PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2022-11-29, 07:20:49
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Paul Thibado | Charging Capacitors Using Graphene Fluctuations  (Read 583 times)
Full Member
***

Posts: 135
Thought I'd share this here. I believe it has been talked about before but in this video, Paul does a deep dive into the system. It contains a boat load of information and to me the most significant want is the 1W/m² power rating. Unlike solar panels this can be stacked either on chip level or die level, increasing the power density significantly.

The most surprising part for me is how this hasn't been picked up by more researchers yet, but we're looking at a very recent breakthrough so it might explode in the coming years and hopefully go commercial. I believe the biggest challenge would be mass production were the current chip crisis would not be helping much.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eonAa29qp70
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1550
Thanks for sharing, sounds very interesting.
It smells like a Maxwell's demon but they say that the entropy increases.

We were just talking about the parametric variation of the capacitor, see https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=533.msg101935#msg101935 , and how to vary the capacitance by a natural phenomenon (wind, ferroelectric material ?...).
The fluctuations of graphene seems to be a good way.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 135
Thanks for sharing, sounds very interesting.
It smells like a Maxwell's demon but they say that the entropy increases.

We were just talking about the parametric variation of the capacitor, see https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=533.msg101935#msg101935 , and how to vary the capacitance by a natural phenomenon (wind, ferroelectric material ?...).
The fluctuations of graphene seems to be a good way.

I agree he seems to be elegantly dancing around that fact. Would also be interesting to perform colorimetric experiments to see if the ambient temperature does indeed get colder around the graphene. If it doesn't then the energy source is not the ambient heat reservoir. Could even be due to the Casimir effect.

What's most interesting is that energy harvesting only occurs when you have a full wave rectifier, so the diodes and their properties are a key ingredient for energy harvesting.

Btw they are already trying to commercialize this through a company called NTS Innovations. Their first-generation chip is targeted towards IOT applications as these require very low power. I believe their target is 1µW for the first gen chips. But the biggest bottleneck is the chip foundry which can have a lead time of up to 6 months in the current climate. Not ideal if you're still in the R&D phase.

However, I see this having great potential to scale as it gets more widespread attention. There are so many variables at play even replacing graphene with another material could show more potential. Stacking this up or even putting them sideways could unluck much more surface area for the effective surface area used. The biggest challenge now is an engineering one but having an infinite energy battery doesn't sound bad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSqsKHQLnWc
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 274
Hi Broli,

Thanks for bringing this up, Broli. There were many points that were helpful in my own studies. The things that stood out for me were:
1) the diode heat bath is the source of energy, and a full wave rectifier is necessary.
2) the diode noise is 'multiplicative noise'.
3) 'the second law is not violated' because an unbalanced system is created where thermal noise energy flows in one direction until equilibrium is reached. This IS a bit of a dance number because the system obviously starts from equilibrium and goes away from it, without adding or taking anything away, like his example of removing a weight from on top of a container of heated gas. I've recently mentioned patents by Harold Black and Robert Forward that use active circuits to create a 'noise vacuum' that thermal noise energy can flow into, and I'm going to look deeper into that because of his comments.

There were numerous other points to think about and I'm going to watch it all again. In particular starting at the 20 minute mark when he talked about the drift current term. which is related to a test I'm about to do.
Although he seems to think that Graphene is necessary for this type of circuit to work, I recently posted a circuit from Shanefield which I put here again, which uses a resistor as the noise source, and a transformer to boost the random noise voltage past the diode V drop. (only one diode, too).
 
Several patents have been issued for devices that work in a single temperature bath, and Thibado and his team indirectly substantiate those patents (which are purported to put out more power than his does).
 
F6FLT and I recently discussed varactor diodes, and I'm wondering if noise fluctuations in such a diode would result in C variations, and further if noise from one diode (varactor or not) could cause C variations in a varactor, which could be tapped for power in a way similar to that shown by Thibado. Maybe they could be pyramided, so that 'multiplicative' noise effects would add up? This seems easy to check out and I'm looking for a source for BB212 varactors now. (Most of the varactors now are surface mount but these old ones have a C ratio of 20, and I can breadboard them).
 
Since work like this tends toward demonstrating new thermodynamics, there's no focus on getting the most power, but on getting power only from the thermal bath to prove a point. My interest is in getting the most power, so I'm focused on active circuits that use additional input (ideally, only an E field) to dramatically increase what can be gotten from the thermal bath.

Fred
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 274

 "Would also be interesting to perform colorimetric experiments to see if the ambient temperature does indeed get colder around the graphene. If it doesn't then the energy source is not the ambient heat reservoir. Could even be due to the Casimir effect."

Several of the other devices I mentioned (Shanefield, Black) do discuss a temperature drop during operation.

Fred
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 135
Yes diodes do interesting things. In fact another emergent field is that of "ballistic diodes" (also known as geometric diodes) for energy harvesting. These do not use hole and electron theory, but work based on their physical shape.



https://www.nature.com/articles/s41699-021-00269-2

This alone could solve the whole rectification problem of harvesting energy from terahertz EM wavelengths (infra-red, light...) a field which has been stagnated for a while due to the lack of any diodes being able to operate at such high frequencies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectenna
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1550
Yes diodes do interesting things. In fact another emergent field is that of "ballistic diodes" (also known as geometric diodes) for energy harvesting. These do not use hole and electron theory, but work based on their physical shape.



https://www.nature.com/articles/s41699-021-00269-2
...

I'm discovering!   O0


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 274
Hi Broli, F6FLT,

Very interesting! I've seen similar structures used in thermoelectric generators where the phonons are bounced back while the electrons continue forward. This increases the figure of merit of the TEG since thermal conduction is reduced relative to electric conduction.

Fred
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1550
It is a pity that we have to face a severe implementation difficulty to experiment.
Does anyone know if a DIYer can make or get graphene?



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 274
It is a pity that we have to face a severe implementation difficulty to experiment.
Does anyone know if a DIYer can make or get graphene?

Hi F6FLT,

Yes, Robert Murray-Smith is an expert on Graphene and has many videos on different methods to make it. I haven't watched any of those but I've watched many others from him. He has a wide ranging mind and his videos are a joy to watch. He's one of those open-minded scientists we talked about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvqkH0WLvyc

There are many more.

He can be contacted through his company Working Ink, but my guess is that many people on this site could watch the videos and make it.

https://workingink.co.uk/contact-us/

Fred
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 135
It is a pity that we have to face a severe implementation difficulty to experiment.
Does anyone know if a DIYer can make or get graphene?

Sadly this is one of those million dollars lab thing :). I too wish we had nano 3d printers by now.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1550
Making graphene sheets is not easy. I have just seen a method, see attached file.

Otherwise there is a simpler method :):
https://nanografi.com/popular-products/graphene-sheet-size-10-cm-x-10-cm-thickness-35-m-highly-conductive/

But when you have that, you are still far from Thibado's experiments! Not within my reach for the moment.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 274
Hi F6FLT,

Although an interesting tech-- and I learned some very useful things from the video-- I have a very specific screening strategy for what I focus on as my 'main line' of research.
The fact is that even if Thibido and company began manufacturing today, the devices, perhaps included in small appliances like cell phones, would have little impact on the global energy picture for some time, if ever. I don't believe any technology that DEFINITIVELY deviates from conventional physics will get any traction from investors, so his company is not likely to go anywhere, like most startups. I consider as a worst case scenario that we have a decade to turn the energy picture around. So things that are going to take years to get from lab to consumer are not going to cut it. Rectenna solar cells, nano-material based thermoelectric generators, and a variety of more obscure devices have been in the pipeline for a long time, and have had no impact on anything, except investor's and college's wallets. And when they are finally commercialized, they will be too expensive to make a serious impact, at least at first.

Although I support all efforts to develop new energy technology, conventional or not, what I myself will work on must:
1) be something that can improve the performance of current energy technology, like solar, geothermal, thermoelectric.
2) be something that can be installed in already existing generating machinery or plants
3) be something that that doesn't require a long development path
4) be something that converts existing energy at higher efficiency, and doesn't call for any new physical principles. Ie, it has to look like current technology to a high degree.
This seems like a tall order, but having reviewed some 2K solar and thermoelectric patents, I believe there are lost or unknown technologies using well established principles for reducing resistive losses, increasing energy conversion, utilizing more ambient energy, etc. This is particularly true in the thermoelectric area, where conventional wisdom seems to be satisfied with approx 6% efficiency, when obvious and clear means are available to approach Carnot efficiencies.
I've had no real success in presenting such technologies here, because they are not glamorous or 'overunity', and I've had no success in presenting them in industry forums or manufacturers, because they are not familiar or use old principles in new ways. I've sent detailed proposals to companies that would stand to make a lot of money if they were to use these concepts, and never gotten a reply, much less a dismissal. So I've decided the only way forward is to build and test them myself, form a company and start licensing or manufacturing efforts. At my age this is a lot to take on, but I think the effort is worth it.

Fred
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 374
Making graphene sheets is not easy. I have just seen a method, see attached file.



Cool link. :D

For an amateur/professional chemist it's actually not that bad of a synthesis.  No ultra high or ultra low temps, no impossible or super expensive reagants, no complicated/critical setups.  Hardest reagent seems to be the hydrazine, but many preparations of it can be found online.

    Reagants:
Sodium Nitrate - common cured meat preservative
H2SO4 - Sulfuric acid drain cleaner
KMnO4 - Potassium permanganate - Pool supply chemical
H2O2 - Hydrogen peroxide.  OTC/Pharmacy.
Hcl - Hydrochloric acid.  Sold as muriatic acid in many places as a cleaner.
Hydrazine (from Hydrazine sulfate) - urea and bleach      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB7vwIFCnR0 and others
Sodium borohydrdide - widely available online    https://www.amazon.com/Sodium-Borohydride-%E2%89%A598-16940-66-2-NaBH4/dp/B09JVCJ76V/ref=sr_1_1

     Preparations:
Reflux:  'boil and condense the vapor'.  Very common chemistry reaction.
'ultrasonicate' - just a fancy alternative to water washing.
centrifuge - gravity separation should work, otherwise vacuum filtration should also work.

I'm not quite sure how you turn graphene into graphene sheet; perhaps it crystallizes into a lattice as a carrier solvent evaporates?  Almost like a paint/varnish.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 274
Hi Hakasys, F6FLT. Broli,

I do strongly recommend looking at Robert Murray-Smith's Youtube videos. He gives multiple methods for creating graphene.

Fred
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 374
Hi Hakasys, F6FLT. Broli,

I do strongly recommend looking at Robert Murray-Smith's Youtube videos. He gives multiple methods for creating graphene.

Fred

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvqkH0WLvyc
TL/DW: "Graphite powder, 75% acetone, 25% water, blend at high speed for an hour or more.  Find a way to separate out the larger bits.  Evaporate onto surface to deposite a sheet of graphene."

Doesn't get much easier than that. ;D
« Last Edit: 2022-11-08, 03:40:43 by Hakasays »


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 274
Yup  ;)
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1550
I don't think we should waste time making graphene, without even being sure to get a good quality, if we can buy it at only 13€ per 10x10 cm sheet.
Our time is precious, we should rather use it to make the setup with the sheet, that's where the real added value is.



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 374
I don't think we should waste time making graphene, without even being sure to get a good quality, if we can buy it at only 13€ per 10x10 cm sheet.
Our time is precious, we should rather use it to make the setup with the sheet, that's where the real added value is.

I think it's a great experiment and skill-building project for the amateur.

Aside from being 95% cheaper if it works, it can be cast into any shape, like films and even mixed into DIY ferrite cores.  Many potential tangents and experiments to be done w/ graphene.

Quality can be easily tested by comparing bulk resistance of the DIY graphene sheet to a known good reference.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3791
Graphene
Well we had some discussions on this ( a possible ability to electroplate Graphene?)
Additionally,
One person who is known to forum from prior investigations..and who I had spoken to many times
Is William Barbat
He had a theory ( low mass electron’s ??)

He also explained things regarding Graphene at one molecular layer ..and how critical the actual orientation
Of Graphene was at this layer ( in “his” application of a tube or core he used)
He did actually get a patent !
And there were results or an experiment shared .. although not more than a basic test ( lacking his Graphene plated  core

The open source FE community does have access to electron Beam microscopes for imaging analysis!
I will try to get more info on the electroplating technique
And also reach out on patent ( if I can find that contact info again…..
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 274
Here's Barbat's patent application, and patent...

Seems to be a variation on the Hubbard coil...

Fred
   
Pages: [1]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2022-11-29, 07:20:49