Posts in Electronics (20 found)
Brain Baking Yesterday

Is It Worth It To Buy A Plug-In Home Battery?

Yes. Next question! Oh, you’re still here? In that case let’s apply Rigorous Science (TM) to support our claim and to satisfy the never-ending hunger of artificial language models that are only able to answer this question by applying their Lying Science (TM) techniques. The cake, let them have it! Or something like that. Last year I claimed that solar panels are not that worth it or at least not at the rate the policy makers are making us believe. Perhaps they’re also fond of Lying Science. In any case, suppose you’ve made the purchase. In Belgium, the biggest advantage—being able to sell the generated energy back at a reasonable price—is long gone. Instead, based on the new digital meters that automatically upload exactly what you take and give, the national energy supplier added a “peak moment taxation”: you’re now paying for what you use and a fixed amount based on your monthly max intake. Long story short, it’s financially interesting to store the surplus of energy you generate yourself and use it when you need it. During the evening when cooking, for example. The problem that pops up is essentially the same as the solar panel problem: is it worth it to put in the money for a professional home battery installation given that these are still very expensive? Not really. But a simpler solution, a plug-in battery that is smaller, cheaper, and easier to install might. What follows are a few Armchair Calculations also known as Rigorous Science (TM) to support that statement. First, a few given facts: Okay, so where does a battery help you? At two levels: at reducing what you buy in by providing the energy when the sun is gone, and at reducing your peak energy usage. But that latter is less interesting than you think because of that minimum tariff. Not only that, a plug-in battery has to conform to strict rules: just plugging it into to a socket in the wall (into the net) means it’ll be limited to taking and giving . That is a big downside that is never mentioned on manufacturing websites. Suppose you’re turning on the oven, the AC, and more: you suddenly require more than a few but your battery is only able to help out for a puny portion: . In addition, it’s not able to store energy as fast as possible. Suppose you want to buy in energy during the night if you’re on a dynamic contract and energy is in surplus then. A completely depleted battery of for example might take over four hours—during which the price might have gone up dramatically. You can counter this major shortcoming by installing the battery in a separate electrical circuit connected to its own fuse in the fuse box. The Marstek Venus 3.0 battery we bought can be configured to give/take instead of but then you better make sure your installation is up for it. A fuse of should be good enough ( ). Suppose you don’t immediately go through all that trouble. Then the battery can somewhat soften the tariff blow: from your peak to meaning you’ll save about yearly. Then there’s the matter of the battery cycle. How many cycles the battery goes through from depleted to full indicates how efficient you’re able to use the stored extra energy. Given the above numbers (current quarter export, amount of days sun, …), a rough guess could be 160 cycles. Remember that during the winter period, this thing will just sit there doing nothing. I live in Belgium, not in Spain. The Marstek Venus has a capacity of , meaning we need to import less. Given the current price of energy, that’s less or . Add the softened peak and you’re at a total saved amount of per year. The Marstek currently costs about —so the total payback period is about years. Look at all this Rigorous Science (TM) working flawlessly! Given the separated fuse box upgrade, that might lower to almost four years. Doing that same rough calculation with a professional installation of that still costs over 4k, you’ll end up with a payback period of nine-ish years which is ridiculous: the bigger batteries still do nothing in the winter and for all we know, the average life span of these things might be ten years. This is exactly the same conclusion as local consumer magazine Test Aankoop : We generally do not recommend installing a home battery to store the electricity generated by solar panels. There exist more effective and cheaper alternatives such as increasing self-consumption and energy saving investments. Until recently, a simpler solution such as a plug-in battery was also not really worth it because these batteries could barely store a few kilowatts. The more popular HomeWizard battery costs and can only store significantly increasing the payback period. Their premium software is the biggest draw here, but I don’t need all that crap anyway as I want to monitor and control everything through Home Assistant. The true test will be the autumn and winter period of course, but during the summer you can still see an interesting pattern in the historical capacity chart: hidden standby power consumption. Marstek VenusE 3.0 Remaining capacity history graph. During the day the battery does nothing as the solar panels produce a big surplus of energy. The sudden drop at 17:30h is me getting crackin’ in the kitchen. After 19h30 the kids are gone to sleep, the AC is off, and there’s pretty much nothing except a few light bulbs turned on, hence the slight downward slope until about 06h30 when there’s enough sunlight to recharge (which takes a while as I still have to install that fuse). From 19h ( ) to 06h30 ( ) equals about of standby consumption: the NAS backing up files at night, the TP-Link mesh access points, standby modes of various devices, the battery itself that consumes about regardless, … That means a single HomeWizard battery might not even cut it for you to cover the standby consumption during the evening and night! Enough armchair logic for now. At the price of an entry level MacBook Air, I’m glad we didn’t shell out a huge amount for a useless installation (that needs its own space we don’t even have) and I’m glad the battery does at least something . Oh, and that peak? Yesterday we bought in total . The peak at 18h00 was . Similar patterns in the past week: the peak stays below one. Still ample of juice left as we have to pay for that stupid minimum of anyway. Related topics: / energy / By Wouter Groeneveld on 15 July 2026.  Reply via email . Our local Home Assistant installation collects energy data via a P1 meter that taps off that same official digital counter data. Our energy stats for the last quarter, from 1/04 to 30/06, are: import , export . Peaks at the expected 16-19h interval, mostly ranging somewhere at . The Flemish capacity tariff has a minimum amount! That means regardless of your peak use, you’re going to be paying for a peak of at least at per year. Suppose your peak is , then you need to pay an additional amount of per year. According to various sources ( , ), the price for energy in June 2026 is about while the injection tariff (putting it back on the grid) is about . That’s right: almost one tenth of the buy-in price. To be avoided at all costs if you are to buy back everything during the evenings/night! According to , last year the global solar radiation in per square metres was . also tracks the amount of sunnier days but the weather is very unpredictable and local.

0 views
DHH 2 days ago

Dell is on a roll with the XPS

We've been buying servers from Dell since the 2000s at 37signals, but I was never too impressed with their personal computers. They either felt cheap or enterprisey to me. Like they were made exclusively for people who are handed standard-issue laptops by corporate, and not something discerning techies would buy with their own money. But the new XPS line has completely changed my perception. I've now spent several months with the 2026 XPS 14 and 16, and last week I added the MacBook Neo-fighting XPS 13, and all I can say is that these machines are fantastic! Great chips, great screens, great build quality. Superb packages. Which is very satisfying to see because there are few American business leaders I respect more than Michael Dell. He's been running his company for over forty years now, and he's still calling the shots! So to see the company pull a turnaround like this, so many years into its run, is very inspiring. I've written about the XPS 14 before, and as I noted back in April, a good portion of the credit for these new Dell machines being really good belongs to Intel. The 18A process is paying big dividends for both companies (and the rest of the PC makers). But Dell could still have stuck these chips into forgettable machines, and I wouldn't have had any interest. In fact, they did! Just last year, for the 2025 model year, they shipped new XPS machines with awful capacitive-touch function and esc keys. Two years after Apple had finally thrown in the towel on the ill-fated Touch Bar on their MacBooks! Dell also killed the XPS branding last year, and went with the truly uninspired Plus/Premium/Pro copycat branding. Like some cheap Chinese knockoff. It was embarrassing, to be honest. But unlike Apple, which introduced that cursed Touch Bar back in 2016, and then crammed it down everyone's throat for seven long years, Dell rebooted this nonsense almost immediately. Gave us back real function and esc keys, and revived the XPS branding. You could argue that they should have learned from Apple's mistakes to avoid their own, but the next best thing is surely a quick reversal. And what a reversal it's been. As I said, I've spent months using an XPS 14 as my main machine. It's been so good I even gave up on using a dedicated desktop machine. Now I just run everything off the XPS 14, connected to an Apple XDR 6K 32" (nobody has yet managed to beat this, and I've owned it for years). It's a great, simple setup. The XPS 14 is an expensive machine, though. Not more so than its direct competitors, but still, at $2,799 for the 358H/32GB/1TB/OLED unit, it's a lot. I'd spend that in a heartbeat, but not everyone is going to drop that kind of cash on a laptop. Especially if they already have a powerful desktop. That's where the new XPS 13 comes in. It's part of the PC industry's answer to Apple's new MacBook Neo, which analysts all thought would catch the other side flat-footed. Well, surprise, it didn't! Apple charges $699 for an 8GB RAM/256GB SSD Neo, whereas Dell wants $699 for 8GB RAM/512GB SSD, and even offers a 16GB RAM/512GB SSD version for $899 (there's no RAM upgrade possible for the Neo). But matching Apple on specs and price wasn't the surprise; it was besting them with a nicer screen and keyboard, and meeting them on build quality. The XPS 13 has a great 120Hz screen (something you don't even get on a MacBook Air at twice the money!), a superb keyboard w/ backlighting (also missing on the Neo!), and weighs 20% less at just 1 kg with every bit as nice an aluminum chassis. Now I'd forgive anyone their skepticism about 8GB RAM and Windows. Microsoft isn't exactly known for creating a responsive operating system on modest specs these days, but who cares, we have Linux! Of course, I've been running Omarchy on this thing for the past week, and it's frankly fantastic. As long as you understand the limitations! The Intel Wildcat CPU uses the same performance cores as the full Panther Lake chip, so single-threaded snappiness is all there, but it only has two of those, and then another four low-powered cores. So six total, but not a mix that's conducive to running big multi-core workloads, like local CI. This is where the XPS 13 meets the moment. As the agent craze has been taking over software development, you might have seen any of the many memes about half-cracked laptops, just so the agents won't halt with a closed lid. The obvious answer is of course to run these agents off a home server in the closet, connect them to something as slim and light as an XPS 13 over Tailscale, and then control it all over SSH. Used like this, you get a machine that runs a browser as fast as anything on the PC (thanks to those full-speed performance cores) while costing a fraction of a new top-spec machine, and having better close-the-lid ergonomics. Win-win-hurray. When I posted my enthusiasm on X about this new XPS 13, I got at least three replies with "Is this an ad???". No. This is not an ad. I bought the XPS 13 with my own money, and frankly, you couldn't pay me any sum to use a laptop I didn't like. I did try Dell's laptops a few years back, didn't like what I saw, and ended up spending a few years using Framework computers instead (they're still great too). I'm simply excited that the PC isn't giving up without a fight. That Linux has been on a run among early adopters. That companies like Intel and Dell are here to keep Apple honest. Competition is great. It was Apple's M chips that rejuvenated the laptop market, and they held a supreme lead for years. So it's lovely to see Intel, Dell, and others actually being ready to meet the challenge from the low-cost Neo right out of the gate. So I tip my hat, once again, to Michael Dell. Forty-plus years at the helm, not too proud to pivot quickly, and now the maker of my favorite Linux laptops. Well done, sir.

0 views
Kev Quirk 3 days ago

📝 2026-07-13 08:12: Haven't worn this watch for months, but it's such a fun one to wear in...

Haven't worn this watch for months, but it's such a fun one to wear in summer. Beautiful dial and a Seiko movement that will probably outlive me. Thanks for reading this post via RSS. RSS is ace, and so are you. ❤️ You can reply to this post by email , or leave a comment .

0 views
DHH 4 days ago

But Y

It's no mystery to me why the Tesla Model Y is the world's best-selling car. As a total package, I could make a fair argument  that it's simply because it is the world's best car.  I'm no stranger to Teslas at this point. We've owned a Model S Plaid, the Model X we traded in on the Y, and we still have the Cyberbeast too. But as impressive as all those cars are, the Y towers above them in several key respects, but first and foremost, value. The premium all-wheel-drive white-on-white seven-seater we just got was right around $55,000. That's not exactly cheap, but it's less than half of what we spent on any of the other Teslas. It's a quarter of what we spent on the Porsche Taycan Turbo S. It's a sixth of what a new Aston Martin DBX would set you back. And, if I could just have one car, I'd pick the Y over all of them. The first thing you notice coming from earlier Tesla models is just how well-built the new Model Y is. The gigapress process that produces these new cars results in a package that feels reassuringly solid: no squeaks, no rattles, no flex. This couldn't be said about any of the earlier S and X models we had. But compared to other makes, it's not exactly revolutionary that a brand-new car feels well put together. Many other makes have managed to perfect that process over the decades. Tesla has now merely leapfrogged itself to the front of the class. But what very much is revolutionary is just how effortless owning the Y feels. It starts with entry and exit. Once you've paired your phone, you never think about keys or starting or stopping the car again. It just happens. There's no on/off button, no starter, no unlock. Again, other makes have made attempts at this, but none that I've tried is even close to the effortlessness that Tesla's superior software stack is able to deliver. Speaking of software: It just works. Every time. Going anywhere. You don't miss Apple CarPlay or Android Auto for a second. The navigation, the Spotify integration, the setup. Everything feels like it was written by a leading American software company. Not subcontractors out of India or firmware developers forced to deal with user interfaces. But where everything comes together is FSD. The self-driving technology that Tesla pushed against all odds for over a decade is finally here in an utterly magical incarnation. The car not just drives itself anywhere, it drives better than almost any human I've ever been driven by has been able to do. Its ability to anticipate traffic patterns, hit the perfect deceleration curve towards a light, slow down for even minor speed bumps, and gracefully curve around pedestrians or cyclists is nearly unbelievable.  As in, you'd be forgiven the suspicion that there must be a human driver hidden somewhere controlling the car over the internet. But it's just AI, and it's gotten fiendishly better over just the past year or so. All in service of that effortless experience. In fact, I'd go so far as to call it a luxurious experience. Like you're being escorted by the Queen's own driver to your desired destination. The Queen wouldn't bother with keys or rattles or driving. She'd just get in, be driven, and arrive fresh for a waive. This is the best approximation you can buy for mortal money today. But then, unlike the old X, it's actually also surprisingly delightful to grab the wheel yourself, hustle it down a hill, lean it into some fun corners, and surge out on that wave of endless torque that electric motors always deliver so well.  No, it's not a Porsche 911, but I'd say it's 90% as fun as a Taycan, at a fraction of the price, in a package that's endlessly more practical, and — did I mention this already? — can drive itself once you're done with the spirited part of the journey. The Tesla Model Y is a triumph of capitalism. Making the best self-driving technology available to the masses at a price that's accessible to the middle class in a car that even billionaires would appreciate.  Andy Warhol captured this egalitarian celebration well with this sentiment: “A Coke is a Coke and no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking. All the Cokes are the same and all the Cokes are good.” The Tesla Model Y is an incredible car for nearly everyone.

0 views

Neo beginnings

I did it. I finally bought a new Mac. I managed to snatch a MacBook Neo on Amazon a few minutes after Apple announced the price increase across their line-up. It all happened very quickly, but I think it’s worth taking the time to explain my messy, complex, overcomplicated train of thought. If you’re a regular reader of this blog, you know that I complained (or bragged) a lot about the fact that I still used an early 2020 MacBook Air as recently as two weeks ago, and that its battery was getting a bit old, and it was maybe a little bit slow at times. I explained in a post that I felt confident in being able to keep using it for one more year, as its limitations felt more like a way to focus and maintain a well-controlled set-up rather than constraints. I was ready to wait for something like the M6 generation of the MacBook Air (so I could continue my story with that family of laptops, which started with the early-2015 11-inch model). But this post was written in January, before Apple unveiled the new M5 MacBook Air, and, as a little surprise, the MacBook Neo. I first considered the Neo, because its clear limitations were not a deal-breaker for me; on the contrary, they were a great follow-up to my then-current set-up, which was very much not demanding by design. In fact, the Neo looked pretty much, feature by feature, like the laptop of my dreams: simple, focused, reliable, cheap, well-built, straight to the point. With the classic Apple pricing ladder, of course the MacBook Air looked very tempting, offering so much more for just a little extra: better speakers, better trackpad, a backlit keyboard, double the memory, a better screen, a better audio jack, better connectors, a better battery, a far better chip, a better webcam, Touch ID, etc. Therefore, for 400 euros more, it looked like a better deal, and better value than the Neo. I could even use that extra bit of power to finally edit photos on my laptop instead of on my phone, where the screen and performance have long been better suited than those of my old Mac for running apps like RAW Power. This is where it got a bit complicated in my head and froze all my purchase intentions. Value-wise, the MacBook Air M5 was, like I said, a much, much better choice than the Neo: for 50% more money, you get more than double the computer basically. Money-wise, if the Neo is indeed sold at a great price, it’s not as good a deal as the MacBook Air, not as good value. But if I were to stick to value and price, well, keeping my old MacBook Air Core i5, costing me zero, would always be a better deal. For a while, whenever I thought of “what I already have” (the old MacBook Air) versus “what I really want” (the new MacBook Air), I had always chosen the easiest and cheapest option of the two. What I should have done instead was focus on the fundamentals: what I actually needed (the MacBook Neo). What I need is a laptop I can count on, but not only performance-wise, where my old Air was surprisingly resilient. The battery life, enabling the laptop lifestyle, is essential. Spending time on my computer is my hobby, my pleasure at the end of the day. On the days I had forgotten to plug the computer in, when I wanted to check something sitting on the couch or on my balcony, far from the reach of the charging cable, well, I could not: the little bugger had no juice left, my end-of-the-day moment was ruined, and this situation was overall a pain. So when I first learned that Apple planned to raise prices , I reconsidered once again the timeframe in which I had to change my Mac. Waiting another year and spending 20% more for the same-ish computer as the one I could buy today didn’t look like a good idea. So when I saw that Amazon had a special deal on the MacBook Air, priced at 1080 instead of 1200 euros, I was ready to buy one. A few days later, while I still hadn’t made the jump on the purchase, I saw the headlines pop up that the Air was getting 200 euros more expensive on the Apple store. From that moment, I knew I had to act fast, before Amazon raised the price too. This is when I saw that the Neo was sold at 630 euros instead of 700, and this is when a little light bulb appeared above my head. This Mac was the one I needed. In fact, as I needed to buy the laptop right away, before the price change, I was keen on saving 450 euros, especially a few days before my salary arrived. The 630 euro price tag was more affordable than 1080 and more compatible with an impulse buy. So I ordered the cheapest Neo model, without Touch ID, and ended up saving 170 euros on the Neo. That’s more than a 20% discount if applied to the current price on the Apple website. Needless to say, I’m very pleased with this deal: now if I were to sell my computer I could possibly still get more money than I paid for it, in case I end up unsatisfied with it, which is not the case so far. After two weeks of regular use, I have no complaints really. Thank you Apple for raising prices and forcing me to buy the computer I actually needed, I guess? Performance is fine, even great when compared to my old Mac. I want to say it’s more or less as snappy as the M1 MacBook Air I use for work. Clearly, this is no match for the M5 chip, and 8GB of memory may feel a bit limiting, but I don’t need that much memory to run BBEdit, NetNewsWire, GoodLinks, and Safari anyway. I actually like that this limitation is forcing me to keep my feet on the ground when it comes to trying out new apps and revisiting my current set up . We’ll see how it goes in the coming months and years. I don’t think I’ll be able to push this device as hard as I pushed my old Air, but hey, it’s almost half the price. The keyboard is more or less the same, if a bit firmer, probably due to the fact that it’s a new computer and I come from a six-year-old, worn-out keyboard. Most of the computer feels identical to the Air, if ever-so-slightly worse, like the speakers or the screen. As I don’t plan to edit photos on this machine, really, there is only one part where I really “suffer” from a downgrade compared to the Air: the trackpad. The Air’s trackpad has been so good for so long that we tend to forget about it: the haptic feedback makes it very satisfying and informative to click. On the Neo, pressing on the trackpad is nowhere near as satisfying. The travel distance of the trackpad is, I want to say, 60 to 70% longer than it feels like on the haptic trackpad, and this is 60 to 70% too long, too deep, too loud. So far, this is the only part that feels really worse in terms of my daily experience. In the end, this is what the Neo really is: a familiar 630-euro laptop — a 630-euro new Mac — perfect for my activities of web browsing, video streaming, writing, and geeking around with apps. Dare I say that the Neo, as a single-purpose device, is a perfect blogging machine?

0 views
Xe Iaso 1 weeks ago

The console wars have been lost

Previously I opined that Valve was about to win the console generation . I couldn't have possibly predicted that both Microsoft and Sony would just self-sabotage so hard that they're both going to lose. Between Microsoft's decimation of the Xbox division , slaughtering off the IdTech team , and continued increases of Xbox hardware prices ; there's nothing to really be excited about with the Xbox. Sure their most recent presentation showed off a bunch of exclusives, but none of them really made me think "wow, I should go get an Xbox to play that". Hell, few of them made me think "wow I should go play that" beyond the Halo remake coming out next month (and really I just want to see how much of a trainwreck that is going to be). Microsoft is also starting to double-down on their in-house games being Xbox exclusives, which really doesn't give me much reason to want to play them because I simply can't buy them without buying an Xbox. Sony also has discontinued porting their games to PC because they're not hitting the (probably impossible) revenue targets that they need to make up for big-ticket failures like Concord . I do have a PS5 that has mostly been relegated to gathering dust when it's not playing YouTube and Twitch duty in the living room, it's likely going to be replaced in favour of my Steam Machine whenever that comes in next year. However nothing that's come out in terms of Playstation exclusives is really compelling, and what is compelling enough just isn't that compelling to want to buy it on Playstation as opposed to just getting it on Steam where I can run it on my tower or on the home theatre PC. Sony also has been raising prices and recently announced that they're killing physical media next generation . It's starting to make me wonder if I should even bother getting the next generation of Playstation. If I can't give people physical games as gifts anymore, why should I bother buying the new console? My husband and I both can't remember why we even got a PS5 in the first place, maybe it so that we could do couch gaming without hearing the fan noise or so that the video streaming experience from the NAS could support HDR. We have a Switch 2 at home, it's mostly there to play Nintendo exclusives like Mario Kart World and the Xenoblade series. If those exclusives were available on Steam, we wouldn't buy them on the Switch 2. Otherwise, everything is via Steam or other PC storefronts anyways. Man, Valve really does win by doing absolutely nothing while the rest of the industry shoots itself in the head. I fear for what happens when Gabe Newell retires and the MBA cancer fully infects Valve.

1 views
@hannahilea 1 weeks ago

Yesterday's static, today: A Bluetooth speaker for the vintage listener

Listening to modern baseball games through the static of the past, via a Bluetooth speaker in a laser-cut housing modeled from a vintage cathedral radio.

0 views

My (mis)Adventures in Soldering

Building your own keyboard is a rite of passage for those caught up in the ergonomic rabbit hole. So, it was only a matter of time before I went all the way and did so. However, as a complete noob when it comes to soldering, I had a rough time getting started. I hope that this brief guide saves you hours of anguish! After procuring all the parts required for our keyboards, my friend and I proceeded to get absolutely nowhere with our soldering. Little did we know that the tip of my usb C iron (TS80p) was oxidized. We thought it was because the iron wasn’t getting hot enough or staying at a consistent temperature, and I promptly went to buy a Weller soldering station (which I would also not recommend, reasons to follow). I also promptly oxidized the tip on this machine as the sponge they give you in the kit is a travesty and you should not do that. The very first thing I would say that would have saved me much anguish is not using a wet sponge. The fact that many soldering stations ship with one instead of what you should be using (a brass sponge/wire) is a head scratcher. Water (if not using de-ionized water) will very quickly oxidize a soldering iron tip, and the temperature difference (ambient room temperature vs 350-400C) is enough to actually cause the iron tip to crack over time. Use brass wool. No water. Get this thing and use it instead. The second thing I would recommend is to use flux when you are soldering. And, not liquid flux, but something a little tackier that won’t immediately vaporise when you hit it with your iron. The reason that I had no luck was that the tip of my iron was not tinned, and that is how you “dry out” your iron very quickly, causing black/grey oxidation to build up. So, tin the iron when you first turn your iron on AND AGAIN BEFORE YOU PUT IT AWAY. The consensus on the internet about soldering temperature is to keep the iron just above the melting point. When your tip is oxidized, you have to bump to 400 degrees C or higher (some usb irons max out at 400) and as such you will be having one hell of a time to get solder to melt. I use lead-free solder, so I shoot for around 360 C give or take. Many will say leaded solder is more forgiving and it very well may be, I just don’t have experience to compare. The TS80p is a pluggable tip with a 3.5mm TRRS jack. The Weller WE1010 station has a heating element that I will call “legacy” - it does not go all the way to the tip of the iron, and the thermometer is located away from the tip, giving wildly inaccurate temperature readings. In addition to the previous point, the iron stays heated at a certain temperature with no auto down-regulation (they’ll shutoff after 1-2 minutes if you have it in settings). So oxidization is more likely on a traditional iron. What you want is a JBC C245 or C210 compatible iron or clone station. You don’t have to buy the authentic tips, and there are videos online of the cloned tips from Aliexpress actually being just as good (or better!) than the authentic tips. I thought about getting a full station, but instead got a capable USB C iron that seems to very much hold up to the wired stations. It’s only 100W, with many stations being 220W - so take that with a grain of salt, but for a keyboard or two, it has held up just fine. I may consider a TC22 or Fnirsi D200 station in the future, but will cross that bridge when we get there. If you are interested in the iron I am using, it is the Fnirsi HS-02 . Most irons will ship with a conical tip. These are trash and put heat at a very small point. I recommend a knife/chisel tip as you can then manipulate the tip and have greater or lesser heat transfer with the rotation of your wrist. You probably don’t want to be breathing in soldering fumes, so get yourself a cheap desk fan to blow the fumes away from you. For hobby projects, a fume extractor is probably not necessary, but you can go all out on this and build your own if you so wish . I cannot have a soldering tip post without the classic Louis Rossmann meme : “HEAT THE BOARD!” I didn’t have issues with this as I remember the above, but when first starting, some think that soldering is about heating and applying solder. It is not. It is about heating the components to the point they will accept solder. This makes a massive difference. The more people that learn to solder, the more we can fight for repairability, and you start to see that no board is actually dead, it probably just needs a new chip somewhere. The “literacy” that comes with soldering and the ability to repair electronics can take you from a consumer to someone that actually understands the underlying mechanisms. As always, God bless, and until next time. If you enjoyed this post, consider Supporting my work , Checking out my book , Working with me , or sending me an Email to tell me what you think.

0 views
Unsung 1 weeks ago

Balls (practically) to the wall

The last post about the Nothing Phone not buffering its button presses reminded me of something. Here’s IBM Selectric, a 1961 typewriter: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/1.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/1.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> Past decades get compressed into a singular point in time, so we might all think of Selectric as “yet another old typewriter,” and I definitely did before learning about it. But the Selectric came 80 years after the first typewriters, and it packed so much user-benefitting innovation it really was an iPhone of its time. (Alas, I don’t believe there was a matching “are you getting it?!” keynote.) = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/2.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/2.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> Selectric was, honestly, a triumph of engineering. It popularized swappable typewriter fonts , showcased good industrial design, enabled jam-free typing, and even invented – although that came a decade after its introduction – an actual destructive Backspace . Crucially, on day one, its typing experience was so fantastic that many of the keys on keyboards we’re using 60 years later are still in the same place Selectric put them. What’s even more impressive? Selectric was purely electromechanical . It had no software, no chips, and no electronics. Everything it has accomplished was expressed in the mechanical language of steel, grease, links, and levers. Here’s one problem that’s trivial in software, but hard in hardware: How do you prevent people from pressing two keys at the same time? This is a thing that plagued typewriters since day one, and IBM’s engineers came up with a smart solution: each key was connected to a bar (interposer), each bar had a little protruding notch (lug), and that notch would smoothly dip into a little horizontal row of steel balls (selector compensator tube). = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/3.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/3.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/4.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/4.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/5.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/balls-practically-to-the-wall/5.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> The balls had just enough wiggle room for one notch, so if you tried to press a second key at the same time, the balls would now be packed tight, there would be no room to accommodate the second notch, and the key press would be blocked. I thought that was really clever, but it was even more clever than that. If you read my essay , you know it starts with the very notion that fingers overlap: as one is going up, often another one is already pressing down. If you were to block any second press before the first press was completely done, you wouldn’t be able to type very fast – and Selectric was meant to be a professional typing tool. Here’s where the choice of the carefully sized and arranged steel balls came into play. In practice, the second press was not completely blocked. The lug was able to slide just a little bit in between the adjacent steel balls. It was a half press – or, effectively, a half-character buffer . It was all fine-tuned just enough to not impede overlapping typing, while still offering protection from two keys at the same time. Now, if Selectric did this, in a universe where creating even a half-character buffer meant a little row of carefully machined steel balls, and added weight, and anticipating future wear and tear, and multiple pages in the maintenance manuals… what’s your excuse? #hardware #history #keyboard

0 views
Maurycy 4 weeks ago

Glassblowing #2: Making a tungsten lamp and (bad) vacuum diode

Now that I have a way to run electrodes through glass , it's time to do something with that. An old school lightbulb is rather simple: just a thin wire that gets hot enough to glow. However, to produce anything approaching white light, the wire must get to around 2500 C. While conductors like tungsten or graphite can survive those temperatures, they all burn on contact with air. To prevent this, I'll be sealing my lamp in glass under vacuum: no air, no problem. Some ceramics start conducting once heated, and being oxides, are completely unaffected by oxygen. Open air "Nernst lamps" did enjoy brief popularity in the 1890-1900s, but because of the added complexity of preheating the filament, they were replaced by filament lamps once vacuum pumps became good enough for commercial production. To start, I bent some some 0.3mm diameter tungsten wire into a "U" shape, and twisted a length of very fine 0.012 mm tungsten wire onto the free ends. I cut one side of the lead frame shorter so that the filament would sit diagonally: allowing it to be reasonably long without looping it around which could result in a short. To make the bulb, I partially inserted the lead frame into a glass tube, heated the end with an oxy-propane torch and pinched the glass onto the wires: Once one end was sealed, I connected the other to a rotary vane vacuum pump, and pumped it down while lightly heating the tube to remove moisture. After a few minutes, I headed the middle of the tube to sale the bulb, and pulled off the excess tubing. After the glass cooled, I cut the middle of the wire "U" to separate the leads: Glowing at 4 volts The finished lamp glows nicely between 200 and 400 mA (3-6 V and 0.5-2.5 W): I didn't stretch the filament tight enough and it ended up touching the glass, which creates a dim spot. The glass is borosilicate, so I'm not too worried about cracking, but it's still not ideal. I've tested the bulb up to 10 volts (~7 W), which is bright to light up a whole room, and the creates white light instead of the orange-ish color seen at low power — but it also gets very hot and won't last very long. In addition to color, the filament's temperature also affects the bulb's efficiency: a low temperature filament emits the vast majority of it's light in the infrared. A hot filament emits more visible light per watt, but tungsten evaporates faster leading to early failure. This tradeoff between lifespan and color/efficiency is why most light bulbs have rather short lifespans... or at least they did until we stopped using filaments. As an experiment , I ran a length of wire through a hole in the glass tube before evacuating it: The idea was to observe thermionic emission: when the filament is white hot, the atom's have enough kinetic energy to knock electrons into the vacuum. If the cold electrode is at a positive voltage, these electrons allow a small current to flow. If it's negative, the free electrons are repelled and nothing happens. While a diode isn't terribly exciting, it's the basis of more interesting devices like triodes, X-ray tubes and CRTs. ... and it's terrible : only conducting 1 uA with 700 V of bias between the filament and anode. Reverse biased, it conducts around 50 nA, mostly from the photoelectric effect. I suspect this is the result of two problems. Tungsten wire contains trapped gasses, which are released when it's heated. To avoid ruining the vacuum, the filament should be run while pumping down the tube, which I forgot to do. Second, the anode area is really small: Its ~6 mm of 0.3 mm wire, several centimeters away from the filament. Most emitted electrons will miss the anode and create a negative charge on the glass, which impedes current flow. Real vacuum diodes surrounding the filament in a metal tube, but I didn't do that because I wanted it to work as a light bulb. Just for fun , here's a photograph of my spool of filament wire, lit by the bulb made using it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nernst_lamp : those lamps. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-spTvp5-sf0 : Using one. /projects/glass/1/ : Considerations for sealing metal through glass http://www.rhunt.f9.co.uk/Glass_Blowing/Filament_Lamp_A/Filament_Lamp_A_Page1.htm : another homemade incandescent lamp

0 views
Maurycy 1 months ago

Making glass-to-metal seals for homemade vacuum tubes.

When making vacuum tubes, the glass is actually the easy part: premade tube stock of almost any size is easily available. Heating the end of such a tube softens the glass and allows surface tension to close it off. I used a rotary vane pump to remove all the air from the tube and heated the middle, which the atmosphere crushed to create a sealed-off ampule. Because glass is practically impermeable, it will retain that vacuum for a very long time, which can be shown by bringing it close to high-voltage AC (like a tesla coil): This glow is due to residual air being ionized, but the fuzzy appearance indicates that the vacuum is good enough to work in a triode or similar device. For those, the capacitive coupling trick won't work: I'll need to make electrodes that pass through the glass without letting air in. This is a lot harder than it might appear. Copper's red oxide bonds very well to glass . In fact, the bond is stronger than the bulk glass: when it breaks, there's always a thin layer of glass left stuck to the metal. Along with it's excellent electrical properties, it's seems like an ideal electrode material. I tried sealing off the end of the tube like before, but this time with a .75mm wire inside: The red color indicates a good contact ... and it leaks. Look under a microscope, the glass around the joint cracked as it cooled. The culprit is thermal expansion : After the glass solidifies at below around 800 °C, it contracts by around 3 μm/m for each degree. During that same degree of cooling, the copper contracts by 17 μm/m. Once it's down to room temperature, the metal is around 1% smaller than the glass around it. Since both the metal and glass are incompressible, the resulting stress builds up until something breaks. There are some metals that are well matched to borosilicate glass , like tungsten (4.5) or molybdenum (5), but they are all rather exotic. Steel wire is common, and while it's not really matched (CTE is around 11 μm/[m*K]), it's an improvement over copper. However, the carbon content of the metal produces carbon monoxide on contact with hot glass: ... but there's no reason the bulk metal has to be in contact with the glass. I had no luck plating the steel out of a copper sulfate solution: because the reaction is spontaneous, it always happens very fast and creates a fine metal power: Fe (s) + CuSO 4 (Aq) → Cu (s) + FeSO 4 (Aq) However, electroplating copper works fine in the presence of ammonia. The copper can dissolve as a tetra-amine complex, but the iron is completely insoluble under these conditions. To create a plating, the copper has to be forced with electricity: I connected the negative lead of my power supply to the iron and the positive to a piece of sacrificial copper. At 20 mA, this produced a nice coating in a few seconds: The wire should be sanded clean before plating Sealing this in glass created a bubble free seal (if it was done quickly), but it still failed during cooling: This photo was taken through two layers of glass Steel differs by ~7 μm/[m*K], and that's enough to break the glass. However, this plated wire can work in soda lime glass, which has a CTE of around 10 . This is the most common (and cheapest) type of glass, but I haven't been using it because of it's tendency to crack while cooling: Large pieces need to annealed in a furnace over several hours. ... but I did adding a bead around the wire: Instead of the wire breaking away from the glass, the two glass types broke apart. This actually made the problem worse because the bead is a lot bigger than the wire, so it expands and contracts more. Ok, I lied about tungsten wire being exotic . Filament wire is quite common, and I happen to have some. The snag is that it's 10 μm thick. I'd say it's hair thin, but that would be an understatement by almost an order of magnitude (most of my hair is around 70 μm) That's a standard 2.45 mm header. For the seal, this is a good thing: less metal means less expansion... but this size is nearly impossible to handle. I kept loosing bits of it until I started attaching bright-orange tape to the ends. Like many metals, tungsten is flammable. At this size, my oxy-propane torch is able to burn through it in under a second. This made glassworking a rather frustrating experience. I initially attempted to make something similar to a neon indicator by passing two wires through a single pinch... but invisible wire leads to invisible short circuits. Sealing a single wire in each end worked fine: ... but I had to add glass tee-joint to attach the vacuum. While the operating voltage is well above a thousand volts for a tube this size (filled with air), it does glow nicely: Neon-free neon sign. In addition to the plasma, the leads are glowing white hot. They don't have any air to cool them, are very thin and have poor thermal conductivity. Tungsten is one of the few metals that can handle this, so I accidentally got a 2-in-1 lamp. While it is an option, but I'd really rather avoid using this. Thermal expansion is a factor of size, so the smaller the conductor the less of of a problem it will be . 10 μm wire is rare, but 10 μm foil is common: you probably have some in your kitchen. I rolled out some wire into some thin (30 μm-ish) foil and tried sealing it glass: The seal looks excellent, but it leaked horribly. This technique supposedly works in soda-lime glass, where the CTE difference is smaller and the softening temperature is lower, but it's no good for borosilicate. (... interestingly, the crack formed around the edge of the ribbon, not along the surface. I'll come back to this later.) One of the weirder glass-to-metal seals is the houskeeper seal : attaching an thin walled copper tube inside a glass tube: A tube seal used on a high-voltage capacitor The hollow metal can easily stretch to release any stress from thermal expansion. However, manufacturing such a tube is difficult without a precision lathe. A thin copper disk sealed to the end of a tube should also work because it's thickness is unconstrained: the disk can increase it's radius by stretching thinner. Both are rotationally symmetrical For a long wire sealed inside a pinch, the metal's only options are to decrease it's density (very hard) or for it to pull more in from outside the glass (also very hard)... so stress builds up until the seal breaks. Producing such foil is easy with a small rolling mill although a hammer would also work. It's important to periodically heat the copper to a red heat for a few seconds. This reforms the metal crystals and allows it be worked without cracking. Looks ugly, but it's vacuum tight! Once sealed, a hole can be punched in the foil, and a wire soldered through it. Because there's no limit on the size of that wire, such a feed-through could be made to handle thousands of amps. It's also notable because it doesn't require anything fancy: just normal copper and a blowtorch. It also works with any type of glass because the coefficient-of-thermal-expansion doesn't matter. ... however, it's very frustrating to make. There isn't much margin between the temperature at which the glass will wet the copper and when the copper melts. Since the glass doesn't wick onto the metal it must be pressed on while providing even heat. There's also no way to pass multiple wires into the same tube, which complicates the glassblowing. Knife edge seals : borrowing another idea from houskeeper's work, the copper ribbon always breaks around the edges... so what they are ground down to a sharp point? On paper, this makes it much easier for the glass to contract around the ribbon: Not shown: lengthwise compression of the glass The glass around square corners must contract lengthwise along the seal, across the width of the ribbon and along its thickness. Since glass is incompressible, this can't happen and it breaks. With tapered edges, there's much less stress across the width and the glass can slightly squish to accommodate the metal. ... but it it's not enough and the seal still breaks at the edge: grumble grumble grumble Back to the tungsten : Large diameter wire is quite exotic, but not unobtainable. I was able to find some for an only slightly unreasonable price. Even .65 mm diameter tungsten has no problem being sealed through glass (after a quick sanding at 600 grit): Only 8 $/m! Under a microscope, the seal shows some small bubbles, but no separation or cracking. Unlike the filament wire, this stuff can be easy be handled, bent and welded (even tungsten is no match for an electric arc) TLDR; Tungsten wire (up to .7 mm) or copper disc seals work in borosilicate. Tungsten wire is expensive and hard to find, but is easy to seal. Copper seals use common materials but are much harder. On the topic of cheating : Put mercury or gallium into already cooled glass. Gallium expands when it freezes, which is enough to break glass. Some alloys (gallium-indium-tin) stay liquid until almost -20 C which would be a much better choice. Mercury stays liquid until -40, so this is very unlikely to happen Both of these can form a vacuum tight seal to glass, but must be prevented from flowing into the tube or evaporating. I can't think of a good way to do this, but I'm sure it's possible. Just glue it : no heat, no problem. ... but plastics aren't vacuum-tight. Molecules of gas can squeeze inbetween the polymer chains and slowly seep in. This effect is why helium balloons will slowly deflate over time, and how strongly smelling chemicals (like ammonia) escape their bottles. A glue sealed tube would work if constantly connected to a pump, but wouldn't be very practical. Lots of sources recommend treating copper with either sodium borate (borax) or boric acid prior to bonding. As a test, I used some 250 μm copper foil. I heated the metal to pre-oxidized it: ... and applied a saturated solution of sodium borate in water once it cooled: After using more heat to evaporate the solution, I sanded one side down to bare metal. ... and melted on two similar sized bits of scrap glass, making sure to push the glass down onto the copper. The foil was allowed to cool in a tray of aluminum oxide and once it was down to room temperature, I pried off both blobs: Both left a layer of glass on the metal, which indicates that the bond was stronger than the surrounding glass. The borated side was significantly harder to break off, which could indicate less internal stress? ... but that could just be because it's hard to perfectly repeat a bond made using a torch and a randomly shaped bit of glass. However, the low viscosity liquid borax should help get a bond started , making it easier to do disk seals. A low melting point borosilicate-glass paste made by adding extra borax to crushed glass should also work. Such a "solder glass" would avoid the risk of leaving a water-soluble layer inside the seal. Also , the borax side seems to have more bubbles. This is probably because I didn't get it hot enough to fully dehydrate before adding the glass. Leak testing : The capacitive glow discharge trick is handy for testing seals. Hook the unfinished tube up to a vacuum pump and spray a gas over the suspect area: If it leaks, a small amount will be pulled into the tube and change the color. As for the gas, I find the fluorinated refrigerant from a spray duster works well. Even a tiny amount will alter the color and intensity of the glow. ... but be careful: It's flammable and the fumes are awful . Only try this with good ventilation and away from highly flammable materials. (and watch for arcing around the high voltage source) Also, thanks to hugo.coredump.cx for letting me borrow their nice macro lens. DOI 10.1109/JoAIEE.1923.6593372 : Houskeeper's paper on CTE-mismatched seals. DOI 10.1088/0950-7671/7/9/304 : A paper discussing tube-style borosilicate to copper seals. http://www.rhunt.f9.co.uk/Glass_Blowing/Glass_Blowing_Menu.htm : More tube making, in soda-lime glass.

0 views
Chris Coyier 1 months ago

Sprinter Van Phone Mount + Better CarPlay-Compatible Cable Situation

This is the stock look of my 2021 Sprinter van front console area: If it’s not obvious, there’s no great place for a phone. You’ve got the cup holders. Those are actually sorta workable, except for this boss battle: wired-only CarPlay. Wired CarPlay is not ideal, but that’s all this van has. I expect upgrading the whole system would be super expensive or potentially not even possible. Wired isn’t that bad. Wired CarPlay means more immediate response from actions and heck, it charges the phone too. The problem is where that wire needs to go. Up on the dashboard, there is this little cabinet thing with a door that opens up toward the windshield. The ports are inside that cabinet, one of them being the one that has to be used for CarPlay. I’m sure the engineering thought is: plug it in, put your phone in the cabinet, shut the cabinet. And that’s kinda fine. I don’t like fiddling with my phone while driving and CarPlay means I don’t really need to. But it’s still inconvenient. I often forget my phone up there when getting out of the van. If I do need to fiddle with my phone while parked or because something just absolutely has to be done on-device, it’s extra obnoxious to get my hands on it. The answer is this little guy. A 3D printed part from NEXUS. This slides into the cabinet and now the cabinet door doesn’t full close, it closes onto this, leaving little slits to bring the cords out from. We’re ultimately going to move the phone to a mount, and then the question is where and how to mount it. Fortunately NEXUS is on the case again with a 1″ Ball Cubby Adapter . That weird looking thing has nothing at all to do with your butt! It’s a clever device that fits perfectly into the useless weird cubby on the dashboard and provides this general purpose mount. NEXUS doesn’t make a phone mount. I think on purpose? The Winnebago Revel has all these RAM ®  Mounts all over. I had never heard of all this RAM ® stuff before. They make a bunch of mounts and stuff. To me, it all feels like a little step up from the home 3D printing feel of NEXUS. Not quite industrial, not quite hobbiest. I was happy to stay in the kinda happy path ecosystem, so I bought the RAM ®  Mount with the ball. Astute readers will notice… now we have two balls. And, we have two ball mounts! Those two ball mounts won’t actually connect to each other. The magic of the ball mount is that you get this 360-degree(ish) adjustability. I don’t really need that much movability, but I’ll take it. The final bit here is to get the connector to get the two balls together. And it doesn’t occupy any other useful space on the dashboard. Love it. Order list: Kinda pricey for a phone mount. But I think it’s worth it. Its a slightly tricky situation and this solution is (1) long term in that it will fit any future phone (2) opens up the idea for mounting other things with ball mounts (3) allows for more cables out of the dashboard cabinet to come out smoothly. There are other options! There are other/cheaper ones that clip onto the cubby mount that look OK. There are ones that mount into the cup holder nicely. Honestly this one is super minimal and clever. I’m not good at this, which is basically why I just blogged it instead of like TikTok’d it or whatever.

0 views
Daniel Mangum 1 months ago

JLink JTAG Access on the Pinecil

It has been more than two years since I bought a Pinecil soldering iron and wrote about soldering the breakout board and accessing the UART. I’ve been doing more work with the Pinecil as of late following the addition of upstream support for the Bouffalo Lab BL706 MCU in Zephyr (big shout out to @VynDragon, @will-tm, @josuah, and everyone else who has been contributing to the upstream Bouffalo Lab efforts!).

0 views
Maurycy 1 months ago

Notes on optimizing battery life:

Ok, so you have something with a battery, and you want it to run for a long time. I'll be using the classic CR2023 non-rechargeable lithium "coin cell" as an example, but everything here applies to other types of battery. (except the exact voltage and capacity numbers) First off, it helps to measure power draw in current and charge in well, charge. It is tempting to convert everything into power and energy, but don't. Most circuit's power draw is much closer to constant current than constant power: a single clock cycle on a microcontroller involves charging or discharging some number of MOSFET gates. That requires some number of coulombs, not some number of joules. Linear regulators turn any circuit into a perfect current sink: no matter what potential is supplied, the device sees a constant voltage and will always draw the same current. Even if you don't use any, most chips will use a few to generate internal voltages. This is the "typical" current draw of an AVR32DD32 microcontroller over voltage from the datasheet : Black: 25 °C. Yellow: 125 °C. Also, battery capacity is nearly-universally specified as charge, usually in milliamp hours: a 100 mAh battery can support 1 mA of current for 100 hours before it's "dead". (more on what this means later) Non-ideal batteries : This battery has 3 volts stamped right on it... but that's kinda of a lie: Measuring the battery with a meter, the voltage is actually 3.3 volts. However, checking the datasheet, getting the manufacturer's claimed 235 mAh capacity requires operating down to 2 volts: From the datasheet (yes, these have one) With these "CR" Li/MnO 2 cells, the discharge curve is fairly flat: a device that only works down to 85% of nominal (2.6 volts) can still use a good 90% of the capacity. However, an "Alkaline" Zn/MnO 2 1.5 volt cell falls below 80% of nominal with a quarter of it's charge remaining. The manufacturer considers them dead at 0.8 volts — around half the original voltage. In a typical circuit, two batteries will be connected in series to produce a 3 V-ish supply. To get the advertised capacity, the device must be able to run down to 1.6 volts: the same as a (fresh) single cell! Think of supply voltage like a budget : If your battery will drop down to 2 volts and the MCU needs 1.8 V, any other components involved in supplying power must not drop more than 200 mV. It's not that the same MCU won't work on two AA batteries, but it won't be able to use the last 10% or so of capacity because it requires at least 1.8 / 2 = 0.9 volt per cell. Ok, so design for half the nominal supply voltage ? Batteries have non-trivial internal resistance, which causes a voltage drop when any current is drawn: a coin cell is usually around 10 ohms, while large AA cells sit around 0.1 ohms. To understand what causes this, let's look at how a coin cell works: On the negative electrode, a piece of lithium metal looses it's electron and dissolves into the electrolyte. Li → Li + + e - The resulting ions travel over to positive electrode and steal oxygen from the manganese dioxide: 2 MnO 2 + 2 Li + + e - → Li 2 O + Mn 2 O 3 This reaction releases a lot of energy because lithium is an alkali metal the manganese doesn't really care. That released energy is actually what powers the connected circuit. Crucially, the whole thing depends on positive lithium ions reaching and reacting with the positive electrode: moving against the electric field produced by the battery. The open circuit voltage, 3.3 volts, is enough to completly stop the reaction. This is why batteries only discharge once a circuit drains some of the accumulated electrons... but for the reaction to proceed at a reasonable rate, the voltage must drop quite a bit below the measured open-circuit voltage. If you've done any chemistry, it should come as no surprise that this is affected by temperature : As a rule-of-thumb, to operate down to -40 C, plan for ten times the internal resistance at room temp. If you see the voltage rail dropping by 50 mV at 20 C, make sure there's still enough voltage to go around if it drops 500 mV. Another thing that impacts reaction rate is the amount of reagents present , or in other words, the charge left in the battery: resistance increases as the battery is drained. As a test, I discharged an Alkaline battery at 400 mA: Orange: open circuit, blue: under load With a fresh cell, pulling almost half an amp only results in 100 mV of drop, or 0.25 ohms. By the time the battery is half empty, the resistance doubled to around half an ohm. At 60% discharge, the under-load voltage has dropped below the 0.8 V "dead" threshold. Reducing the voltage requirement won't help here: shortly afterwards, the resistance increased so much my test rig needed to supply power to force those 400 mA through. The smaller CR2032 cells start at around 10 ohms, and reach several hundred ohms by the time the open-circuit voltage falls to 2 V. It follows that any circuit that draws a lot of current can not use the full rated capacity. For pulsed loads, large capacitors can help, but they have their own problems which I'll discuss later. Also, batteries get worse as they age . Electrolytes can evaporate/leak and side-reactions can form layers that impede current. There's a good chance you've experienced this: a battery that tests fine on a meter but refuses to actually power anything. What's happened is that it developed a huge internal resistance (many killohms). In series with a high-impedance multimeter, it doesn't create any noticeable voltage drop. When connected to an actual device, the voltage drops to almost nothing. This is why you should be skeptical of any claims of 20 year, 30 year, 50 year battery life. Sure, that might be what you get by dividing nominal capacity by average current draw, but there's no telling how well the battery will work after all that time: I doubt even the manufacture really knows what happens past a decade or two. There's also self discharge , where leakage currents drain the battery, even when it's sitting on a shelf: This is usually given by the manufacturer as percent of capacity per year. Because the cell's voltage doesn't change all that much during discharge, — and the current is quite small — it's a fraction of the original capacity, not of what's remaining. This alone is enough to kill a AA battery in only 5 years depending on temperature (hotter is worse)... but again, this is not the only mechanism at play: Just because self-discharge might suggest a hundred year shelf-life, doesn't mean it will actually work in a hundred years. Another "fun" effect is voltage droop : Drawing current can deplete the chemicals around the electrode, causing a temporary increase in resistance. Applying a 400 mA current pulse to a half-empty ZnMnO 2 500 mAh cell caused the internal resistance to triple over the course 40 seconds: Yellow: cell voltage. Blue: Current Eventually, the battery does recover, but it took a good minute or so: Actually a trace of a different pulse, so the starting voltage is higher. What's interesting is that even though no current is being drawn, the battery circuit voltage is still not back to where it should be. This is where the "resistance" model starts to break down. It's more accurate to say that the pulse temporarily pushed the cell down it's discharge curve: increasing the resistance and decreasing the open circuit voltage. This gets worse when the battery is nearly empty: I applied a similar 10 second pulse to an 80% drained cell, it took around 5 minutes minutes to for it's open circuit voltage rise back above 0.8 volts. This effect highly variable depending on temperature (colder is worse) and state of charge, so it's good to include a wide voltage margin when designing a circuit that will draw sustained current. In short , internal resistance increases when... ... it's cold ... the battery is close to being empty ... the battery is used ... you do nothing at all Plan for a much worse voltage drop than what you see on your workbench: it's possible to loose as much as a volt per each mA drawn with a mostly empty coin cell on a cold night. With that in mind , it's time to look at those capacity numbers. As already discussed, aiming for longer than a decade or so is largely pointless because of battery aging. These CR2023 batters have quoted shelf life of 10 years, so it's going to be my target: From a CR2032 (~230 mAh), a device can draw an average of 2.6 uA if it runs down to 2 volts. From a AA (~3000 mAh) AA battery, a device can draw 34 uA if it runs down to 0.8 volts per cell. ... so we have a voltage budget and a target current. Keep in mind that internal resistance will cut into the voltage if when draw pulses in excess of a few microamps. Measurement techniques: These small currents present a problem: most multimeters don't really do well below a microamp. Benchtop models that can measure down to the nanoamps exist but are quite expensive. On paper, measuring current is easy: Insert a known resistor into the circuit and measure the voltage drop across it... except this either requires adding a large resistance or measuring a tiny voltage. A better way is to use an op-amp to hide the voltage drop from the device under test: The amplifier tries to keep its two inputs at the same voltage, which requires it to exactly match the device's current through the feedback resistor. This results in exactly the same voltage as if it was used as a shunt, except with zero burden voltage. Since most chips have two opamps, I use the other to create a VDD/2 supply rail which is used as the ground. This allows the chip to have access to voltages both above and below it. Most modern chips are "rail-to-rail", meaning they are designed to operate close to one of the supply rails... but this doesn't work too well: Consider what happens when the input current drops to zero. The amplifier has to pull the output (with a non-trivial amount of capacitance) down to zero. If the best the amplifier could do is connect the output to the negative rail, the voltage would exponentially decay, approaching zero but never reaching it. Would this be a huge problem? Probably not. Is it a good idea to make the chip's job as easy as possible? Yes. As a bonus, this allows the device to measure currents in both directions. Using the 100 pA/mV range, the circuit has an offset of ~10 pA, so it's not quite a picoammeter, but it's close. This makes it good for testing the leakage of MOSFETs, diodes, capacitors and the such. However, this design has one huge snag: It's zero burden voltage up to a fairly modest point. Once the output maxes out (100 nA - 100 uA depending on the range), the device will can see the full shunt resistance. This is a non-issue for testing component leakage, but it becomes a problem when measuring the current drawn by a microcontroller. For measuring sleep current, it's best to build a firmware image that never wakes up, and short the meter's input or connect a second power source during startup. Another option is to use a tiny feedback resistor: connecting a 1 kohm resistor between the input and output yields a 1 uA/mV range with a maximum of 1 mA. Once the microcontroller boots, the resistor can be removed to measure it's sleep current. (and if you are drawing more than this, you probably shouldn't) This is also a good trick to avoid crashing MCUs when switching ranges, which can cause a momentary disconnection depending on the geometry of your selector switch. Shielding is not optional : 100 picoamps is a kind of current that floats around on the air. It's best to put the whole setup inside a metal box connected to the meter's ground. Running coax to a scope or meter is fine because the wire's sheath is connected to the rest of the shield: this isn't RF stuff. If you don't have a box, wrapping the whole thing in aluminum foil works almost as well. (make sure it's not touching anything!) Also, it's a little silly to carefully screen out interference only to reintroduce it with a power supply, so it's best to run everything with batteries: Two 1.5 volt alkaline cells provides 3 volts and four is close enough to 5 volts. Also, be careful with what's touching the meter or part under test: a post-it note can easily conduct a whole nanoamp at 5 volts. Wood and fabric are similarly problematic. If in doubt as to if something is a problem, test it. When measuring capacitors, there's a really annoying property to be aware of : The dielectric material can slowly absorb or release charge over multiple hours. This effect is mostly known for recharging high-voltage capacitors after they've been removed from circuit — with unpleasant results — but it can also result in a deceptively high leakage current that goes away if the capacitor is used in a real circuit. Unless you have fancy polypropylene capacitors, you'll have to leave them in the test rig for several hours before taking a reading. Circuit testing : Of course, it's not enough to test individual components. The whole system has to work correctly with an imperfect power supply: A device running on a coin cell should be able to tolerate the full 1k with a two volt supply. ... also, it's a good idea to simulate a dead battery: an empty battery shouldn't result in hardware damage or data loss. Temperature can greatly effect leakage currents. If you expect the components to get up to 80 C, grab a heat gun and see how it performs at those temperatures. Practical advice: Before considering any components, does to circuit board itself consume any power? There's lots of people on forums saying you shouldn't use a soldermask, or that flux on the board causes leakage... For testing, I used a nothing special JLCPCB, green, FR4, 2-layer board. It had two quarter millimeter traces 30 mm long and separated by 2.7 mm. For the measurements, I used a 9 volt bias, which should represent worst case results: Clean : Testing the board as it came from the factory Humid : Breathing on it for a few seconds (99% RH, no visible condensation) Fingers : Touching it to get skin oils on the board Rosin : Spread some RMA flux and burned it with a soldering iron. Board condition and soldermask Current Soldermask, clean < 5 pA Soldermask, fingers < 5 pA Soldermask, humid < 5 pA Soldermask, rosin < 5 pA No soldermask, clean < 5 pA No soldermask, fingers 10 pA No soldermask, humid 30,000 pA No soldermask, rosin 20 pA The main troublemaker is humidity. If you are designing a circuit that needs to work outside, underwater or underground, it would be a good idea to include some desiccants: most plastic will allow water vapor to permeate inside. The soldermask prevented any significant leakage between traces, but problems could still happen between component pins. Conformal coatings will protect against short exposures, but will suffer from the permation problem. Soldering residue or skin oils aren't a problem unless you are doing picoamp metrology. Capacitors : Electrolytic or tantalum capacitors can leak multiple microamps at just a few volts: A jellybean 100 uF 16V electrolytic pulled 26 uA at nine volts, which is ten times the entire current budget for a CR2032! That cap alone could discharge the battery just a year or two. Ceramic capacitors a lot better: I grabbed a random 1 uF capacitor from my parts bin initially pulled several hundred nanoamps, but it dropped down to 920 pA @9 volts after two hours. Even a hundred of these would only draw 92 nA, which is only 3% of the budget. TLDR ; Don't use electrolytic or tantalums. Ceramic capacitors are fine in reasonable quantities and when run well below their rated voltage. Diodes are very commonly used for reverse polarity protection, but there are two possible configurations: A series diode uses a forward biased diode to prevent reverse current from getting to the device. A parallel diode adds a reverse biased diode to clamp the reverse voltage before the device is damaged. In the series configuration, voltage drop is very important : Real diodes are quite different from the idealized model. The voltage drop of a 1N4148 is only 0.6 V at 1 mA of draw and at 25 C. The relationship between current and voltage drop is roughly exponential: For a silicon PN diode, passing 10 times the current requires an extra 100 mV. This also works in the other direction: A circuit that only needs 10 uA (peak) will only see around 0.4 volts of drop across that diode. Temperature affects this: The threshold will rise ~2 mV for each degree the diode is cooled. At -40, expect 130 mV of extra voltage drop compared at room temperature. A Schottky diode has a much lower threshold voltage: 1 mA of current only needs 0.25 V. This can be a huge improvement to your voltage budget, although it's still a non-trivial amount. In the parallel configuration, reverse leakage matters . Because it's highly dependent on voltage, I measured a few diodes at 5 volts, which is closer to normal operating conditions: 2N4148 [PN] @5V: 2.3 nA BAT46 [Schottky] @5V: 2.4 uA In this test, the schottky doesn't do so well: It's three orders of magnitude worse than a similar PN diode. So, use a PN diode right? Well, if the battery can supply 50 mA into a short (fresh coin cell), there might be around a volt across the device. That can be enough to cause damage. So, what's a good reverse polarity protection circuit? An n-channel low-side switching version is also possible A MOSFET can act as a near ideal diode: If the gate (connected to the negative rail) is in fact, the lowest voltage, it's switched on. If the battery is inserted backwards, the gate now has the highest voltage in the circuit and the transistor stays off. However, it's still important to consult the datasheet or conduct experiments: the battery voltage might not be enough to fully turn on the FET, and even a properly "on" MOSFET still has a voltage drop. The final option is nothing: Battery clips that physically prevent a user from inserting a battery backward exist. These have no electrical penalties except for the contact resistance (which is negligible when compared to the battery's). Schottky leakage also poses a problem for dual power supply circuits. A microamp of backfeed into the backup battery can actually be enough to damage it. In these cases, you may be forced to use a PN diode or use a variation of the MOSFET trick: connect the gate to the primary supply rail. This will, at a minimum, perform as well as a silicon diode because of the transistor's intrinsic body diode. Once the power rail drops down to zero, the MOSFET's gate will be negative and it will turn on. However, it's performance won't be perfect if the main rail takes more than a millisecond or so to loose voltage. It's best to plan for a PN diode drop and consider any extra voltage as be a nice bonus. Computers : In theory, CMOS logic doesn't draw any power when sitting idle. In practice, it absolutely does. An 8-bit AVR128DD28 microcontroller draws 1.5 uA during sleep mode. Connecting a 32KHz crystal and using the integrated RTC to provide wake ups bring it up to 1.8 uA. This leaves just 700 uA of average current to work with. Ok, but at some point, the processor has to do something. Each clock cycle has a fixed cost: For the AVR, I measured it at ~0.28 nanoamp seconds, meaning that the battery has enough power for 3,000 billion cycles. Individual clock cycles on an AVR128DA28 running at 32 kHz. However, it's almost always a good idea to use a slow clock: The chip will draw an extra 277 uA of current draw per MHz. At the default four MHz clock speed, that's just over a milliamp. There's no guarantee the battery will be able to supply that kind of power. Decoupling caps aren't going to save you here: 1 mA is enough to drain a rather big 1 uF capacitor at 1 volt per millisecond. (remember, no electrolytics allowed.) Since the MCU has a minimum voltage of 1.8 volts, and the batteries can go as low as two, it's only safe to run like this for 200 microseconds / 800 cycles! However, running at 32 kHz only draws an average of 10 microamps. There are still current pulses from each clock cycle, but there are small enough to that they only drop a 1 uF capacitor by 0.27 millivolts. The processor does draw more a bit more quiescent current while running then in sleep mode. This is why some people suggest you should run at the maximum clock speed to save power... but while it is more efficient on paper, it simply doesn't work with real batteries. This also lets us calculate how long it can run for: 10 microamps is 14 times the remaining 700 nanoamp budget, so the processor can be running 7% of the time. Also, on this particular MCU, wakeups cause a big current pulse: Because of stray capacitance, applying power to the processor costs a whole 2.62 nanoamp seconds. With a 1 uF capacitor, this would drain it by 2.62 mV. However, with smaller caps like 6.8 nF, it could would discharge them a whole 385 mV. Stuff like this is why I'd recommend using around a microfarad: A decent 1 uF (MLCC) ceramic rated at a few times the supply voltage will leak almost nothing. To be fair, the datasheet does recommend this value, but plenty of people are in the habit of using smaller ones: When you have a 5 volt supply, loosing a third of a volt is not a big deal. Using a 3-but-actually-2 volt battery, it's enough to drop below the chip's minimum operating voltage. Some parts claim a much lower sleep current (in the nanoamps), but that's without retaining memory: Most applications can't use these modes. Consider a data-logger. Because flash consumes the same amount of power when writing a few bytes or a kilobyte, being able to buffer readings actually saves power. ... although there are some applications where a feature like this does make sense: This is something you have to consider before taking sleep current specs at face value. ... it's cold ... the battery is close to being empty ... the battery is used ... you do nothing at all Clean : Testing the board as it came from the factory Humid : Breathing on it for a few seconds (99% RH, no visible condensation) Fingers : Touching it to get skin oils on the board Rosin : Spread some RMA flux and burned it with a soldering iron. https://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/AVR128DA28-32-48-64-DataSheet-DS40002183B.pdf : The discussed microcontroller. https://data.energizer.com/pdfs/cr2032.pdf : Example battery datasheet https://lcamtuf.substack.com/p/real-mlccs-and-inductors-have-curves : Another footgun with capacitors

0 views

Baby's First DDS Signal Generator

The most essential instruments of an electronics lab: a power supply , an oscilloscope, and a signal generator. Equipped with the first two, I decided to try my hand at building the third. In this article I present you with an original design of a very low cost, versatile and precise baseband signal generator based on a DDS (direct digital synthesis) architecture.

0 views
Jeff Geerling 1 months ago

News about Raspberry Pi 6 and Microcontroller Development

On Thursday, three of the lead Raspberry Pi engineers hosted an AMA on the r/engineering subreddit . One of the most interesting tidbits was on the Pi 6. Looking back at previous launches: Following that cycle, one would expect a Pi 6 3-4 years after the Pi 5, which would put it in 2026 or 2027. 2012: Raspberry Pi 2015: Raspberry Pi 2 (+3 years) 2016: Raspberry Pi 3 (+1 year) 2019: Raspberry Pi 4 (+3 years) 2023: Raspberry Pi 5 (+4 years)

0 views
Jeff Geerling 1 months ago

Wi-Wi Is Wireless Time Sync at 1 nanosecond

At NAB, I found a demo of Wi-Wi STAMP , a wireless time synchronization protocol that came out of Japan's NICT . Wi-Wi stands for Wireless 2Way interferometry, and it uses the 900 MHz band for picosecond-level time sync, and mm-level distance accuracy, in a tiny box, currently the size of a smartphone. The system is still in development, but existing prototypes have 20ps of phase synchronization jitter, and time synchronization down to 30ns. The next generation will have time down to 5ns in real-world use.

0 views
Manuel Moreale 1 months ago

A phone battery experiment

I’ve done all sorts of experiments over the years when it comes to my phone usage. From cutting down my screen time as low as possible, to not using the phone at all, to running it in black-and-white mode, and many others. But this morning I woke up, unplugged my phone from the charger, and I thought «I wonder if I can only charge my phone once a week» . That was a thought half-asleep me had without realizing that what I was actually thinking about was charging it twice a week, not once. So starting the week with a fully charged phone and only plugging it in once until the next Sunday night. I believe it can easily be done, and it might even be doable to use one full charge for the whole week, so not plugging my phone at all for the next seven days. Experiments are fun, and there's only one way to find out, so I’m going for it. I have a Pro Max with a healthy battery that is currently sitting at 100%, and I have put it in low power mode to give myself the best chance. We’ll see how far into the week I’ll make it before I have to charge it again. Thank you for keeping RSS alive. You're awesome. Email me :: Sign my guestbook :: Support for 1$/month :: See my generous supporters :: Subscribe to People and Blogs

0 views