EEStor says something - but not too much

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

birchoff
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 7:11 pm

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby birchoff » Thu Dec 18, 2014 3:06 pm

So here is what I dont get. what is the claimed capcity of their capacitors?

Asterix
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:08 pm

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby Asterix » Thu Dec 18, 2014 6:56 pm

birchoff wrote:So here is what I dont get. what is the claimed capcity of their capacitors?


Nobody knows that--all we have are "layers" and previous tests have shown wide variability between samples. There are no fully-assembled testable capacitors using Weir's technology.

Nor any EESUs for that matter...

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby GIThruster » Thu Dec 18, 2014 8:57 pm

They have made some fantastical claims of lab tests. Trouble is when AFRL and LockMart went to validate them they got nothing.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

papapoe
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 12:23 am

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby papapoe » Thu Dec 18, 2014 11:19 pm

Nanocarbons is an expert summing up the latest PR,

"About the only hope for significant economic viability was with higher ED at high voltage than commercial alternatives, since ED scales cost via size and materials. Zogbi' statement on low cost manufacturing is 'a bridge too far' for three reasons:
1. He claims to be a market segments and applications expert, not a manufacturing expert.
2. There are no commercial equivalent parts (hundreds to thousands of layers, even at lab scale, from which to extrapolate essential cost items like yield and throughput.
3. It appears the manufacturing process would require sequential layer depositions on current collectors (alternative a cut and stack interleaving) followed by some bakeout for dryness followed by hermetic encapsulation (to exlude moisture intrusion. The complexity compares unfavorably with all aluminum electrolytic and most polymer film caps. Those processes (omitting various form factor lead attach complexities are really simple, and low cost in present high volumes:
(a) For AE, a special grain structure high purity aluminum foil anode is etched and oxidized (the diaelectric oxide thickness increasing with intended voltage) in a large scale reel-to-reel process. The anode foil is slit to individual cap width, interleaved with separator and 'cathode'current collector (the electrolyte itself is the 'cathode') and spiral wound in another reel-to-reel process, stuffed in a can sealed after adding electrolyte. Two fast reel-to-reel processes scaled to a $6billion industry, no slow drying step as is necessary with supercaps. Result is low cost.
(b)Most PF are even simpler. Take whatever polymer film, vacuum metallize (usually aluminum, like for throw away potato chip bags), spiral wind reel-to-reel,flatten (literally squash 'square'), encapsulate by dip coat. Done.

That said, there may still be some faint hope replacing high V wet tantalum (but not ubiquitous 'dry' tantalim to 35v). Said so in mu post What did Galnagni see? Late last year. High V wet tantalum are very high cost parts, inherent in the sintered/oxidized tantalum slug with the necessarilymthick tantalum pentoxide dielctric layer, used where cost is unimportant compared to volumetric efficient and reliability (e.g. avionics). Tantalum ain't cheap. But that is a much, much smaller market than Zogbi has stated. In fact, less than 16% of the $6 billion aluminum electrolytic market cited in his Zenn report is high voltage Zenn potential--according to Zogbi's own publicly available cap market overview from yearend 2013. So it appears he is being paid to at best spin, and at worst knowingly misrepresent, ZennStor commercial potential based on the Intertek technical performance report. Knowing misrepresentation would include actual potential addressable market segment sizes, and the indeterminability of potential ZennStor product cost from just a few proof of principle layers."

mvanwink5
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby mvanwink5 » Fri Dec 19, 2014 4:02 am

With the bad news release of test sample size (conveniently the day after the big stock P.R. pump job) high ED went out the window. ED is terrible. So, it was all pump and dump. Just what Zenscam has done since day #1. Same old scam.
Near term, cheap, dark horse fusion hits the air waves, GF - TED, LM - Announcement. The race is on.

Asterix
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:08 pm

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby Asterix » Fri Dec 19, 2014 7:20 am

Well, that's just it--a "Hail Mary" miracle play from an outfit left running on fumes looking to get a cash infusion should be viewed with more than a grain of skepticism. In the case of the poop reported by Weir since the very beginning, doubly so.

Another thing to keep in mind if you believe the PR is that capacitor technology is moving pretty fast with advances in materials. In the remote possibility that Zennstor may bring the technology to market, it may already well be obsolete.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby GIThruster » Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:20 pm

papapoe wrote:Nanocarbons is an expert summing up the latest PR,

"About the only hope for significant economic viability was with higher ED at high voltage than commercial alternatives, since ED scales cost via size and materials. Zogbi' statement on low cost manufacturing is 'a bridge too far' for three reasons:
1. He claims to be a market segments and applications expert, not a manufacturing expert.
2. There are no commercial equivalent parts (hundreds to thousands of layers, even at lab scale, from which to extrapolate essential cost items like yield and throughput.
3. It appears the manufacturing process would require sequential layer depositions on current collectors (alternative a cut and stack interleaving) followed by some bakeout for dryness followed by hermetic encapsulation (to exlude moisture intrusion. The complexity compares unfavorably with all aluminum electrolytic and most polymer film caps. Those processes (omitting various form factor lead attach complexities are really simple, and low cost in present high volumes:
(a) For AE, a special grain structure high purity aluminum foil anode is etched and oxidized (the diaelectric oxide thickness increasing with intended voltage) in a large scale reel-to-reel process. The anode foil is slit to individual cap width, interleaved with separator and 'cathode'current collector (the electrolyte itself is the 'cathode') and spiral wound in another reel-to-reel process, stuffed in a can sealed after adding electrolyte. Two fast reel-to-reel processes scaled to a $6billion industry, no slow drying step as is necessary with supercaps. Result is low cost.
(b)Most PF are even simpler. Take whatever polymer film, vacuum metallize (usually aluminum, like for throw away potato chip bags), spiral wind reel-to-reel,flatten (literally squash 'square'), encapsulate by dip coat. Done.

That said, there may still be some faint hope replacing high V wet tantalum (but not ubiquitous 'dry' tantalim to 35v). Said so in mu post What did Galnagni see? Late last year. High V wet tantalum are very high cost parts, inherent in the sintered/oxidized tantalum slug with the necessarilymthick tantalum pentoxide dielctric layer, used where cost is unimportant compared to volumetric efficient and reliability (e.g. avionics). Tantalum ain't cheap. But that is a much, much smaller market than Zogbi has stated. In fact, less than 16% of the $6 billion aluminum electrolytic market cited in his Zenn report is high voltage Zenn potential--according to Zogbi's own publicly available cap market overview from yearend 2013. So it appears he is being paid to at best spin, and at worst knowingly misrepresent, ZennStor commercial potential based on the Intertek technical performance report. Knowing misrepresentation would include actual potential addressable market segment sizes, and the indeterminability of potential ZennStor product cost from just a few proof of principle layers."


Whomever you're quoting here is obviously not familiar with the state of the art in 3D printing. LockMart is now printing drones. Printing layers for interleaving at the molecular scale is on the table. In fact I'd be curious whether this isn't what Musk plans to do in that giga-factory he's building. Anyone who neglects what Musk is investing in, has not read the signs of the times. He's got something next gen or he wouldn't be building his own battery factory. My question is, is he really planning to build batteries, or something else?

I guess we'll find out in the next couple years, but obviously Musk thinks whatever he builds will be a game changer (read "disruptive technology") and enough to move us to electric cars.

Time to work on electric spacecraft. Earth to LEO on battery power, anyone?
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

papapoe
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 12:23 am

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby papapoe » Fri Dec 19, 2014 4:15 pm

GIThruster wrote:Whomever you're quoting here is obviously not familiar with the state of the art in 3D printing. LockMart is now printing drones. Printing layers for interleaving at the molecular scale is on the table. In fact I'd be curious whether this isn't what Musk plans to do in that giga-factory he's building. Anyone who neglects what Musk is investing in, has not read the signs of the times. He's got something next gen or he wouldn't be building his own battery factory. My question is, is he really planning to build batteries, or something else?

I guess we'll find out in the next couple years, but obviously Musk thinks whatever he builds will be a game changer (read "disruptive technology") and enough to move us to electric cars.

Time to work on electric spacecraft. Earth to LEO on battery power, anyone?


I know the person is familiar with 3d printing, he deals with Lockheed Martin.

Please don't insult the intelligence of Musk if you are implying Dick Weir is working on something similar to what Musk is, because Weir isn't.

In case you forgot, it wasn't to long ago when Dick Weir and his apologists were peddling all over the internet the EESU was tested a million cycles with hardly any leakage; someone should ask Dick Weir what happened to those EESUs? I'll give you a hint, they never existed.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby GIThruster » Fri Dec 19, 2014 5:08 pm

papapoe wrote:I know the person is familiar with 3d printing, he deals with Lockheed Martin.

Then perhaps you can explain why he's implying molecular level interleaving compares unfavorably to spraying a sheet and rolling it up the way we do for current electrolytic caps. It doesn't. Modern methods for molecular level interleaving are often closely held trade secrets, but can be found throughout the semiconductor industry, and 3D printing is being developed on a proprietary basis for specific mass production facilities like that at LockMart in places all over the world. It's about time. The original concept called variously "laser sintering" and "additive manufacturing" has been in use with ceramics at places like LockMart for more than a decade.

The point is, the quote above is incorrect. Many manufacturing methods exist to build structures like what Weir wanted, and these do not "compare unfavorably" once you look at the consequences of molecular level construction. Nanomaterials are the future and much of the future has arrived. We're dong this stuff now. Weir had this much right and whomever you're quoting has it wrong. Modern methods link things like femtosecond pulse laser echo velocimetery to ion polishing through active feedback and can mass produce astonishing things. Obviously, your friend making this statement is clueless about this.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

papapoe
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 12:23 am

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby papapoe » Sat Dec 20, 2014 1:31 pm

GIThruster wrote:
papapoe wrote:I know the person is familiar with 3d printing, he deals with Lockheed Martin.

Then perhaps you can explain why he's implying molecular level interleaving compares unfavorably to spraying a sheet and rolling it up the way we do for current electrolytic caps. It doesn't. Modern methods for molecular level interleaving are often closely held trade secrets, but can be found throughout the semiconductor industry, and 3D printing is being developed on a proprietary basis for specific mass production facilities like that at LockMart in places all over the world. It's about time. The original concept called variously "laser sintering" and "additive manufacturing" has been in use with ceramics at places like LockMart for more than a decade.

The point is, the quote above is incorrect. Many manufacturing methods exist to build structures like what Weir wanted, and these do not "compare unfavorably" once you look at the consequences of molecular level construction. Nanomaterials are the future and much of the future has arrived. We're dong this stuff now. Weir had this much right and whomever you're quoting has it wrong. Modern methods link things like femtosecond pulse laser echo velocimetery to ion polishing through active feedback and can mass produce astonishing things. Obviously, your friend making this statement is clueless about this.


I am not going to spend anymore time with you if you really believe Dick Weir who can not read a voltmeter correctly, knows anything about manufacturing methods to build structures. Dick Weir's scam has been going on for over 10 years. He has no product to show for but press releases which are used for pump and dump.

If you want an answer to your question, go to http://theeestory.ning.com/forum/topics ... 2#comments
(as I'm sure you never heard of that site, wink, wink), ask Nanocarbons your questions there in that thread. He will answer all your questions. Also when you are at eestor.ning go into their chat room, tell Tobin Harris AKA EEventually who is basically peddling your BS to come out of hiding from the chat room and tell Nanocarbons he is wrong if he has any balls.

It's just interesting how now the enablers of Dick Weir's fraud are peddling the BS Dick's powder is worth millions. Here is a recent example:

December 19, 2014 - 03:12 PM 55 Reads
Post# 23250495
Rate this post
0 starsv
RE:RE:RE:RE:manipulated takedown..
I believe there is a website now although I didn't check, cause I'm sure it would be useless.

As far as I can tell, the press release is intended as a misdirection while insiders become legally permitted to scoop up the company. It is clear by now that the current efforts of designing an actual EESU (a super capacitor) have had minimal success. The value of EESU technology is limited, although ZNN having a market cap of $25M probably undervalues the achievement in its own right. Regardless, there is hidden value in the powders that everyone seems to be ignoring. The powders alone are worth enough to make ZNN an immediate buy recommendation.

Why is no one talking about this? EEStor has been getting powder patents for years, but Richard Weir doesn't seem to care about monetizing them. He gets these patents because he's OCD about protecting some mythical EESU that is impossible to make. During the last capital raise, the investors were specific and open that their intention was to immediately monetize anything EEStor had and they didn't care about anything else. The powders are where it's at. The capacitors are probably not viable economically, but I'd assume part of the deal was that he gets to keep on working on them forever. Weir can produce powders at less than half the cost of others, and they are better quality.

Having followed this closely, Weir comes off as a big of a crack pot, but he knows chemistry, and there is big money here. The release shows there is money, but they have successfully misdirected everyone. I emplore everyone to look into the value of the powders IP and report it here so the company doesn't get stolen under our noses.

Read more at http://www.stockhouse.com/companies/bul ... 50WxpDX.99

Asterix
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:08 pm

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby Asterix » Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:03 pm

I can categorically state that Zenn has held true to one of their claims.

Zenn = "Zero emissions, no noise".

I haven't ever seen a noisy, smoke-belching Zenn car. Nor, I suspect, will I ever.

So there's a promise kept.

papapoe
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 12:23 am

EESTor/Zenn Scam continues

Postby papapoe » Thu Apr 02, 2015 3:47 pm

March 31, 2015 ZENN had their annual AGM. Ian Clifford is back to being CEO of ZENN.
Listen to the BS from Ian Clifford and Dck Weir at AGM,

2015 Zenn AGM Part 1
2015 Zenn AGM Part 2
Part 1 Ian Clifford gives his presentation, Q&A
Part 2 Q&A continued, Dick Weir answers questions, yes DW was at AGM.

It's obvious the few remaining enablers of EEstor/Dick Weir's fraud are getting desperate because they are blaming skeptic Professor Neilson for Zenn stock price drop. IMO Professor Neilson is a genius :-)

mvanwink5
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby mvanwink5 » Thu Apr 02, 2015 3:55 pm

Zenn = Zero Products
Near term, cheap, dark horse fusion hits the air waves, GF - TED, LM - Announcement. The race is on.

Asterix
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:08 pm

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby Asterix » Sat Apr 04, 2015 6:19 pm

I note that theeestory.com site has been offline for the past few days (right after the AGM).

Anyone know if that's permanent?

mvanwink5
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Re: EEStor says something - but not too much

Postby mvanwink5 » Sat Apr 04, 2015 7:05 pm

As I understand it, the pumpers (few remaining) felt that it was no longer a positive pump site and gave an ultimatum, then left after not getting what they wanted. Drama to unfold (probably like the last time - or not - no loss either way).
Near term, cheap, dark horse fusion hits the air waves, GF - TED, LM - Announcement. The race is on.


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests