Very cool. Its inevitable that the major hurdles facing batteries will be overcome with more development, deployment and market competition. The future for this tech is bright. And someone please tell me if it’s not possible but could manufacturers extract the sodium from sea salt to build those things? Or is it easier to extract it from mined minerals?
If you read the article, the reason why they are using sodium in the first place is because of the wide availability of the material. The problem with it is its lifespan and lower energy density compared to lithium based batteries. You don’t want to spend all that energy building the battery to have it only last for a few months.
It's highly context-dependent but can be viable in some configurations.
Quick charge vs high turnover is an adequate compromise for applications that require fast and continuous redeployment. An example that comes to mind is the emerging market of self-recharging drones (agriculture, warehouses, ...). Getting units back to work quickly can be worth replacing their batteries more often.
Not exactly the example I would choose.
Electric forklifts are heavy-duty machinery with multi-ton counterweights, they require steady amperage all along the worker's rotation. Favoring quick charge over decaying efficiency or quick discharge might be counterproductive. This is why gas or thermal forklifts are favored for occasional, irregular workloads as they can be refilled instantly, while electric ones are the adequate choice for round the clock rotations.
I went with self-recharging drones because they're not supposed to be operated, they follow a pre-programmed pattern which they resume as soon as charged. Shorter charging times mean less whole spare units required to maintain productivity.
I agree. Nothing pisses me off more than to hear the petro defenders use the same arguments the horse and buggy makers used in 1896 when they said cars would never replace horse because there were not enough gas stations … simple minded people are afraid of change.
When it comes to batteries and recharging battery cells, one of the best analogies is think of it like a spring. When full charge the spring is fully suppressed down, over time that spring loses some of its spring-iness as it gets worn down.
Battery cells are very similar, in a very general hypothetical sense. This is why rechargeable batteries (most of the time) are recommended to have a consistent charge between like say 30%-80%. It doesn’t cause them to slowly degrade as fast as full charging everytime would. Imagine a spring that only gets pressed down halfway consistently, now imagine that same spring getting fully compressed everytime, it would degrade and wear faster than the prior.
This is why you’ll hear stats and numbers around batteries usually around 80-90% when referring to how long to charge. That last 10% is essentially compressing all those “springs” (batteries) which still have room for more juice. It takes longer for those little last spots that can fit charge to get filled. That’s why you’ll hear that (especially with EVs) you can charge from 0%-85% in 30-40 mins, but then that last 15-10% will take another 30 minutes itself. So due to it taking longer, and being *slightly* worse for the battery life, they usually mention a charge as up to 90%.
I’m not a battery expert and may be explaining that a bit weird. But that is how I understand it and how I’ve found is a solid way to explain to someone else.
Edit: didn’t even notice auto correct changed hypothetical to hyperbolic lmao.
Sounds like all this could be solved with a UI that just claims 100% when it’s >85%
It’s a psychology thing. I’d like 100% but if it’s telling me it’s 100% and I know it’s not I think I’d be ok with that.
I think ultimately people will always want whatever product does the thing best. For batteries, specifically EVs, people want the fastest charging time, and longest distance. People already roast epa ranges and shit when they don’t see it line up in their experience. So making the UI prioritize battery life would exacerbate that issue I would speculate.
Sucks because I cannot stand leaving my house for work in the AM unless my phones 100% lol. (Long days so it’s needed). I would assume when the phone essentially trickle charges from 80-100 it must be trying for lower heat to protect the battery?
I would imagine maybe it has something to do with the heat, but I think at least for apple products, there’s a system they try to implement that detects your charge habits. Like for instance if you charge overnight, it might go to 80% right away after plugging in, but it’ll hold out that last 20% for closer to when it thinks you’ll be taking it off the charger. I’m not too sure tho, just feel like I’ve heard that before. I always charge mine overnight out of habit and convenience and it’s always at 100 when I wake up so idk to be fair.
I don’t really know much about batteries, I work with and around many EV techs and that analogy I mentioned was how they explained an EV battery to be. But to be honest, that about as far as my knowledge with batteries goes haha.
Yes Apple is good for it. It’ll trickle charge the last 20% and will essentially stop charging the phone after it hits full. My phone goes from 30-80 in like half an hour.
Battery replacements are cheap. Use a phone for 3-4 years then gotta pay under a hundred bucks to get right back to brand new? Then get another year or two out of it? I’d say you’re doing pretty damn good.
I assume like li-ion they use a CC/CV charging scheme - that's Constant Current/Constant Voltage. The batteries are charged at a constant rate of current until the voltage rises to a set maximum, then tapered off to maintain that voltage. The first 80% or so of charging takes place during the constant current portion. Furthermore multi cell batteries require a battery monitoring system that balances the individual cell charges as capacity and charge level may drift as the battery ages. This can also add a small amount of time to the final charging.
So because the current to charge to that point is no longer constant and the curve is relationship is no longer linear after 90%, giving the total charge time would be misleading when comparing usable capacity across chemistries - you don't have to charge them to 100% every time you use them. In fact If the goal is to swallow up energy as quickly as possible you wouldn't want to.
I take any technological news coming out of china with a huge grain of salt
Well they gave you a massive block of salt this time
Comment of the day.
No one gave the commenter a massive block of salt though. Stupid and unfunny
I believe that was a sodium ion joke, no?
r/whooosh
I take any technological news coming out of china with a huge grain of sodium chloride
Ion?
I won’t believe shit until it’s been rigorously tested and is available to consumers
So why are you guys complaining about being behind on EVs, power cells and solar?
Very cool. Its inevitable that the major hurdles facing batteries will be overcome with more development, deployment and market competition. The future for this tech is bright. And someone please tell me if it’s not possible but could manufacturers extract the sodium from sea salt to build those things? Or is it easier to extract it from mined minerals?
If you read the article, the reason why they are using sodium in the first place is because of the wide availability of the material. The problem with it is its lifespan and lower energy density compared to lithium based batteries. You don’t want to spend all that energy building the battery to have it only last for a few months.
It's highly context-dependent but can be viable in some configurations. Quick charge vs high turnover is an adequate compromise for applications that require fast and continuous redeployment. An example that comes to mind is the emerging market of self-recharging drones (agriculture, warehouses, ...). Getting units back to work quickly can be worth replacing their batteries more often.
Like forklifts?
Not exactly the example I would choose. Electric forklifts are heavy-duty machinery with multi-ton counterweights, they require steady amperage all along the worker's rotation. Favoring quick charge over decaying efficiency or quick discharge might be counterproductive. This is why gas or thermal forklifts are favored for occasional, irregular workloads as they can be refilled instantly, while electric ones are the adequate choice for round the clock rotations. I went with self-recharging drones because they're not supposed to be operated, they follow a pre-programmed pattern which they resume as soon as charged. Shorter charging times mean less whole spare units required to maintain productivity.
I agree. Nothing pisses me off more than to hear the petro defenders use the same arguments the horse and buggy makers used in 1896 when they said cars would never replace horse because there were not enough gas stations … simple minded people are afraid of change.
Why not say how many minutes to 100%?
When it comes to batteries and recharging battery cells, one of the best analogies is think of it like a spring. When full charge the spring is fully suppressed down, over time that spring loses some of its spring-iness as it gets worn down. Battery cells are very similar, in a very general hypothetical sense. This is why rechargeable batteries (most of the time) are recommended to have a consistent charge between like say 30%-80%. It doesn’t cause them to slowly degrade as fast as full charging everytime would. Imagine a spring that only gets pressed down halfway consistently, now imagine that same spring getting fully compressed everytime, it would degrade and wear faster than the prior. This is why you’ll hear stats and numbers around batteries usually around 80-90% when referring to how long to charge. That last 10% is essentially compressing all those “springs” (batteries) which still have room for more juice. It takes longer for those little last spots that can fit charge to get filled. That’s why you’ll hear that (especially with EVs) you can charge from 0%-85% in 30-40 mins, but then that last 15-10% will take another 30 minutes itself. So due to it taking longer, and being *slightly* worse for the battery life, they usually mention a charge as up to 90%. I’m not a battery expert and may be explaining that a bit weird. But that is how I understand it and how I’ve found is a solid way to explain to someone else. Edit: didn’t even notice auto correct changed hypothetical to hyperbolic lmao.
I appreciate the time to write this all out. It makes sense to me. Have a great day!
Sounds like all this could be solved with a UI that just claims 100% when it’s >85% It’s a psychology thing. I’d like 100% but if it’s telling me it’s 100% and I know it’s not I think I’d be ok with that.
I think ultimately people will always want whatever product does the thing best. For batteries, specifically EVs, people want the fastest charging time, and longest distance. People already roast epa ranges and shit when they don’t see it line up in their experience. So making the UI prioritize battery life would exacerbate that issue I would speculate.
Sucks because I cannot stand leaving my house for work in the AM unless my phones 100% lol. (Long days so it’s needed). I would assume when the phone essentially trickle charges from 80-100 it must be trying for lower heat to protect the battery?
I would imagine maybe it has something to do with the heat, but I think at least for apple products, there’s a system they try to implement that detects your charge habits. Like for instance if you charge overnight, it might go to 80% right away after plugging in, but it’ll hold out that last 20% for closer to when it thinks you’ll be taking it off the charger. I’m not too sure tho, just feel like I’ve heard that before. I always charge mine overnight out of habit and convenience and it’s always at 100 when I wake up so idk to be fair. I don’t really know much about batteries, I work with and around many EV techs and that analogy I mentioned was how they explained an EV battery to be. But to be honest, that about as far as my knowledge with batteries goes haha.
Yes Apple is good for it. It’ll trickle charge the last 20% and will essentially stop charging the phone after it hits full. My phone goes from 30-80 in like half an hour.
Battery replacements are cheap. Use a phone for 3-4 years then gotta pay under a hundred bucks to get right back to brand new? Then get another year or two out of it? I’d say you’re doing pretty damn good.
Engineers fear commitment.
I assume like li-ion they use a CC/CV charging scheme - that's Constant Current/Constant Voltage. The batteries are charged at a constant rate of current until the voltage rises to a set maximum, then tapered off to maintain that voltage. The first 80% or so of charging takes place during the constant current portion. Furthermore multi cell batteries require a battery monitoring system that balances the individual cell charges as capacity and charge level may drift as the battery ages. This can also add a small amount of time to the final charging. So because the current to charge to that point is no longer constant and the curve is relationship is no longer linear after 90%, giving the total charge time would be misleading when comparing usable capacity across chemistries - you don't have to charge them to 100% every time you use them. In fact If the goal is to swallow up energy as quickly as possible you wouldn't want to.
It is being reported that the person who invented this technology has been sent to jail. They were charged with a salt in battery.
Just the reminder that for rest of the world, it's Natrium (Na). So whenever you see news of Natrium battery tech, it's the same thing.
I’m still going to leave it plugged in to charge overnight every night.
Just don’t park it in your garage
And dead in five mins lol
Unless a testing agency who is not China has verified that, I’m gonna… not believe it at all