The Triumph of Dedicated Solutions Over Double Duty; How Mu

[Bret Cahill]

There are other factors at work here. In the late 19th Century and much of the 20th Century they didn't always have the money or tools for more sophisticated designs requiring more components so mechanical design relying on dove tails, i.e, using the rims of a bicycle wheel for the brakes instead of a dedicated disk rotor, seemed justified.

This is in stark contrast to the way electronic design has always been: Most every component has always been for a single purpose.

As the electronics industry has mushroomed and taken over a lot of the tasks of of machinery, i.e., electric motors vs engines -- there isn't much out there more multi duty than crankcase oil --, etc., it may have induced a psychological "follow the leader/winner" effect on mechanical design as well..

Using hot radiator water to heat your motor vehicle may be one great exception, but it now seems ignorant/backwards to not go with dedicated solutions, certainly when they are cost effective. The emphasis last century on clever double duty solutions now seems to be an almost rinky dink low brow distraction than something that really served the needs of society.

Even the usefulness of cleverness in _any_ field now seems to be in doubt.

I mention this because there are a lot of low-hanging-fruit innovations in many fields that were overlooked until now that should have been successful decades ago. Why? Obviously design mentality has changed. Engineering is more arbitrary and psychological than many think.

Some of this may be fallout from electronic design relying exclusively on dedicated components.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

Discover how the supercapacitor can enhance the battery
https://batteryuniversity.com/index.php/learn/article/whats_the_role_of_the_supercapacitor

The supercapacitor, also known as ultracapacitor or double-layer capacitor, differs from a regular capacitor in that it has very high capacitance. A capacitor stores energy by means of a static charge as opposed to an electrochemical reaction. Applying a voltage differential on the positive and negative plates charges the capacitor. This is similar to the buildup of electrical charge when walking on a carpet. Touching an object releases the energy through the finger.

There are three types of capacitors and the most basic is the electrostatic capacitor with a dry separator. This classic capacitor has very low capacitance and is mainly used to tune radio frequencies and filtering. The size ranges from a few pico-farads (pf) to low microfarad (ÎźF).

The electrolytic capacitor provides higher capacitance than the electrostatic capacitor and is rated in microfarads (ÎźF), which is a million times larger than a pico-farad. These capacitors deploy a moist separator and are used for filtering, buffering and signal coupling. Similar to a battery, the electrostatic capacity has a positive and negative that must be observed.

The third type is the supercapacitor, rated in farads, which is thousands of times higher than the electrolytic capacitor. The supercapacitor is used for energy storage undergoing frequent charge and discharge cycles at high current and short duration.

Farad is a unit of capacitance named after the English physicist Michael Faraday (1791–1867). One farad stores one coulomb of electrical charge when applying one volt. One microfarad is one million times smaller than a farad, and one pico-farad is again one million times smaller than the microfarad.

Engineers at General Electric first experimented with an early version of supercapacitor in 1957, but there were no known commercial applications. In 1966, Standard Oil rediscovered the effect of the double-layer capacitor by accident while working on experimental fuel cell designs. The double-layer greatly improved the ability to store energy. The company did not commercialize the invention and licensed it to NEC, who in 1978 marketed the technology as “supercapacitor” for computer memory backup. It was not until the 1990s that advances in materials and manufacturing methods led to improved performance and lower cost.

The supercapacitor has evolved and crosses into battery technology by using special electrodes and electrolyte. While the basic Electrochemical Double Layer Capacitor (EDLC) depends on electrostatic action, the Asymmetric Electrochemical Double Layer Capacitor (AEDLC) uses battery-like electrodes to gain higher energy density, but this has a shorter cycle life and other burdens that are shared with the battery. Graphene electrodes promise improvements to supercapacitors and batteries but such developments are 15 years away.

Several types of electrodes have been tried and the most common systems today are built on the electrochemical double-layer capacitor that is carbon-based, has an organic electrolyte and is easy to manufacture.

It looks a little like they cannot make up their minds on how to store energy. Good dovetails, especially where the 2 effects have the same goal, generally don't werk out.

Compressed air is right after a battery in energy density. They already like to compress air before it enters a fuel cell. Why not dovetail high pressure with electro chemical effects?

Or high pressure with electrostatic?

Maybe there's some organism that dovetails all three?

Just don't mention my name for any grants.


Bret Cahill

There are other factors at work here. In the late 19th Century and much of the 20th Century they didn't always have the money or tools for more sophisticated designs requiring more components so mechanical design relying on dove tails, i.e, using the rims of a bicycle wheel for the brakes instead of a dedicated disk rotor, seemed justified.

This is in stark contrast to the way electronic design has always been: Most every component has always been for a single purpose.

As the electronics industry has mushroomed and taken over a lot of the tasks of of machinery, i.e., electric motors vs engines -- there isn't much out there more multi duty than crankcase oil --, etc., it may have induced a psychological "follow the leader/winner" effect on mechanical design as well.

Using hot radiator water to heat your motor vehicle may be one great exception, but it now seems ignorant/backwards to not go with dedicated solutions, certainly when they are cost effective. The emphasis last century on clever double duty solutions now seems to be an almost rinky dink low brow distraction than something that really served the needs of society.

Even the usefulness of cleverness in _any_ field now seems to be in doubt..

I mention this because there are a lot of low-hanging-fruit innovations in many fields that were overlooked until now that should have been successful decades ago. Why? Obviously design mentality has changed. Engineering is more arbitrary and psychological than many think.

Some of this may be fallout from electronic design relying exclusively on dedicated components.


Bret Cahill

 

On Wednesday, 1 January 2020 18:28:18 UTC, Bret Cahill wrote:

> There are other factors at work here. In the late 19th Century and much of the 20th Century they didn't always have the money or tools for more sophisticated designs requiring more components so mechanical design relying on dove tails, i.e, using the rims of a bicycle wheel for the brakes instead of a dedicated disk rotor, seemed justified.

business is competitive. Things were far tighter in the past


> This is in stark contrast to the way electronic design has always been: Most every component has always been for a single purpose.

Someone never heard of reflex receivers. I couldn't even begin to count the number of circuits using bits for more than 1 purpose.


> As the electronics industry has mushroomed and taken over a lot of the tasks of of machinery, i.e., electric motors vs engines -- there isn't much out there more multi duty than crankcase oil

what does it do other than lubricate an engine & carry debris away?

--, etc., it may have induced a psychological "follow the leader/winner" effect on mechanical design as well.

Using hot radiator water to heat your motor vehicle may be one great exception, but it now seems ignorant/backwards to not go with dedicated solutions, certainly when they are cost effective.

I don't think a blanket approach is really justified. Some products/markets are best served with dedicated subsystems, some best served with older style cost cutting designs. What has changed is the shift in the percentages of the 2.


> The emphasis last century on clever double duty solutions now seems to be an almost rinky dink low brow distraction than something that really served the needs of society.

It may be less used now in electronics, but that doesn't change its importance in the past century, and it is still used.


> Even the usefulness of cleverness in _any_ field now seems to be in doubt..

that's an unusually foolish statement


> I mention this because there are a lot of low-hanging-fruit innovations in many fields that were overlooked until now that should have been successful decades ago. Why?

An interesting topic that deserves more than a quick reply. As a society we do seem slow to embrace a fair percentage of technological progress. Often the reasons why are sound, not always.


> Obviously design mentality has changed.

to some extent, inevitably.

> Engineering is more arbitrary and psychological than many think.

some is. Much isn't. I'm not sure that tells us much.

Some of this may be fallout from electronic design relying exclusively on dedicated components.


Bret Cahill

....which it hasn't. The changes are more due to much lower costs, much greater disposable wealth and the consequent rise of greater pressure for products to [appear to] be better than the competition.


NT

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2020-02-13, tabbypurr@gmail.com <tabbypurr@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wednesday, 1 January 2020 18:28:18 UTC, Bret Cahill wrote:

There are other factors at work here. In the late 19th Century and much of the 20th Century they didn't always have the money or tools for more sophisticated designs requiring more components so mechanical design relying on dove tails, i.e, using the rims of a bicycle wheel for the brakes instead of a dedicated disk rotor, seemed justified.

business is competitive. Things were far tighter in the past


This is in stark contrast to the way electronic design has always been: Most every component has always been for a single purpose.

Someone never heard of reflex receivers. I couldn't even begin to count the number of circuits using bits for more than 1 purpose.


As the electronics industry has mushroomed and taken over a lot of the tasks of of machinery, i.e., electric motors vs engines -- there isn't much out there more multi duty than crankcase oil

what does it do other than lubricate an engine & carry debris away?

cools the pistons and fills the hydraluic valve lifters

I'm not certain that that's everything.



--
Jasen.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-02-14 00:41, Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2020-02-13, tabbypurr@gmail.com <tabbypurr@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, 1 January 2020 18:28:18 UTC, Bret Cahill wrote:

There are other factors at work here. In the late 19th Century and much of the 20th Century they didn't always have the money or tools for more sophisticated designs requiring more components so mechanical design relying on dove tails, i.e, using the rims of a bicycle wheel for the brakes instead of a dedicated disk rotor, seemed justified.

business is competitive. Things were far tighter in the past


This is in stark contrast to the way electronic design has always been: Most every component has always been for a single purpose.

Someone never heard of reflex receivers. I couldn't even begin to count the number of circuits using bits for more than 1 purpose.


As the electronics industry has mushroomed and taken over a lot of the tasks of of machinery, i.e., electric motors vs engines -- there isn't much out there more multi duty than crankcase oil

what does it do other than lubricate an engine & carry debris away?

cools the pistons and fills the hydraluic valve lifters

I'm not certain that that's everything.

Helps cool the valves too. Sodium-filled exhaust valves work by
improving heat transfer from the valve head to the guide via the oil.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Bret Cahill]

There are other factors at work here. In the late 19th Century and much of the 20th Century they didn't always have the money or tools for more sophisticated designs requiring more components so mechanical design relying on dove tails, i.e, using the rims of a bicycle wheel for the brakes instead of a dedicated disk rotor, seemed justified.

business is competitive. Things were far tighter in the past


This is in stark contrast to the way electronic design has always been: Most every component has always been for a single purpose.

Someone never heard of reflex receivers. I couldn't even begin to count the number of circuits using bits for more than 1 purpose.

You need something like, say a cap or inductor, deliberately designed to have, say, a high resistance to keep the circuit above a certain temperature. Most here will snicker / summarily dismiss that approach like those late night 30 min. infomercials where the last use of the whopper chopper is as a bludgeon.

The OP never claimed there aren't exceptions in both fields, just that this is one of the least discussed differences between circuit design and, say, machine design and D & D seems to be disappearing in many places w/o comment.

It's not just happening in mechanical design. It may apply to humans. There's a tsunami of online work style / life style articles all saying, with at least some credibility, that multi-tasking -- "flat land thinking" as Nietzsche called it -- may have seemed to work in the past but it will not help you accomplish anything worthwhile nowadays. Today the philosopher gets the $$$.

So when is D & D clever and when is D & D too-clever-by-half?

The reason this question is important is D & D seems to be enjoying a renaissance in geo engineering schemes where it might be cheaper to work with infrastructure that's already in place.

For example, you might want to water desert crops with shredded Mylar in the irrigation mix. Glitter on the soil cools desert ag areas for a longer growing season, less evaporation of water plus more light on the leaves for faster turnaround. As well as increasing the albedo. (Maybe crankcase oil is more multitasking.) Obviously this would only be done for the initial irrigation of row crops but any time for flooding orchards.

If D & D turns out to be a dumb approach in _all_ fields in the long run, that could help shift funding to geo engineering schemes that have a better chance of working, not making an even bigger mess.


Bret Cahill


Milo Minderbinder after re-purposing his Egyptian cotton: "Is it that bad?"

Yossarian (spitting out the chocolate covered cotton): "It's even worse. You didn't even take the seeds out."

-- Joseph Heller

 

[Bret Cahill]

There are other factors at work here. In the late 19th Century and much of the 20th Century they didn't always have the money or tools for more sophisticated designs requiring more components so mechanical design relying on dove tails, i.e, using the rims of a bicycle wheel for the brakes instead of a dedicated disk rotor, seemed justified.

business is competitive. Things were far tighter in the past


This is in stark contrast to the way electronic design has always been: Most every component has always been for a single purpose.

Someone never heard of reflex receivers. I couldn't even begin to count the number of circuits using bits for more than 1 purpose.


As the electronics industry has mushroomed and taken over a lot of the tasks of of machinery, i.e., electric motors vs engines -- there isn't much out there more multi duty than crankcase oil

what does it do other than lubricate an engine & carry debris away?

cools the pistons and fills the hydraluic valve lifters

I'm not certain that that's everything.

Helps cool the valves too. Sodium-filled exhaust valves work by
improving heat transfer from the valve head to the guide via the oil.

The head gasket is the multi tasking hold out that should have gone dedicated a century ago, even in small vehicle engines. The oil and coolant ports in the head and block could be recast / re 3-D printed to cool anything that's being cooled now with dedicated external tubing from the block to head..

Then the head gasket could be dedicated to just one task: sealing the high pressure high temperature cylinders. Not only would this reduce blown H-Gs but when they did blow the engine would still run indefinitely on the remaining cylinders. They may already do this with larger engines, i.e., marine diesels.

First guess: A multi tasking head gasket saves about 2 minutes labor in the manufacture of the engine.


Bret Cahill

Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Bret Cahill]

When energy or other resources are at a premium then multi tasking may very well still be better.

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-y-octovalve-easter-egg-teardown/

 

[Bret Cahill]

Like "kids in a candy store" double duty reappears in geo engineering schemes:


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Looking for ideas with multiple benefits Professor Boyd said there was a preference internationally for techniques that had multiple benefits for the environment, along with those that did not step too far from the realms of financial reality.

"There has been so much sensationalism around this, with people talking about mirrors in space, or thousands of these bobbing pipes in the ocean," he said.

"It's become a little bit sci-fi.

"We really want to bring that back to earth by exploring work that involves environmental co-benefits."


https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-10-07/scientists-warn-we-have-10-years-to-start-removing-co2/11563584