Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

How do you store and manage your electricity?
ChemicalHorizon
Noobie
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue, 01 May 2018, 18:27
Real Name: Anthony Rich

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by ChemicalHorizon » Mon, 28 May 2018, 19:51

Most likely ICP yes, will check tomorrow, posted in a hurry this arvo. Chemical Engineer here, will utilise 2 labs, 1 at my disposal, and another commercial lab for what I cannot do in house.

Key items in my mind:

Carthode elemental
Anode BSE microscope (graphite or graphene), or other, may need further work as it's checked.
Electrolyte elemental

I don't see a value add option to test the unit as a whole on a test bench. As far as I can see, to settle the makeup it must be by invasive testing of the cell.

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2410
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by weber » Mon, 28 May 2018, 20:12

Thanks @magnify, for going to the trouble of reading the whole thread so carefully. And thanks coulomb, for taking the time to respond to magnify's points. But I must correct one misconception that you presented.
coulomb wrote:
magnify wrote: Supercaps Groupie (page 2)
" ... We’ve already 100% cycle tested for 3000 cycles at 1.5C, 14 cycles per day, and the test is still going. ... "
Ok, that's the best evidence on the side of supercapacitors. But we only have the manufacturer's word that the cycles are really going down to zero volts every day, and that there is no significant degradation of performace, particularly storage capacity (apparent Ah). LTOs are supposed to last 10,000 cycles or so, so the degradation at 3,000 cycles would be modest, especially if they're not really going down to zero volts. Perhaps there is electronics in the Arvio box that saves the batteries from total discharge.
It would be the best evidence for supercapacitors, if it were true. But it is not doing 100% cycles and it is not doing them at 1.5C.

You must have missed where I pointed out, in this post, that in this video, if you ignore what Paul is saying and just look at the numbers, you can see, in two different ways, that he is in fact only cycling the module by about 57% of its capacity, and is only doing it at 0.75C. For an LTO battery, the voltages correspond to cycling it between about 33% and 90% SoC. This is "thrashing it with a feather". I would not expect any noticeable decrease in capacity for an LTO after even 10,000 cycles when treated so gently.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2410
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by weber » Mon, 28 May 2018, 20:26

@magnify, You try to find holes in "the LTO hypothesis" and that's all well and good. But the proposers of that hypothesis are not the ones selling a product and making completely unsubstantiated claims in order to sell it.

Let's see you expend the same effort finding all the holes in "the supercapacitor hypothesis" and noting all the suggestions we've made for how Arvio could "try harder" but have failed to do so.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

User avatar
jonescg
Senior Member
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu, 21 Jan 2010, 23:05
Real Name: Chris Jones
Location: Perth, WA.

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by jonescg » Mon, 28 May 2018, 20:28

ChemicalHorizon wrote:
Mon, 28 May 2018, 19:51
Most likely ICP yes, will check tomorrow, posted in a hurry this arvo. Chemical Engineer here, will utilise 2 labs, 1 at my disposal, and another commercial lab for what I cannot do in house.

Key items in my mind:

Carthode elemental
Anode BSE microscope (graphite or graphene), or other, may need further work as it's checked.
Electrolyte elemental

I don't see a value add option to test the unit as a whole on a test bench. As far as I can see, to settle the makeup it must be by invasive testing of the cell.
Yes the whole module would be an expensive paperweight, but a single cell would be good.

I studied a B.Sc. in chemistry, where organic synthesis and biochemistry were my majors. I ended up moving to Perth in 2003 to study plants and genetics for my PhD and postdoc. Now I work on batteries :)

Welcome to the forum by the way! We meet at Curtin uni on the 12th of June, so it would be good to have you along.
AEVA National Secretary, WA branch vice-chair

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2410
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by weber » Mon, 28 May 2018, 22:13

@magnify
You know what makes you look like a troll? You were doing ok, right up until you wrote this. Twice now. From an anonymous account.
magnify wrote:
Sun, 27 May 2018, 21:45
Not good enough---try harder.
That's a completely ridiculous thing to say. We've collectively spent hundreds of hours, pro-bono, motivated only by a desire for the truth, so as to protect consumers, and sellers of genuine energy storage products, and yes we even tried to save Arvio from their own ignorance (which is now looking decidedly wilful). We made use of every scrap of data Arvio have provided, and we analysed every paper they have put up as describing a possible chemistry for their devices. We don't have the ability to try any harder than we already are, because Arvio have repeatedy refused to supply individual cells for testing, insisting that we had to buy complete modules. And they have refused to say what test results would convince them that these are not supercapacitors. We are already convinced. They have not done, or have not published the results of, an easy test of their claim of operating at 85 °C. And they have not responded to our simple request to show everyone what is under the Kilowatt Labs sticker on the claimed USB-rechargeable AA-sized device.

Tell me you don't have a vested interest in it being a supercapacitor. I'm guessing you ordered a couple of modules before you learned about this thread, and now you're desperately trying to convince yourself you haven't blown $7000. Am I right? :)

We have not damaged Arvio's reputation. They have done that themselves. It would only be us doing the damage if Arvio's claims were true and it really was a supercapacitor.

As I've done my best to explain, the voltage versus time data already published by Arvio, is completely sufficient, on its own, to prove conclusively that it is not a supercapacitor. Tell me what part of that you don't understand, or don't believe, and I'll try to explain it better.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

magnify
Noobie
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun, 27 May 2018, 17:56

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by magnify » Mon, 28 May 2018, 22:58

@Weber. There's the over-cooked suspicion and accusations again. You want to be taken seriously don't you? Well that's not the way.

For what it's worth, I'm happy to state I have no vested-interest in any of these techs, products or companies, nor have I ordered or bought any of these Kilowatt Labs 'capacitor units'.

However, I have considered obtaining one for testing, but as I found today the Arvio-shop's supercapacitor page link is curiously not reachable.

https://arvioshop.com.au/supercapacitor

I had it bookmarked and accessed it just days ago, and google confirms it's the right address.

The TechPack page and its two brochures are still accessible.

http://arvio.com.au/tech_pack

http://arvio.com.au/independence-day-brochure%20

http://arvio.com.au/supercapacitor-brochur

Hopefully someone's checking for 5 acres of graphine, if only to reassure themselves.

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2410
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by weber » Tue, 29 May 2018, 04:22

magnify wrote:
Mon, 28 May 2018, 22:58
Weber. There's the over-cooked suspicion and accusations again.
They seem overcooked to you. They seem perfectly reasonable to me. Those are just matters of opinion, as are all your suppositions about what companies would and wouldn't do.

How about addressing the data regarding current, voltage, time and temperature?
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

magnify
Noobie
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun, 27 May 2018, 17:56

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by magnify » Tue, 29 May 2018, 07:40

weber wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 04:22

Those are just matters of opinion, as are all your suppositions about what companies would and wouldn't do.
As are your suppositions Weber, you could have left all that stuff out, but you didn't, you chose to go that way, and it reads like company-trolling. Your findings could have sufficed to create the appropriate testing and reporting without getting needlessly antagonistic.
weber wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 04:22

How about addressing the data regarding current, voltage, time and temperature?
That's been done and is not good enough, material testing is what's required. Instead of further attempting to draw me into agreeing with your suppositions, focus on material test confirmation or falsification.

I await some non proxy-facts.

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2410
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by weber » Tue, 29 May 2018, 15:27

magnify wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 07:40
Your findings could have sufficed to create the appropriate testing and reporting without getting needlessly antagonistic.
Bad weber! I let my aversion to scammers show, and that has somehow invalidated my arithmetic.
magnify wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 07:40
weber wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 04:22

How about addressing the data regarding current, voltage, time and temperature?
That's been done and is not good enough, material testing is what's required.
Sure. The testing that has actually been done is not good enough, and the testing that can't be done (without the cooperation of the scammers) is what's required. Yeah. Thanks for that.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

magnify
Noobie
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun, 27 May 2018, 17:56

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by magnify » Tue, 29 May 2018, 16:59

The following link purports to show rectangular shaped super capacitors, as used in the Kilowatt Labs "Capacitor Module" series/parallel "Super Capacitor Array".

http://kilowattlabs.com/energy-storage-technology.html

"Supercapacitors Connected in a Series and Parallel Combination"

http://kilowattlabs.com/img/img-Pseudo- ... nected.jpg

There are 160 rectangular supercapacitor devices depicted.

So the PCB mounted blue tubes were apparently the "Battery Array" part of the "Charge Retention Circuit", as per the "Charge Storage Assembly", that's depicted in the Patent Application diagram.

A rectangular supercap shape maximises available volume.

MicrotronTec.com is the company claiming to manufacture the graphine supercaps in China, and supply them for KiloWatt Labs (the marketer), but MicrotronTec says this:

http://microtrontec.com/technologies.php
Graphene-Based Ultracaps

Unlike conventional ultracaps using Activated Carbon, Microtron’s storage cells use graphene. The higher surface area of graphene allows Microtron to deploy ultracap cells with capacitance values of up to 140,000 farads vs the 3,000 farads in most ultracapacitors on the market today.
One can only presume this 140,000 farad refers to a complete "Capacitor Module" supercap array.

140,000F ÷ 160 devices = 875F per supercap.

A rectangle has about double the volume of a cylinder, of same height and width, so appears plausible.

There's also an early generic prototype image shown in the second swipe graphic on their Technology page link. Note that the 3,000 farad figure mentioned only refers to generic commercial "ultracapacitors", that are not claimed to be within the "Capacitor Module", so don't get hung-up on that number, as it's not relevant.

MicrotronTec's Technology page is clearly showing a very early prototype of the three subsequent renditions which we now see as the early Kilowatt Labs product which we have pictures of. So the Kilowatt Labs units were clearly developed by MicrotronTec, who also claim to operate the Chinese factory that's manufacturing the depicted rectangular graphine supercaps. Which they then supply for "Capacitor Modulule" assembly, by GreenTec.com, in Dubai, for Kilowatt Labs, to market them of late.


NOTE: When a boy, by default, people gave everyone the benefit of the doubt, until proven otherwise. It was the right thing to do, plus it just worked, really well.

magnify
Noobie
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun, 27 May 2018, 17:56

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by magnify » Tue, 29 May 2018, 17:14

btw, Arvioshop's link came back up this morning, seems it was down only about 24 hours.

https://arvioshop.com.au/supercapacitor

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2410
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by weber » Tue, 29 May 2018, 18:58

So are you suggesting that Arvio completely failed to notice 160 rectangular things in the same box as the 1200 cylindrical things? Or that they saw them, but were too stupid to suspect they might be the supercapacitors, and so completely failed to mention them, or test them, even after we pointed out that their tests showed the cylindrical things to be batteries?

If there are any supercapacitors in that box (which we have always allowed there might be), they are only there for show. The 1200 cylindrical things that Arvio have told us are there, completely explain the energy storage capacity of the box, by being nominally 2.4 volt 1.3 amp-hour lithium-titanate cells. 1200 x 2.4 x 1.3 = 3744 Wh.
magnify wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 16:59
A rectangle has about double the volume of a cylinder, of same height and width, so appears plausible.
I'm starting to get an idea of why our calculations may be lost on you. ;)
NOTE: When a boy, by default, people gave everyone the benefit of the doubt
we tried to
until proven otherwise.
it has been
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

User avatar
reecho
Senior Member
Posts: 579
Joined: Sun, 17 Apr 2011, 02:39
Real Name: Richard Baird
Location: Perth WA
Contact:

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by reecho » Tue, 29 May 2018, 19:59

Oh please...

When you post this at a bottom of a post:

"Not good enough---try harder."

You are a troll or a sockpuppet. Take your pick. We use real identities here and are a pretty tight bunch. You failed that test.

Our bullshit filters are highly tuned.

magnify
Noobie
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun, 27 May 2018, 17:56

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by magnify » Wed, 30 May 2018, 01:19

weber wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 18:58
So are you suggesting that Arvio completely failed to notice 160 rectangular things in the same box as the 1200 cylindrical things?
No. I've just pointed out that Kilowatt Labs, the people who make it, say these exist in there, and that the storage is primarily based on them, and not on the charge-maintaining battery array.

Did you not notice 'Supercaps' was in no hurry to be clear about the method and mechanism?

And you have misunderstood, there is a distinction being made, 'Supercaps' said:
Hi Adverse effects, I was referring to modules not cells. By that I mean a unit in our case made of 1200 cells in series and parallel.
We can parallel the modules almost indefinitely.
In other words, there are 1,200 somethings within the Kilowatt Labs "capacitor module" case, in series and parallel, some of which constitute the supercapacitor array, and some of which constitute the cap's charge-retention battery array, as per the patent application details.

Now you can assume any cynical baseless proofless things that you want to, Weber, I'm now sure you will. But I'm interested in figuring out what they have claimed, despite the conspiracy theorist inclined within the thread. And I don't presume in the first instance that they're crooks, like you quickly decided was the case, within your first comments to topic. Because just maybe, they aren't crooks. In fact, I think this is vastly more likely, in the circumstances. So I'll do what you should have tried, and figure out how this can be done, sans an assumed scam option/tangent.

To account for it, Microtrontec must have developed an extremely cheap method of synthesising graphine, so they could make an extremely cheap supercap module. But these don't retain charge long enough to be much use. So to keep them charged, plus desirably (marketably) non-flameable, and low-toxic, they devise a robust new Li battery type, for an integrated trickle recharge array, via the balance control module, to slow trickle-charge the supercaps to keep them at, or near to a full charge for much longer, to allow rapid supercap level discharge, and supercap level recharge. i.e. partial capacity of the unit's storage potential. So the batteries don't get used much, if possible. Some applications may use more batteries than others. A regularly used EV city commuter may use mostly supercaps, for instance, with a 'reserve' battery.

After recharging the current unit, and the supercap volts begin fall, the Li immediately recharges the supercap array to full, if possible.

So, it goes like this, when charging the supercaps begin to refill fast, which simultaneously sends electrons into the control circuit, which begins to recharge the Li battery array via taking electrons from the supercap array.

Hence the discharge and recharge looks like a type of Li battery, hence the time to partial charge is slower than you'd expect for a supercap, as it is almost immediately recharging the Li array too.

However, you have fully charged the supercap array after about 30 sec, and only partially charged the Li array (when fast charging ~4 mins). So when all charging stops, or is interupted, the controller prevents the supercaps from recharging the Li array further, so after 4 mins there's just enough charge in the Li array (3 mins and ~30 sec worth), to keep the supercap array full, for a day or three.

So the control system is biased to keep the supercap array full, if possible, to ensure rapid discharge and recharge can occur at the level of the supercap array only, but much longer to fill the battery array as well.

But why bother? Why not just use LTOs? Scheesh!

Because the graphine supercaps are very cheap, compared to even a bulk-buy of LTOs, and the supercaps can recharge and discharge at least ~50% of the unit's available energy storage in tens of seconds. And recharge it just as quickly, when needed, so you are almost immediately able to function practically, at a high level, with plenty of juice in seconds.

That's gold, especially for vehicle application. Plus these can then viably utilise rapid wireless partial recharging. That is transformative. Tap and go payment is a cherry on top. Suddenly EVs and recharging them becomes mainstream practical, virtually a non-issue. And there's real scope for much cheaper supercapacitor modules to come.

Let's say a Li battery array constitutes 25% of the total storage. Then you'll only need to use 25% of the more expensive Li batteries, to make this unit work, once you've created the programable control system. Package it, market it (which Kilowatt Labs are doing poorly, so far), and roll it out.

Input costs have plummeted, profit margin just shot up, and the tech is very convenient so will be popular. The potential to make a highly competitive transformative discharge/recharge with useful storage capability is very clear, once you have a cheap fast industrial graphine synthesis capability.

Who wouldn't do that? Namely, create what the patent application depicts. Who would not patent it? You'd make an old-school fortune, if you have the cheap abundant graphine source.

And already potential useful density is three times higher than claimed in these caps.
weber wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 18:58
If there are any supercapacitors in that box (which we have always allowed there might be), they are only there for show.
Priceless. Oh yes, these things happen all the time.

Sarc not required.
weber wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 18:58
... by being nominally 2.4 volt 1.3 amp-hour lithium-titanate cells. 1200 x 2.4 x 1.3 = 3744 Wh.
You have actual proof of this? No? Another supposition? Oh, too bad. And look at you, you were convinced LTOs would be much too expensive to make the margin.

And isn't it 2.7 volt and 3550 Wh?
weber wrote:
Tue, 29 May 2018, 18:58
it has been [proven]
You haven't proven a thing, just speculation on more speculation, padded-out with assertions and bonus accusations. Not your finest hour.


@ reecho, I don't care about your happy consensus, or close-knit social comfort-blanket, it's irrelevant. I'm much more inclined not to follow a crowd, or the group-think 'leaders', because groups, without actual evidence, are just as likely to be wrong, if not considerably moreso.

I'm going to state that I think you've all got it wrong due to jaded collective cynicism and a willingness to blithely accept proxy-facts in place of real ones, and peer rush to bid-up the 'conclusions' and group-nod knowingly, then defend it. Love that.

It's going to be interesting to watch, but don't worry, I couldn't be bothered holding grudges, or to say I told you so, as you'll all be too busy cleaning off the egg anyway.

So please, strut about all you want, do a little tap dance jigg, it's exciting.

TCryptos
Noobie
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon, 02 Apr 2018, 05:28
Real Name: Thor

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by TCryptos » Wed, 30 May 2018, 08:18

Microtrontec.com is currently hosted at Turnkey Internet Inc.. This domain is connected to IP address 66.206.43.154 which is hosted on a server that appears to be located in Latham, United States. This domain is ranked number 12929241 in the world. It seems Microtrontec.com has about 5 daily visitors. Taking into account all these variables, we estimate the value of this website at: $11 USD.
https://w3bin.com/domain/microtrontec.com
Other websites who use this Google AdSense account ID: 3557783114367802

rick-e.com
Kilowattlabs.com is currently hosted at Digitalocean Llc. This domain is connected to IP address 174.138.33.145 which is hosted on a server that appears to be located in North Bergen, United States. This domain is ranked number 2758827 in the world. It seems Kilowattlabs.com has about 48 daily visitors. Taking into account all these variables, we estimate the value of this website at: $102 USD.
https://w3bin.com/domain/kilowattlabs.com

These companies certainly look like major world energy players.

User avatar
Richo
Senior Member
Posts: 3198
Joined: Mon, 16 Jun 2008, 00:19
Real Name: Richard
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by Richo » Wed, 30 May 2018, 12:40

Microtrontec.com
These are just as suss.
1 CEO, 4 advisors and a Uni student in Politics and international affairs.
This does not make up a manufacturing business.

http://microtrontec.com/storage.php
Once again the graph at the bottom of this page looks like a battery not a cap.

There isn't even a picture of the actual product.
Vaporware.
Help prevent road rage - get outta my way! Blasphemy is a swear word. Magnetic North is a south Pole.

User avatar
Richo
Senior Member
Posts: 3198
Joined: Mon, 16 Jun 2008, 00:19
Real Name: Richard
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by Richo » Wed, 30 May 2018, 12:42

http://rick-e.com/about.php

Say what now:

Microtron Technologies Inc. is a US based technology development company pioneering tehnee regley-cstericct oerc orensoemaryc. hM, dicervoetrloopnm ise wnte,l la pnods mitiaonnuefda ctotu rreinagc,h p brootmho dteinvge lao psminogo atnhd t rdaenvseitloiopne dto emcaonnuofmacietusr winigth f ahceilaitdieqsu ainr tGeursa ning Wzhaosuh (inCghtinoan) D. .C. (USA), research labs in Dubai (UAE)
Help prevent road rage - get outta my way! Blasphemy is a swear word. Magnetic North is a south Pole.

User avatar
Richo
Senior Member
Posts: 3198
Joined: Mon, 16 Jun 2008, 00:19
Real Name: Richard
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by Richo » Wed, 30 May 2018, 12:44

It seems Kilowattlabs.com has about 48 daily visitors.
Sorry I'll cut down on my daily visits :lol:
Help prevent road rage - get outta my way! Blasphemy is a swear word. Magnetic North is a south Pole.

User avatar
Richo
Senior Member
Posts: 3198
Joined: Mon, 16 Jun 2008, 00:19
Real Name: Richard
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by Richo » Wed, 30 May 2018, 12:50

magnify wrote:
Wed, 30 May 2018, 01:19
So the control system is biased to keep the supercap array full, if possible, to ensure rapid discharge and recharge can occur at the level of the supercap array only, but much longer to fill the battery array as well.
Sorry I already said Power IN = Power OUT
Weather there is fancy control circuit moving energy in and out of caps wont make any difference.
Especially at these low power levels.

So unless these magical caps are real it is better (cheaper) just to use LTO's.
Help prevent road rage - get outta my way! Blasphemy is a swear word. Magnetic North is a south Pole.

User avatar
Richo
Senior Member
Posts: 3198
Joined: Mon, 16 Jun 2008, 00:19
Real Name: Richard
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by Richo » Wed, 30 May 2018, 12:53

research labs in Dubai (UAE)
Oh yeah - same place as the guy who took out the kilowatt patent on the control circuit.

It still reads as big ring of scam to me.
Help prevent road rage - get outta my way! Blasphemy is a swear word. Magnetic North is a south Pole.

User avatar
Scotty T
Groupie
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue, 10 Mar 2015, 17:57
Real Name: Scott Taylor
Location: Canberra

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by Scotty T » Wed, 30 May 2018, 15:48

I'll see if I can ask someone at work about these claims. There's some journal articles linked below about graphene and supercapacitors for those people that understand more than me about it.

https://research.csiro.au/graphene/rese ... roduction/

magnify
Noobie
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun, 27 May 2018, 17:56

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by magnify » Wed, 30 May 2018, 16:04

Richo wrote:
Wed, 30 May 2018, 12:44
It seems Kilowattlabs.com has about 48 daily visitors.
Sorry I'll cut down on my daily visits :lol:
Given they just showed up on the market and only in Australia, so far, and their website is still being developed, I'm not really surprised.

What I noticed in all the associated company sites (even reseller Arvio) is they all seem to have adopted the blurb on the MicrotronTec pages, where it is referring to just the supercap devices themselves, and have hyped and used that same blurb about the performance of the supercap devices, to also (falsely) describe the perfornance of a completed Killowatt Labs "Capacitor Module", which is obviously misleading and wrong, wrong, WRONG.

Which is what I meant by saying Killowatt Labs is doing a poor job at marketing this thing, which is their main task it seems.

At the very least they need to clean up, or better still, completely scap the text in all those websites, and just use data from the Kilowatt Labs user and technical manuals to describe the "Capacitor Modules", minus the BS.

They needed to do that back in February at the latest.

What would help a lot is if Arvio, the importer, put a full pdf of the manuals for the 3.55 kWh and 7.1 kWh units online---ASAP. With a proper brief on what it is, what it contains and wha it really does, in practice.

Plus then get it fully reviewed and independently chemically tested.

Kilowatt Labs aim seems to be to buy time before a competitor can figure out the tech, and gear up to take them on with a similar product. But that will not work, they need to be open, or else they'll keep coming over as dodgy. They aren't ready for prime time. Hence dipping their toe in Australia first.

Seems Arvio is expected to get it done, locally, but there's nowhere near enough information transparency to explain this thing adequately to this market, at this point. As 'Supercaps' said he couldn't even basically discuss the 'IP', much too NDA bound. And that won't cut it marketing a new tech in Australia.

Kilowatt Labs have a lot of work to do and it appears it's the company founders who are shooting themselves in the foot so far.

2/10 for marketing, Kilowatt Labs.

TCryptos
Noobie
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon, 02 Apr 2018, 05:28
Real Name: Thor

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by TCryptos » Wed, 30 May 2018, 16:10

OK, so I've been thinking about the whole lithium battery backup to mitigate against leakage concept that Kilowatt Labs talk about in their material - it bothers me. I did a couple of simulations and found out why:

Assumptions: 3.5 kWh of total storage, initial voltage 60V, leak resistance 250 ohm. With those numbers a 7000F capacitor leaks down to 30V from 60V over 14 days.

I did the numbers with 7000F capacitance and no battery, 6000F and 0.5 kWh battery and 5000F and 1.0 kWh battery:

Here's 2.5 kWh of capacitor storage with 1 kWh of additional lithium backup (red) compared to all capacitor, no battery (blue):

Image

Here's 3.0 kWh of capacitor storage with 0.5 kWh of additional lithium backup (red) compared to all capacitor, no battery (blue):

Image

In all cases, having the lithium battery backup reduces the energy available at any time after t=0. It's because the capacitance is less for the same total storage.

Having the battery present does hold up the terminal voltage for longer of course - in my simulations, the 0.5 kWh battery maintains 60V for about 32 hours (capacitor unassisted is down to 55V) and the 1.0 kWh battery for about double that (capacitor unassisted down to 50V). That is at a cost to total available stored energy though.

The rickshaw site linked above talks about 9% lithium in the pack, which is less than I've modeled. So the voltage maintenance time will be even less and the energy storage hit likewise less.

In any case, if the "graphene supercapacitors" are so much cheaper than lithium batteries, it really makes no sense to include any lithium batteries at all - you'd be better served by spending that money on adding more supercaps. You can play with the numbers, but the principle will still hold.

TCryptos
Noobie
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon, 02 Apr 2018, 05:28
Real Name: Thor

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by TCryptos » Wed, 30 May 2018, 16:17

Kilowatt Labs have a lot of work to do and it appears it's the company founders who are shooting themselves in the foot so far.
Using a $10 / month hosting service for a supposedly international concern is hardly a good look.

magnify
Noobie
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun, 27 May 2018, 17:56

Re: Arvio 3.5kWh drop-in-battery-replacement supercapacitor on sale

Post by magnify » Wed, 30 May 2018, 16:46

@ TCryptos

Agree, even basic examination, sans simming, makes clear a domestic E storage will benefit from more supercaps and less battery array, maybe 75:25 (at least it won't hurt, except costs more), while a regularly used car would maybe suffice with 90:10 (thereabout), an e-bike 100% caps.

Post Reply