Micropower: Difference between revisions

From Open Source Ecology
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Minor Clarification)
(Added some more information)
 
Line 7: Line 7:
*[[Open Source Microfluidics Construction Set]]
*[[Open Source Microfluidics Construction Set]]
*[[Open Source Fuels Construction Set]]
*[[Open Source Fuels Construction Set]]
=Background=
==Historical Origin==
*The idea originated in the 80’s/90’s in NATO Countries along the development aims of the [[Single Fuel Standard]]
*The idea was essentially to have Soldiers’ Radios, Jammers, GPS Navigators, or Batlefield Computers etc run on the same [[JP-5]] / [[JP-8]] as everything else
*The idea could be made SLIGHTLY more “sane” by a larger worn device powering all the equipment on said person via a [[Wiring Harness]] of sorts combined into the [[Backpack Frame]] or Outerwear itself etc
**RE: [[Passive Exoskeleton]] and [[Active Exoskeleton]] especially
***Although the advantage of this level of tech on a per-soldier level vs sticking them all in a (potentially cheaper) APC/IFV etc is debatable (despite the latter being far less “sci-fi” )
***IE instead of Per-Soldier Bullet Direction Finding, Navigation, Comms, EW, and such…you just have that powered by the GIANT DIESEL TRUCK ENGINE…
*The concept faded though with the proliferation of more energy efficient/smaller electronic devices, and the [[Lithium Ion Battery]]
**To a lesser extent reliable [[Alkaline Batteries]] and [[Disposable Lithium Batteries]] too
==Potential Resurgence==
*Several factors may make the pursuit of the technology worthwhile again, while at the same time making it more “workable”
*1.) As per the Russian Invasion of Ukraine, short of expensive vehicles with MASSIVE Active Protection System + SHORAD investments (and things such as Net Protected Roads/Tunnel Networks, vehicles are vulnerable and Force Dispersion is a requirement
*2.) Logistics are Strained
**Although Micropower wouldn’t be “pure” of this/Fuel Logistics still suffer
*3.) UAVs, UGVs, Coms, and EW Requirements raise the need for Energy, while Battery Technology is advancing less explosively
*4.) While the cost argument/tradeoffs vs PROPER mechanization still exist, the per-person loads, and COTS solutions, are making exoskeletons more viable
*5.) Simpler options such as [[SOFCs]] exist that are far less “Kerbal” than Chip Scale Gas Turbines, or everyone having a Rotary Engine]] buzzing away on their backpack
**Also like batteries they are silent
***For example consider Early Boston Dynamics to Modern (Battery Electric) Spot


=Internal Links=
=Internal Links=

Latest revision as of 01:57, 12 January 2026

Basics

  • Devices utilizing small fuel powered generators that produce electrical power of ~1-10 Watts
  • They utilize Micro Fuel Cells, Micro TECs, Micro Turbines, and Micro ICEs
  • They can power small conventional electronic devices such as smart phones and computers via a cable, or be integrated into speciality devices designed around Micropower Generators

Uses

Background

Historical Origin

  • The idea originated in the 80’s/90’s in NATO Countries along the development aims of the Single Fuel Standard
  • The idea was essentially to have Soldiers’ Radios, Jammers, GPS Navigators, or Batlefield Computers etc run on the same JP-5 / JP-8 as everything else
  • The idea could be made SLIGHTLY more “sane” by a larger worn device powering all the equipment on said person via a Wiring Harness of sorts combined into the Backpack Frame or Outerwear itself etc
    • RE: Passive Exoskeleton and Active Exoskeleton especially
      • Although the advantage of this level of tech on a per-soldier level vs sticking them all in a (potentially cheaper) APC/IFV etc is debatable (despite the latter being far less “sci-fi” )
      • IE instead of Per-Soldier Bullet Direction Finding, Navigation, Comms, EW, and such…you just have that powered by the GIANT DIESEL TRUCK ENGINE…
  • The concept faded though with the proliferation of more energy efficient/smaller electronic devices, and the Lithium Ion Battery

Potential Resurgence

  • Several factors may make the pursuit of the technology worthwhile again, while at the same time making it more “workable”
  • 1.) As per the Russian Invasion of Ukraine, short of expensive vehicles with MASSIVE Active Protection System + SHORAD investments (and things such as Net Protected Roads/Tunnel Networks, vehicles are vulnerable and Force Dispersion is a requirement
  • 2.) Logistics are Strained
    • Although Micropower wouldn’t be “pure” of this/Fuel Logistics still suffer
  • 3.) UAVs, UGVs, Coms, and EW Requirements raise the need for Energy, while Battery Technology is advancing less explosively
  • 4.) While the cost argument/tradeoffs vs PROPER mechanization still exist, the per-person loads, and COTS solutions, are making exoskeletons more viable
  • 5.) Simpler options such as SOFCs exist that are far less “Kerbal” than Chip Scale Gas Turbines, or everyone having a Rotary Engine]] buzzing away on their backpack
    • Also like batteries they are silent
      • For example consider Early Boston Dynamics to Modern (Battery Electric) Spot

Internal Links

External Links