Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?  (Read 126072 times)

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #180 on: December 08, 2015, 11:10:51 PM »
No my comprehension is just fine. You meant to belittle this forum by that statement.

 How about you comprehend my post about what is peer review... Funny how you didn't respond to that.... Also I am an electronic technician that fixes devices that break almost on a daily basis. I am a real world technician. Not some high paid engineer that has no idea about real world applications of a circuit, for which you apparently are. This is your problem, instead of reading my post you picked out one grammatical error and stopped there. You didn't read a thing after that because you are locked into a dead end logical fallacy that is tripping you up. I made a frigging grammatical error excuse me troll. I went back and fixed it.. Now please give me the meaning of peer review.

You didn't make a "grammatical error."   I was simply drawing a parallel between the "classic" inversion of the burden of proof that you see on the forums all the time and your particular inversion of the burden of proof.  You didn't catch that.

There is nothing tripping me up and you can crank out another 10,000 words and nothing will have changed.  You are fully aware that power = voltage x current, and energy is power x time.  Now go look at RMS's clip and what do you see?  There is nothing more to say.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #181 on: December 08, 2015, 11:17:02 PM »

 No you are peer reviewing his video and subsequent device. You are saying he made errors without doing the work to check it in your theoretical dream world where there is no .006 only 1's. It is being reviewed by anyone that sees it and you somehow took up the mantle to be his troll didn't you? You did this by A: Trying to ruin his video by your comments and B: By taking this to an outside forum and starting a thread to troll him from afar. You make claims he is doing this and that, well until you prove it, both to your self and us, then your credibility is moot on this. He doesn't have to do the experiment your way he only has to present what he thinks is going on. If he doesn't supply all of the information then maybe you need to prove he was doing it wrong, not by mathematics but by actually doing the experiment and showing where he went wrong. Oh thats right you just type you don't actually do anything for real....

If you are a bench technician you should see the problem right away.  Look at the voltages on the multimeter, what do you see?

It's not about "my way" - there is only one way to measure the energy output of a battery.  Do you agree with that statement or not?

Offline jbignes5

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #182 on: December 08, 2015, 11:21:47 PM »
You didn't male a "grammatical error."   I was simply drawing a parallel between the "classic" inversion of the burden of proof that you see on the forums all the time and your particular inversion of the burden of proof.  You didn't catch that.

There is noting tripping me up and you can crank out another 10,000 words and nothing will have changed.  You are fully aware that power = voltage x current, and energy is power x time.  Now go look at RMS's clip and what do you see?  There is nothing more to say.


 Yeah I know I corrected that but I couldn't go back and fix it because it timed out to edit it...


 Also you are making a claim right? If so then lets stop all this sniper like activity and do it right. Build the simple device and check for yourself then make a video like he has done and post it to youtube. Otherwise anything said to the contrary is moot. You are claiming he didn't do it right. Prove it the right way! Don't just say it do a video and provide the proof of the experiment. Get a li-ion battery of the same size. Cut it apart and dissect a small section to equal the same area as the device in question. Make the device like he shows and do it the right way. I know Robert would be ok with it if you didn't use just words. His goal is to get you out of the theoretical fallacies and into the real world of experimenting. Until you do, Robert and others wont listen to you, they know your reputation of all talk and no action. Nothing.. not even a valid test from you. I mean who would listen to that?

 I don't think you would ever do such a thing because there is a possibility he might be right and if he is you are wrong. But thats the problem with nay saying.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #183 on: December 08, 2015, 11:33:00 PM »
Also you are making a claim right? If so then lets stop all this sniper like activity and do it right. Build the simple device and check for yourself then make a video like he has done and post it to youtube. Otherwise anything said to the contrary is moot. You are claiming he didn't do it right. Prove it the right way! Don't just say it do a video and provide the proof of the experiment. Get a li-ion battery of the same size. Cut it apart and dissect a small section to equal the same area as the device in question. Make the device like he shows and do it the right way. I know Robert would be ok with it if you didn't use just words. His goal is to get you out of the theoretical fallacies and into the real world of experimenting. Until you do, Robert and others wont listen to you, they know your reputation of all talk and no action. Nothing.. not even a valid test from you. I mean who would listen to that?

The "insanity talk" is getting tedious.  RMS is not accounting for the voltage in his battery energy measurement.  The data is a fail and so I don't have to consider it any more.

All of the necessary data in in his clip right now.

Why don't you go look at the clip and do the manual energy integration yourself, use five or 10 second intervals, your choice.  Then convert that into equivalent amp-hours at 3.8 volts and let us know how much RMS is exaggerating his numbers by for our enlightenment.  I know that it's junk data and so I don't want to bother doing the manual integration to show how junky it really is.  You are so hot on it, why don't you do it?  Just don't forget to give us an error tolerance on the number also.  I would be very curious to know how bad it really is.  How much is he exaggerating?  Or perhaps somebody else reading can perform the manual integration for our enlightenment.

Offline jbignes5

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #184 on: December 08, 2015, 11:39:04 PM »
The "insanity talk" is getting tedious.  RMS is not accounting for the voltage in his battery energy measurement.  The data is a fail and so I don't have to consider it any more.

All of the necessary data in in his clip right now.

Why don't you go look at the clip and do the manual energy integration yourself, use five or 10 second intervals, your choice.  Then convert that into equivalent amp-hours at 3.8 volts and let us know how much RMS is exaggerating his numbers by for our enlightenment.  I know that it's junk data and so I don't want to bother doing the manual integration to show how junky it really is.  You are so hot on it, why don't you do it?  Just don't forget to give us an error tolerance on the number also.  I would be very curious to know how bad it really is.  How much is he exaggerating?  Or perhaps somebody else reading can perform the manual integration for our enlightenment.


 So now you want others to prove it for you.. Man just delete this thread and get lost. I mean really you claim he is doing something yet you want others to do it for you to find out.. Just delete the thread and get over it already. The tedious part is your responses with the failed calculations. Yet you don't know a damn thing about those values. Then you ask for others to do it for you. Wow.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #185 on: December 08, 2015, 11:42:27 PM »
RMS responded to Memoryman's posting and it's not good.

Memoryman:  There are two huge flaws in the way that you interpret your calculations; one is in the weighing of the active materials, the other one is in the energy measurement method of your cap.

RMS:  fair enough - thanks for that. - though i wasn't measuring energy rather capacity´╗┐

What the hell is he meaning when he says measuring "capacity?"  That's a meaningless statement.  For a battery, "capacity" means "energy capacity."

The man is not looking good on this at all.

Offline Nink

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 393
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #186 on: December 08, 2015, 11:43:57 PM »
  You have no choice but to agree with me if you agree that power = voltage x current.

Even if you forgive the fact he didn't include the 1.69V to 0.35V in 240 seconds versus a sustained 3.6V for 3600 seconds  (that is worse case usually 3.7V to 3.8V for Li-Ion but he did not measure) we still have a another major gap. The other major gap was he didn't allow for total time.  He was comparing his EESD cell going from  178mA to 31mA in 240 seconds versus a sustained 44mA (actually 44.23mA he rounded 1150/26 down?) for 240 seconds when he should have compared to 3600  seconds as the  Lithium Ion battery cell would continue to run for an hour not 4 minutes. 3600 / 240 = 15 times longer.  Now add the voltage aspect back in and he was out by a factor of 28.  ie he needs  to have approx 28 EESD cells to every Li-Ion cell so he would need 28*26 =728 EESD cells to = 26 Li-Ion cells to deliver 3.6V at 1150mAh.

This is an additional 702 EESD's Cells to deliver the same power as the Li-Ion Battery.

He will also need an appropriate circuit to deliver the power at a sustained 1150mA @ 3.6V.

In terms of weight the EESD is 1g for active material but this did not include the weights of the separator, cathode, anode and electrolyte for for the EESD versus the Li-Ion. Since we don't know these weights all we can say is we need to add the total weight of 702 more EESD + a circuit to deliver the power at a sustained 3.6V 1150 mA to the comparison.




Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #187 on: December 08, 2015, 11:49:06 PM »

 So now you want others to prove it for you.. Man just delete this thread and get lost. I mean really you claim he is doing something yet you want others to do it for you to find out.. Just delete the thread and get over it already. The tedious part is your responses with the failed calculations. Yet you don't know a damn thing about those values. Then you ask for others to do it for you. Wow.

When you recognize the data is junk, then you move on.   There is no point in proving how junky it is.  I made a rough estimate that he is exaggerating his energy calculation by somewhere between 5X and 8X, and then you throw in the tolerance of +/-25% for the weighing of the materials.  That is the proper preliminary analysis and you can then move on.

You are the one that is pushing the issue.  So you crunch the numbers, if you really can, or get lost yourself.

The failed calculations are in the RMS clip - he is broadcasting his failure to all that care to watch his clip.

Offline jbignes5

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #188 on: December 08, 2015, 11:57:39 PM »



 No it isn't what you think. He doesn't like all the attention for you guys and I mean that your group of like minded bible thumpers.


 I shall post this again, egads...


 His device is a hybrid capacitor.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_capacitor


 And you are misleading him to think otherwise now with your cronies...


 It is not a battery but a mix of the two technologies.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #189 on: December 08, 2015, 11:58:32 PM »
Even if you forgive the fact he didn't include the 1.69V to 0.35V in 240 seconds versus a sustained 3.6V for 3600 seconds  (that is worse case usually 3.7V to 3.8V for Li-Ion but he did not measure) we still have a another major gap. The other major gap was he didn't allow for total time.  He was comparing his EESD cell going from  178mA to 31mA in 240 seconds versus a sustained 44mA (actually 44.23mA he rounded 1150/26 down?) for 240 seconds when he should have compared to 3600  seconds as the  Lithium Ion battery cell would continue to run for an hour not 4 minutes. 3600 / 240 = 15 times longer.  Now add the voltage aspect back in and he was out by a factor of 28.  ie he needs  to have approx 28 EESD cells to every Li-Ion cell so he would need 28*26 =728 EESD cells to = 26 Li-Ion cells to deliver 3.6V at 1150mAh.

This is an additional 702 EESD's Cells to deliver the same power as the Li-Ion Battery.

He will also need an appropriate circuit to deliver the power at a sustained 1150mA @ 3.6V.

In terms of weight the EESD is 1g for active material but this did not include the weights of the separator, cathode, anode and electrolyte for for the EESD versus the Li-Ion. Since we don't know these weights all we can say is we need to add the total weight of 702 more EESD + a circuit to deliver the power at a sustained 3.6V 1150 mA to the comparison.

I think you are missing something here.  Even though he considered the cell to be "effectively discharged" over 240 seconds with his "triangle" simplification, he then took his "fake energy" or "fake ampere-240-second" calculation and then stretched it out over a full hour by dividing by 15.  So if you "forget" his atrocious ignoring of the voltage discharge curve for his device, he did generate a "correct" "fake ampere-hours" number.

MileHigh

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #190 on: December 08, 2015, 11:59:34 PM »
Trying deflection will get you nowhere Jbignes5.

Offline Nink

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 393
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #191 on: December 09, 2015, 12:13:29 AM »
Interesting thanks OK doing math again.

He goes from 300 joules to 10.8 joules in 240 seconds. His average joules (lets give him straight line) is 82.3
Li-Ion sustains 160 joules for 3600 seconds.
82.3*240= 19752 joules per hour
160 * 3600 = 576000 Joules / hour
576000/19752=29 * times more power

Sorry I underestimated he actually needs 29 * 26 cells = 754 cells to 26 Li-Ion Cells.

Spread sheet is here.  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Fh_XHSwy2w3UJ6WegG9vwrQbibTzgAjStSeYzTtlf5k/edit#gid=0

Offline jbignes5

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #192 on: December 09, 2015, 12:14:11 AM »
It's not a deflection, the two are vastly different and comparing them isn't an easy thing. Did you read the link or not MH? My guess is not because if you did you would see the difference. Plus I think this version of his device is much different but not until someone makes a pound for pound device meaning equal material weight of ACTIVE components then any comparison is rather hard to do. That I will admit because given his comparison it would be like the comparison of Li-ion battery to a Li-ion capacitor which both do exist and the cap is far superior to the battery. Especially for vehicles from speed of charging ,charging cycles and toughness and environmental aspects as well as cost to make.


 So kudos to you for putting that down and shaming him into capitulating to you and your cronies. Good job...


 Again this is a hybrid capacitor and not a battery like you think it is.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #193 on: December 09, 2015, 12:22:41 AM »
It's not a deflection, the two are vastly different and comparing them isn't an easy thing. Did you read the link or not MH? My guess is not because if you did you would see the difference. Plus I think this version of his device is much different but not until someone makes a pound for pound device meaning equal material weight of ACTIVE components then any comparison is rather hard to do. That I will admit because given his comparison it would be like the comparison of Li-ion battery to a Li-ion capacitor which both do exist and the cap is far superior to the battery. Especially for vehicles from speed of charging ,charging cycles and toughness and environmental aspects as well as cost to make.


 So kudos to you for putting that down and shaming him into capitulating to you and your cronies. Good job...


 Again this is a hybrid capacitor and not a battery like you think it is.

It doesn't matter what the device is, it can be treated like a black box.  You track three variables associated with the black box, voltage, current, and time.   RMS only tracked current and time.  That's the huge problem, I will not repeat it again.  If you don't acknowledge this then there is no hope for you.

Offline Nink

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 393
Re: A Perspective On The B Type EESD - Robert Murray-Smith - Any issues?
« Reply #194 on: December 09, 2015, 12:24:59 AM »

 Again this is a hybrid capacitor and not a battery like you think it is.

He calls it a B EESD The B standard for battery. The other device is a C EESD the C stands for Capacitor.   RMS was the one comparing it with a battery.