CT scans of batteries
scanofthemonth.com
scanofthemonth.com
*source: I work with two of the machines here: https://www.bruker.com/en/products-and-solutions/microscopes... (and one more from Bruker which is so old that they don't show it on their website anymore).
I presume you're not scanning biological material with such a high acceleration voltage, so I'd look into NDT systems from https://www.nikonmetrology.com/en-us/x-ray-ct or https://www.zeiss.com/microscopy/en/products/x-ray-microscop...
Good resolution is also important. Say I want to analyze something the size of a can of soup and get to tens of microns resolution.
Zeiss and Nikon are not cheap options. Is anyone out there bringing the cost down?
Usually bundled for the user, but can be completely separated.
> Good resolution is also important. Say I want to analyze something the size of a can of soup and get to tens of microns resolution.
The Bruker machine I use can do ~15 cm diameter samples at ~40 um voxel size, so that’s something that should be possible with any machines.
> Bringing cost down
MicroCT machines are not cheap, but - as I’ve seen from our buying process - all in the same ballpark. You might not need your own machine, but use a ‘supplier’ for CT Scans in a case-to-case basis.
Or they could just read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_nomenclature, which describes the relevant IEC standard.
[1] https://cleantechnica.com/2018/07/08/tesla-model-3-chevy-bol...
Therefore all you have is stacking it up. parallel or serial, thats what there is to get higher voltages, more current draw, longer life per-cell.
Inside a lead acid battery its multiple surfaces, sub-cells. It's normal. inside almost any domestic battery I suspect its sub-cells, sub-cells all the way down.
A giant roll of surface, to increase the area in contact might be one way of getting "more" in terms of current draw or lifetime. I bet that its voltage remains close to the constant in this, hence Tesla "stacking" up the rolled cells, to boost voltage.
IIRC, “battery” used to be the technical term for “a bunch of connected power cells”.
Of course, the Leaf makes a bunch of other decisions that are different to Tesla - lower price point, smaller battery/reduced range, air-cooling batteries instead of water-cooling, a (now abandoned) battery lease scheme, and suchlike.
[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=nissan+leaf+cell&tbm=isch
A certain amount of stacking is necessary to get up to a decent voltage, as others have pointed out. But even "100 brick-sized cells" would be a more dangerous prospect than "thousands of 18650 cells".
That seems like a missed opportunity for a watercooling pipe, or anything else to use that space effectively.
Performance assessment of a passive core cooling design for cylindrical lithium-ion batteries https://doi.org/10.1002/er.4061
You can only have a roll that long before tension from anode expansion will start mechanically damaging it.
Manufacturers intentionally leave some free space to let the roll expand, and shrink
They'd be ideal for home batteries you'd think - I wonder when they'll switch the Powerwall.
There's a theory that Powerwall was just a way for Tesla to not waste their excess battery manufacturing capacity when car production wasn't keeping up. I don't know how true that is, but if so there isn't much of a need for them to figure out how to sell CATL's excess battery supply.
Confused by the text about the alkaline scan (the first one). The +ve side is called the anode isn’t it, not the cathode? And electrons originate at the cathode not the anode. Or is the usual terminology inverted because it’s a battery or this particular type of battery? I don’t know much about batteries; chemistry never a strong suit.
Super cool, but requires account to check out a scan-which won’t work on mobile regardless, fyi.
I can imagine making changes to a battery production line, scanning a few samples, and using the scans to tweak angles, speeds, stops etc.
I'm sure these scanners are expensive. Very cool though.
Anyone with a napkin can elaborate why this is not feasable?
The amount of energy stored in a Tesla is about 100kWh or about 3.6e8J.
You would need 36,660 tonnes suspended by a meter to store an equivalent amount of energy (or 1 tonne suspended 36.7km). https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=100kWh+%2F+%281+tonne+*...
> Once all balls are on the bottom, generated electricity is used to rotate the whole thing and start process anew.
If here, you mean part of the electricity generated by the flow, then it can't work because pumping it back up is subject to friction (in fact, generation from when it flows down is also subject to friction) and to mechanical/electrical conversion losses.
On a 100% efficient system with no losses, you would get perpetual motion, but subtracting any energy from the system would make it slow or stop.
I do wish Samsung would already release some of them to the public ffs. Surely they can come up with a price that would beat what Tesla's offering for bulk and sell it on the open market.
If a device was made up of components that all had very different densities, maybe one could analyze the points and determine components and do a “explode” animation.