only in
this respect.
I was curious as to any current advances such as what 'news' had bothered to
provide with his links, but again it seems caps have limited use comparable
with batteries from all that I have read.
I'm not deterred other than through my own limitations to find a storage
solution nor am I convinced that research into the potential of capacitors
as a propulsion mechanism has reached any sort of maturity - far from it.
The limitations of rapid discharge of caps obviously poses a big challenge
but unfortunately this is not my field and my understanding is limited. That
said; Imp a thinking sort of guy and with more knowledge/understanding a
solution path may eek an existence. For example a system with hysteresis
with rate-independence which can be instantly switched as in a
ferroelectrical component (polarized) paraelectric material.
This would have to be a nonlinear ferroelectric (Teflon?) influenced by an
electric dipole from an external field (electret?), but which might allow
steady state discharge as required (turnable capacitance).
Accordingly "my research" suggests that the very nature of a nonlinear
ferroelectric with turnable capacitance can be made much smaller in size and
weight (thin films), and less dense comparable with non-turnable capacitors
of similar capacitance. Similarly a stack of some "n" size may produce the
desirable storage potentials required.
Spontaneous polarization is a very useful and desirable property of a
ferroelectric capacitor. Also useful is that the change in polarization
results in a change of the material lattice producing surface charge which
can cause current flow without the presence of an external voltage across
the capacitor. However the properties of piezoelectric and pyroelectric
materials are usually limited to micro systems such as memory, sensors and
cigarette lighters etc. with macro electrets some way to go.
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> I was curious as to any current advances such as what 'news' had bothered to
> provide with his links, but again it seems caps have limited use comparable
> with batteries from all that I have read.
News is cluless about everything. If he writes something you can be pretty
certain it's wrong or the precise opposite of reality.
HTH.
Graham
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> I'm not deterred other than through my own limitations to find a storage
> solution nor am I convinced that research into the potential of capacitors
> as a propulsion mechanism has reached any sort of maturity - far from it.
How are you going to make them any better ? Caps have been made commercially
for a century or so and the methods and limitations are all well known.
Graham
Mauried
About the best you can do with caps is make them a bit smaller and a
bit cheaper, but thats about it.
Electricity is difficult stuff to store.
Thats why just about every electricity storage method in existance
converts the electricity into something else and then stores the
something else.
Still pretty innefficient but at least you can store lots of energy.
The simplest solution is to not have to store electricity in the first
place.
News
"Mauried" <mau...@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:48e48200....@news.tpg.com.au...
>>Stringer wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not deterred other than through my
>>> own limitations to find a storage
>>> solution nor am I convinced that research
>>> into the potential of capacitors
>>> as a propulsion mechanism has reached
>>> any sort of maturity - far from it.
It has still along way to go yet.
> About the best you can do with caps is
> make them a bit smaller and a
> bit cheaper,
They are improving the charge storage constantly. They may never have the
energy storage density of a battery, but used properly they can make an
impact indeed. Assisting batteries in hybrid cars is one clear application.
> The simplest solution is to not
> have to store electricity in the first
> place.
Yep. Use compressed air. Air is free.
News
> it seems caps have limited use comparable
> with batteries from all that I have read.
One company in Texas is claiming that they have developed and are going
produce an untracapacitor comparable to a battery in energy storage and
physical size. We shall see. Many have promised the earth and never
produced. If they are genuine then these will replace batteries left right
and centre and the 100% electric car is here, even power tools will have
them. A minute to charge up the drill? Sounds OK to me.
Nevertheless supercapacitors as they are right now are very useful and will
be introduced into vehicles to capture kinetic energy and give it back off.
As I mentioned in a previous post, supercapacitors are used in third-rail
rail systems in the UK, buried under the ground, not adding weight to the
train, and on trains in Germany and buses in Shanghai.
Be prepared to see more of them about in odd usages.
Eeyore
News wrote:
> They are improving the charge storage constantly.
Not really. Capacitor products are very mature.
> They may never have the
> energy storage density of a battery,
Not a hope in hell. By several orders of magnitude.
> but used properly they can make an
> impact indeed. Assisting batteries in hybrid cars is one clear application.
Only to absorb the charge from regenerative braking.
Graham
Eeyore
News wrote:
> "Stringer" <stri...@virgin.net> wrote
>
> > it seems caps have limited use comparable
> > with batteries from all that I have read.
>
> One company in Texas is claiming that they have developed and are going
> produce an untracapacitor comparable to a battery in energy storage and
> physical size.
Oh sure ! LMAO !
> We shall see. Many have promised the earth and never produced.
Like MDI for example and the air car ?
Graham
David Williams
-> > have to store electricity in the first
-> > place.
-> Yep. Use compressed air. Air is free.
But compressors aren't. Nor are pressure tanks.
I did a few calculations about compressed-air powered cars. Suppose
there are 10 kilograms of air. That's about 6 cubic metres at
atmospheric pressure or about 20 litres at 300 atmospheres. The tanks
to hold it would weigh many tens of kilograms, so we're pushing the
limits for a small car.
The *only* energy in compressed air is the kinetic energy of its
molecules. If it expands by pushing a piston, some of the kinetic
energy is given up, so the air cools. A bit of the heat energy in the
air is converted to mechanical energy. But, unless extra heat is added,
the *most* energy that can be given to the piston must be less than the
original kinetic energy of the molecules.
Air molecules move at about the speed of sound, about 300 metres per
second at ordinary temperatures. So the total kinetic energy is 10 kg
of air is (1/2) x 10 x 300^2 joules, which comes to 0.45 megajoules.
One kilowatt hour is 3.6 megajoules, so the energy in the air is 0.125
kWh.
We figured recently that 30 kWh might be enough to drive a small car
200 kilometres. At that rate, the range of the compressed-air car would
be a bit less than *one* kilometre. I can imagine that, with
regenerative braking and the like, the range might be stretched to two
or three kilometres, but not much more.
This is a basic physical limitation. Improved technology isn't going to
change it.
I have read that demonstrations of compressed-air cars have been done
in which journalists were driven around a city block. They were amazed.
But they weren't told that they had almost exhausted the car's energy
supply.
dow
David Williams
-> > have to store electricity in the first
-> > place.
-> Yep. Use compressed air. Air is free.
But compressors aren't. Nor are pressure tanks.
I did a few calculations about compressed-air powered cars. Suppose
there are 10 kilograms of air. That's about 6 cubic metres at
atmospheric pressure or about 20 litres at 300 atmospheres. The tanks
to hold it would weigh many tens of kilograms, so we're pushing the
limits for a small car.
The *only* energy in compressed air is the kinetic energy of its
molecules. If it expands by pushing a piston, some of the kinetic
energy is given up, so the air cools. A bit of the heat energy in the
News
"David Williams" <david.w...@bayman.org> wrote in message
news:1222982183.9...@bayman.org...
>-> > The simplest solution is to not
> -> > have to store electricity in the first
> -> > place.
>
> -> Yep. Use compressed air. Air is free.
>
> But compressors aren't. Nor are pressure tanks.
Air is still free and never breaks down and wears out.
> I did a few calculations about compressed-air powered cars. Suppose
> there are 10 kilograms of air. That's about 6 cubic metres at
> atmospheric pressure or about 20 litres at 300 atmospheres. The tanks
> to hold it would weigh many tens of kilograms, so we're pushing the
> limits for a small car.
That is using ineffecient air motors - Tata/MDI and Engineair
http://www.engineair.com.au/ claim theirs are far more efficient than those
in normal use.
Regen braking using air is a very good appliction for vehicles.
News
> I have read that demonstrations of compressed-air cars have been done
> in which journalists were driven around a city block. They were amazed.
> But they weren't told that they had almost exhausted the car's energy
> supply.
Tata think differently. look at:
http://www.tatamotors.com/our_world/press_releases.php?ID=281&action=Pull
http://www.eurekareporter.com/article/080712-as-it-stands-vehicles-that-run-on-air-are-ready
http://www.greenoptimistic.com/2008/07/13/air-powered-tata-nano/
Stringer
I have absolutely no intention of even thinking about doing so, the
"potential" is what intrigues me - its usefulness.
It is important to understand here that the charged capacitor/electret
cannot itself perform work.
The device simply supports an electrostatic field. The cap can, however, be
used for generating (by induction) electrical energy that CAN perform work.
Don Kelly
> In article <gxgEk.92042$KV1....@newsfe25.ams2>, stri...@virgin.net
> (Stringer) says...
>
>> as
>> a storage mechanism for propulsion?
>
> anything but brief high voltage pulses. Starting capacitors are used in
> AC motors to balance the starting power factor of the inductive load.
>
>
> For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
-------------------
Starting capacitors are used in single phase AC motors to cause a phase
shift in the starting winding to get a better starting torque than would be
possible otherwise. They are not used to correct power factor. Start and
run capacitors for single phase motors are also not used for power factor
correction but to simulate a 2 phase machine under both running and full
load conditions.
Power factor correction uses capacitors in parallel with the motor
(generally for polyphase motors which do not need starting windings or
capacitors).
In any case, the application of capacitors in AC circuits is not of concern
here.
The idea of storing energy in ultracapacitors is definitely of interest but
has nothing to do with brief, high voltage pulses. Very high capacitances
are possible but, as at presence, the voltages and energy storage are
limited. There have been experimental busses using such capacitor banks.
As an aside, a conventional 1200rpm unloaded 120V 5HP DC motor looks like a
multi-farad capacitor. Stored energy is in its moment of inertia. If
equivalent capacitance can be obtained with a decrease in volume and weight-
it is worth exploring.
--
Don Kelly dh...@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
Eeyore
David Williams wrote:
> -> > The simplest solution is to not
> -> > have to store electricity in the first
> -> > place.
>
> -> Yep. Use compressed air. Air is free.
>
> But compressors aren't. Nor are pressure tanks.
>
> I did a few calculations about compressed-air powered cars. Suppose
> there are 10 kilograms of air. That's about 6 cubic metres at
> atmospheric pressure or about 20 litres at 300 atmospheres. The tanks
> to hold it would weigh many tens of kilograms, so we're pushing the
> limits for a small car.
>
> The *only* energy in compressed air is the kinetic energy of its
> molecules. If it expands by pushing a piston, some of the kinetic
> energy is given up, so the air cools. A bit of the heat energy in the
> air is converted to mechanical energy. But, unless extra heat is added,
> the *most* energy that can be given to the piston must be less than the
> original kinetic energy of the molecules.
This why I gather Tata intend to use it a bit like an ICE by adding some
fuel. If it ever gets that !
> Air molecules move at about the speed of sound, about 300 metres per
> second at ordinary temperatures. So the total kinetic energy is 10 kg
> of air is (1/2) x 10 x 300^2 joules, which comes to 0.45 megajoules.
> One kilowatt hour is 3.6 megajoules, so the energy in the air is 0.125
> kWh.
>
> We figured recently that 30 kWh might be enough to drive a small car
> 200 kilometres. At that rate, the range of the compressed-air car would
> be a bit less than *one* kilometre. I can imagine that, with
> regenerative braking and the like, the range might be stretched to two
> or three kilometres, but not much more.
>
> This is a basic physical limitation. Improved technology isn't going to
> change it.
>
> I have read that demonstrations of compressed-air cars have been done
> in which journalists were driven around a city block. They were amazed.
> But they weren't told that they had almost exhausted the car's energy
> supply.
The fact it was slowing down wasn't a give away ? ;~)
They are also incredibly noisy. No muffler it seems. I suppose that would
reduce the power output further still.
Graham
Eeyore
News wrote:
> "David Williams" <david.w...@bayman.org> wrote
>
> >-> > The simplest solution is to not
> > -> > have to store electricity in the first
> > -> > place.
> >
> > -> Yep. Use compressed air. Air is free.
> >
> > But compressors aren't. Nor are pressure tanks.
>
> Air is still free and never breaks down and wears out.
Oh big deal.
> > I did a few calculations about compressed-air powered cars. Suppose
> > there are 10 kilograms of air. That's about 6 cubic metres at
> > atmospheric pressure or about 20 litres at 300 atmospheres. The tanks
> > to hold it would weigh many tens of kilograms, so we're pushing the
> > limits for a small car.
>
> That is using ineffecient air motors - Tata/MDI and Engineair
> http://www.engineair.com.au/ claim theirs are far more efficient than those
> in normal use.
They can't change the fundamentals of physics to twit.
Not one has ever been sold.
Graham
Eeyore
News wrote:
Not all that press release garbage again.
It means NOTHING. Until the product is in the showrooms it might as well be fairy dust.
Graham
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> > Stringer wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not deterred other than through my own limitations to find a storage
> >> solution nor am I convinced that research into the potential of
> >> capacitors
> >> as a propulsion mechanism has reached any sort of maturity - far from it.
> >
> > How are you going to make them any better ? Caps have been made
> > commercially for a century or so and the methods and limitations are all
> well known.
>
> I have absolutely no intention of even thinking about doing so, the
> "potential" is what intrigues me - its usefulness.
>
> It is important to understand here that the charged capacitor/electret
> cannot itself perform work.
> The device simply supports an electrostatic field. The cap can, however, be
> used for generating (by induction) electrical energy that CAN perform work.
I think you need to learn some science.
Graham
Don Kelly
from braking as useful tractive energy? Whether the stored energy is from
braking or from some other source of quick charging is not really a factor.
Certainly they are limited in the same way that flywheel storage is limited
but in busses all that is necessary is that the energy stored is enough to
get them to the next stop where they can be "recharged". Flywheel busses
have been used successfully (but whether they have stood the test of time is
something that I don't know) While I don't generally agree with "News"
particularly on technical matters, the exploration of "supercapacitors" with
respect to applications such as busses is valid and some success has been
obtained. So far any advantage over batteries appears to be quick charging.
I don't often agree with "News" because he has really no concept of the
factors involved in technologies and tends to accept every news announcement
as factual but, in this case, he is talking about something that is feasible
or will be feasible soon.
--
Don Kelly dh...@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
----------------------------
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48E3BD1E...@hotmail.com...
Don Kelly
"Ray King" <rayj...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:2BxEk.40468$XT1....@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> Hi,
>
> What's the discussion concerning batteries vs.caps? I thought they were
> to keep the electrolyte from destroying the plates. I should think the
> batteries/caps should be examined at high voltage because of the energy
> formula says E = 1/2 C VV.
> The energy capacity of a cell increases more rapidly at high voltage.
>
> Ray
>
A battery takes electrical energy, stores it as chemical energy and
releases it as electrical energy. A capacitor takes, stores and releases
electrical energy. The storage means differ and the weight/volume per useful
joule differ. At low voltages, supercapacitors store more than batteries per
unit volume/ weight but extending this advantage to higher voltage,
batteries still have the advantage. The formula that you cite does not
apply to batteries.
Mauried
They need also to be far more cost effective than batteries.
Hi energy density batteries such as NIMH and Lithium Ions do have
fairly good energy densities per unit weight, but extremely poor
energy densities per dollar.
The old lead acid still wins hands down in this regard.
Stringer
Yes I do need to learn some science as does everyone. If I had all the
answers I would not be discussing or replying to a sceptic.
I suppose you think I went wrong somewhere? please enlighten me!
Eeyore
Don Kelly wrote:
> At low voltages, supercapacitors store more than batteries per
> unit volume/ weight
Are you sure about that ?
Graham
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Stringer wrote:
> >> > Stringer wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I'm not deterred other than through my own limitations to find a
> >> >> storage solution nor am I convinced that research into the potential of
>
> >> >> capacitors as a propulsion mechanism has reached any sort of maturity -
> far from
> >> >> it.
> >> >
> >> > How are you going to make them any better ? Caps have been made
> >> > commercially for a century or so and the methods and limitations are
> >> > all well known.
> >>
> >> I have absolutely no intention of even thinking about doing so, the
> >> "potential" is what intrigues me - its usefulness.
> >>
> >> It is important to understand here that the charged capacitor/electret
> >> cannot itself perform work.
> >> The device simply supports an electrostatic field. The cap can, however,
> >> be used for generating (by induction) electrical energy that CAN perform
> >> work.
> >
> > I think you need to learn some science.
>
> Yes I do need to learn some science as does everyone. If I had all the
> answers I would not be discussing or replying to a sceptic.
> I suppose you think I went wrong somewhere? please enlighten me!
Capacitors store ENERGY in that electrostatic field. Fundamental physics.
Induction doesn't come into it at all.
Graham
Stringer
>> >> cannot itself perform work.
>> >> The device simply supports an electrostatic field. The cap can,
>> >> however,
>> >> be used for generating (by induction) electrical energy that CAN
>> >> perform
>> >> work.
>> >
>> > I think you need to learn some science.
>>
>> Yes I do need to learn some science as does everyone. If I had all the
>> answers I would not be discussing or replying to a sceptic.
>> I suppose you think I went wrong somewhere? please enlighten me!
>
> Capacitors store ENERGY in that electrostatic field. Fundamental physics.
> Induction doesn't come into it at all.
>
I think maybe you are confusing actual ENERGY as opposed to POTENTIAL
ENERGY.
Energy is derived when flows of electric charge can be produced within
conductors and cannot exist within insulators.
A capacitor is an insulator material (resistant) material and can store
potential energy which is independent of the current flowing through it.
It can be short circuited or used as induction within a field.
You may be thinking in terms of electromagnetic induction which is not what
I was saying. I was referring to electrostatic induction which is something
completely different although I did not make that clear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatic_induction
did I learn something?
David Williams
-> > there are 10 kilograms of air. That's about 6 cubic metres at
-> > atmospheric pressure or about 20 litres at 300 atmospheres. The tanks
-> > to hold it would weigh many tens of kilograms, so we're pushing the
-> > limits for a small car.
-> That is using ineffecient air motors - Tata/MDI and Engineair
-> http://www.engineair.com.au/ claim theirs are far more efficient than those
-> in normal use.
The little calculation I did earlier assumed *perfect* efficiency of
the motor, turning every joule of energy in the compressed air into
mechanical work. No motor can be more efficient than that.
I do agree that regeneration (or maybe we should call it recompression)
could extend the range of the vehicle somewhat beyond the 850 metres that
my calculation showed. But it's completely implausible to think that
the range could be extended by more than a factor of two or three.
No. Compressed-air powered vehicles will never be commercially produced
for use on roads. Really, they won't.
dow
David Williams
I doubt it. They are wringing a lot of publicity out of this compressed
air notion which is probably helping them to sell other vehicles. But
they can't change the laws of physics, and they know it.
dow
Stringer
> A capacitor is an insulator material (resistant) material and can store
> potential energy which is independent of the current flowing through it.
> It can be short circuited or used as induction within a field.
>
Or more specifically a capacitor "consists" of an insulator material
(separated) by a dielectric preventing charge from moving directly between
the plates.
News
Have you contacted auto giant Tata and told them this?
News
"Don Kelly" <dh...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:RFeFk.13696$ex3....@newsfe02.iad...
> I don't often agree with "News" because he has really no concept of the
> factors involved in technologies
Absolute tripe. I think you are one of those that said an air engine can't
move more than a a mile or so.
> and tends to accept every news announcement as factual
Again, tripe. I give links for information.
> but, in this case, he is talking about something that is feasible or will
> be feasible soon.
Ultracapacitors are happening now, in rail and bus applications, and will be
in cars/trucks pretty soon. They will make a difference in all sorts of
applications. The big if, is whether an ultracapacitor can be used as a
battery, which at least one company is saying it has achieved. If so then
expect big changes.
Eeyore
News wrote:
> "Don Kelly" <dh...@shaw.ca> wrote
>
> > I don't often agree with "News" because he has really no concept of the
> > factors involved in technologies
>
> Absolute tripe. I think you are one of those that said an air engine can't
> move more than a a mile or so.
Well there's a remarkable lack of evidence of *proven* range on ANY MDI vehicle.
> > and tends to accept every news announcement as factual
>
> Again, tripe. I give links for information.
Links targeted at gullible fools such as yourself.
> > but, in this case, he is talking about something that is feasible or will
> > be feasible soon.
>
> Ultracapacitors are happening now, in rail and bus applications, and will be
> in cars/trucks pretty soon.
Purely for regenerative braking since they can absorb charge faster than the
battery can whose life would be inpaired if you tried dumping all that much
energy into it in a short period.
> They will make a difference in all sorts of
> applications. The big if, is whether an ultracapacitor can be used as a
> battery, which at least one company is saying it has achieved.
Cite !
> If so then expect big changes.
The fact is that even the very best ultracaps have miserable energy density
compared to batteries. It's basic science on account of the very fundamental
underlying principles of energy storage involved.
Graham
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> >> >> It is important to understand here that the charged capacitor/electret
> >> >> cannot itself perform work.
> >> >> The device simply supports an electrostatic field. The cap can,
> >> >> however, be used for generating (by induction) electrical energy that
> CAN
> >> >> perform work.
> >> >
> >> > I think you need to learn some science.
> >>
> >> Yes I do need to learn some science as does everyone. If I had all the
> >> answers I would not be discussing or replying to a sceptic.
> >> I suppose you think I went wrong somewhere? please enlighten me!
> >
> > Capacitors store ENERGY in that electrostatic field. Fundamental physics.
> > Induction doesn't come into it at all.
>
> I think maybe you are confusing actual ENERGY as opposed to POTENTIAL
> ENERGY.
Absolutely NOT.
> Energy is derived when flows of electric charge can be produced within
> conductors and cannot exist within insulators.
PURE GARBAGE
You don't even know how to use the words properly.
> A capacitor is an insulator material (resistant) material and can store
> potential energy which is independent of the current flowing through it.
> It can be short circuited or used as induction within a field.
You're quite mad. In it's simplest form a capacitor consists of 2 conductive
plates separated by an insulator called the dielectric. The dielectric can even
be air bit in many cpacitors it is a plastic film or a ceramic. Electrolytic
capacitors have a somewhat more complictaed construction. Such a construction
with plastic film may be rolled into a tube for example for convenience.
See.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor
Graham
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
NO
Eeyore
David Williams wrote:
And you didn't even start to address the losses involved in compressing the air to
begin with did you ?
Graham
Eeyore
News wrote:
> "David Williams" <david.w...@bayman.org> wrote in message
>
> >-> > I did a few calculations about compressed-air powered cars. Suppose
> > -> > there are 10 kilograms of air. That's about 6 cubic metres at
> > -> > atmospheric pressure or about 20 litres at 300 atmospheres. The tanks
> > -> > to hold it would weigh many tens of kilograms, so we're pushing the
> > -> > limits for a small car.
> >
> > -> That is using ineffecient air motors - Tata/MDI and Engineair
> > -> http://www.engineair.com.au/ claim theirs are far more efficient than
> > - >those in normal use.
> >
> > The little calculation I did earlier assumed *perfect* efficiency of
> > the motor, turning every joule of energy in the compressed air into
> > mechanical work. No motor can be more efficient than that.
> >
> > I do agree that regeneration (or maybe we should call it recompression)
> > could extend the range of the vehicle somewhat beyond the 850 metres that
> > my calculation showed. But it's completely implausible to think that
> > the range could be extended by more than a factor of two or three.
> >
> > No. Compressed-air powered vehicles will never be commercially produced
> > for use on roads. Really, they won't.
>
> Have you contacted auto giant Tata and told them this?
They don't make one.
It seems you cannot differentiate between a press release designed to gain
publicity, and a real product. Never mind the physics involved which will
doubtless be forever beyond you.
Graham
Eeyore
David Williams wrote:
It's my understanding (see one of News' links) that they plan to burn
gasoline as well in the MDI engine. A kind of ICE - air hybrid.
Graham
Stringer
>
>
> Stringer wrote:
>
>> >> >> It is important to understand here that the charged
>> >> >> capacitor/electret
>> >> >> cannot itself perform work.
>> >> >> The device simply supports an electrostatic field. The cap can,
>> >> >> however, be used for generating (by induction) electrical energy
>> >> >> that
>> CAN
>> >> >> perform work.
>> >> >
>> >> > I think you need to learn some science.
>> >>
>> >> Yes I do need to learn some science as does everyone. If I had all the
>> >> answers I would not be discussing or replying to a sceptic.
>> >> I suppose you think I went wrong somewhere? please enlighten me!
>> >
>> > Capacitors store ENERGY in that electrostatic field. Fundamental
>> > physics.
>> > Induction doesn't come into it at all.
>>
>> I think maybe you are confusing actual ENERGY as opposed to POTENTIAL
>> ENERGY.
>
> Absolutely NOT.
Yes you are.
>
>
>> Energy is derived when flows of electric charge can be produced within
>> conductors and cannot exist within insulators.
>
> PURE GARBAGE
PURE FACT. Other than being an idiot, why would you say otherwise?
Energy is derived when flows of electric charge can be produced within
conductors - surely even you know that much?
and; Energy cannot exist within insulators - maybe this is the bit your
having trouble understanding?
"Potential energy" can exist within an insulator but not "energy" - because
it cannot flow! do you get it now?
>
> You don't even know how to use the words properly.
>
Its the concept of things that you cannot fathom so the words would not help
you in any case.
>
>> A capacitor is an insulator material (resistant) material and can store
>> potential energy which is independent of the current flowing through it.
>> It can be short circuited or used as induction within a field.
>
> You're quite mad. In it's simplest form a capacitor consists of 2
> conductive
> plates separated by an insulator called the dielectric. The dielectric can
> even
> be air bit in many cpacitors it is a plastic film or a ceramic.
> Electrolytic
> capacitors have a somewhat more complictaed construction. Such a
> construction
> with plastic film may be rolled into a tube for example for convenience.
> See.....
Just for the record:
A dielectric is a nonconducting substance - it's an "insulator" and
therefore under normal conditions will resist current flow.
Just because it "resists" - does not mean it is a resistor. it does resist
and it does insulate.
Although a "dielectric" and "insulator" are generally synonymous, the term
"dielectric" is often used when referring to the effect of alternating
current fields on the substance while the term "insulator" is more often
used when the material is being used to withstand a high electric field.
so putting it all together...
A dielectric is the non-metallic component of a capacitor (non-conducting)
which resists current flow between the two metallic conducting plates due to
it's insulating properties.
How or why would anyone refute the basic principles of how a capacitor
works? but as you clearly copy and paste or prove by
word-play trivialities then it becomes just a game to you. Get real.
> Capacitors store ENERGY in that electrostatic field. Fundamental physics.
>
Technically incorrect.
It is more correct to say that the capacitor simply 'supports' an
electrostatic field. The electrostatic field is a "potential energy", it is
not energy - it is not doing work, it is not doing something.
energy (from the Greek - energeia, "activity, operation", from - energos,
"active, working")
Energy = "doing something".
Potential energy is static.
The fact remains it is YOU that is wrong when you contradicted
me categorically by stating:
> Induction doesn't come into it at all.
>
ROFLMHO
The cap CAN be used for generating (by induction) electrical energy that CAN
perform work.
I think its YOU that needs to lean some science.
Larry Caldwell
Kelly) says...
> Starting capacitors are used in single phase AC motors to cause a phase
> shift in the starting winding to get a better starting torque than would be
> possible otherwise. They are not used to correct power factor. Start and
> run capacitors for single phase motors are also not used for power factor
> correction but to simulate a 2 phase machine under both running and full
> load conditions.
Phase shift and power factor are the same thing. When you bring the
current phase closer to the voltage phase, you increase the power
factor. Inductive current phase trails the voltage, and capacitive
current leads the voltage.
--
For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> Just for the record:
> A dielectric is a nonconducting substance - it's an "insulator" and
> therefore under normal conditions will resist current flow.
> Just because it "resists" - does not mean it is a resistor. it does resist
> and it does insulate.
Just for the record you're a complete idiot.
Graham
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> The cap CAN be used for generating (by induction) electrical energy that CAN
> perform work.
MORON
Stringer
Oh dear... you've lost the plot!
Please go join alt.idiots
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Stringer wrote:
> >
> >> The cap CAN be used for generating (by induction) electrical energy that
> >> CAN perform work.
> >
> > MORON
>
> Oh dear... you've lost the plot!
> Please go join alt.idiots
And how many years did you spend at University learning electronics ? It's 4 in
my case.
Go to the bottom of the class.
Induction plays NO parts in capacitive energy storage. Induction is what's used
in transformers, motors and generators/alternators for example.
Graham
Stringer
news:gc2o1l$9r9$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> One company in Texas is claiming that they have developed and are going
> produce an untracapacitor comparable to a battery in energy storage and
> physical size.
Marketing hype/hypothetical?
citation?
Stringer
>> > Stringer wrote:
>> >
>> >> The cap CAN be used for generating (by induction) electrical energy
>> >> that
>> >> CAN perform work.
>> >
>> > MORON
>>
>> Oh dear... you've lost the plot!
>> Please go join alt.idiots
>
> And how many years did you spend at University learning electronics ? It's
> 4 in
> my case.
>
I suppose then you have forgotten all that you learned
> Go to the bottom of the class.
The dunce hat belongs to you.
>
> Induction plays NO parts in capacitive energy storage. Induction is what's
> used
> in transformers, motors and generators/alternators for example.
>
You are still confused.
What is the difference between magnetic induction and electrostatic
induction?
I'll give you a clue... you already mentioned some examples of magnetic
induction duh!
Here is an animation to help you in your studies:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=pJ36EtABLAk
News
"Stringer" <stri...@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:DHCFk.21$8r...@newsfe03.ams2...
I gave a link to the company. As I said, we shall see.
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> "News" <kill...@invalid.invalid> wrote
> >
> > One company in Texas is claiming that they have developed and are going
> > produce an untracapacitor comparable to a battery in energy storage and
> > physical size.
>
> Marketing hype/hypothetical?
> citation?
I wish I could remember the name. I do recall one. It was based on unsound
theory about dielectric properties and they've disappeared off the map now.
Graham
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> What is the difference between magnetic induction and electrostatic
> induction?
Similarity you mean ?
Neither have anything to do with practical energy storage in a capacitor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatic_induction
Graham
Eeyore
News wrote:
> "Stringer" <stri...@virgin.net> wrote
> > "News" <kill...@invalid.invalid> wrote
> >>
> >> One company in Texas is claiming that they have developed and are going
> >> produce an untracapacitor comparable to a battery in energy storage and
> >> physical size.
> >
> > Marketing hype/hypothetical?
> > citation?
>
> I gave a link to the company.
No you bloody well didn't.
Graham
Bert Hickman
The company's name is EEStor.
They have not disappeared.
And, their technology may, in fact, be real. The evolving business
relationships with the military and other companies suggest that they
apparently have more than unsound theory going for them.
EEStor claims they can achieve higher energy densities (450 - 682 Wh/kg)
than Li-ion batteries. They apparently are using multilayered high k
(>19,000) barium titanate ceramic capacitor technology using "ultra
capacitor architecture" to eliminate the voids that normally occur
between crystals of the dielectric material during sintering. These
voids limit the overall capacitance and breakdown voltage of current HV
ceramic capacitors. A July 29th press release contains the following
additional tidbit:
"... the plastic matrix allows for better crystal polarization and that
this "along with other proprietary processing steps provides the
potential of a polarization saturation voltage required by EEStor, Inc."
Polarization by a strong electric field is done in the final steps of
manufacturing so that the material will form domains that are oriented
in the proper direction for the best permittivity and energy storage.
The world patent states this is done at 180 C with 4000 V."
Some additional info/discussion links:
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/eestor-announces-certification-additional-key/story.aspx?guid=%7BAB6D95CC-0C6B-4734-83CB-990B4451270C%7D&dist=hppr
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/eestor-lightevs-sign-exclusive-technology/story.aspx?guid=%7B2972B144-0DFB-40DF-B1B3-180D8BB2FE51%7D&dist=hppr
http://earth2tech.com/2008/09/30/eestor-to-super-charge-electric-bikes/
http://bariumtitanate.blogspot.com/2008/07/eestor-beyond-permittivity.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor
This the potential (NPI) to be truly disruptive technology...
Bert
--
***************************************************
We specialize in UNIQUE items! Coins shrunk by huge
magnetic fields, Lichtenberg Figures (our "Captured
Lightning") and out of print technical Books. Visit
Stoneridge Engineering at http://www.teslamania.com
***************************************************
Eeyore
Bert Hickman wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> > Stringer wrote:
> >> "News" <kill...@invalid.invalid> wrote
> >>> One company in Texas is claiming that they have developed and are going
> >>> produce an untracapacitor comparable to a battery in energy storage and
> >>> physical size.
> >> Marketing hype/hypothetical?
> >> citation?
> >
> > I wish I could remember the name. I do recall one. It was based on unsound
> > theory about dielectric properties and they've disappeared off the map now.
>
> The company's name is EEStor.
Thanks, I remeber it now.
> They have not disappeared.
>
> And, their technology may, in fact, be real. The evolving business
> relationships with the military and other companies suggest that they
> apparently have more than unsound theory going for them.
Er NO.
Their technology is based on very high K (dielectric constant) ceramic dielectrics.
There's one problem with Hi-K dielectrics, the dielectric constant falls very rapidly with applied voltage. An extremely well known phenomenon. Except to
them perhaps ?
So a capacitor that say measures 1 Farad at an applied voltage of say 1 Volt, may reduce by several orders of magnitude by the time it's charged to a useful
200-400V.
Basically useless. The company will wither and die once the investors' money is spent Guaranteed. They're trying to break the laws of physics like Meyer
tried. Not terribly useful.
Graham
Larry Caldwell
rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com (Eeyore) says...
> > >> A trunk full of ultra-caps would probably get you to the end of the road.
> >
> > They can get you a little further than that now.
>
> IDIOT
Ultra caps are a solid state modification of capacitors that use a
filler between the plates that sequesters electrons. The most common
material is activated charcoal, which has holes to stow the electrons
in. If they ever manage to manufacture carbon nanotubes of the right
size, they might reach 50% of the energy density/kg of a Li-ion battery.
There are a couple of drawbacks. The first is that the filler material
saturates at between 2 and 3 volts, which can be overcome by stacking a
lot of super caps in series. The other is the potential to discharge
really quickly, with a flash and a bang, in case of accident.
The Chinese are running a bus on ultra caps, by recharging at every bus
stop. The down side there is that the bus has to stop at every stop to
recharge, even if there are no passengers. The up side is that the
charging rate of ultra caps is only limited by resistive heating. As
long as you don't melt the electrodes, you can pump a lot of current
into them.
For automotive use, they might find application in electric muscle cars,
where jackrabbit starts and heavy regenerative braking is desirable.
For most purposes, it would be an additional expense with very little
payback.
Stringer
> Ultra caps are a solid state modification of capacitors that use a
> filler between the plates that sequesters electrons. The most common
> material is activated charcoal, which has holes to stow the electrons
> in. If they ever manage to manufacture carbon nanotubes of the right
> size, they might reach 50% of the energy density/kg of a Li-ion battery.
>
> There are a couple of drawbacks. The first is that the filler material
> saturates at between 2 and 3 volts, which can be overcome by stacking a
> lot of super caps in series. The other is the potential to discharge
> really quickly, with a flash and a bang, in case of accident.
>
> The Chinese are running a bus on ultra caps, by recharging at every bus
> stop. The down side there is that the bus has to stop at every stop to
> recharge, even if there are no passengers. The up side is that the
> charging rate of ultra caps is only limited by resistive heating. As
> long as you don't melt the electrodes, you can pump a lot of current
> into them.
>
> For automotive use, they might find application in electric muscle cars,
> where jackrabbit starts and heavy regenerative braking is desirable.
> For most purposes, it would be an additional expense with very little
> payback.
>
Let us contend for now with "Nanosafe batteries" (made by Altairnano) which
have replaced the graphite in the anode electrode with nano-titanate.
This change gives them vastly better numbers. We're talking batteries that
can be charged in less than 10 minutes, have a power density of 4,000 W/Kg,
and can retain 85% of their charge after 15,000 - 20,000 charge cycles.
Combine this with a wider operating temperature range (between -50 to 75
degrees C) than standard li-ion batteries, expected life of 12-20 years
(depending on use) and batteries that have not smoked or caught fire in any
of the standard battery tests, and you've got a battery with great potential
for automotive use.
They claim instantaneous power even at extreme temperatures, can deliver
power per unit weight and unit volume several times that of conventional
Lithium-Ion batteries.
They powered the world record beating EV dragster driven by Dennis Berube in
Tucson Arizona on December 30th 2007, during which he achieved a top speed
of over 160mph in under 8 seconds.
The UK Lightning car company http://www.lightningcarcompany.co.uk uses this
technology.
There are no gearboxes, differential, axle, drive shafts or propshafts to
contend with. All of the power is generated at the wheel, the point at which
it's required, which eliminates mechanical complexity and power losses. It
also uses regenerative braking which doesn't create friction and useless
heat in order to slow down. Instead it reverses its electric motor turning
it into an electric generator, creating electricity which is fed back into
the battery pack.
Stringer
Have you subscribed yet to alt.idiots?
Also alt.sceptics i hear are wanting new grim reapers - right up your
street!
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> Have you subscribed yet to alt.idiots?
Have you learnt any science yet.
There are perhaps some 'Ladybird' books that may cover the topic.
http://www.ladybird.co.uk/
Graham
Larry Caldwell
(Mauried) says...
> About the best you can do with caps is make them a bit smaller and a
> bit cheaper, but thats about it.
Solid state ionics was discovered clear back in the '50s, and ignored at
the time. If you put a filler material between the plates and the
insulator, you can pack electrons into holes on the negative side, and
pack the positive side with holes. You can build a 1 farad capacitor
small enough to hold in your hand. Conventional capacitors that size
would be measured in micro farads. It really is useful technology.
Super capacitors have made experimental rail guns a reality. You can
recharge them fast enough that you can get off a second shot on the same
day.
They just don't have adequate energy density for automotive use.
Current materials store about 55 watt-hours/kg. While getting 55 watts
out of a 1 kg capacitor for an hour is impressive as hell, it's not
going to run a car very far.
Eeyore
Larry Caldwell wrote:
> (Mauried) says...
>
> > About the best you can do with caps is make them a bit smaller and a
> > bit cheaper, but thats about it.
>
> Solid state ionics was discovered clear back in the '50s, and ignored at
> the time. If you put a filler material between the plates and the
> insulator, you can pack electrons into holes on the negative side, and
> pack the positive side with holes. You can build a 1 farad capacitor
> small enough to hold in your hand.
With a couple of volts rating sure. That's a minscule amount of energy. A
battery will do vastly better.
Do you think capacitor manufactureres are deliberately conspiring to prevent
the use of 'better' materials ? Naturally, of course you are
IDIOT.
Graham
Mauried
Yes, most of the super capacitors around these days are low voltage.
Cars need capacitors of hundreds of volts, similar to the batterys
that EVs use.
Packing more farads into the same space by increasing the charge
density also drops the voltage ratings.
You cant win.
Larry Caldwell
rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com (Eeyore) says...
You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. Is it congenital, or
did you study to be that stupid?
Eeyore
Larry Caldwell wrote:
> rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com (Eeyore) says...
> > Larry Caldwell wrote:
> > > (Mauried) says...
> > >
> > > > About the best you can do with caps is make them a bit smaller and a
> > > > bit cheaper, but thats about it.
> > >
> > > Solid state ionics was discovered clear back in the '50s, and ignored at
> > > the time. If you put a filler material between the plates and the
> > > insulator, you can pack electrons into holes on the negative side, and
> > > pack the positive side with holes. You can build a 1 farad capacitor
> > > small enough to hold in your hand.
> >
> > With a couple of volts rating sure. That's a minscule amount of energy. A
> > battery will do vastly better.
> >
> > Do you think capacitor manufactureres are deliberately conspiring to prevent
> > the use of 'better' materials ? Naturally, of course you are
> >
> > IDIOT.
>
> You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. Is it congenital, or
> did you study to be that stupid?
You seem to have no knowledge of science. I work with capacitors every day. I'm an
electronics consultant. And YOU are ?
Graham
Stringer
> You seem to have no knowledge of science. I work with capacitors every
> day. I'm an
> electronics consultant. And YOU are ?
>
> Graham
>
Cumon now... stop joking around rabbit man.
(alt.idiots)
Stringer
news:MPG.23527f6e8...@news.peaksky.com...
Railguns are "scary" weaponry with potential design velocities approaching
Mk10 for military projectile use! This would pierce the armoured plating on
a tank and pass out the other side. They also use compulsators in place of
capacitors obtaining energy from a lowpower source, storing it, then
generate a high-power output.
Not seen or heard of any railgun designs other than straight bars due to the
tremendous heat/friction associated with firing. A large geometric circular
dual-rail design (at much less charge obviously) would provide some
interesting dynamics - if it survived.
>> Larry Caldwell wrote:
>> You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. Is it congenital, or
>> did you study to be that stupid?
> Eeyore wrote:
> You seem to have no knowledge of science. I work with capacitors every
> day. I'm an
> electronics consultant. And YOU are ?
Eeyore is a primary school teacher. He is not used to his students or anyone
answering back or questioning his mad interpretations (they are only 5-7
year olds)
He spends his leisurely time sticking capacitors up rabbits arses while most
of us are content with lab rats/guinea pigs for more serious work.
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> > You seem to have no knowledge of science. I work with capacitors every
> > day. I'm an electronics consultant. And YOU are ?
>
> Cumon now... stop joking around rabbit man.
What joke is that. I am registered with HMCR (Her Majesty's Customs and
Revenue) as an 'electronics consultant'. I have worked (or consulted for)
for some of the top companies in my field(s). What does the IRS call you ?
Graham
Stringer
You joke yet you lost your sense of humour.
Stop your negativity and maybe someone will take you seriously.
But just for the record I'm a product designer with an engineering
background, 21 uncontested patents to my name and 66 product designs
accredited.
This is not a pissing contest!
But it is amusing ;
Larry Caldwell
I am able to read and write simple English, which apparently exceeds
your capacity. You are also a liar. I can't imagine an electronics
consultant who has never heard of a series circuit. You have, however,
answered my question. Nobody can be that stupid without working at it.
Stringer
> Considering energy storage capacity in batteries for electrically powered
> vehicles and the associated charge/ re-charge time/ weight limitations...
> Anyone done any feasibility studies of using Capacitors and its potential
> as a storage mechanism for propulsion?
>
> If the potential can be utilised, considering all safety aspects,
> technology barriers etc. How could the energy be discharged
> minimilistically (partly) and steadily over a particular driving distance
> without fully discharging or would this method (if feasible) be used in a
> charge/discharge/recharge rapid-response probability?
>
------------------------------
Neodymium-iron-boron magnets can produce a field of about 0.1 T.
Superconducting magnets can reach field strengths as high as 13.5 T.
A pulse magnet however provides very high magnetic fields as high as 72 T.
Magnet Lab's most powerful non-destructive pulse magnet generates a field of
88.9 tesla.
http://www.magnet.fsu.edu/education/tutorials/magnetacademy/magnets/page7.html
To give you an idea; 6 tesla, 180,000 times the Earth's magnetic field.
Unfortunately pulsed magnets (non destructive types) provide brief, but
extreme magnetic fields and according to one source the magnets have a life
expectancy between 500 and 800 pulses.
Then there are Hybrid magnets NHMFL's 45 Tesla hybrid magnet is the highest
continuous magnet field available in the world. The outer superconducting
coil produces static field of about 11 Tesla, with the rest of the field
being generated by water-cooled resistive insert. Bore size diameter is 32
mm.
I found this Applet of a pulse magnet:
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/electromag/java/pulsedmagnet/index.html
Use mouse to simulate voltage/capacitance on a sliding scale, change from AC
to DC using the crowbar diode, switch on/off.
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Stringer wrote:
> >
> >> > You seem to have no knowledge of science. I work with capacitors every
> >> > day. I'm an electronics consultant. And YOU are ?
> >>
> >> Cumon now... stop joking around rabbit man.
> >
> > What joke is that. I am registered with HMCR (Her Majesty's Customs and
> > Revenue) as an 'electronics consultant'. I have worked (or consulted for)
> > for some of the top companies in my field(s). What does the IRS call you ?
>
> You joke yet you lost your sense of humour.
> Stop your negativity and maybe someone will take you seriously.
> But just for the record I'm a product designer with an engineering
> background, 21 uncontested patents to my name and 66 product designs
> accredited.
> This is not a pissing contest!
> But it is amusing ;
You still haven't the faintest clue about capacitors though so I assume the
above is all bullshit. It would be easy enough for you to prove it after all.
Graham
Eeyore
Larry Caldwell wrote:
Who said anything about series circuits ? Of course I know what one is you dimwit.
The astonishingly low intelligence of the average American never fails to amaze me. Like
your President Mr Chimp for example who started a war you're losing with a country that
was never any serious danger to you.
Graham
Larry Caldwell
rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com (Eeyore) says...
> Who said anything about series circuits ? Of course I know what one is you dimwit.
You are the bozo who thought the saturation voltage was relevant. I
just mentioned watts per kg., which can be configured any way you like.
You have no clue about electronic devices. Perhaps you should stick to
burning dung, since you generate so much of it.
Larry Caldwell
says...
> ----------------------------
> "Ray King" <rayj...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:2BxEk.40468$XT1....@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> > Hi,
> >
> > What's the discussion concerning batteries vs.caps? I thought they were
> > the same except for the activation of electrolyte and the plate thickness
> > to keep the electrolyte from destroying the plates. I should think the
> > batteries/caps should be examined at high voltage because of the energy
> > formula says E = 1/2 C VV.
> > The energy capacity of a cell increases more rapidly at high voltage.
> >
> > Ray
> >
> A battery takes electrical energy, stores it as chemical energy and
> releases it as electrical energy. A capacitor takes, stores and releases
> electrical energy. The storage means differ and the weight/volume per useful
> joule differ. At low voltages, supercapacitors store more than batteries per
> unit volume/ weight but extending this advantage to higher voltage,
> batteries still have the advantage. The formula that you cite does not
> apply to batteries.
The only advantage of a supercap over a battery is the near
instantaneous charge/discharge capability. If you need something to
quickly absorb a large glop of energy, like regenerative braking, and
spew it back out when you leave the stop sign, a supercap might have a
place.
News
Might? They are using them right now to do just that. The point about
advances in supercapacitors is that they may get to the same physical size
and the same energy storage of a battery - or approach it. If that does
occur then the supercapacitor will replace many batteries, as it would be a
battery.
This is why supercapacitors are getting a lot of attention. There
application is not just for road vehicles.
Mauried
wrote:
Not even close.
Why dont you do a bit of basic research and have a look at the costs
of storing energy in a capacitor.
In terms of dollars per unit of energy stored batteries win hands
down.
A small AA NIMH battery rated at 1.2 volts 2500 mAH costs $4 at my
local shop.
Please tell me where I can buy a supercapacitor that will hold as much
energy for the same price.
News
"Mauried" <mau...@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ebf36c...@news.tpg.com.au...
>
> Not even close.
No. They are being used on British electric railways, so that is very close.
> Why dont you do a bit of basic research and have a look at the costs
> of storing energy in a capacitor.
I did some research and supercapacitors are getting a lot of research
directed at them because they hold much potential.
<snip>
Stringer
> In article <48EB2DDD...@hotmail.com>,
> rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com (Eeyore) says...
>
>> Who said anything about series circuits ? Of course I know what one is
>> you dimwit.
>
> You are the bozo who thought the saturation voltage was relevant. I
> just mentioned watts per kg., which can be configured any way you like.
> You have no clue about electronic devices. Perhaps you should stick to
> burning dung, since you generate so much of it.
>
Would that be rabbit dung from sticking capacitors up their arses?
Stringer
>
>
> Stringer wrote:
>
>> What is the difference between magnetic induction and electrostatic
>> induction?
>
> Similarity you mean ?
>
No. There is similarity but i asked whats the difference, there is a
difference.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatic_induction
>
I am so pleased for you. You found the answer in that link and you found it
all by yourself?
So when you said "Induction doesn't come into it at all"...
Electrostatic induction should not be confused with electromagnetic
induction; both are often referred to as 'induction'.
(quoted as found from your link)
Eeyore
Larry Caldwell wrote:
> rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com (Eeyore) says...
>
> > Who said anything about series circuits ? Of course I know what one is you dimwit.
>
> You are the bozo who thought the saturation voltage was relevant.
Using the wrong words again. Capacitors have a WORKING voltage not saturation you damn
numbskull.
Stop blathering about stuff you haven't the tiniest clue about.
Graham
Eeyore
News wrote:
> The point about
> advances in supercapacitors is that they may get to the same physical size
> and the same energy storage of a battery - or approach it.
And the moon is also made of green cheese.
You know NOTHING about dielectric properties.
SHUT UP ! It's getting intensely boring. I might even consider an abuse report.
Graham
Eeyore
Mauried wrote:
> "News" wrote:
> >
> >This is why supercapacitors are getting a lot of attention. There
> >application is not just for road vehicles.
>
> Not even close.
> Why dont you do a bit of basic research and have a look at the costs
> of storing energy in a capacitor.
> In terms of dollars per unit of energy stored batteries win hands
> down.
> A small AA NIMH battery rated at 1.2 volts 2500 mAH costs $4 at my
> local shop.
And about 50c ea in packs of 12 and more from China on ebay.
> Please tell me where I can buy a supercapacitor that will hold as much
> energy for the same price.
He can't of course. In his addled mind it will happen though 'sometime in the
future'.
Graham
Eeyore
News wrote:
> "Mauried" wrote
> >"News" > wrote:
> >>
> >>This is why supercapacitors are getting a lot of attention. The
> >>application is not just for road vehicles.
> >
> > Not even close.
>
> No. They are being used on British electric railways, so that is very close.
Errr ..... Cite maybe ? Possibly for regenerative braking but absolutely not as
a primary source of traction power, same as hybrid cars.
Graham
Eeyore
Stringer wrote:
> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Stringer wrote:
> >
> >> What is the difference between magnetic induction and electrostatic
> >> induction?
> >
> > Similarity you mean ?
>
> No. There is similarity but i asked whats the difference, there is a
> difference.
>
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatic_induction
>
>
> I am so pleased for you. You found the answer in that link and you found it
> all by yourself?
> So when you said "Induction doesn't come into it at all"...
> Electrostatic induction should not be confused with electromagnetic
> induction; both are often referred to as 'induction'.
> (quoted as found from your link)
But it has zilch to do with energy storage. The energy in a capacitor is stored
in the dielectric material as a result of its polarisation by the applied
voltage.
Graham