[Discuss] My God! It's Full of Batteries!
Richard Pieri
an unwieldly name) yesterday and proceeded to take it apart. This is
relevant to the recent discussion about tablets and power consumption.
For comparison, I have here an HP Pavilion dm1-4010us notebook with
11.6" 1336x768 screen and Fusion E-450 APU clocked at 1.65GHz. The
battery pack on it is rated at 55 Watt-hours and HP rates the whole kit
as running "up to 9.5 hours" on battery power.
iPad 2 has 25 Watt-hours of battery packs inside the case and is rated
at 9-10 hours run time. The The New iPad (by Ghu that's *still* an
unwieldly name) has 42.5 Watt-hours of battery packs inside delivering
the same 9-10 hours run time. Nobody's publicly posted the TDP numbers
yet but you can figure it's rather higher than iPad 2's based on the
power consumption.
It was suggested that these devices could ramp up their bus and CPU
clocks when on mains power. It's not "just" ramping up the clocks. You
need to cool it. Even fanless Atom netbooks have open space for
convection cooling. There is no space inside iPads for airflow. The
metal case back is how iPads dissipate heat. Apple doesn't even use
screws because they take up too much space. It's all glued together.
That's the design philosophy for these things. Doesn't matter who makes
them, be it Apple or Motorola or Barnes & Noble or whoever. More
battery equals more run time equals better product. They're not going
to "waste" space for airflow when that space could be used for more battery.
--
Rich P.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Dis...@blu.org
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Jerry Feldman
batteries also. With all this demand for better batteries (eg. smaller,
lighter) I'm still not seeing any of the newer technologies coming to
market any time soon, such as carbon-nanotubes. Electric cars such as
the Volt (35 miles/charge), Leaf (90 miles/charge), Prius plugin (15
miles/charge) all laptops, smartphones, tablets suffer from the size and
weight of modern batteries as well as charge times.
IMHO, 9-10 ho0urs of battery time is reasonable for a laptop/tablet, but
the downtime to recharge can be significant.
--
Jerry Feldman <g...@blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id:3BC1EB90
PGP Key fingerprint: 49E2 C52A FC5A A31F 8D66 C0AF 7CEA 30FC 3BC1 EB90
Stephen Adler
make good hand warmers?
Cheers. Steve.
Richard Pieri
> IMHO, 9-10 ho0urs of battery time is reasonable for a laptop/tablet, but
> the downtime to recharge can be significant.
Indeed, and that leads to another cooling problem: batteries generate
heat as they charge. Faster charging yields higher temperatures.
That's not typically a problem for notebooks with 60-90 Watt power
bricks, but tablets are supposed to charge from USB which is 10 Watts
for the plug-in charger.
Steve asked:
> Is the lack of air flow a good or bad thing? Are the new iPad going to
> make good hand warmers?
I'll give credit to the ARM architecture: it's much more power efficient
than x86. The aluminum back panel is an excellent radiator but it's
*huge* compared to the die so you're not going to be using it to keep
your hands or your cat warm during winter. Unless it's charging, in
which case the entire area of those massive battery packs is is going to
be heating up that panel. Well, as much as 10 Watts can manage. :)
Jerry Feldman
> On 3/16/2012 10:38 AM, Jerry Feldman wrote:
>> IMHO, 9-10 ho0urs of battery time is reasonable for a laptop/tablet, but
>> the downtime to recharge can be significant.
>
> Indeed, and that leads to another cooling problem: batteries generate
> heat as they charge. Faster charging yields higher temperatures.
> That's not typically a problem for notebooks with 60-90 Watt power
> bricks, but tablets are supposed to charge from USB which is 10 Watts
> for the plug-in charger.
>
>
> Steve asked:
>> Is the lack of air flow a good or bad thing? Are the new iPad going to
>> make good hand warmers?
>
> I'll give credit to the ARM architecture: it's much more power
> efficient than x86. The aluminum back panel is an excellent radiator
> but it's *huge* compared to the die so you're not going to be using it
> to keep your hands or your cat warm during winter. Unless it's
> charging, in which case the entire area of those massive battery packs
> is is going to be heating up that panel. Well, as much as 10 Watts
> can manage. :)
>
nano-tube appears to be a leading contender for future batteries either
with Li-ion or alone. But, I don't really see anything in this area
coming anytime soon. Storage is another issues, but that is moving
ahead. I think we will see carbon nano-tube batteries being adopted in
smartphones and tablets on the sooner side for many reasins including
the heat issue. Of course, at breakfast time, you could turn the device
over and fry some eggs :-)
Richard Pieri
> This gives rise to the need for a new type of battery. The carbon
> nano-tube appears to be a leading contender for future batteries either
> with Li-ion or alone.
I see batteries as being a dead end. They're entropic, which is a fancy
way of saying that they wear out with use. It's inescapable.
I see room-scale broadcast power as being the real game-changer.
Resonant inductance won't replace batteries, but it will change how they
are used. Batteries won't be primary power sources. They'll be buffers
to cover short term signal loss when moving between rooms or while
commuting.
Resonant inductance works on the small scale. Our "good friend" RFID
operates on resonant inductance. RI power has been demonstrated at real
world room scales. It's not yet cost effective but solving that is just
a matter of time.
Tom Metro
> I see room-scale broadcast power as being the real game-changer.
Nah. I think if you dig deeper into this you'll find that the power
potential just isn't there. To capture the power needed in a small
portable device would exceed what the laws of physics allow for.
Though that's relative to power requirements. If you have a tablet that
uses 1/100 (maybe less - I haven't done the math) the power of current
tablets, then it might fly. As you noted, this approach works for RFID
tags, but their power need relative to their antenna size makes this viable.
> I see batteries as being a dead end. They're entropic, which is a fancy
> way of saying that they wear out with use. It's inescapable.
Agreed. But the answer is super capacitors. They're doable within the
laws of physics. It's just a matter of material science.
-Tom
--
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
Tom Metro
> iFixit got their hands on one of the first The New iPads...
> ...has 42.5 Watt-hours of battery packs inside delivering
> the same 9-10 hours run time.
> at 9-10 hours run time.
I noticed that last week when I Googled to look up the resolution of the
iPad 3 and ASUS Transformer Prime and came across a comparison article
showing the iPad 3 as 40-something Watt-hours, and the ASUS as
20-something Watt-hours. I thought it might be a typo.
What are they doing with all that extra juice?
> Nobody's publicly posted the TDP numbers yet but you can figure it's
> rather higher than iPad 2's based on the power consumption.
A lot of it is likely going to the display. They are still the dominant
power sink in portable devices.
-Tom
--
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
Jerry Feldman
> On 3/16/2012 1:28 PM, Jerry Feldman wrote:
>> This gives rise to the need for a new type of battery. The carbon
>> nano-tube appears to be a leading contender for future batteries either
>> with Li-ion or alone.
>
> I see batteries as being a dead end. They're entropic, which is a
> fancy way of saying that they wear out with use. It's inescapable.
>
> I see room-scale broadcast power as being the real game-changer.
> Resonant inductance won't replace batteries, but it will change how
> they are used. Batteries won't be primary power sources. They'll be
> buffers to cover short term signal loss when moving between rooms or
> while commuting.
>
> Resonant inductance works on the small scale. Our "good friend" RFID
> operates on resonant inductance. RI power has been demonstrated at
> real world room scales. It's not yet cost effective but solving that
> is just a matter of time.
>
be a primary power source for many years to come. But, chemical
batteries (lead acid, Lithium-ion, NMH, ...) are on their way out. New
types of batteries will be coming to market, at first led by tablets
that need additional power and much lower weight. Carfbon nano-tubes are
capacitors that do not lose their charge rapidly. These fit well into
your resonant inductance. RI is a chicken-egg issue that over time will
probably replace the current recharge by wire. The nano-tube works into
this technology. But in the short term, each generation of portable
computer needs more powerful power storage devices, along with faster
recharge times. But, the need to newer batteries in cars is also pretty
high. Pure electric vehicles like the Leaf and Tesla will need a
increase their range and reduce recharge times. 8-10 hours is just
unacceptable. I could live with a Volt where my commute is short, but
also where I need a longer travel time on occasion. I think it will take
another few years before we see significantly improved battery technology,
Jerry Feldman
> Richard Pieri wrote:
>> iFixit got their hands on one of the first The New iPads...
>> ...has 42.5 Watt-hours of battery packs inside delivering
>> the same 9-10 hours run time.
>> iPad 2 has 25 Watt-hours of battery packs inside the case and is rated
>> at 9-10 hours run time.
> I noticed that last week when I Googled to look up the resolution of the
> iPad 3 and ASUS Transformer Prime and came across a comparison article
> showing the iPad 3 as 40-something Watt-hours, and the ASUS as
> 20-something Watt-hours. I thought it might be a typo.
>
> What are they doing with all that extra juice?
>
>
>> Nobody's publicly posted the TDP numbers yet but you can figure it's
>> rather higher than iPad 2's based on the power consumption.
> A lot of it is likely going to the display. They are still the dominant
> power sink in portable devices.
>
>
John Abreau
which I imagine would require far less power. Lose the big display, and perhaps
the rest of the device could be squeezed into a Twiddler-like chord keyboard.
--
John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix
OLD GnuPG KeyID: D5C7B5D9 / Email: abr...@gmail.com
OLD GnuPG FP: 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99
2011 PGP KeyID: 32A492D8 / Email: abr...@gmail.com
2011 PGP FP: 7834 AEC2 EFA3 565C A4B6 9BA4 0ACB AD85 32A4 92D8
Shirley Márquez Dúlcey
> On 03/16/2012 02:56 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
>> Richard Pieri wrote:
>>> iFixit got their hands on one of the first The New iPads...
>>> ...has 42.5 Watt-hours of battery packs inside delivering
>>> the same 9-10 hours run time.
>>> iPad 2 has 25 Watt-hours of battery packs inside the case and is rated
>>> at 9-10 hours run time.
>> I noticed that last week when I Googled to look up the resolution of the
>> iPad 3 and ASUS Transformer Prime and came across a comparison article
>> showing the iPad 3 as 40-something Watt-hours, and the ASUS as
>> 20-something Watt-hours. I thought it might be a typo.
>>
>> What are they doing with all that extra juice?
Faster processor, Retina Display, LTE. What I wonder is how they
squeezed in so much more battery without making the thing significantly
heavier.
Richard Pieri
> Faster processor, Retina Display, LTE. What I wonder is how they
> squeezed in so much more battery without making the thing significantly
> heavier.
The new display panel is slimmer than the previous generation's display
panel.
--
Rich P.
Nilanjan Palit
> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:57:51 -0400
> From: richar...@gmail.com
> To: dis...@blu.org
> Subject: Re: [Discuss] My God! It's Full of Batteries!
>
> On 3/16/2012 3:48 PM, Shirley Márquez Dúlcey wrote:
> > Faster processor, Retina Display, LTE. What I wonder is how they
> > squeezed in so much more battery without making the thing significantly
> > heavier.
>
> The new display panel is slimmer than the previous generation's display
> panel.
Chips with more features or faster frequencies don't weigh more :-)
Richard Pieri
>
> Chips with more features or faster frequencies don't weigh more :-)
They do. The A5X CPU in the The New iPad is physically larger than the A5 CPU in the iPad 2. Both use the same process. Bigger + same = heavier.
But seriously, the new display panel is slimmer and lighter, but the new battery packs (there are three in each The New iPad) are thicker and heavier. That's how Apple did it "without making the thing significantly heavier". The The New iPad is about 50 grams heavier and 0.6 mm thicker than its predecessor.
--Rich P.
Jerry Feldman
> On Mar 16, 2012, at 4:08 PM, Nilanjan Palit wrote:
>> Chips with more features or faster frequencies don't weigh more :-)
> They do. The A5X CPU in the The New iPad is physically larger than the A5 CPU in the iPad 2. Both use the same process. Bigger + same = heavier.
>
> But seriously, the new display panel is slimmer and lighter, but the new battery packs (there are three in each The New iPad) are thicker and heavier. That's how Apple did it "without making the thing significantly heavier". The The New iPad is about 50 grams heavier and 0.6 mm thicker than its predecessor.
>
mother, for instance, has a Kindle, but she won't put it in a case,
because it makes it too heavy. While some of the internal components are
heavier, it is the battery that adds a significant amount of weight, to
tablets and laptops. This is why we are limited by the current
technology. The new Lithium-Air batteries are one technology that should
help to reduce weight, but those are not expected in production until
about 2020. I suspect that carbon-nano-tubes won't be available for at
least that long. Until we can get more powerful, lighter batteries, the
tablets are not going to significantly replace the laptops until we can
reduce the weight of the batteries.
Richard Pieri
> The desirability of the tablet computers are their portability. My
> mother, for instance, has a Kindle, but she won't put it in a case,
> because it makes it too heavy.
Yep. Amazon's "official" Kindle covers roughly double the carry weight
of the devices. That's why I got a third party sleeve for my DX.
Remember convenience? The sleeve protects the Kindle when it is in my
pack, and stays in my pack when I'm using the device. This is why Apple
redesigned the "official" cover for the iPad 2 as a folding flap that
functions as screen protector and stand base. It's all about
convenience with these devices.
> lighter batteries, the tablets are not going to significantly replace
> the laptops until we can reduce the weight of the batteries.
This is a big part of why I believe that resonant inductance will
replace batteries. RI short circuits the battery weight problem by
eliminating or reducing the need for battery power. An RI-powered The
New iPad wouldn't need 42 Watt-hours of battery packs. A 5 Watt-hour
battery pack would provide enough power for about 30 minutes of roaming
use or several hours of standby power and it would considerably reduce
the total mass.
--
Jerry Feldman
> On 3/17/2012 9:18 AM, Jerry Feldman wrote:
>> The desirability of the tablet computers are their portability. My
>> mother, for instance, has a Kindle, but she won't put it in a case,
>> because it makes it too heavy.
>
> Yep. Amazon's "official" Kindle covers roughly double the carry
> weight of the devices. That's why I got a third party sleeve for my
> DX. Remember convenience? The sleeve protects the Kindle when it is
> in my pack, and stays in my pack when I'm using the device. This is
> why Apple redesigned the "official" cover for the iPad 2 as a folding
> flap that functions as screen protector and stand base. It's all
> about convenience with these devices.
>
>
>> lighter batteries, the tablets are not going to significantly replace
>> the laptops until we can reduce the weight of the batteries.
>
> This is a big part of why I believe that resonant inductance will
> replace batteries. RI short circuits the battery weight problem by
> eliminating or reducing the need for battery power. An RI-powered The
> New iPad wouldn't need 42 Watt-hours of battery packs. A 5 Watt-hour
> battery pack would provide enough power for about 30 minutes of
> roaming use or several hours of standby power and it would
> considerably reduce the total mass.
>
Additionally, in a truly portable solution, where you are outside or
possibly in a train, plane or bus you most likely won't have RI. Today's
battery technology is very much improved over a few years ago. This is
why I think that carbon nano-tubes will replace Li-ion batteries in that
they are essentially capacitors that retain their charge much longer
than normal capacitors, and hence a faster recharge cycle, and no
chemicals. But, the main for tablets is weight, and batteries are a big
factor in weight. Same with electric cars.