News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by TheLoafOfBread on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:12AM (#36954309)
Superconductors allow creation of non-chemical energy storage whose capacity is only limited by storage's mechanical resistance from being crushed by its own magnetic field and which has nothing like "finite charge-discharge cycle life limit"

Additionally it has no internal resistance, so you can charge such battery virtually immediately, but you can also discharge it immediately. This will be important for energy based weapons.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by op00to on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:16AM (#36954331)
Will batteries still explode like LiPo batteries?
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by amluto on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:37AM (#36954445)
No, they’ll explode unlike LiPo batteries. LiPo batteries merely catch fire.

An electromagnet, superconducting or otherwise, has large internal forces. If the support structure lets go, it will move. And, if part of the circuit becomes non-conducting, an inductive kickback will occur, generating enough voltage to (initially) sustain the original current.

You could cut a Li-ion battery in half, and the two halves will continue to store their chemical energy, at least until they burn up. If you cut an inductor in half (which is what this type of energy storage device is), that energy will dissipate very quickly whether you like it or not.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by mmis1000 on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @07:20AM (#36954689)
A battery that transform all energy it stored into heat sounds more like a bomb instead. Imagine someone accidentally heat up the 'super-conductive' battery to the point that it is no longer super-conductive.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:52AM (#36955329)
That goes for any sufficiently dense energy storage system, including most batteries. Imagine someone accidentally shorted out a car battery with something that can withstand a few thousand amps. (Come to think of it, a room temperature superconductor would do nicely for that purpose...).
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by sudosysgen on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @09:49AM (#36955922)
I did something similar once with a high power lowish voltage battery array - my soldering iron's shroud literally vaporized with a deafening bang before even triggering the fuse.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @10:09AM (#36956148)
Ri of those is typically 1 Ohm or thereabouts, which at 500 A develops 500W in the battery itself and a large multiple of that in your 'load' (in this case your soldering iron :) ).

When working with large battery arrays I use tools that are taped in all the way except for the business end, just in case. All you need to do is drop a wrench in the wrong spot and it's party time.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by sudosysgen on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @11:09AM (#36956964)
Not 1Ohm, in my case the array had an internal resistance of 15 milliOhms, which is way more fun. Though I imagine the BMS and fuse were relatively effective resistors in that situation too.

Agreed about taped tools, I figured that one out right after replacing the fuse :)

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @12:04PM (#36957883)
Oh that's really danger territory.

A BMS typically has a small shunt that helps to figure out the state of charge as well as a large transistor in series with the current to allow switching the battery in and out of circuit.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by sudosysgen on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @12:20PM (#36958129)
Yes, I had an additional fuse in series, what I was referring to is that the BMS's own internal resistance is larger than that of the battery pack. Indeed in an overcurrent situation you can't rely on the MOSFET not to fail short.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @12:23PM (#36958174)
I've seen fets in BMS in Bosch packs cracked in half, top blown off. Quite impressive.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by r2_pilot on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @09:58AM (#36956033)
Well, for starters, batteries have their own internal resistance. Not a whole lot, but enough that whether you short out with copper wire or superconductor, the effect would be the same.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @10:07AM (#36956117)
> Well, for starters, batteries have their own internal resistance.

Indeed they do.

> Not a whole lot, but enough that whether you short out with copper wire or superconductor, the effect would be the same.

Not necessarily, assuming a charged battery in many cases with a copper wire the wire will simply heat up to the point of evaporation and then break the circuit as it sprays molten copper bits all over the place. Some heat will be generated in the battery as well. Watch people mess up with starter cables for some ideas on how this tends to go (and do so from a distance...).

Using a massive copper connector that you some how instantly put across the terminal and manage to keep there would indeed make the balance of the resistance shift to the guts of the battery, which would heat up faster than that that energy can be shed and hence in all likelihood (violently) explode. Besides bits of molten lead and zinc for a car battery you now also have the joy of having to deal with spraying acid. Which depending on the state of charge of the battery can be really nasty stuff.

With a superconductor there would be no chance of the conductor evaporating first, there isn't any work done in the superconductor so it will stay cold, an explosion of the battery would be all but guaranteed.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by amluto on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @05:53PM (#36963667)
Keep in mind that a superconducting energy storage device is kind of the opposite of a battery. An idle battery at full charge has some voltage and zero current, and it’s perfectly happy to stay like that.

An idle superconducting energy storage at full “charge” is not carrying a charge at all — it’s carrying a current. If you cut the wire (or blow a fuse), V = L dI/dt will generate an arbitrarily high voltage to keep that current flowing.

I imagine one would need some spark gaps and/or capacitors to limit the voltage.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @05:17PM (#36977630)
It's a coil. You can just place another inductor around it and increase / decrease that current at will. This is how Kamerlingh Onnes injected current into his superconducting media during the original experiments and that is a two-way street.

https://www.lorentz.leidenuniv.nl/history/cold/DelftKes_HKO_...

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by mnw21cam on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @10:20AM (#36956258)
When an MRI machine has a quenching event, it's a very serious deal. All the energy from the electromagnet gets dumped as heat, which boils off the coolant very quickly. MRI machines have to have a quench pipe which allows the now-gaseous helium to escape to the outside just in case of such a thing happening.

The LHC had a quench event in 2008, which explosively vapourised about 6 tonnes of helium, resulting in considerable damage, and it took more than a year for the accelerator to come back online.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by rajamaka on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:27AM (#36955117)
I haven't taken a science class since I was 16 but could the battery be grounded to prevent an explosion?
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jj999 on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @09:06AM (#36955448)
How do you intend to keep the grounded battery charged ?
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by galangalalgol on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:35AM (#36954433)
Well there wouldn't be fires that produce toxic fumes and burn even under water, but if the coil fractured in an accident all that energy would be released in a tiny fraction of a second instead of a combustion event that takes time. That seems bad...
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by yetihehe on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:42AM (#36954471)
> all that energy would be released in a tiny fraction of a second

Probably along with a large electromagnetic pulse...

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by ben_w on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @07:38AM (#36954783)
Necessarily with a large EMP, as the energy is stored in the magnetic field.

Fortunately the energy density[0] is comparable with rubber bands[1] and supercapacitors[1], so while the EMP is large, it's not terrifyingly large.

[0] at least according to wikipedia, 4-40 kJ/kg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ...

[1] 1.6-6.6 kJ/kg and 10-30 kJ/kg respectively: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by galangalalgol on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:56AM (#36955360)
The energy density isn't the scary bit, the power density is. The referenced paper in that Wikipedia article indicates ~10^5 higher power density than li-ion. So while it stores 10x less energy than li-ion it dumps it so much faster. The difference between a combustion and a detonation if you will. I'm guessing the vicinity of the thing would get turned to plasma.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by ben_w on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @09:20AM (#36955593)
A very small and localised plasma near the normal conductors that suddenly experience a rapidly decaying magnetic field; but the total energy is still (relatively) low compared to, say, the thermal heat capacity of the air of about 1.3 kJ/K/m^3.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by almostnormal on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:59AM (#36955384)
That energy density number likely includes the cooling system.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by galangalalgol on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @09:31AM (#36955725)
That is what I thought too, but reading the paper referenced it seemed like they only included the coils, not even the support structure to keep them from collapsing. But it wasn't that clear.

Edit: they were clear that the limiting factor on energy and power density was the forces exerted on the coils.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by Timon3 on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:46AM (#36954490)
A colleague recently showed me the coil of a broken superconducting magnet after it quenched. There was an easily visible rip in the structure, even though the whole thing was enclosed. It must have at least had enough kinetic energy to tear the metal apart.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:54AM (#36955341)
I've had a relatively small (about 2" x 2" x 1") ceramic magnet explode on me. The shrapnel was embedded deep into the adjacent wall.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by ajago on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:21AM (#36954353)
Can you elaborate on this please? How can superconductors be used for storage?
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by hovering_nox on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:27AM (#36954388)
Basically, just push more and more electricity into a coil of superconductive wire. Because the wire has no resistance, the electricity just loops around forever.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by adrian_b on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:25AM (#36954376)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ...

For now, this is restricted to special applications due to great size and cost. The great size and cost are caused mainly by the cooling systems.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by formerly_proven on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:26AM (#36954383)
The magnetic field of a superconducting electromagnet contains a lot of energy because the field can be very strong with a large cross section. It’s the conjugate of a capacitor after all, it’s just that the energy density of normal inductors is much lower than that of capacitors. Using a superconductor also avoids resistive losses for (dis)charging.

(Inductors are very frequently used for very short-term energy storage (~fractions of a millisecond). For example, all energy output by a flyback converter was briefly stored in the transformer’s magnetic field. Unlike a regular transformer/forward converter, where the magnetic field is just a side effect of coupled inductors, so none of the energy is stored in it.)

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by Sharlin on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:30AM (#36954410)
But obviously you can't exactly carry multi-Tesla electromagnets around. So no car batteries, much less phone batteries. Large energy storage facilities for grid power regulation, possibly.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by galangalalgol on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:38AM (#36954451)
Could you shield them with mumetal? Maybe make tiny arrays of thousands of them each with smaller atorage surrounded by mumetal to let them be close. That way if they break it is only those along the break that would discharge instantly.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:07AM (#36954967)
The quantities of energy released would heat up the material around it to the point that it may well lose its superconducting properties as well. Likely failure of any winding in such a setup would set off the rest as well unless there is a lot more separation. Mu metal has a relatively low saturation limit.

And that's before we get into the purely mechanical stresses created by such an event, which likely will destroy the vicinity of the carrier of the current.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by formerly_proven on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:37AM (#36955195)
Fermi check: Mu metal boxes are only good enough to reduce the influence of this planet's magnetic field, not eliminate, and that's a really weak field (in terms of flux density, it's of course also really freakin gigantic).
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:45AM (#36955268)
Well, they are used in electromagnetic shielding but you'd need an awful lot of it to overcome the kind of field that even a single winding of a superconductor puts out, my intuitive guess is that for any realistically available level of shielding that the magnetic field would punch right through it as if it wasn't there at all.

Just look at what happens if you leave something made out of metal lying around near an MRI machine when it is switched on and that's not for want of attempts to shield it.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by TheLoafOfBread on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:53AM (#36954526)
If you will close it into ferrite cup as it is done today with coils, then all the magnetic field should be limited only on coil on ferrite material itself.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by choeger on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @06:59AM (#36954564)
That's a physics-based assumption, not an engineering-based one.

Unlike the effect on nuclear fusion, the idea of using SC as storage devices is pretty much pure theory.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by TheLoafOfBread on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @07:02AM (#36954578)
It is actually used and it exists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ... See applications
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by choeger on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @07:46AM (#36954826)
That's neat, but it misses the point. LK-99 is not even available for engineering, yet. You might be able to use one of the existing designs. Maybe you need to come up with a new design. But you cannot do that just yet.
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by jacquesm on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:04AM (#36954949)
> But using LK-99 in a SC storage device is still theoretical.

Of course it is, any kind of use of this stuff is still theoretical. That's a content free statement. But GP was making the assumption that if it works it can be used for storage. But that doesn't really follow from the properties of the material as described so far. You'd need a lot more current carrying capacity for that to become a realistic possibility.

Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by cbolton on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @08:37AM (#36955190)
The storage capacity is also limited by the superconductor's critical current. I imagine everything is fine until you add that extra bit of current that causes the material to switch out of superconductivity and all the concentrated energy has to find an escape real quick...
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by chaorace on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @10:21AM (#36956267)
Sounds like an energy weapon to me!
Re:First claimed successful replication of LK-99 superconduc... by gattr on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @12:12PM (#36958004)
This (unplanned loss of superconductivity) sometimes happens to accelerator magnets in LHC. To prevent stuff from melting/blowing up, there's an elaborate protection system integrated ([1]).

[1] LHC Magnet Quench Protection System https://cds.cern.ch/record/259538/files/P00021565.pdf