Talk:Nickel-Iron Battery/Research Development
Can this be refactored to a solid design and materials sourcing strategy? - Marcin 7/18.11
I think that is best handled under a seperate page. I'm refactoring with the following intent ...
- 1. Nickel-Iron_Battery - canonical reference
- 2. Nickel-Iron_Battery/Research - reference material: patents, papers, material sources, notes
- 3. Nickel-Iron_Battery/Prototype - practical design approach
- 4. Edison_Battery/Manufacture - description of Edison's construction and manufacturing process
Yup, it's all still pretty rough.
Part of the problem is that we haven't done enough research yet to pick out practical design. Part of the reason I'm focusing so heavily on Edison's original design. But ... "Ed" of "Ed's Workshop" (not OSE) has blazed ahead on prototyping some chemical preparation, anode/cathode design, and cell case form factor. We need to get a grip on his work to see if it's the most practical form to follow. To put it another way, I don't know if 'we' know enough yet to bridge the gap between commerical-off-the-shelf and a open-source community solution. Ron Broberg 15:42, 18 July 2011 (PDT)
Very good research work. Love the notes and analysis. A minor suggestion is to clean up links like http://www.nickel-iron-battery.com/ by putting them in brackets like this: . Most of the URLs cited are not human memorable anyways, so why take up screen space with them? The "footnote" form of the links ]]provided by MediaWiki is a good feature. - Mark J Norton
Punctuation needs to be redone by the author of the last edit. There is none and it makes it difficult to tell where sentences start or finish. There are also spelling error that are in decipherable. The author needs to have a go at learning what capitalisation full stops and word spacing is all about. Otherwise its excellent research but I'm having trouble following it. Wesley bruce 20:07, 17 July 2011 (PDT)
Oh thanks, Wesley. Seen the note I added to the page. It was not intended to be a work of art, rather I was using the wiki as part of my workspace, integrating it into the process of what I was doing, instead of using it as a presentation space as is too often done, which in many cases omits important details. I believe that provides better transparency. Unfortunately some people are too afraid of being misinterpreted (as you are doing) or embarrassed to do this, which is partly why this place lacks transparency so badly. I have made a conscious decision not to spend much time on the OSE project anymore due to the management issues. Gregor 09:31, 18 July 2011 (PDT)
Gregor, I haven't been around very long, but I can see that there is a very strange mix of 'very complete' and 'very incomplete' pages on this wiki. The steam engine is an example of the former. Any page relating to electronics is an example of the later. I certainly appreciate your Ni-Fe materials, but, yeah, it needs to be organized better. OTOH, with the eyes of the innocent, it is obvious which of you have contributed to the topic and which offered insults. Hope you stick around some and I hope you don't mind some re-org of this page. Ron Broberg 11:49, 18 July 2011 (PDT)
Ron, pages are looking much nicer - more readable. Thanks for taking the time to do that. Hopefully, we can get Gregor to resume contributions. Mjn 19:34, 18 July 2011 (PDT)
Thanks gregor. I'm not sure it omits anything. I just found it very hard to use. Wesley bruce 14:23, 26 July 2011 (CEST)