Iron nitride transformers could boost energy storage options

March 25, 2016
Sandia National Laboratories researcher Todd Monson and his colleagues have demonstrated the fabrication of iron nitride transformers in power-conversion test beds. Credit: Randy Montoya

A Sandia-led team has developed a way to make a magnetic material that could lead to lighter and smaller, cheaper and better-performing high-frequency transformers, needed for more flexible energy storage systems and widespread adoption of renewable energy.

The work is part of a larger, integrated portfolio of projects funded by Department of Energy's (DOE) Energy Storage Program in the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability.

Transportable and power conversion systems, which can fit inside a single semi-trailer, could make it cost effective to rapidly install solar, wind and geothermal energy systems in even the most remote locations.

"Such modular systems could be deployed quickly to multiple sites with much less assembly and validation time," said Sandia researcher Todd Monson of Nanoscale Sciences Department, who led the team with Stan Atcitty of Sandia's Energy Storage Technology & Systems Department.

Sandia manufactures iron nitride (γ'-Fe4N) powders by ball-milling iron powders in liquid nitrogen and then ammonia. The iron nitride powders are then consolidated through a low-temperature field-assisted sintering technique (FAST) that forms a solid material from loose powders through the application of heat and sometimes pressure.

The FAST manufacturing method enables the creation of transformer cores from raw starting materials in minutes, without decomposing the required iron nitrides, as could happen at the higher temperatures used in conventional sintering. Previously, the γ' phase of iron nitride has only been synthesized in either thin-film form in high-vacuum environments or as inclusions in other materials, and never integrated into an actual device.

Monson said using this method could make transformers up to 10 times smaller than they are currently.

No machining required

"FAST enables the net-shaping of parts, meaning that iron nitride powders can be sintered directly into perfectly sized parts, such as transformer cores, which don't require any machining," Monson said.

Due to its magnetic properties, iron nitride transformers can be made much more compact and lighter than traditional transformers, with better power-handling capability and greater efficiency. They will require only air cooling, another important space saver. Iron nitride also could serve as a more robust, high-performance transformer core material across the nation's electrical grid.

So far, Monson and his colleagues have demonstrated the fabrication of iron nitride transformer cores with good physical and magnetic characteristics and now are refining their process and preparing to test the transformers in power-conversion test beds.

"Advanced magnetic materials are critical for next-generation power conversion systems that use high-frequency linked converters, and can complement Sandia efforts in ultra-wide bandgap device materials for improved power electronics systems. They can withstand higher frequencies and higher temperatures, which ultimately result in high power density designs," said Atcitty.

Monson, Atcitty and their team built on Sandia's expertise in power electronics and magnetic materials in strong collaborations with University of California, Irvine, and Arizona State University researchers, who helped with materials processing and systems-level modeling.

Team members from Sandia and UC Irvine have filed a patent application for the materials synthesis process.

"Power electronics represents a substantial cost factor in an effective energy storage system," said Imre Gyuk, Energy Storage program manager in the DOE's Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability.

Explore further: Graphene and metal nitrides improve the performance and stability of energy storage devices

Related Stories

Flexible dielectric polymer can stand the heat

August 28, 2015

Easily manufactured, low cost, lightweight, flexible dielectric polymers that can operate at high temperatures may be the solution to energy storage and power conversion in electric vehicles and other high temperature applications, ...

Researchers apply diamond coatings to iron and steel tools

March 17, 2016

Scientists from Tomsk Polytechnic University (TPU) have created coverings for next-generation cutting tools that are not only durable, but also suitable for the treatment of most materials. They have developed a technology ...

Characterization of soft magnetic nanocomposites

December 10, 2015

Optimizing the performance of soft magnetic materials requires an understanding of the nanostructure and consideration of the local composition of each phase. The researchers successfully correlated the crystallization state ...

Recommended for you

Swiss unveil stratospheric solar plane

December 7, 2016

Just months after two Swiss pilots completed a historic round-the-world trip in a Sun-powered plane, another Swiss adventurer on Wednesday unveiled a solar plane aimed at reaching the stratosphere.

Solar panels repay their energy 'debt': study

December 6, 2016

The climate-friendly electricity generated by solar panels in the past 40 years has all but cancelled out the polluting energy used to produce them, a study said Tuesday.

Wall-jumping robot is most vertically agile ever built

December 6, 2016

Roboticists at UC Berkeley have designed a small robot that can leap into the air and then spring off a wall, or perform multiple vertical jumps in a row, resulting in the highest robotic vertical jumping agility ever recorded. ...

166 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

gkam
1.4 / 5 (10) Mar 25, 2016
Hmmmmm, . . I wonder about the center frequencies and Q, and if they can also be used in low-frequency (utility) operations.
Uncle Ira
3.9 / 5 (11) Mar 25, 2016
Hmmmmm, . . I wonder about the center frequencies and Q, and if they can also be used in low-frequency (utility) operations.


Well considering that transformers work best at lower frequencies and have high reactance at high frequencies it will probably work best in "low-frequency (utility) operations".

Cher, it is materials technology that is getting improved. The transformer tech is not a factor.

But other than all that, you sound just like a Senior Electrical Engineer.
gkam
1.4 / 5 (10) Mar 25, 2016
And you sound like someone who risks this:

http://www.thegua...n-google

Uncle Ira
4 / 5 (12) Mar 25, 2016
And you sound like someone who risks this:
So all you got is the empty "You are a goober so it doesn't count when you are right and I have experience so it doesn't count if I am wrong"?

Got anything on this technology to say? That is not wrong, I mean. You did realize this is the article about transformer CORE MATERIAL, right?

You did not know that the "Q" factor (that you thought would make you sound like the "Senior Electrical Engineer") is nothing more than the reactance (X) divided by the resistance of the wire in the windings (R),,, you didn't know that, ho, ho.

Cher, how many peoples have tried to help you with,,,

THIS IS A SCIENCE SITE!!!!

COMING HERE TO PRETEND YOU ARE THE ELITE EXPERIENCED ENGINEER IS HARD TO DO!!!!!!

AND YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO REALIZE THAT MOST PEOPLE HERE RUN CIRCLES AROUND YOUR "EXPERIENCE".
Eikka
5 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2016
the "Q" factor is nothing more than the reactance (X) divided by the resistance of the wire in the windings (R)


Q is a property that is related to signal damping in resonant systems. It's a number that attempts to quantify for one thing how much the circuit (or physical mechanism) tends to ring or oscillate/overshoot in response to a signal input. That information is useful for signal filters. Q applies to all sorts of passive and active circuits, so it isn't -always- that simple.

An ideal transformer hasn't got a "Q". The whole concept of Q or quality factor doesn't even apply - it would be like asking "how high does a bag of sand bounce when you drop it on the floor?" - it doesn't because it isn't bouncy.

Practical transformers have some amount of distributed capacitance and resistance in the windings, making them somewhat resonant at some frequency, but as you rightly point out that doesn't concern what core material is being used.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Uncle Ira
3.7 / 5 (9) Mar 26, 2016
That information is useful for signal filters. Q applies to all sorts of passive and active circuits, so it isn't -always- that simple.
glam-Skippy threw him out there in the article about transformer cores. So it is that simple, he doesn't know what he was talking about.

An ideal transformer hasn't got a "Q". The whole concept of Q or quality factor doesn't even apply - it would be like asking "how high does a bag of sand bounce when you drop it on the floor?" - it doesn't because it isn't bouncy.
But there are not any ideal transformers. An infinite "Q" is only possible if there is zero resistance of the windings.

But glam-Skippy did not realize that "Q" is not a big deal in power transformer Hz. They don't have much inductive reactance.

The only point I was making is that glam-Skippy likes to throw some buzzy sounding words to try to sound like the "Senior Electrical Engineer" when he does not have any idea of what he is talking about.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 26, 2016
Poor Ira. He was absolutely SURE I was not real that he want bat-shit crazy in ALL CAPS.

Just like otto.

You can look up every word and try as you like to make semantic references to phenomena you do not understand, but it does not make you anything but an internet troll.

I suggest you take your silly adolescent semantic games to Twitter, or back to High School, where you apparently still reside.

How did we wind up with a band of snipers and character assassins in this site?
Uncle Ira
3.7 / 5 (9) Mar 26, 2016
Poor Ira. He was absolutely SURE I was not real that he want bat-shit crazy in ALL CAPS.

Just like otto.

You can look up every word and try as you like to make semantic references to phenomena you do not understand, but it does not make you anything but an internet troll.

I suggest you take your silly adolescent semantic games to Twitter, or back to High School, where you apparently still reside.

How did we wind up with a band of snipers and character assassins in this site?


What does all that got to do with you being a total idiot in the "Senior Electrical Engineer" field. You can get all mad and insulted all you want, you are still really stupid to keep pretending.

You are still only a pretend "Senior Electrical Engineer". You have been exposed at every turn. How tight you hang on to the delusion that you are still fooling anybody is the sure sign of your mental conditions.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 26, 2016
The titles were Energy Services Engineer and Senior Energy Services Engineer. I did not design anything, but did training and troubleshooting for the company and our customers, as a consultant. They hired us in at the level most folk retire at the company because we already had over 20 years of experience each, and most of us had advanced degrees. The troubleshooting I did for customers got recognized by EPRI, who had me write and deliver most and then all of the Power Quality Course for the utility industry in the US.

Those who squandered their lives doing the same thing everyday cannot understand how some of us do not like that. What is comfortable to some is a rut to many of us. We need more, . . more learning, more experience, more life, than riding on the same boat everyday.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 26, 2016
Let's clear this up right here: In these fora, I mentioned much of my professional experience. Yes, it is unlikely that one person did that, but in retrospect, it really is true. I did not appreciate my life before being challenged by the snipers and character assassins here, and now I really want to thank them.

Ira and otto and Stumpy make half of their posts trying to abuse me, because when challenged on my experience, I proved it. They had no good response for that occurrence, so they just got nasty and filthy and abusive. The unexpected usually brings out true character.

Now, can we get back to science, and off the adolescent nastiness?
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
both overunity technologies of future
@zephir
1- that link is to your personal pseudoscience phishing reddit site and is NOT science!

that has all the credibility of linking a pic of Zsa Zsa Gabor as proof of "overunity"... or worse, the bible

2- overunity = perpetual motion. "A perpetual motion machine is a hypothetical machine that can do work indefinitely without an energy source. This kind of machine is impossible, as it would violate the first or second law of thermodynamics" https://en.wikipe...l_motion

https://books.goo...;f=false

https://books.goo...;f=false

just build one already ,zeph! get rich! get a nobel!

.

snipers... character assassins
Translation: anyone who proves liar-kam is wrong with evidence supported by science
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 26, 2016
" liar-kam"?
---------------------------------------

Gosh, Captain Trumpy, aren't you just trashing folk again?

Captain Stumpy
3.2 / 5 (9) Mar 26, 2016
@liar-kam
trashing? no
labeling and defining your true nature? yes
I did not design anything
then you couldn't have been a "senior engineer"
but did training and troubleshooting for the company and our customers, as a consultant
then per CA state law (and most other states) you committed fraud - see above links
The troubleshooting I did for customers
and again, this requires a PE per CA state (see above links)
my professional experience
rule 37
when challenged on my experience, I proved it
NO, we challenged you on your blatant LIES - big difference

i don't care what you did... but when you state LIES, it gets challenged until you have proof
and proving you are fraudulent & breaking CA law doesn't make you correct in your other posts, like your THz arguments, Anti-nuke fearmongering claims about it's safety, listening to Scorpion sink live or other various BS claims

Now, can we get back to science, and off the adolescent nastiness?
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 26, 2016
Trumpy, your aggression is only digging your hole deeper. Wiki all you want, you cannot change the facts.

You are trashing my real identity, and have posted information on the internet, leaving yourself open to suit and punishment. I proved I was celebrated at the Air Force Flight Test Center when you said I was not there. I proved my studies and reports for NASA. I proved my experience in the Electronic Battlefield. I proved I wrote and taught Power Quality to the nation's utility engineers.

It really got to you because you were so SURE you had exposed someone like you, you went overboard, and are now exposed by your own foolishness.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.5 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
CORRECTION: the legal links proving liar-kam committed fraud by his above claims are found in this post
Wiki all you want
those links are to
1- the CA Dpt of Consumer Affairs, Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists (your "state board" governing requirements for PE's and rules for engineers in the state - where fraud gets reported to as well)
http://www.bpelsg..._eng.pdf

2- National Society for Professional Engineers, who helped write the rules for the state Boards
http://www.nspe.o.../what-pe

it is telling that you don't know who governs your own "professional industry"
You are trashing my real identity
you always have the option of litigation, as i told you
but remember it will only cause you grief because i CAN prove you are a fraud and posting libel

you went overboard, and are now exposed by your own foolishness.
Now, can we get back to science, and off the adolescent nastiness?
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 26, 2016
Just found an old business card from at least 30 years ago, when I was Senior Energy Services Engineer for what was then the biggest non-governmental power company on Earth, and sent it to Capt. Trumpy.

Let's see how he deals with it, after screaming I was "LYING!".
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (10) Mar 26, 2016
@zephir
There is a statement of professor from Delft University. So is he liar and the people who honored/confirmed him are liars too?
if he claims he built a perpetual motion machine (overunity) - then that is a resounding yes

besides not actually reading the above definition and link - lets just look at the evidence in real life:
1- you linked images. not original source material. hell, even i can use photoshop

2- actually read this link https://en.wikipe...l_motion

3- most importantly, this is no different than other proposed overunity magnetic motors of the past using the same basic design but more powerful "magnets" etc...
it does not generate E- for use, it is not helpful for work and it has been proven by history to not be an effective means for either as well

IF this overunity machine was so great, why aren't we using them right now to do anything?
that Geneva link was from 2013

so, where is the product?
Captain Stumpy
3.2 / 5 (9) Mar 26, 2016
Just found an old business card from at least 30 years ago, when I was Senior Energy Services Engineer
@liar-kam
so what? anyone can make a business card
hell, i have business cards from when i worked in the Engineering Dept. of an aircraft parts manufacturing company... that proves only one thing: someone paid to have business cards made
and sent it to Capt. Trumpy.
and it proves only that someone paid to have business cards made
it doesn't prove you did anything, or don't you get that part?
especially considering your above FRAUD claims
Let's see how he deals with it, after screaming I was "LYING!"
i don't scream that you are lying
i said you are a liar (this is factual and proven) and that you are claiming to have committed FRAUD
there is a difference

thanks for the card and stuff... can i forward them to the State Board of CA and have you investigated now?
gkam
1.5 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
I sent you proof, Capt. Trumpy, and now want an apology.

I think you are incapable of it. Like Ira, you will change the subject, or find another point of attack. Your buddy Donovan was surprised to hear of your character issues in public sight.
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
and now want an apology
you want an apology because you committed fraud?
ok... i am sorry you committed fraud
I think you are incapable of it
i just apologized for you committing fraud

can't you read?
find another point of attack
you mean like pointing out when you blatantly lie or commit fraud?
like above or here? http://phys.org/n...ess.html

http://phys.org/n...ich.html

ok! whatever
Your buddy Donovan was surprised to hear of your character issues in public sight.
yep he asked what i did
so i sent him all the same links and evidence
even sent him the e-mails where i told you to provide evidence and redact your info

still not banned, despite your attempts to drag this into other forums
LMFAO

try again little girl!

PS - HEY - i thought you were going to take me to court!
where are your lawyers?
that just means you LIED again, you know....
gkam
1.5 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
"thanks for the card and stuff... can i forward them to the State Board of CA and have you investigated now?"
---------------------------------

Yes, please do. It shows malice, not just ignorance and poor character.

Was the front page of the newspaper of the Air Force Flight Test Center faked, too?

How about the NASA catalog listing my studies and reports?

The name and photographs of me on military websites?

Admit it, Trumpy, you got caught by your own nastiness and poor character. Others have noticed, too.
Captain Stumpy
3.5 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
Yes, please do
linking these threads too, BTW
shows malice
well, i tried to tell you that you need to provide evidence, so your malice will be noted ... sorry. your own fault
you got caught by your own nastiness and poor character.
from day one i have always asked for EVIDENCE
this means even for your idiocy, liar-kam

it is not poor character to require someone to actually validate a claim, it is called critical thinking and demonstrates a knowledge and acceptance of the scientific method - this is important to anyone who wants to work in a STEM field (KEY)

it is a WIN-WIN for me when you produce evidence
problem is, you don't know what constitutes evidence and what it means
Try reading these: http://www.auburn...ion.html

https://en.wikipe...evidence

PS - it is not malice to want to protect people from FRAUD, either
let them do the legwork of investigating -they have more resources
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 26, 2016
"it is not poor character to require someone to actually validate a claim,"
-------------------------------------

Okay, let's see your Fire Truck license.
Uncle Ira
3.7 / 5 (9) Mar 26, 2016
thanks for the card and stuff..
I hope he did a better job on that then he did on his sophisticated high tech interweb place. Did he put the cartoon of him wearing the silly looking pointy cap on it? The one with the moons and stars on him? I am sure that instilled confidence in the prospective customers.

try again little girl!
I really wish you would not encourage him Captain-Skippy. He is really really and more really bad at this.

PS - HEY - i thought you were going to take me to court!
where are your lawyers?
Ask him to tell you all about the emails he sent to nice peoples at physorg telling them they could be libel for the damaging did to him. Then ask him why he thought it would be worth his while two weeks after threatening legal action to send some more emails volunteering to be a moderator and clean this place up.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 26, 2016
":so what? anyone can make a business card hell, i have business cards from when i worked in the Engineering Dept. of an aircraft parts manufacturing company.."
------------------------------------

And what did they give you as a title?

Did you check mine out, and notice it has the genuine old logo from the mid-1980's before it was changed? And did you notice how I faked the coffee stains from 30 years ago?

Yeah, Trumpy, everything is fake but you.

You got caught.
Captain Stumpy
3.5 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
Okay, let's see your Fire Truck license.
for which truck? LMFAO
or what about the Class A CDL which is required for all the above before you can get the specialised license?

WHY is this relevant to your fraud or to the article?

besides -
I already gave you all the license numbers registered with the NFPA and IFSAC certifications which prove my IAFF, IFSAC etc certifications - if you failed to actually use that info to contact IAFF or IFSAC than that is upon you, not i

given that it is OT and irrelevant, i will not post it here because it has already been posted here

enjoy

.

I hope he did a better job on that then he did on his sophisticated high tech interweb place
@IRA
well, it has a coffee stain on it... does that count?
of course, i have also had business cards that claim i am a professional Female Body Inspector, so i don't know what he wants me to believe with that

i sent you a copy with my reply
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.5 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
And what did they give you as a title?
Research Engineer
bot how is that relevant? i had a REAL PE engineer that signed off on all work (because it is a requirement BY LAW and also per FAA regulations)
Did you check mine out
NOPE. don't care. like i said, i have a business card saying i am FBI - see my post to Ira above for more details
notice it has the genuine old logo from the mid-1980's before it was changed?
did you notice MY logo i sent you? it hasn't changed in decades
everything is fake but you
not really. the only fake is what can't be proven

-a business card doesn't prove anything other than someone paid to have business cards made
again, read the EVIDENCE links i provided above for info
You got caught
doing what? making you provide evidence?

LMFAO
like i said
WIN-WIN
Captain Stumpy
3.5 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
so you couldn't probably use it for heating of your home by electricity produced.
@ZEPHIR
so then what good is it?
if it can't produce E-
and it can't actually provide work for use (like an ICE)

then what is the purpose of the machine?
(or didn't you get that point by the above post?)
It doesn't generate the energy from nothing
again, read the link re: "overunity" and "perpetual motion"
when the magnetic motor runs, it cools itself
very pretty pictures... so what?

again: what good is it?
if it can't produce E-
and it can't actually provide work for use (like an ICE)

then what is the purpose of the machine?

like i said, the most telling evidence is the fact that no one anywhere has this machine being used for any actual work or functional purpose - they're made for pretty pictures like you posted, but we're not talking ART, we're talking functional science and technology, right?

compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Tektrix
5 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2016
. . . overunity technologies of future.

"Over-unity" energy generation implies the negation of mass/energy equivalence. Without this equivalence, information would be exchanged superluminally and retro-causality would dominate physical processes. That obviously isn't happening or we wouldn't be here to speak of it.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (9) Mar 26, 2016
You can place it outside of your home and use the electricity produced inside it
@zephir
you first!
... when you demonstrate it's effectiveness, call the Nobel committee first
you'll help to fight with global warming
Uhm... i am 100% solar and wind
... how is buying your uber-generator that can't be proven effective going to help fight global warming?
like i said, you can't prove it works - NO ONE can or has!
...exception of mainstream physics and its dull proponents
the reason you can't actually provide a working prototype that effectively produces E- is because MS doesn't believe in pseudoscience?
huh

again: what evidence do you have that said perpetual motion machine actually works as you claim? other than the pretty pictures, that is, which prove only that you are able to take pictures of something you don't understand (or is that steal or copy pics from elsewhere? your choice)
Tektrix
5 / 5 (2) Mar 26, 2016
How do you demarcate local from global and keep the two in isolation from each other? As for speed of light violations in condensed matter, you are confusing group velocity and phase velocity- the former of which can be superluminal but cannot be used to exchange information.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (9) Mar 26, 2016
@zeph cont'd
it's like to say, that the stars cannot collapse into black holes, because if it would happen, we wouldn't be here to speak of it (as the Sun would did it too)
if you're going to talk about actual physics, it would be a good idea to actually look up some details and find out what it takes to form things like black holes... making comments like you did there makes you look even more stupid than you usually do

so again: you claim this tech works, but i don't see you using it nor do i see you dumping all your $$ into it

this means your either lying, a hypocrite or intentionally attempting to deceive for fraudulent or other purposes (like your aether religion = pseudoscience)

point is: evidence is still the key, be it claims like the idiot liar-kam above or your claims about perpetual motion devices that create energy

until you can provide proof, your claims can be dismissed without a thought as mindless drivel because (again- key words) "no evidence"
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Tektrix
5 / 5 (1) Mar 26, 2016
This is rather weak argument . . .


No, it's not. Retro-causality precludes the evolution of complexity, without which our formation would not be possible. Retro-causality also flies against your invocation of negentropy- a condition defined by its increased order relative to its surrounding chaos. You simply cannot have it both ways.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Tektrix
5 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2016
The overunity devices are just another example of seeming "miracle", which just utilizes the energy of vacuum around particles instead of inside them.


Thanks for bringing a whole new level of clarity to the discussion.
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.5 / 5 (8) Mar 26, 2016
I admit, the complexity of Mr. Stumpy's thinking may not serve as a best example for it
@zephir
actually the thinking is very simple and tied directly to critical thinking and logic
what you have made is claims - some are untested claims, but most are actually called "false claims" ( http://www.auburn...ion.html ) b/c they absolutely cannot be proven and there is an overabundance of validated evidence refuting your claims

this goes back to your comments about overunity and your machine

you want to add your complex theoretical musings on how it works, but you can't actually provide a demonstrated validated proof of it actually working
(IOW - the evidence clearly demonstrates you are talking out of your buttocks)

so it is simple, really
until you can actually provide a working machine that generates electricity or does work similar to an ICE, then your claims have the same veracity as any religious claim
(NONE)
compose
Mar 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.3 / 5 (7) Mar 26, 2016
Einstein
@zephir
yeah... you mean like GR/SR?
the problem with your argument is that they were actually validated later "with evidence"
yet his claims were not the same veracity as any religious claim
that is because they were validated with evidence
you know, like this: https://en.wikipe...lativity

that is how science works
you are not offering the testing or the proof... just the BS claims
now consider the history of the subject with things like this: https://en.wikipe...nity_Toy

most are loosely based on this: https://en.wikipe..._paradox

https://upload.wi...ator.jpg

problem is: no one has ever proven to make it work as you claim above, but lots of people have made "overunity" devices based upon this and made claims, like you do

considering the history of overunity and you vs science, proof and evidence?
you do the math
Uncle Ira
3.4 / 5 (10) Mar 26, 2016
@ Zephir-Skippy. How you are Podna? I am good me, just fine and dandy and enjoying life.

I am not sure what you mean by this,,,,,

The magnetic motors rotate itself without doing any work


I am confused, maybe it is my fault because of the differences in our usual languages. I thought if something rotates by definition work is getting done. What makes it rotate? That something is doing work because it is causing (applying a force) the motor to move through a distance (rotate).

Are you really saying you have found a perpetual motion machine in the macro world?
Eikka
3 / 5 (2) Mar 27, 2016
I thought if something rotates by definition work is getting done.


An object in steady motion isn't doing any work. Its just conserving momentum.

If a force is applied, then work is being done.

That's the trick behind many perpetual motion machines: they're some sort of pendulums or rotating things, balls on tracks etc with extremely low friction, that are placed in such ways that they keep spinning due to the Coriolis effect. They spin because the earth spins and the system conserves momentum, and then the inventor spins some story about vacuum energies.
compose
Mar 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 27, 2016
I'll read the scholarly article as soon as I can get my hands on it, but the "high frequency" part is extremely interesting. Power converters (also known as "switched-mode power supplies") are a strong enabling technology for renewables, since they can convert power from diverse sources into power that's compatible with batteries. Along with batteries, these are one of the enablers for renewables. The efficiency of such converters is also an enabling technology for satellites and probes to discover the solar system, and enable satellite communications.

This article, and the discoveries it documents, are actually a lot more important than appears at first glance.
compose
Mar 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (5) Mar 27, 2016
Bah. Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be anything in the scholarly literature so far. Maybe someone else has better search skillz than I do.
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Mar 28, 2016
will ever emerge in scholarly literature
@zeph
there are only three reasons why research would not make it into peer reviewed publications
1- it is classified by the gov't
2- there is no evidence supporting the conclusions (making it pseudoscience)
3- conspiracy

given that only 1 and 2 are actually the only reasons ever for suppressing legitimate research and that there has never been any proof of 3 that wasn't also then demonstrated to be directly tied to 2, then ....

compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Phys1
5 / 5 (3) Mar 28, 2016
This kind of machine is impossible, as it would violate the first or second law of thermodynamics
Laws of thermodynamics are violated routinely - for example during crystallization https://www.youtu...ZI2rwyHg and the well arranged structure gets formed. Try to explain it thermodynamically.

It is called a phase transition in thermodynamics.
Explanation of phase transitions is core thermodynamics.
You evidently do not know thermodynamics very well.
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Phys1
4 / 5 (4) Mar 28, 2016
"The law expresses the irreversibility of the process. "
https://en.wikipe...dynamics
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Uncle Ira
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 28, 2016
An object in steady motion isn't doing any work. Its just conserving momentum.

If a force is applied, then work is being done.


Nice try Skippy. But we were talking about a motor. Now I would think that any motor under discussion has some mass. That massiness making me think it might have to interact with OUTSIDE forces, uh, like gravity, friction, vibrations and such like. It's got to do more than just "conserve momentum", it needs a little extra to keep going, eh?

Mind you, this was not some "ideal textbook problem for the whiteboard", it was the real world motor that Zephir-Skippy claims to know about. But you your own self validated my comment,,, "extremely low friction"
Uncle Ira
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 28, 2016
That's the trick behind many perpetual motion machines: they're some sort of pendulums or rotating things, balls on tracks etc with extremely low friction, that are placed in such ways that they keep spinning due to the Coriolis effect.
And the Coriolis effect is nothing more than a transfer of energy (doing work) by one system (the earth) to another (the motor).

They spin because the earth spins and the system conserves momentum, and then the inventor spins some story about vacuum energies.
But the motor is not part of the system Zephir-Skippy implied. He implied the motor was rotating independently. Which is what I asked to start with. If you consider the "earth and the motor" to be part of a system so it conserves energy, then so is a "battery and a motor"

All that says it the same thing I said. Something gave it a shove (did work) to get him rotating, and "spinning because the earth spins" is (work getting done by the earth to the motor)
essaycakea
2 / 5 (4) Mar 28, 2016
TO compose- as someone not involved in the science, physics, mathmatical or engneering "world" at all, myself, being just regular old layperson, having nothing to set myself apart from any other oblivious,careless, ignorant american citizen other then just an interest in particle physics, astronomy, physics , einstein, hawking, quantum tunnelling, mathematics and the combined effects and results and implications of such, i have felt alone, discouraged and dumbfounded to come to realize that NONE of these feilds and experts in such feilds communicate with eachother, let alone work, or even THINK together. when i realized that me, a nobody, w/out a formal, or even informal education in ANY of these areas had come to certain conclusions about the true implications of this knowledge, well first i was sad, then angry, then i just laughed at how CLUELESS, we, as a race, (as in "human" race..are) after i read some disappointing, (confusing?)comments, YOU RESTORED HOPE! THANK U! COMPOSE
essaycakea
2.3 / 5 (3) Mar 28, 2016
compose ;YOU GOT IT, AND PEOPLE ARE LISTENING, FORGET WHAT THE "NAY SAYERS" SAY, their minds are closed up too small to see it, some people listen though. keep telling it like it is, you are right on, thank you. and maybe there is still hope...
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (7) Mar 28, 2016
will ever emerge in scholarly literature
@zeph
there are only three reasons why research would not make it into peer reviewed publications
1- it is classified by the gov't
2- there is no evidence supporting the conclusions (making it pseudoscience)
3- conspiracy

(Gasp!) Cap'n - what if it's all three!?!?!?
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Phys1
3.7 / 5 (6) Mar 28, 2016
Every irreversible process violates the thermodynamic time arrow - it acts like the extra-dimensional singularity of it.

That is plain bullshit.
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 28, 2016
"After all, the violation of 2nd thermodynamic law by (temporal) formation of Maxwell demon is something, which admits even the mainstream physics already - and it utilizes the quantum phenomena for it, which also violate the thermodynamic time arrow in certain extent."
---------------------------------

Didn't they find the Demon itself heats up when operating?
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 28, 2016
I doubt it.
compose
Mar 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 28, 2016
Let's hope you are right.

Not my field.
compose
Mar 29, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Mar 29, 2016
@beni-kam
Let's hope you are right
Not my field.
this is why you are ridiculed and no one believes you are an engineer

this absolutely IS your field
zephir (compose) has stated "proof" of an overunity (AKA_ perpetual motion) electrical generating work doing machine that will solve the world problems if only we invest in it

not only is this smack dab in your chosen "pg&e senior engineer nuke specialist super-uber consultant" job description, it is taught in engineering 101 (confirmed by 3 PE's i talked to) and my daughter (PE) had the exact same basic "overunity" machine in her class described using the same principles and arguments

but then you claim it's not in your field?

it is really simple to figure out: there is NO overunity device, and zeph is propagating pseudoscience
otherwise we would have these things being put in every household in the US and the power companies would be sending profits thru the roof
Captain Stumpy
3.5 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
everyone of you could contribute into scientific revolution today simply by convincing the physicists about overunity reality
@zeph
1- your awt page and youtube is *not* source material nor reputable science journals with peer review
2- if this perpetual motion device was even half as capable or showed 25% the promise you claim, the power companies would own the patent on it and you would see profits through the roof

which brings us back to the main problem: pseudoscience and your belief in it

just because you want something to be true, doesn't mean it is

your machine is no different than the thousands of youtube overunity machines and all have the exact same argument you make "if only"

problem is - until you can demonstrate one that will actually do what is claimed, the ONLY argument you have is "if only"

you didn't read a single link i left, did you?

epic fail
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
Poor Sgt Trumpy. He has been trying for a long time to convince me I was not an Electronic Test Engineer, or a Facility Engineer, or a Plant Engineer, or a Senior Energy Services Engineer, or a Research Engineer, because I do not have the diploma with the word "engineer' on it.

These folk who hide in the woods from life have no idea how the real world out there works.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
He has been trying for a long time to convince me
has nothing to do with you
it has to do with your evidence, which has been an epic fail
These folk who hide in the woods from life have no idea how the real world out there works
so tell me why it isn't your field, liar-kam

explain why power generators and work-load machines who create power by perpetual motion is not in the field of an "Electronic Test Engineer, or a Facility Engineer, or a Plant Engineer, or a Senior Energy Services Engineer, or a Research Engineer"

the reason i make this point is because even my daughter, an electrical engineer with a PE learned about this crap... as well as her professor, who was a REAL PE who worked with the power companies and still consults in our area, and he stated it was a first year course problem everyone talks about to students

so again.... explain to everyone why it isn't "your field"
please be specific and detailed - and use references and links/evidence
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
Your six-foot-four daughter is an EE and a PE? Prove it. You demand proof, so prove it.

Well maybe she learned about quantum batteries, I did not.

"Actually the oldest running battery (Zamboni cell) and/or Karpen's pile from Romania can also work as a quantum battery"

Yes, I got the inventors in Technical Services, everything from The Electrokinetic Device of Townsend Brown made real by his last lab assistant, or the "Solid State Power Coupling" using MHD, or the fools making cars to run on compressed air (generated by the vehicle itself), and others. Too many to count.

What did you do?

Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Mar 29, 2016
What did you do?
well, i just proved you were a chronic liar and you have no idea what overunity and perpetual motion machine means...

and you weren't specific, BTW...
i don't care about your vague accomplishments, nor do i care about your life history

explain why power generators and work-load machines who create power by perpetual motion is not in the field of an "Electronic Test Engineer, or a Facility Engineer, or a Plant Engineer, or a Senior Energy Services Engineer, or a Research Engineer"

tell me what that isn't in your "field" and you can't refute it to zeph

gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
I hope you looked up T.Townsend Brown, an interesting guy. I never got to meet him, but my mentor at PG&E did,and did some research stuff for him for a while in regard to petroelectricity.

I took a working model of his device to a Future Energy Fair at Stanford, expecting to see a great interest. But there was another speaker across campus at the same time who got all the attention: Gorby's first West Coast appearance.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
"well, i just proved you were a chronic liar and you have no idea what overunity and perpetual motion machine means..."
------------------------------------
Really? How?

Why are your silly emotionally-derived assumptions more proof than copies of my performance reports and my DD-214? Where are yours? Who is the phony, the liar?

Trumpy, you are coming apart, pieces are flying off of you as you spin out of control.

Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Mar 29, 2016
I hope
OT and irrelevant
TL;DR
Really? How?
because, as i noted, overunity perpetual motion machines who do work and create electricity really is all in your particular field of expertise, per your own claims of working with and consulting to pg&e, etc
or is your literacy problem rearing it's ugly head again?
Why are your silly emotionally-derived assumptions more proof than copies of my performance reports and my DD-214?
we're talking about pg&e and you want to distract with an abused overrated military system?
LOL
so, where is your proof that electrical generators are not in the field of an engineer working for the electric company?
Where are yours?
in my folder
Who is the phony, the liar?
you just proved that YOU are

so... you think that i am coming apart?
i am not the one threatening to litigate against everyone like you are

brittle ego?
https://www.psych...ttle-ego
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
"brittle ego?"
--------------------

No, Trumpy, you are the one scared into attacking others. I know it was a terrible shock to get those documents showing my work for NASA and at the Air Force Flight Test Center, and all the other stuff. I guess it was just too much frustration

Now, show us proof of your assertions of being a real "Truck Captain". Or the proof of what you bragged about with your daughter. You brought her into this, now you prove it.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
those documents
@liar-kam
1 wasn't a shock b/c i don't care- rule 37

2- and as i stated before, this does not make you correct when facing factual evidence that proves you wrong about a topic (that argument is called "argument from authority" and when you're wrong, you are simply wrong, regardless of your credentials or supposed career)

the point is not and never has been "that" you did anything (no once really cares, plus Rule 37)
it has always been that you can't actually prove most of your comments with evidence
show us proof of your assertions of being a real "Truck Captain"...your daughter...
as soon as you can provide a logical reason why this should be relevant to the conversation

because the *topic* of said conversation centers around your failure to provide evidence while ignoring that generators and power production really are a part of engineering for power plants and pg&e

*but* per your own claims, it isn't your field
why not?

Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
@liar-kam
Now, show us proof of your assertions
you are still trying to redirect away from your absolutely false claims that overunity perpetual motion engines creating electricity are somehow not within the field of a pg&e engineer who has experience in nukes, power plants, etc

so again: quit with the red herrings, strawman and attempted redirection into fallacious argument from authority and prove, with evidence, that "overunity perpetual motion engines creating electricity are somehow not within the field of a pg&e engineer who has experience in nukes, power plants, etc"

thanks
(links and references would be nice, but i aint holding my breath on that one)
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
Stop the red herring. My statement was regarding quantum devices, not power generation.

This is only a diversion because you cannot prove any of your own assertions of who you even are, let alone a six-foot-four daughter with an EE and a PE.

Now, stop screaming "liar" at others, and put up.
Captain Stumpy
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 29, 2016
Stop the red herring
that is what i am trying to get you to do!
so quit it
My statement was regarding quantum devices, not power generation
1- zeph was talking about overunity devices and perpetual motion, so throwing "quantum" into the argument why you shouldn't answer only means you didn't understand a thing he said about the devices

2- you didn't specifically say that, did you?
Now, stop screaming "liar" at others, and put up
Sure! i am gonna post that right as soon as you can show, with evidence, why "overunity perpetual motion engines creating electricity are somehow not within the field of a pg&e engineer who has experience in nukes, power plants, etc"

be very specific and answer the question i asked
thanks!
:-D
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
@liar-kam
Now, show us proof of your assertions
you are still trying to redirect away from your absolutely false claims that overunity perpetual motion engines creating electricity are somehow not within the field of a pg&e engineer who has experience in nukes, power plants, etc

so again: quit with the red herrings, strawman and attempted redirection into fallacious argument from authority and prove, with evidence, that "overunity perpetual motion engines creating electricity are somehow not within the field of a pg&e engineer who has experience in nukes, power plants, etc"

thanks

man... the silence speaks volumes, doesn't it

gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
You idiot, I told you I did professional analyses of all those crazy ideas while in Technical Services at PG&E, and my "not my field" statement was regarding quantum matters. How many did they bring to you?

I know this is all you have to distract us from finding out who you really are, and why you are so SCARED for us to find out. But it is time you came out of hiding.

Come on, we won't make too much fun of you, . . I promise.
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 29, 2016
I know this is all you have to distract us from finding out who you really are
@liar-kam
how is that?
1- i'm not anonymous
2- it isn't the basis of my argument, which is from evidence, not from self-perceived authority like yours is
But it is time you came out of hiding
just because you are too inept to figure out how to use the internet doesn't mean everyone is
i suggest taking some classes at the local Jr. college or buy a book... you know, like this one: http://www.amazon...18096142

I told you I did professional analyses of all those crazy ideas
and yet you still can't figure out that overunity and perpetual motion are scams?

wow...

this speaks volumes
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 29, 2016
What I'm waiting for is for the conversation to turn back to high-frequency transformers and power conversion, and the enablement of renewable energy sources.

Fat chance.
Benni
1.8 / 5 (5) Mar 29, 2016
What I'm waiting for is for the conversation to turn back to high-frequency transformers and power conversion, and the enablement of renewable energy sources.

Fat chance.


Yeah, and if they don't you're gonna send your strong armed guy chileastro after them to beat them up in a dark alley because they disagree with so much of the mindless drivel you post?
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
"What I'm waiting for is for the conversation to turn back to high-frequency transformers and power conversion, and the enablement of renewable energy sources."
-----------------------------------------

Thank you.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 29, 2016
Yeah, and if they don't you're gonna send your strong armed guy chileastro after them to beat them up in a dark alley because they disagree with so much of the mindless drivel you post?
Lenni, you ever heard of a Cuk converter? How about Middlebrook's canonical method? Synchronous rectifiers? IGBTs?

You boast about your engineering skillz, now's the time to step up to the plate and swing at the pitch.

That was strike one.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
Rumor has it that if your gate is properly isolated, you can transist bipolarly. Then them-there gates can be strobed-like in an array to create voltage waveshapes, some folk say, . . . .
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (7) Mar 29, 2016
Rumor has it that if your gate is properly isolated, you can transist bipolarly. Then them-there gates can be strobed-like in an array to create voltage waveshapes, some folk say, . . . .
Gracie, propound on the canonical method.

This is a test.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 29, 2016
Note for observers: there are few if any on-line resources regarding switched-mode power converters, and even in the twenty-first century they are considered by most electronics engineers to be a black art, much like microwave electronics, despite the existence and confirmed utility of the canonical method. This is because complex mathematics are required to use the canonical method, not merely imaginary numbers but (shudder) calculus and stuff. Really efficient switched-mode power converters are mostly relegated to satellite technology, where weight and efficiency are at a high premium.

Observers should note, however, that the canonical method dates from the late 1970s and early 1980s, and if proper attention had been paid in the decades since, we would have far more advanced power supply designs than are commonly used in consumer electronics. Most consumer electronics is powered by linear power supplies which have a maximum efficiency of 50% at best.

[contd]
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 29, 2016
[contd]
Switched-mode power converters, in contrast, generally have a minimum efficiency of 80%, and really good designs can easily exceed 95% efficiency; converters that exceed 98% efficiency are currently in orbit on satellites, where weight and efficiency are paramount concerns in design, and where the only power available is solar. The implications for renewable energy and electric vehicles will be obvious given a little thought.

It's sobering to realize that a great deal of our high technology is powered by inefficient linear power supplies, and that this could have been different for several decades if we'd only paid attention to Drs Cuk and Middlebrook long ago.

And I seriously doubt Gracie has any idea of this. Nor will she find out about it by searching the 'Net; you have to actually buy books and read and understand them to know what I'm even talking about here.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
Da S, the transition to switch-mode power supplies started in the 1980's, when they proliferated in electronics. The non-linear currents they draw, high in third harmonics, secondarily in fifths, burdened usually-neglected and undersized Neutrals, often to the melting point. They started the need for Power Quality.

New standards limit those harmonics now, but other requirements, such as reference-grade Grounds are still there.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (8) Mar 29, 2016
Da S, the reason for worry is most present in three-phase systems, usually 120/208 commercial applications, where all three conductors share the Neutral. With regular sine waves, the currents would cancel at least partially, but with the steep narrow current pulses from charging that big capacitor in the SMPS, they instead add their frequencies and their values at peak. The 180 Hz (relatively) fast rise-time pulses suffer the skin effects of the wire as well.

I have seen 500 MCM Copper wire melt at connections and Copper-plate small patches of panel.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
Da S, if you want to see the reason for the 500MCM wire melting, go to: http://kamburoff....vey.html and look at the graphs of the transformer feeding that panel.

Look at the full graph. The top two traces in black are the voltage and current respectively of Phase A. Notice how the peak currents flatten the voltage waveform, creating fifth harmonics. You can see the same thing in the red traces for Phase B, and the blue ones for Phase C, plus their imbalances.

Notice as well how the non-linear currents in the Neutral (# 3), add both value and frequency instead of subtracting them as with sine waves. In this sytem, the combined Neutral currents were higher than any of the phase currents. With typical loads, Neutrals are undersized because there currents cancel in the Neutral, but that only works when they exist there at the same time and overlap.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
Two folk have given me ones for those posts. Do they have more intelligent responses?
Benni
2.6 / 5 (5) Mar 30, 2016
Two folk have given me ones for those posts. Do they have more intelligent responses?


You should ask Schneib if he knows how to do Differential Equations
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
Isn't that irrelevant?

What you do is what counts.
dnatwork
5 / 5 (2) Mar 30, 2016
Wow. Just wow.

Is this one guy with six accounts talking to himself? Why do you other folks ever bother?
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
Wow. Just wow.

Is this one guy with six accounts talking to himself? Why do you other folks ever bother?

because letting misinformation and lies, or argument from authority that is blatantly false spread creates more stupidity?

here is a great video on the why
https://www.youtu...EwjBXlZE
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
Yeah, sorry, dnatwork. We have a few trolls here who think this is their own playground, and we others do not belong here. They assume the role of judge/executioner/cop/bully, denigrating anyone who disagrees with them. And do NOT prove you actually did something, because these folk have not. They will do anything they canto discredit you.

Sorry you came into this - I was hoping for a real forum myself, not some playground of bullying anonymous cowards.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (7) Mar 30, 2016
OK, Gracie, you do appear to know some about SMPSs, but I have to point out that you don't appear to be familiar either with the canonical method, nor with its implications WRT the four geometries of SMPSs, only with the failures of the ones in bad quadrants. Nevertheless, I took you off ignore temporarily in order to give you a few fives, for at least not trying to bob and weave and dodge and make stuff up.

You really should have a look at Cuk and Middlebrook's papers, and understand that there are four domains for SMPS geometries: one where there are instabilities at the input (the ones you are talking about), one where there are instabilities at the output, one where there are no instabilities, and one that's more useful as an amplifier of AF or RF than as a power converter. (This fourth geometry is called a "Class D amplifier" by some EEs.)

The Cuk converter is the third geometry, and it is as close as we will ever come to a "DC transformer" in the real world.

[contd]
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
[contd]
The point is, the higher the switching frequency, the closer the converter comes to a "DC transformer."

And you don't realize this until you understand the canonical method and its implications for SMPS design. The industry has been ignoring this for three decades, because they're afraid of a little calculus. There is at least some argument that we would be in less trouble with AGW had they stepped up to the plate and made consumer electronics with much higher efficiency.
gkam
1.4 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
"You really should have a look at Cuk and Middlebrook's papers"
---------------------------

Okay.

My name isn't Gracie.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
OK, I'll give up calling you "Gracie" if you give up appeal to personal authority based on what you claim to have done. It's what you know that will make people respect you here; grandiose claims of experience that are easily disproven will not help you nor make people respect you. Obvious subject matter expertise will. If you'll give up this bad habit I think you will find that most people will stop blaming you for stuff in the past. I certainly will.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
The AC/DC SMPS used in consumer and commercial and industrial electronics which I am familiar use large capacitors to store just part of the sine wave. Since they all draw at the peak, they can load the circuits and flatten the voltage waveshape if they are a significant part of the total load.

That is what happened in the case above, in which a building which was not wired for non-linear loads was stuffed with them.

-------------------------------------
"grandiose claims of experience that are easily disproven will not help you nor make people respect you"

Oh, and which ones are those?
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
The Cuk converter puts transformers at the input and output and uses the capacitors in the switch. It doesn't inject noise into the source, and doesn't inject noise into the sink; it's a linear load, and a linear source, from the POV of the source and sink respectively. Cuk called it the "optimum topology converter" and proved it by getting his SMPS installed on satellites. The consumer electronics EEs didn't even have the grace to be embarrassed.

-------------------

Well, none if you're giving them up. Otherwise I'll just put you back on ignore and watch Ira torture you.

Your call.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
I want to know what you think is untrue, so I can prove it to you.

Got a temporary email account?

This is not bragging, it is admitting it. Yeah, what happened to me is unlikely, but real. Sorry.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
If you'll give up this bad habit I think you will find that most people will stop blaming you for stuff in the past. I certainly will
@Da Schneib
ditto for me... it was what i told him in the messages i sent him as well as on PO
just like i said from the beginning:
use science
links
references
studies
That way the people have to refute the science, not you
http://phys.org/n...ded.html

he started attacking me because he made a stupid error about THz & refused to actually read the studies which refuted his claim
http://phys.org/n...ess.html

but see... Gracie is always right, you know, because he has an honorary paid for degree, worked with pg&e and is a super-commando from the air farce, is a volly firefighter and cop know-it-all and NASA too

I suggest making him use the Joint to pass any PM's

just for safety sake and to insure he doesn't get your IP from the e-mail addy
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
"The consumer electronics EEs didn't even have the grace to be embarrassed."
-------------------------------------

It is called cost-consciousness. They can afford fancy stuff on satellites, but not for your Tee-Vee machine.

But it has been a life-saver for avionics. The stuff we had to deal with in the vacuum tube and early transistor days were heavy and required maintenance, cooling, and lots of space.
Da Schneib
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 30, 2016
I'm not interested in any of that. I'm interested in what you know and can talk sensibly about, and I'll respect you more for that than anything else. Why not just accept that and move on?

You'll note that I don't make any claims about my education or work experience here. I talk about what I know about, and I can prove it without having to share personal information, simply by demonstrating knowledge of the material. I'm not here to prove how cool I am, I'm here to talk about interesting stuff.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
"The consumer electronics EEs didn't even have the grace to be embarrassed."
-------------------------------------

It is called cost-consciousness. They can afford fancy stuff on satellites, but not for your Tee-Vee machine.
But it's not even cost conscious. I can build a Cuk converter that works better than a linear power supply with half the components and a quarter of the cost.

But it has been a life-saver for avionics. The stuff we had to deal with in the vacuum tube and early transistor days were heavy and required maintenance, cooling, and lots of space.
Better have a look at the linear power supplies in the computer and communications gear on an airliner before you say that.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
Haven't seen the inside of a comm unit for 40 years, thanks.

I brought up my experience because I expected folk to ask questions, not to brag. Working on rocket planes is not very common, and I thought folk here were real, and interested in how they worked, who flew them, what it took, and some personal notes of the pilots or other stuff.

It was the same with government spying and the Electronic Battlefield. Then, Power Quality.

I had an extremely varied background. Please stop resenting it.
Da Schneib
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 30, 2016
I don't resent it, I've had a pretty varied background myself; I'm an EE by degree and early work experience, and a CS by my last two decades of experience, just for example. But I don't go around bragging about it. I let my knowledge show itself; it doesn't need any frosting and I don't respect people who think it does.

Just talk about what you know, and let people respect that. You don't have anything to prove if you do that, and diplomas and work history are immaterial at that point. This is an Internet forum, not a job interview.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
see Da Schneib?

You actually start talking about "his" field of expertise and you ask probative questions which should elicit answers that he claims to have ...

but his reply is essentially "Haven't seen the inside of a comm unit for 40 years - I had an extremely varied background. Please stop resenting it" ????

This is why he is picked on

i think i will change by tactic a bit though, for the sake of PO
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
That's OK, he does seem to know something about SMPS; I don't really care what experience bolsters that, I can tell when someone knows what they're talking about and when they don't. Where I start to get hard to get along with is when someone starts blathering about something they know nothing of, and everyone can tell because they don't know obvious answers, and their response is to tout their experience. There are lots of people with great looking resumes who don't know jack squat about how to really make things work, and I encounter them all the time at work. There, I have to put up with them. Here, I don't.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
The current traces I directed you to which caused the vaporization of part of a 500 MCM copper cable were almost all from SMPS. Look up the ampacity of a 500 MCM copper cable.

Old Man Ohm had it right. And when we double or triple the instantaneous current as is done with many SMPS, the instantaneous heat goes up by a factor of four to six. Additionally, the relatively fast risetime puts much of it into higher frequencies, exascerbating skin effect.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
And see, when someone votes me a 1 for saying that actually being able to demonstrate what you know is better than providing pieces of paper that claim you know stuff, then I know I'm dealing with bureaucRATS.

The current traces I directed you to which caused the vaporization of part of a 500 MCM copper cable were almost all from SMPS. Look up the ampacity of a 500 MCM copper cable.
So? I told you why those SMPSs do that. Now you're ignoring reality again. This is where you stop being an informed source and start being a bureaucRAT.

Old Man Ohm had it right. And when we double or triple the instantaneous current as is done with many SMPS, the heat goes up by a factor of four to six. Additionally, the relatively fast risetime puts much of it into higher frequencies, exascerbating skin effect.
Only if you put the caps at the input and output instead of in the switch where they belong. You really ought to study up on this stuff before you start blathering.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
Where I start to get hard
@Schneib

thought about replying here, but instead sent it to your gmail

dinner
PEACE
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
"then I know I'm dealing with bureaucRATS"
----------------------------------
Well,you can always just call us names, like otto and Ira and Stumpy do, the bullies on the beat here. And I wanted a place to send proof because you attacked my integrity.

But you do not want to see what may be embarrassing to you and your buddies.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
The four topologies are:
1. Caps at input and output. These are Class D amplifiers, AF or RF depending on the frequency response of the transformers.
2. Caps at the input and coils at the output. These propagate interference to the input.
3. Caps at the output and coils at the input. These propagate interference to the output and are totally unsuited to modern power conversion.
4. Coils at the input and output. These don't propagate interference at either end and are the optimum topology.

And that's what the canonical method shows.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
I am not a power supply designer, I troubleshoot systems. That looks good to me. Go look at Trumpy's Power Quality recordings and see his side of it. He says his six-foot-four-inch daughter with the EE and the PE thinks it is not true or or something. He is pretty vague about it.

Anyway, go look at he waveshapes of what we face in the Real World, and make of them what you will. They do not look linear to me.

With the increasing standards for harmonics, you can build the power supplies we really do need. Good opportunity?
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
"then I know I'm dealing with bureaucRATS"
----------------------------------
Well,you can always just call us names
No, that's not what it's about. It's about whether you know your sxxt or not. And when you demonstrate you don't know your sxxt, then you can expect to be ridiculed.
the bullies on the beat here.
It's not about bullying. It's about whether you know your sxxt or not.
And I wanted a place to send proof because you attacked my integrity.
I'm attacking your statements, not you. And I'm attacking them because you don't know your sxxt. And no pieces of paper will prove you know your sxxt when you don't know your sxxt.
But you do not want to see what may be embarrassing to you and your buddies.
It's not me who's demonstrating they don't know their sxxt, it's you.

If you want to talk to an EE about SMPS you should know SMPS. If you don't you have something to learn and if you resist learning it then you're a 'crat.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
"you're a 'crat"
----------------------
And you're a name-caller.

Nyaaa, nyaaa, . .

You folk just cannot resist personal attacks, can you?

What is it with you?
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
I am not a power supply designer, I troubleshoot systems.
OK, I troubleshoot systems too, but that doesn't prevent me from designing and implementing SMPS that operate at above 98% efficiency using the proven techniques of the canonical method.

Anyway, go look at he waveshapes of what we face in the Real World, and make of them what you will. They do not look linear to me.
The whole point of the canonical method and the optimum topology is that it doesn't matter whether it's linear or not. The non-linearity of the input or output are canceled. The input and output don't affect the switch, and the switch frequency doesn't affect the input or output. That's why it's the optimum topology.

With the increasing standards for harmonics, you can build the power supplies we really do need. Good opportunity?
Not for me; I can make a lot more money in CS than in EE. And the EEs are dumb; they are afraid of a little calculus.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
"you're a 'crat"
----------------------
And you're a name-caller.

Nyaaa, nyaaa, . .

You folk just cannot resist personal attacks, can you?

What is it with you?
It's not with me, it's with you: you left out the "if" part. That's lying.

I've given you a chance and not voted a 1 for you, and gave you three 5s.

Get over it.
gkam
1 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
"And the EEs are dumb"
-----------------------------

Okay, . . good-bye.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Mar 30, 2016
Works for me. I respect people who have and show knowledge; I disrespect people who don't have it and can't show it no matter what pieces of paper they claim to have.

Welcome to reality. You look like a lot of people I've seen with great resumes who don't know their butt from a hole in the ground.

Bye now. You can't say I didn't try.
Uncle Ira
4 / 5 (8) Mar 30, 2016
You can't say I didn't try.
It was as good a try as any I have seen so far. Honest and sincere just like when the Captain-Skippy tried to help him.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Mar 30, 2016
No, you have changed the charges. Ira and otto and Trumpy charge me with lying about my experience and education. I proved it, yet they still scream I did not.

Let us settle that one, first.
Uncle Ira
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 30, 2016
No, you have changed the charges. Ira and otto and Trumpy charge me with lying about my experience and education.
Cher, what this "charges" business? You say a lot things here that don't sound true to me. That is not my fault, it is your fault for saying things that don't sound right to me. I am not "charge" you with anything.

I proved it, yet they still scream I did not.
You the one doing all screaming. All I am doing is just playing along with you. You never "proved" any of the things I asked about, just other things that I did not ask about what you thought would make good smoke and mirrors.

Let us settle that one, first.
Settle what? It is not my thing to settle.

If you don't like the impression you make on peoples, instead of you demanding they see you like you are trying to be seen, change your style and show us the different person. You will never get people to see what you want by demanding they not see what you show them.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 02, 2016
Time to get rid of the snipers here with their personal attacks. The goober Ira thinks he is some kind of Cajun Philosopher, but does not have the maturity for it. When proven wrong, he lies.

So, let us get back to transformers, shall we? In fact, I have some transformer questions for you, . . ready?
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 02, 2016
I want Trumpy in on this, too,and the sniper otto. I will ask simple basic questions.

Let's see if their Wiki has the answers. These will be some of the things I used to teach.

Okay, . . I have a sensitive unit I want to protect from powerline disturbances, so I buy an isolation transformer. But the salesman says I need a "shielded" transformer. Why?

In the shielded one, the "shield" takes out the noise going from one side to the other. How much of the power is lost as well? Why or why not?
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 02, 2016
That's a pretty basic question, and it is the"why" which is important here. I teach this in the first couple of hours of a three-day course.

Since Ira has already given me a one for that post, I await his answer, if he can find it in Wiki.

If he were real, he would have known.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 02, 2016
More "ones" from Ira, but no answer. I guess they did not know, and have trouble finding it in Wiki. They should have taken my courses.

Still waiting, Ira, . . .
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 02, 2016
Well, I'm 71, so I had better not wait for Ira to figure it out. Transformers operate on magnetic fields, and the sides normally do not even touch, sharing only a Ground. As the voltage of the sine wave increases, so does the current in the coil, generating a magnetic field, which increases as the voltage increases, but limited by induction how fast the magnetic field can expand. The rise time of that field is tuned to the frequency of the power.

Noise on the line is too fast to be carried across the transformer coils, because the inductance cannot change that fast. So how does the noise get across? The electric field of the disturbance. The sides of the transformer can operate as a capacitor and conduct fast risetime components across. Shields are electrostatic, and blocked there.

Power is transferred through the magnetic field, which is unaffected by the electrostatic shield.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 02, 2016
The coolest part of teaching Power Quality was the field effects, and how they affect disturbances on powerlines. Analysis of those waveshapes can indicate probable cause, distance and other effects.

Like events in life, how they look from one perspective is not the same as the same event seen from another.
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Apr 02, 2016
I will ask simple basic questions
@liar-kam
you mean like the ones you couldn't answer from Da Schneib above?

before you start talking about challenges, why don't you actually answer Da Schneib above and demonstrate your knowledge with an actual engineer who can point out the flaws in your own knowledge... like he did above

Until you do that, i suggest you quit spreading pseudoscience and fearmongering about nukes or THz, or any other hate-based fearful emotions you have
The goober Ira
Time to get rid of the snipers here with their personal attacks and character assassination with ad hominem over substance and science
does not have the maturity for it
Time to get rid of the snipers here with their personal attacks and character assassination with ad hominem over substance and science

need i continue to point out your logical fallacy here?
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 02, 2016
"you mean like the ones you couldn't answer from Da Schneib above?"

Show me, Bigmouth. Which "ones"?

You had no idea how transformers work, how noise couples, and neither does Ira, the "Breaker-breaker!" wizard.

Next we can talk about the propagation of disturbances through transformers and the powerlines.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (8) Apr 02, 2016
You had no idea how transformers work, how noise couples, and neither does Ira, the "Breaker-breaker!" wizard.


Cher, look, you know from previous "debating" that I do know how transformers works. What you wrote up there is the most elementary stuffs. Nothing to crow about. It's first semester tech school stuffs.

You are the one who did not know what Fourier Analysis was, when I asked you about it, you thought when I said Fourier Transforms, I meant to say some kind of transformer. You did not know what Fourier Transforms or Fourier Series were.

Cher, you might think that knowing the basics about transformers is really something to crow about. But Cher, here it is first grade stuffs. It would like somebody coming on here and bragging (a certain another "engineer" comes to mind, eh Bennie-Skippy) saying they knew all about relativity because they heard about E = mc^2. It is moron level stuffs because Bennie-Skippy didn't even know that is not even the whole formula.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (8) Apr 02, 2016
One P.S. for you glam-Skippy. If you have not noticed, I have not postumed anything on here for 4 or 3 days.

I know how you like to "debate" and tussle with everybody, but you really shouldn't spend the whole begging for someone to come out and play. It makes you like a lonely child.

I am sorry that you didn't get to fool around with me, but I am at work and doing something that is taking up all my attentions for a few more days. It's a brand new thing and needs me to pay attention. I will probably be squared away in another 4 or 3 days so just be patient, maybe you can find someone else to do battle with until then.

gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 03, 2016
You could not understand the field questions, so you beg off.

If you already knew it, let's go to the next question, shall we?

Oh, I forgot, you are "busy".

If you just end your silly adolescent personal attacks, you would not have to hide.

gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 03, 2016
" maybe you can find someone else to do battle with until then."
----------------------------

I do not "battle" with you, Little Ira. I make a statement usually from experience, and you scream "LIAR!", like otto and Grumpy. You never forgave me for actually being at Edwards AFB, doing studies and reports for NASA, working on nuclear powerplant safety systems, being Senior Engineer for the then-largest non-governmental power company on Earth, teaching utility engineers about power quality nationwide, or the other stuff.

You hide in the mud, and make silly and adolescent comments thinking you are cool, but those of us who are older have seen your type before, and know why you are hiding.

Are you looking up electric and magnetic field effects of electrical power?
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 03, 2016
Little Ira is "too busy" to debate, but I see he is not too busy to follow me around to award me "ones". I think he got shy when he got straightened out so many times.

Did Grumpy ask his 6'4" daughter with the PE and the EE about my transformer question? Did she know? No, because they do not teach thinking in school, they teach memorization and routine-following.

These three snipers depend on Wiki, since their education and personal experience are lacking.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (6) Apr 03, 2016
You are the one who did not know what Fourier Analysis was, when I asked you about it, you thought when I said Fourier Transforms, I meant to say some kind of transformer. You did not know what Fourier Transforms or Fourier Series were.
Wow, I missed that one.

Someone who doesn't know the difference between the frequency domain and the time domain? This person has either never used an oscilloscope, never used a frequency analyzer, or never used either. What EE doesn't know how these basic instruments work and how their measurements relate to one another? You can't get a degree in EE without knowing this.

Yes, really.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 03, 2016
You missed it because it did not happen. And you do not need a degree in EE to be a good scope jockey. It was my favorite tool in the service. We had both HP and Tektronix scopes for Igloo White, plus some in the Sonic Analyzers in the aircraft. And one magically fell into my lap once in the form of a Time Domain Reflectometer, the only time I needed one.
gkam
1 / 5 (7) Apr 03, 2016
I can probably find a picture of the Sonic Analyzer and the Lockheed model 417 high fidelity instrumentation recorder onboard one of our Igloo White aircraft if requested.

Yes, . . really.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.