I'm getting emails at my designated email box,
eestorblog@gmail.com, saying there's a new EEStor patent out there, no, there's not one, back and forth, etc. Honestly, I can't figure it out, so if anyone wants to air it out, here's the new thread to do so.
62 comments:
There are two recent one's I've heard of both first found by JohnG at Tyler's blog.
20070148065 Method of preparing ceramic powders using chelate precursors
20080031796 Method of preparing ceramic powders using ammonium oxalate
Are there other's apart from these?
This paragraph below seems to perhaps give more detail regarding the exact structure of the material they are using. Any experts care to comment?
[0016]High-permittivity calcined composition-modified barium titanate powders can be used to fabricate high-quality dielectric devices. U.S. Pat. No. 6,078,494 (hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety) describes examples of various doped barium titanate dielectric ceramic compositions. More specifically, the '494 patent describes a dielectric ceramic composition comprising a doped barium-calcium-zirconium-titanate of the composition (Ba.sub.1-.alpha.-.mu.-.nu.A.sub..mu.D.sub..nu.Ca.sub..alpha.)[Ti.sub.1-x- -.delta.-.mu.'-.nu.'Mn.sub..delta.A'.sub..mu.'D'.sub..nu.'Zr.sub.x].sub.zO- .sub.3, where A=Ag, A'=Dy, Er, Ho, Y, Yb, or Ga; D=Nd Pr, Sm, or Gd; D'=Nb or Mo, 0.10.ltoreq.x.ltoreq.0.25; 0.ltoreq..mu..ltoreq.0.01, 0.ltoreq..mu.'.ltoreq.0.01, 0.ltoreq..nu..ltoreq.0.01, 0.ltoreq..nu.'.ltoreq.0.01, 0.ltoreq..delta..ltoreq.0.01, and 0.995.ltoreq.z.ltoreq.0 .ltoreq..alpha..ltoreq.0.005. These barium-calcium-zirconium-titanate compounds have a perovskite structure of the general composition ABO.sub.3, where the rare earth metal ions Nd, Pr, Sm and Gd (having a large ion radius) are arranged at A-sites, and the rare earth metal ions Dy, Er, Ho, Yb, the Group IIIB ion Y, and the Group IIIA ion Ga (having a small ion radius) are arranged at B-sites. The perovskite material includes the acceptor ions Ag, Dy, Er, Ho, Y or Yb and the donor ions Nb, Mo, Nd, Pr, Sm and Gd at lattice sites having a different local symmetry. Donors and acceptors form donor-acceptor complexes within the lattice structure of the barium-calcium-zirconium-titanate according to the invention. The dielectric ceramic compositions described by the '494 patent are just some of the many types of ceramic compositions that can be fabricated using the processes and techniques of the present application.
Links:
METHOD OF PREPARING CERAMIC POWDERS USING AMMONIUM OXALATE
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/WO2008017047.html
Method of preparing ceramic powders using chelate precursors
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2007/0148065.html
It appears from further due dilligence that the main Patent in question is still under review
Correspondence between the European Patent Office and EESTOR's attorney indicates they may be close to issuing a patent. There is lots of new material to read at
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=EP1789980&F=0
At the link, you can get up to date information on this important Patent application for EESTOR.
WIPO published the application, as pointed out by Nekote and Jay but
WIPO has no power to grant Patents. Each jurisdiction...ie USPTO or EPO... must issue a Patent granting legal rights in its own jurisdiction, although applying for a Patent through WIPO is the only application necessary in all countries who are parties to the Berne Treaty (this includes the USA as of 1989 as well as the UK).
The link I provided above leads to up to date documentation, and i mean all of it, between EESTOR's Patent attorney in the UK and the European Patent Office.
Click on
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=EP1789980&F=0
then click on
"View document in the European Register"
You can view all of the correspondence as well as the examination report issued by the EPO by clicking the link on the left of that page
"all documents"
If you click the link "about this file". It tells you that the status of the application is "in progress".
It also indicates the "database was updated on July 22, 2008."
But the most recent document I could find was a "Reply to the Examination Report" filed by EESTOR's attorney. You can read it as well as the EPO report it refers to at the links above.
steve - now this is the kind of stuff that warms my heart. Thanks for the link..
Ok Y-Po and JohnG below is a quoted paragraph from the patent located here:
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.jsp?SEARCH_IA=US2005028970&DBSELECT=PCT&ABIMAGE=09032006%2FUS2005028970_09032006_gz_en.x4&C=10&TOTAL=18&IDB=0&TYPE_FIELD=256&SERVER_TYPE=19-10&ELEMENT_SET=B&START=1&SORT=41231903-KEY&QUERY=%28IN%2Fweir+AND+IN%2Frichard%29+&RESULT=5&DISP=25&FORM=SEP-0%2FHITNUM%2CB-ENG%2CDP%2CMC%2CAN%2CPA%2CABSUM-ENG&IDOC=1324301&IA=US2005028970&LANG=ENG&DISPLAY=DESC
copied from the above referenced patent:
The following data indicates the relativity permittivity of ten components measured at 85° C, then 85° C and 3500 V, and the last test 85° C and 5000 V. Components 850 C 85° C - 3500 V 85° C - 5000 V 1. 19,871 19,841 19,820 2. 19,895 19,866 19,848 3. 19,868 19,835 19,815 4. 19,845 19,818 19,801 5. 19,881 19,849 19,827 6. 19,856 19,828 19,806 7. 19,874 19,832 19,821 8. 19,869 19,836 19,824 9. 19,854 19,824 19,808 10. 19,877 19,841 19,814 Average K 19,869 19,837 19,818 Results indicates that the composition-modified barium titanate powder that has been coated with 100 A Of AUO3, immersed into a matrix of PET plastic, and has been polarized provides a dielectric saturation that is above the 5000 V limit and the relative permittivity is highly insensitive to both voltage and temperature.
Now they not only state measurements but also they clearly mention dielectric saturation.
For one this decidedly eliminates the theory that they are not aware of potential dielectric saturation effects. Secondly it strongly indicates they have measured them.
Marcus,
Take a look at the "description" from the "all documents" link dated June 23rd, 2008.
Specifically look at page 2...
In marcus's post about the permittivity data, it's important to point out that the 10 "components" tested are completed EESU's, not "powders"
Yes I had seen that. However dielectric breakdown isn't the same as dielectric saturation as far as I understand. Breakdown occurs when the dielectric starts conducting. The effect of saturation is to lower permittivity - thereby lowering the amount of charge that can be stored - this usually occurs as the voltage increases.
The main technical criticism is that dielectric saturation hasn't been taken into account when the energy density calculations were made in the first patent. A few people (not only Y_Po) have suggested that they weren't aware of this phenomenon but see my post above.
UFTO WRITE UP ON EESTOR "PROTOTYPES
UFTO = Utility Federal Technology Opportunities
"A multi-client "technology scouting" program which finds and investigates new developments of strategic interest and benefit to energy utility companies."
Check out what they have to say about EESTOR' "prototypes" back on May 5th, 2004:
The technology is basically a parallel plate capacitor with barium titanate as the dielectric. With it's extremely high permittivity, barium titanate has a long history in capacitors, but one known for high leakage, voltage breakdown and temperature sensitivity. EEStor has confronted these drawbacks head on, and has measurements on prototypes to support their claims.
The product is a ceramic-based unit fabricated with integrated-circuit techniques. The design is based on proprietary technology and there is a patent pending for the production process. There are no corrosive, hazardous, or explosive materials used in manufacturing this product, making this a totally green technology. Also, since it is ceramic, it can be fully charged and discharged using ultrahigh currents and at electronic speeds repeatedly with no degradation to the original specifications. Samples have been rapid-cycled over 1 million times, with no change of any kind. Operating temperature is -40 to +85 deg C.
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/uftonotes04.html#Subject:%20UFTO%20Note%20-%20EEStor%20Ultracapacitor
This line caught my eye:
Fully densified ceramic components of this powder coated with 100 A of aluminum oxide (alumina) 8 and a 100 A of ρoly(ethylene terephthalate) plastic as the matrix 8 with a dielectric thickness of 9.732 μm can be safely charged to 3500 V.
StephenB
zawy, what do you make of their more detailed description of the crystal structure described above. In particular the donar-acceptor complexes. Anything jump out as non-standard?
One thing that has bothered me for a while: How have they tested a prototype to 1,000,000 cycles? Do they have a way of charging it faster than 5 minutes?
5 minutes x 1,000,000 is almost 10 years, and that doesn't even allow time for the discharge
Has anyone been able to glean any info about production rate claims? It would be interesting to find out how many kW-hrs of storage a line could put out in a year.
Stephen
@ackkk:
They haven't tested any EESUs, they've tested "components", 30000 of which are parallelled to make an EESU. The components could be charged and discharged in much less that 5 min.
ackkk, if an ESU is built up out of smaller parts (the patent says "In the example, the size is length = 0.508 cm and the width 1.143 cm with an area = 0.581 cm2"), then all you'd have to do is test one of these.
StephenB
I think one thing everyone needs to keep in mind about EEstor patent is that its a method of building an EESU.
They site 14 other patents that address breakthroughs in dielectric saturation,temperature coefficients, material breakthroughs and properties. Most of which where discovered a couple year prior to him filling his first patent App in 2001.
It has become obvious to me that he hasnt reinvented the wheel here guys. I bet most if not all of his patents are on how to make this thing. Wiers real invention here is the production line. You can thank few hundred research scientists aswell for their contribution, but this is old science.
That's just science. Work is always built on other's work. Weir definitely built his work on previous discoveries. But there is definitely must be an added discovery in the composition of the EESU, or someone else would have done it.
Jay:
I looked at those references pretty closely, and I did not see any that addressed the key problem of dielectric saturation.
Can you be more specific? That would be the real breakthrough. I have said before that the rest is almost trivial if you have a stable hi-K with hi field.
Also, there are two distinct devices EEStor is claiming, people seem to be confusing the two. The WIPO application is for BT loaded film capacitors, with aluminum electrodes, where all the "measurements" were taken. The US patent is for a solid ceramic multilayer with nickel electrodes.
Very different parts and technologies.
So? Edison didn't really pull the light bulb out of thin air either. The technology was already there he just changed it enough to make it practical to use and produce.
johng said:
I looked at those references pretty closely, and I did not see any that addressed the key problem of dielectric saturation.
Dialectric saturation is addressed in the "description" and the "claims" section of the Patent application. From "description:
Results indicates that the composition-modified barium titanate powder that has been coated with 100 A Of AUO3, immersed into a matrix of PET plastic, and has been polarized provides a dielectric saturation that is above the 5000 V limit and the relative permittivity is highly insensitive to both voltage and temperature.
And from the Claims section:
12. The method steps as recited in claim 1 that provide stable relativity permittivity up to a temperature of 85° C and voltages up to 5000 V which also indicates that dielectric saturation has not been reached.
13. The method steps as recited in claim 1 that provide full polarization of the alumina-coated calcined composition-modified barium titanate particles in a poly(ethylene terephthalate) matrix. 14. The method steps as recited in claim 1 that provide an EESU with a volume of 4541 inch3.
15. The method steps as recited in claim 1 that provide the capability of components to withstand 1,000,000 full voltage cycles of 3500 V to 0 V, then back to 3500 V without degrading the leakage, capacitance, or voltage breakdown capabilities of the component.
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.jsp?SEARCH_IA=US2005028970&DBSELECT=PCT&C=10&TOTAL=18&IDB=0&TYPE_FIELD=256&SERVER_TYPE=19-10&QUERY=%28IN%2Fweir+AND+IN%2Frichard%29+&ELEMENT_SET=B&START=1&SORT=41231903-KEY&RESULT=5&DISP=25&FORM=SEP-0%2FHITNUM%2CB-ENG%2CDP%2CMC%2CAN%2CPA%2CABSUM-ENG&IDOC=1324301&IA=US2005028970&LANG=ENG&DISPLAY=DESC
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=EP1789980&F=0
It has become obvious to me that he hasnt reinvented the wheel here guys. I bet most if not all of his patents are on how to make this thing. Wiers real invention here is the production line. You can thank few hundred research scientists aswell for their contribution, but this is old science.
Yet all these scientists say "It can't work"
Thanks, Steve
But what I was looking for was the reference that Ray made of someone else having solved the dieElectric saturation problem.
Again that is the KEY, I do not believe the initial patent without it. I tried following the method described in the patent, and DID NOT get the same results.
As you probably know, unless a "person skilled in the art" (which I think 35 years in it qualifies me as) can duplicate the patent, then it is not valid.
ackkk - from the WIPO patent document.
"a component" = 10 of the 100 layer basic "elements", I think
.5 second charge; 1.0 second discharge; 17.4 days to do 1,000,000 cycles @ 1.5 seconds / cycle
"Full charge/discharge cycles of a component from 3500 V to 0 V at 85° C. After each 100,000 cycles the leakage current was recorded. The leakage current was multiplied by 31,351 to reflect the full EESU value. The rise time on the charging voltage was 0.5 seconds and the discharge time was 1.0 seconds. The RC time constant was 0.11 seconds for both the charging and the discharging times. The voltage breakdown was tested at the end of 10**6 cycles and was measured at 85° C with the results being 5.82 x 10**6 V/cm and the total capacitance was measured at 30.85 F. The final test data indicates that the full cycle testing did not degrade the total capacitance, leakage, or voltage breakdown capabilities of the component."
Johng, I think people on both sides of the fence agree that the secret to storing vast amounts of energy is probably not contained in that patent. Hence your failure is perhaps not surprising. Either its because they have no clue or that they are protecting their secrets. Since it is invalid methodologically, it is also not surprising that it would be ineffective legally also, since its written in such a specific way as others have pointed out.
The question then becomes what was its purpose? Again both sides would probably agree that it may have been written to help attract funds. But if I was writing this patent and I knew it was a sham I would also be very worried that others might also think it a sham. However if I wasn't aware it was a sham then I would be happy writing it....
Either way though they did get the funding!
Marcus,
Then it is concluded, it is a scam.
"However if I wasn't aware it was a sham then I would be happy writing it...."
The part that doesn't make sense about Eestor just making a "mistake" is the continued march down the path. These questions were raised YEARS ago. If you really think they've made a mistake and don't have a breakthrough that is still secret, you also assume no one in Kleiner, Zenn, Lockheed or even Mort Topfer has any knowledge of the issues, nor have they been alerted to them.
Now does anyone really believe that? Does anyone believe that not ONE egotistical academic has reached out to the parties involved to try to play hero (and cash in)?
Also how can anyone think it makes sense that they've poured millions into creating a production line for something without building a prototype? It just doesn't make a shred of sense. Why not just build one freakin' test model in the 7 years they've been in business? OF COURSE they would. Wouldn't Kleiner insist on it if no one else did? Wouldn't Zenn insist on it prior to upping their ante by taking an equity position?
The "mistake" line of thinking is ridiculous IMO. Either it works, or it's an OUTRAGEOUS scam.
I believe there is a prototype. Producing the same thing in a production line therefore must be possible - but can they accomplish it? That's the question for me.
I've put in my bet that it works. If I lose I can live with it. If I didn't get in and it does work, that would be tougher.
richterm,
Your nice theory ignore the fact of their patent. If it breakthrough then it was apparently maid by complete idiots. So you have to somehow explain their patents. What is the point of filing patent which create impression that you are idiot?
They could have mentioned k-problem in the patent.
I did ignore the patents we've seen because I'm not qualified to comment on them to the positive or negative. There may be patents in the works that explain all questions. We have no way of knowing.
If the existing patents we've seen are incomplete or have problems, I can only guess as to the motivation. Misdirection? Even if they're incomplete, does the patenting of the process protect them even if they use broad specs in some areas that don't show their hand?
I stand by my personal conclusion that events point to this either having been proven to work in private, or this being a scam. The problem with a scam is that I can't think of a plausable scenario whereby Kleiner, Zenn, Lockheed and a respected businessman like Topfer would allow themselves to be involved all the way to this point.
It's easy to call them idiots on this blog. They wouldn't care and would not be prodded into revealing secrets. If they come out with this product will you call yourself an idiot? No, y_po will just fade away.
I did ignore the patents we've seen because I'm not qualified to comment on them to the positive or negative. There may be patents in the works that explain all questions. We have no way of knowing.
That is your problem. You don't understand that there is no good way to explain older patents with new ones.
And your problem is you don't understand that what's in the existing patents is of very little consequence if there's a working EESU.
richterm,
What you suggest is simply ridiculous .
Good argument, I see now that it's ridiculous.
I see now that it's simply impossible that there's something the great y_po doesn't know which is driving all these idiots (successful, rich people like Kleiner, Zenn, Lockheed) to say they're about to start producing EESUs.
You are a wise man.
These idiots will soon be standing around at the end of the completed multimillion dollar production line as they see the first EESU roll off. The fools will hook the thing up and be dumbfounded when they find it provides only a fraction of the power they expected.
They will all look Weir and say "I thought you tested it." To which he will respond saying either..
"Nah, I just assumed it would work. Look at my notebook."
or
"Gotcha. I got all your money and there's nothing you can do about it. I drink your milkshake."
Well, I smell another true believer and since arguing with steves was found to be pointless...
richterm @7:38 and 10:17
I think you bring up an interesting point, namely, how can Zenn, the venture capitalists and Lockheed/Martin fall for a possible scam?
First, I don't believe this started out as a "scam". I think a number of people were so blinded by the huge potential, that they ignored a couple signs.
Look at what's going on, the whole energy thing is foremost in everyone's mind. The slightest glimmer of hope is going to be seen by some as a bright light.
I have only been involved with venture capitalist once, and that was a disappointment. Unknown to me, the person asking for money knew it would not work, but sold the concept of an instant hot water system by getting the investors to appreciate how much cold water goes down the drain when you are waiting for warm. Everyone's head nods with enthusiasm, and the money is given over, only to be wasted on a fancy car and office to entice others.
Anyway, the point is, if something is a sure thing, you don't go to venture capitalists, their money is very expensive. If Weir had a dielectric which was immune to high fields, he could have gotten tens of millions from a banker, or any of the dozen capacitor manufacturers that would be put out of business.
So, he puts together a patent application, and convinces Zenn and KP that he has the possibility of a breakthrough. He probably believed it himself. There are articles out there that satisfy each of the pieces of the puzzle, such as using glass to lower the firing temperature, and improve the voltage breakdown. There are dozens of patent out there on High K ceramics, 20,000 and higher. There are discussions of using base metal electrodes, and so on. The problem is that one cant just add these all together, and expect them to equal the sum of the parts.
The second point is, and this I have done a lot, is that the big companies like Intel, IBM, and so forth, expect that their suppliers know more about the details of BT than they do. When we propose a research area, we can fill in a lot of blanks. But when they throw in a couple million dollars, and they have, that's not a guarantee of success or vouching for the scientific integrity of the proposal. Sometime the project is successful, and sometimes its not.
In summary, I believe that Weir and company don't yet know what they don't have. With their "new process" they are up to making the BT, the first step in a long process. (I still don't understand why they didn't buy the pure BT to begin with, and save a couple years. Maybe they needed the time.) The initial patent application has too many internal contradictions to have been anything but estimates based on a couple readings. It was obviously done in a hurry, with the point being to get something concrete on file. As we discussed elsewhere, that WIPO application does not ever become a patent in itself, it's a bridge to other countries.
y_po -
I agree our continued dialog is pointless.
I will continue to point to the smoke and heat and say there must be fire. You will continue to rehash the properties of a material that cannot burn.
I'm not naive enough to be 100% sure about what will happen, but I am comfortable enough to be taking a speculative shot on it with Zenn.
Who knows what your real story is, but I do not believe it's wise to say something can never work if you don't know the hidden details of how they're trying to make it work. That IMO is either arrogance or a calculated stance with a financial agenda.
johng -
It's a judgement call and you're entitled to your opinion.
That's a valid point of view, and that's the greatest source of aany uncertainty on my part. I still feel the scales are tipped toward signs pointing toward a working product, so I'm taking the shot.
The involvement of Lockheed and the interview with their exec is pretty important. Without that you could probably envision a naive small electric car company and a greedy clueless VC firm getting swindled. LM said the thing works - no caveats. Unless Eestor rigged the demo, I'm pretty convinced LM saw a working prototype.
In summary, I believe that Weir and company don't yet know what they don't have.
I find it hard to believe.
The fact that they issued new patent which looks like a complete fabrication. Delays with publication of testing results.
I think shortly after the first patent they realized they are not going to make revolution and started a scam.
richterm;
I was under the impression that Lockheed-Martin had NOT seen a prototype...did I miss something?
y-po
what is the patent number of this "new patent"...I'm beginning to think I missed somthing there, too.
Thanks
what is the patent number of this "new patent"...I'm beginning to think I missed somthing there, too.
It is this new patent this thread is talking about. In it they mention "saturation" and claim it does not saturate :)
johng - draw your own conclusion.
From the Lockheed interview..
Q:What have you seen from EEStor in terms of their technology?
LL:We’ve visited their facility. We were very impressed. They are taking an approach that lends itself to a very quick ramp-up in production...
Q:Do they have something that they’ve tested that you’ve seen which makes you want to work with them?
LL:We haven’t personally tested their prototypes yet...
Q:Are you confident that their technology will offer a greater amount of energy and power density than batteries?
LL:Yes, and at a fraction of the cost.
Q:Do their caps hold 10x the energy at 1/10th the weight of a lead acid battery?
LL:Yes....
richterm:
He dodged the question about whether he had seen the prototype.
He has not "personally tested" the device, which means to me, he did not even "witness" a test.
How do you see that as different. That he was convinced by the EEStor people that it would work?
As I said, draw your own conclusion. If it doesn't make sense to you, I'm not going to try to convince you, just explan my thinking. Totally a judgement call.
Realize that he's answering under a nondisclosure, so he has to be careful.
I take it as implying they've seen a demonstration, but hedging in saying they have not tested them personally.
He answered Yes to the other two questions, and would not be able to IMO if he did not see a demonstration. How else could he be confident?
Also note that LM signed this agreement with Eestor back in January. As the interview states, they would be working on integrating EESUs into prototypes this year. It is now almost August. LM has looked under the hood by now, and would have disassociated themselves already if the emperor had no clothes.
All IMHO.
OK, richterm, I get your point.
Interesting that the same dialog can be interpreted so differently.
We would all feel better if Liebman would have made an unambigueous statement, a la "I saw a prototype and it works!"
As is said, "Reasonable people can disagree"
What still bugs me though, and this is not intended to start an argument, is how someone not familiar with a capacitor production line can judge what he saw...
I would not know what a real FBI id looks like, how do those people on TV know?
In my opinion it is either a scam at this point or they are for real. It is inconceivable to me that they would build a production line, in fact several, without testing a single prototype. That said, I do agree that the wording from LM is ambiguous. Whether that was intentional or accidental however is anyone's guess.
I agree it's either a scam or for real. Too far down the path to just not know if it works.
I can't figure out what the scam would be exactly. There are some really rich people involved and unless they are being fooled too, you have to include them in the scam.
Does this man seem like the type to line his pockets pumping Zenn stock?
http://news.cnet.com/Tackling-Intel-Mission-impossible/2008-1041_3-5623382.html
http://www.topferfoundation.org/mort.htm
If it is a scam it has to be EEStor scamming the rich folks.
I guess so, although the Zenn stock is in question too.
So let's play out the scam hypothesis. If it were a scam on the rich folks, who are we talking about?
From my recollection on Kleiner, they've invested a few million $. It seems they also have options on a next round of financing once production is ready to commence. Doesn't seem like a plausable scam target, as they must be spending the few million they got from Kleiner. If they don't create a working product, they get no more $$ in the next round.
Zenn? Another few million for the rights, and the equity position.
Lockheed? I'd bet their deal depends on a working product being produced.
In all from these 3 parties, we're probably talking about roughly $20M in upfront cash they'd have to be trying to steal. Subtract from that all their outlays on facilities, salaries, etc and it seems like smallish money to devote 7 years time on. Factor in it would require the willingness to make yourself a laughingstock for $$ when you're rich already.
Unless there are private investors they're scamming who are much deeper invested into this.
Subtract from that all their outlays on facilities, salaries, etc and it seems like smallish money to devote 7 years time on
Who say it is financially successful scam? It did not start as a scam. It became the scam when they realized it would not work, probably right after their 2006 patent.
I thought we agreed not to converse y_po.
BTW - that's ridiculous.
richterm,
Sorry, I thought you came to your senses. Apparently I was wrong
Let me make a prediction...the market is up, Zenn stock is up, so shortly, an announcement will be made that EEStor has achieved the Permittivity target!
And, I believe it will be around 20,000. That much is simple.
Bloggers will go crazy, posters will say "We told you so!"
Zenn stock will go up another buck, and Weir will not be taking interviews.
Money will flow!
But, no mention will be made of its behaviour with voltage or temperature. So, they still will have nothing new.
In six months, the stock will drift lower, and Zenn will announce that they have a alternative backup battery solution, just in case EEStor doesnt pan out.
The stock will go up!
You read it here first, folks.
;>)
It reminds me Enron in summer 2001 or Germany in 1944 :)
johng when you "tried it and it didn't work" did you follow the complete protocol including the compression at 100 bar (about 1500 psi) at 180C for 45 minutes after screen printing?
I assume you've seen the wiki discussion paragraph on this (near the end of the page)?
Marcus:
My main problem was with the aluminum ink. I could not get conduction until I used even higher pressures. When I remove the pressure, the material became non-conductive.
I checked the K by using vacuum metallization with aluminum, which is the normal way one puts an electrode on the plastic. The K was about 30. I comressed it, and the K stayed the same.
Post a Comment