A 189 Year Old Limitation on Inductor Size Has Been Broken (2018)
1–10 of 55 posts
Re: A 189 Year Old Limitation on Inductor Size Has Been Broken (2018)
#2What medium is paid access now? Do they pay the content creators?
Re: A 189 Year Old Limitation on Inductor Size Has Been Broken (2018)
#3The medium article links to a nature article which explains in depth: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41928-017-0010-z
This seems like an interesting development, but the performance gain appears to be limited to low value inductors in the 10's of GHz range. Those inductors are already very small and easily integrated on RF ICs.
If you want to miniaturize electronics you need to miniaturize the inductors used in power conversion, which typically operate in the KHz to low MHz range. It's a very different problem.
Re: A 189 Year Old Limitation on Inductor Size Has Been Broken (2018)
#4It mentions 50 percent greater inductance than a a regular coil. Which is great, but would only reduce the size by a third.
I imagine this has some use cases that would merit the higher cost (graphene is expensive, right?). But probably not many.
Re: A 189 Year Old Limitation on Inductor Size Has Been Broken (2018)
#5It mentions 50 percent greater inductance than a a regular coil. Which is great, but would only reduce the size by a third. I imagine this has some use cases that would merit the higher cost (graphene is expensive, right?). But probably not many.
To be fair - a 33% reduction in size is massive for something that has remained largely unchanged for the better part of 2 centuries.
Re: A 189 Year Old Limitation on Inductor Size Has Been Broken (2018)
#6What medium is paid access now? Do they pay the content creators?
Well, it's a register wall, not a pay wall. Agree it's annoying. The real annoying part to me is that Google seems to treat it the same as freely available no-registration content.
Re: A 189 Year Old Limitation on Inductor Size Has Been Broken (2018)
#7What medium is paid access now? Do they pay the content creators?
Oh, I just open the link in incognito mode and I can read the full article...
Re: A 189 Year Old Limitation on Inductor Size Has Been Broken (2018)
#8The medium article links to a nature article which explains in depth: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41928-017-0010-z This seems like an interesting development, but the performance gain appears to be limited to low value inductors in the 10's of GHz range. Those inductors are already very small and easily integrated on RF ICs. If you want to miniaturize electronics you need to miniaturize the inductors used in pow…
But it's a good start, no? And the theory has been proven as sound. I'm guessing/hoping they'll target the higher ranges soon.
Re: A 189 Year Old Limitation on Inductor Size Has Been Broken (2018)
#9The medium article links to a nature article which explains in depth: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41928-017-0010-z This seems like an interesting development, but the performance gain appears to be limited to low value inductors in the 10's of GHz range. Those inductors are already very small and easily integrated on RF ICs. If you want to miniaturize electronics you need to miniaturize the inductors used in pow…
But it's a good start, no? And the theory has been proven as sound. I'm guessing/hoping they'll target the higher ranges soon.
Its a material that basically gives electrons "inertia" which acts like an inductance derived from magnetic fields. There is a time constant to it, which determines at what frequency range it starts contributing to the inductance value.
To make it useful for power electronics they would have to push out this time constant by at least 4 orders of magnitude, I don't believe the theoretical material properties support that.
You might see this shaving off a few mm^2 from RF ICs and providing better RF performance. Applications in power electronics, where inductors take up the most volume, seems unlikely.