Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 675 posts

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#531

Post by bobthepanda »

largbae wrote: post #442
hedora wrote: post #417

In related news, diesel is $7/gallon, and peets coffee is $25/lb, and computers (hardware and cloud) are up 25-50%. The official numbers claim 3% inflation. Does anyone actually believe that? We were seeing 30% YoY before Iran here in California. The discrepancy is so large, I’m wondering if there’s an official explanation or some reasonable explanation, or if they’re just not bothering anymore.

Diesel is $5 in the Southeast, what kind of supply chain issue could cause 40% diff? Should we hire some tanker trucks and arb this?

Most oil production and refining capacity is east of the Rockies and transported to major population centers using pipelines. The Rockies, Sierra Nevada, etc. make pipelines much more cost prohibitive since you have to pump it over the mountains; trains and trucks are a lot more expensive to use for transport; and tankers would have to use the Panama Canal, which besides being a much longer distance also has usage fees.

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#532

Post by matthiasl »

ssl-3 wrote: post #511
DiabloD3 wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only should you get rid of them, but also they are a fire hazard. Also, do not accidentally plug surge protectors into each other, metal oxide varistors can star fires _without_ meaningful surge conditions when you do so. I prefer to buy products without MOVs entirely due to the risk, with the exception of one, Tripp Lite Isobars; but I prefer to use series mode protectors such as Brickwall or SurgeX.

> Not only should you get rid of them, but also they are a fire hazard. Are they not a fire hazard even when new? MOVs do tend to degrade with use (especially after they've gone conductive to snuff one or more surges). But AFAICT we can't really know, without potentially-destructive testing, whether a given MOV is in good shape -- whether installed last week, last year, or 30 years ago. > Also, do not accidentally pl…

"What is the mechanism that increases risk for MOV-sourced fires in this arrangement?"

I wondered the same thing, and failed to find a satisfying explanation.

I can find plenty of reports of MOV fires, especially in situations where there's a persistent over-voltage, e.g. a 120 V site actually having closer to 240 V due to a floating neutral. But I don't see how chained MOVs make that worse in general. This blog post has some nice photos:

https://www.electrical-forensics.com/SurgeSuppressors/SurgeS...

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#533

Post by adamwong246 »

jayd16 wrote: post #292
backprop1989 wrote: post #262

Step 1: Put the helium in a blimp Step 2: Fly around the straight and over to Taiwan Step 3: Pump it into the chip factory There you go, solved it.

How do you get the blimp back?

easy problem to solve- single use zepplins.

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#534

Post by consp »

matthiasl wrote: post #532
ssl-3 wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not only should you get rid of them, but also they are a fire hazard. Are they not a fire hazard even when new? MOVs do tend to degrade with use (especially after they've gone conductive to snuff one or more surges). But AFAICT we can't really know, without potentially-destructive testing, whether a given MOV is in good shape -- whether installed last week, last year, or 30 years ago. > Also, do not accidentally pl…

"What is the mechanism that increases risk for MOV-sourced fires in this arrangement?" I wondered the same thing, and failed to find a satisfying explanation. I can find plenty of reports of MOV fires, especially in situations where there's a persistent over-voltage, e.g. a 120 V site actually having closer to 240 V due to a floating neutral. But I don't see how chained MOVs make that worse in general. This blog post…

No clue about the actual reliability of this[1] article but the mechanism mentioned (new pathways due to changes in crystalline structure due to uneven heating) sounds possible.

1. https://incompliancemag.com/how-and-why-varistor-failure-occ...

Reread your wondering and now conclude its about chained situations which this also does not answer.

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#535

Post by cowanon2222 »

randomNumber7 wrote: post #509
jmyeet wrote: post #345

This situation would be laughable if the consequences weren't so dire. I have problems adequately stating just how incompetent and ill-thought out this entire misadventure was. I say this because everything that's happened has been completely foreseeable and foreseen , including the ability of Iran to retaliate by closing the Strait of Hormuz. This has been something many militaries around the world have planned scen…

Who are the good guys?

Sometimes there isn't a good guy, just a bad guy and a worse guy.

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#536

Post by Gud »

dyauspitr wrote: post #428
hedora wrote: post #417

In related news, diesel is $7/gallon, and peets coffee is $25/lb, and computers (hardware and cloud) are up 25-50%. The official numbers claim 3% inflation. Does anyone actually believe that? We were seeing 30% YoY before Iran here in California. The discrepancy is so large, I’m wondering if there’s an official explanation or some reasonable explanation, or if they’re just not bothering anymore.

This administration is America slitting its wrists.

More like randomly shooting itself causing non-lethal injuries, but in aggregate, enough blood loss to die.

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#537

Post by burnt-resistor »

srik wrote: post #192
randerson wrote: post #150

I've developed a new fear of my 2025 desktop PC being damaged by a power surge or something, because it would cost at least $2K more to replace than I paid for it, assuming I can even find parts now. Compared to the rest of my adult life when I used to secretly pray for something to fail so I would have a reason to upgrade.

Living in developing countries taught me to never plugin expensive computers without a surge protector UPS.

I grew up in San Jose CA in the 80's and 90'd on a street with a perpetually bad transformer. We had UPSes on every computer and proper surge protectors on everything of value.

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#538

Post by burnt-resistor »

schiffern wrote: post #282
srik wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Living in developing countries taught me to never plugin expensive computers without a surge protector UPS.

Commercial uses layered surge protectors (Type I, II, and III), which is also recommended for other users but rarely followed. In surge prone areas, at a minimum I would have good quality whole-house surge protector (eg Siemens 140 or Eaton 108), and a good quality surge protector strip for any computer/TV/phone charger. I also put surge protectors in front of expensive white goods like the fridge, washer/dryer, dish…

Not completely correct, nuanced, or comprehensive.

Direct lighting strikes cannot be defended against without extreme costs. This type of risk is generally extremely unlikely except for certain niche use-cases like equipment or facilities on tall peaks.

Transients from lightning (E2) nearby and distant nuclear detonations can be defended against, and often require additional protection of telco and internet entry points. Whole house type 1 SPD devices exist for residential applications. This is much more likely than direct lightning strikes, especially in certain areas and can be defended against for reasonable cost. The main issue of lacking it is the unseen, cumulative degradation of semiconductor components that lead to instantaneous or eventual failure, especially in high value devices like electrically-communicated motors in HVAC systems. There is no reasonable expectation of defense against a direct lightning strike even with type 1 SPD, and there are different types of lightning with vastly different amounts of energy. A positive strike direct hit will totally fry anything and everything.

What generally isn't defended against at all in any infrastructure or system except some military equipment is H/NEMP E1 (short duration impulses) or E3 (E3a or E3b; long duration surges larger than lightning) such as from unusual space weather events or nuclear blasts.

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#539

Post by Panoramix »

nine_k wrote: post #416
staplung wrote: post #410

Can someone explain why helium is used for these purposes, as opposed to some other noble gas? I think there's more argon (it's about 1% of the atmosphere) than helium so is helium somehow special, or is it just cheaper, despite being rarer and non-renewable?

Helium has the second highest [1] specific heat capacity (after hydrogen); it's significantly higher than that of even water. It's damn efficient at cooling or heating. With that, it's chemically inert, unlike hydrogen or ammonia. There's no reasonable substitute. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_specific_heat_capacit... (Sort by the third column.)

It's about the thermal conductivity.

Helium has 150mW/mK vs Argon ~18mW/mK so you can't replace it.

The only alternatives to Helium are Neon, which is 3x worse and much more expensive, and hydrogen. However, hydrogen is flammable so it's a very bad idea to use it in a fab which has extremely poisonous gases and needs a cleanroom environment. A fire would ruin your whole factory and kill your engineers.

Re: Qatar helium shutdown puts chip supply chain on a two-week clock

#540

Post by burnt-resistor »

tharkun__ wrote: post #397
tempaccount5050 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you in an area with a bad electrical grid or something? In 40+ years I've never had a single device get fried from a surge/storm. My "surge protector" power strips are from the 90s and probably don't even work.

This. Same timeframe and I've lived through both lots of lightning storms and in areas with lots of power failures. Some of them intermittent and essentially caused by transformers blowing up. Like earlier this winter, we had multiple storms where you'd hear a transformer blow up, in many cases even seeing the sky light up as well from it, power going out, couple seconds, power coming back, next transformer blowing o…

Definitely use quality surge protectors on expensive equipment connected to generators.

PSA: UPSes and GFCI/GFI extension cords won't work properly when connected to a stand-alone generator with a bonded neutral. I've tried using enterprise UPSes on such generators, but they absolutely won't work. In such scenarios, debond the generator's ground from neutral, apply a very large warning label to it being debonded, and drive a massive ground rod electrode into the ground as close to the generator as possible and ground the neutral there. This does work and is much safer because there's a stable voltage reference source. It's more of a hassle but can be necessary for some off grid and temporary scenarios.

Post reply on HN