sodium, potassium and magnesium chlorides as Thermal energy storage Medium

The thermal energy storage material of this invention is prepared by mixing sodium chloride, potassium chloride, and magnesium chloride in eutectic proportions. While the precise eutectic composition is most desirable because of the maximization of effectiveness of the salt mixture, an excellent energy-storage material is obtained from a salt mixture comprising from 22.5 to 26.5 weight percent of sodium chloride, from 18.5 to 22.5 weight percent of potassium chloride and from 53.0 to 57.0 weight percent of magnesium chloride.

Small quantities of one or more additional salts referred to as additive salts may be added to the salt mixture. These additive salts lower the melting point slightly, e.g , a small addition of a sulfate salt lowers the melting point from 385° C. to 380° C. The preferred salts are calcium, barium, or strontium cloride; sodium, potassium, or magnesium bromide, fluoride, or sulfate. The amount of these salts may be as high as 10 weight percent of the total composition.

The salts are at least 90 percent pure with no impurities which react with the chlorides, e.g., chromium oxide (CrO3) or vanadium pentoxide (V2 O5). If additive salts are to be mixed with the ternary salt mixture, then it is preferred that the purity of the salts of the present invention be such that the final mixture comprises at least 90 weight percent of sodium chloride, potassium chloride, and magnesium chloride. Larger amounts of impurities would diminish the effectiveness of the salts. In order to minimize any corrosion problem, water and hydrogen chloride are expelled from the mixture. An excellent method for eliminating water and hydrogen chloride involves an initial melting and cooling of the salt mixture. While melted, the remaining hydrogen chloride or water is eliminated by the inclusion of strips of an active metal, e.g., aluminum in the melting salt mixture. The hydrogen chloride or water attacks the metal when the temperature is raised above 500° C. The attack generally continues for several hours and is evidenced by an evolution of gas. When gas is no longer given off, the salt mixture is free of those two impurities.

Preferably, the salt mixture meets the following specifications. It has a melting point from 385° C. to 393° C. It is judged sufficiently dry by test such that an immersion of magnesium metal in a melt of the salt at a temperature in excess of 455° C. results in a gas generation rate not exceeding 1.6 × 10-5 m3 s-1 per m2 of magnesium surface. Further, the solid mixture dissolves in water producing an insoluble residue not exceding 9% of the mass of the solid placed in the water.

The thermal-energy storage material of this invention may be used in any type of hot-gas engine, such as one using a polyatomic gas in a closed cycle circulation system having a conventional steam turbine. One system is described in Chubb, T.A., "Analysis of Gas Dissociation Solar Thermal Power System", in Solar Energy, 17 (2-D): p. 129-36, 1975; in U.S. Pat. No. 3,972,183 of T.A. Chubb; and in U.S. Pat. No. 3,997,001 of T.A. Chubb. All three above references are incorporated herein by reference. Briefly,, energy is stored and released in the above systems in the following manner. The salt mixture is packaged in an assemblage of small, partially filled metal containers mounted on racks inside an airtight tank. During the daytime, energy is introduced to the tank by "heat release" pipes at the bottom of the tank. This energy is derived from a chemical reaction 1/2 O2 + SO2 → SO3 that occurs as the gas stream from a solar collection field passes over a catalyst bed contained in the pipes. The heat release pipes are embedded in a pool of m-terphenyl liquid. Energy input causes the terphenyl to boil and increases its vapor pressure within the tank resulting in condensation on the outside surfaces of the salt cans. The heat-of-condensation of terphenyl causes the salt within the cans to melt.

During the night when energy is no longer being supplied to the heat-release piping, the pool of liquid at the bottom of the tank cools so that the salt cans become the hottest portion of the tank assembly. The sides of the cans are continuously wetted with liquid terphenyl supplied by a pump and spray system. The surface film evaporates, cooling the salt and maintaining a high vapor pressure of terphenyl within the tank. Energy is withdrawn from the tank by introducing water into steam generator lines at the top. Condensation of terphenyl vapor on the steam lines delivers heat to the steam generator lines, boiling the introduced water and superheating the resultant steam.

Having generally described the invention, the following examples are given for purposes of illustration. It is to be understood that the invention is not limited to these examples, but is susceptible to different modifications that would be recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art.

EXAMPLE I

Chloride salts which meet the preferred specifications were selected. A 200 gm salt mixture comprising 24.5 weight percent of sodium chloride, 20.5 weight percent of potassium chloride, and 55.0 weight percent of magnesium chloride was prepared and was dried of water and hydrogen chloride. Subsequently the mixture was reheated in a thick-walled aluminum crucible. The variation of the temperature with time is shown in FIG. 1. During reheat, plateau "A" results from the melting of the salt mixture. After heat or power is cut off, the mixture cools. Plateau "B" results from freezing of the salt mixture.

EXAMPLE II

A 2262 gm sample of the same mixture and of the same specifications as Example I was prepared by the technique of Example I. The sample was placed in a 1152 gm thick-walled crucible and was heated electrically. The sample was heated with an applied power of 906.7 watts. FIG. 2 shows the variation of the sample temperature with time. The heat of fusion was calculated to be between 97 and 98 cal/gm.

Obviously many modifications and variations of the present invention are possible in light of the above teachings. It is therefore to be understood that within the scope of the appended claims the invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described.

Read More at
Thermal energy storage material comprising mixtures of sodium, potassium and magnesium chlorides - US Patent 4119556 Description


SATA vs. EIDE hard drive: what's the difference?

You need a SATA controller to attache SATA hard drive. Lots of motherboards come with these on board in addition to the EIDE and cards are available. The technologies don't conflict, but they are definitely not interchangeable. SATA transferring data faster, but is only 7 pin connector. how come can be faster than 80 conductor IDE? (i also understand that USB is faster than parellel port, but still wanna know the technical issue inside.)

http://www.maxtor.com/en/technologies/serial_ata/faq.htm

Be aware with SATA, most of the bios needs upgrade even if they have SATA controller on that. High-end motherboards use the ICH5 Southbridge (part of Intel 875P chipset). ICH5 has 2 SATA ports integrated. Silicon Image is another chip manufacturer used for on-board SATA support.

Right now the speed difference between SATA-150 and ATA-133 or ATA-100 is negligible.  Even 7200rpm drives can't usually sustain more than 50 megabytes/sec of transfer anyway, let alone 100, 133, or 150MB/sec.

Obviously the extra bandwidth comes into play when you've got multiple devices on a single IDE channel but if performance was really that critical you'd have every device on its own connector.

The primary difference is: SATA is the future, PATA is the past.

The SATA connectors are much more convenient, the cost increase now is negligable (and will flip as time goes on), and the ceiling is much, much higher. SATA has none of PATA's limitations.

But should you replace PATA drives today with SATA drives? No. Should you consider using SATA if you get a new PC or motherboard with SATA support, and you have to buy drives anyway?

Oh, plus, if performance is an issue, SATA has 10k drives available (36 and 72GB). PATA does not. An array of 10k SATA drives is damn fast. Server fast.

You can also buy adapters between SATA and EIDE.  I'm not sure all configurations are supported, but you should be able to go between EIDE connectors on the motherboard and a SATA drive.

Regarding performance of SATA drives:

http://research.microsoft.com/~Gray/papers/MSR_TR_2003_70_%20SATAPerformance.pdf

A Quick Look at SATA Disk Performance

We have been investigating the use of low-cost, commodity components for multi-terabyte SQL Server databases. Dubbed Storage Bricks, these servers are white box PCs containing the largest ATA drives, value-priced AMD or Intel processors, and inexpensive ECC memory. One issue has been the wiring mess, air flow problems, length restrictions, and connector failures created by seven or more Parallel ATA (PATA) ribbon cables and drives. Large capacity Serial ATA (SATA) drives have recently become widely available for the PC environment at a reasonable price (1k$/TB). In addition to being faster, the SATA connectors seem more reliable, have a more reasonable length restriction (1m) and allow better airflow. We tested two drive brands along with two RAID controllers to evaluate SATA drive performance and reliability. Each disk delivers about 50 MBps sequential and about 75 read IOps and 130 write IOps on random IO. The cards saturate at 200MBps on sequential but scale linearly to 8 disks for random IO. A surprise is that software RAID1 generally performs best and is easiest to manage."

"You can also buy adapters between SATA and EIDE.  But it is not sure all configurations are supported, but you should be able to go between EIDE connectors on the motherboard and a SATA drive".

I thought they had ones that went both ways, but I could be wrong.  Why would you want it?  So that drive manufacturers have an incentive to start making SATA drives right away without risk of reducing their market from people who still only have PATA connectors.

I've accidentally ruined so many PATA cables (by pulling the socket thing off the ribbon) that I was really looking forward to SATA... But alas, the SATA connector is still a flimsy little plastic thing. It doesn't even lock in place.

I'm not sure what the whole point of ATA is these days; why not just use FireWire? (probably because the controller needed between the bus and the disk is still fairly expensive... but it would be so much nicer to run your whole storage system on one or more hot-plug FireWire buses)

Out of curiosity, if more people used SCSI, would the prices come down to IDE levels? Or do the drive electronics mandate a minimum pricing?

The cost difference between SCSI and IDE drives is not just the interface.  Largely it is the market targeted by the drive makers.  They design their SCSI drives for business use, and therefore make them more reliable and faster.  IDE drives are for consumer use so they are made to be as inexpensive as possible.

It is possible to make SATA drives on par with SCSI drives, for a price.  I imagine it would be possible to make SCSI drives almost as cheap as IDE drives, but it is not worth it since there is not a mass market for SCSI drives, especially now with SATA.

I have heard that the Western Digital Raptors (the 10K SATA drives) actual share drive hardware with their SCSI cousins, which is why they're available in the common SCSI sizes (36GB and 72GB) and not in the more typical PATA sizes.

The biggest question most of we can't answer is the difference between SATA and PATA or as the techno-weenies call it "regular hard drives". Because this forum pretty much saves me about a 15 to 25 minute education process for customers, I would like to thank you guys for having this thread up here for me to print and hand to people and let the PEBKACs slowly do the math themselves.  On a slightly related note tho...I haven't seen much thought being put out on one potential for SATA...I could be wrong but listen for a minute...the S in SATA is Serial..we have had serial ports for awhile and know how they work..USB (still a Serial Bus) made things easier..one of the nice things about USB being on a "serial bus" its biggest point of sale is "hot swapable" And from what I have been reading about all of the PCI-X stuff..being that everything there is going to be a serial bus..the most simple things like sound cards/modems/nics/ EVEN Video cards are gonna be hot swappable.

Granted that its not the primary drive that you have booted from and are now using an operating system on...would your SATA drive currently be hot swapable...or is that something that is currently limited by todays Parrallel interface bus south bridges.  Or am i the first to ask that?    (on a related note i know i have lost any and all ability to spell).

Some people said that PATA is faster than SATA, in some case.

but the technical note, certified that SATA is much more better than PATA. How is the PATA works when transferring data with 80 conductor IDE cable?

Purely from a performance (gaming) point of view, how do the current crop of PATA and SATA drives match up? Also, how much difference does an 8mb cache vs 2mb cache make?

The price diffential between PATA Seagate 120Gb and SATA. Seagate 120GB(2mb, I haven't checked out 8mbs yet) is nearly 15%, 4400 bucks to 5600 bucks. Also whats the advantages and Disadvantages of Maxtor vs. Seagate. I also hear a lot of scare stories of how the PATA 2mb 120gb seagate is crashing a lot. Anyone heard anything?