Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Chip-cooling Technology

samzenpus posted about 7 years ago | from the cool-off dept.

Hardware 167

BillOfThePecosKind writes "Researchers have demonstrated a new technology using tiny "ionic wind engines" that might dramatically improve computer chip cooling, possibly addressing a looming threat to future advances in computers and electronics. Purdue researchers funded by Intel have improved the "heat-transfer coefficient" by some 250%. I never liked water cooled systems, and this sounds promising. However I wonder how much ozone one of these things produces."

cancel ×

167 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ozone production FTW (4, Funny)

SamP2 (1097897) | about 7 years ago | (#20231843)

"I wonder how much ozone one of these things produces."

Produces? Hey, let's make a ton of these and solve the ozone hole problem forever!

Re:Ozone production FTW (1, Informative)

SoapBox17 (1020345) | about 7 years ago | (#20231885)

Welcome to 2004. The o-zone problem is solved. It fixes itself over time, as long as nothing is continually damaging it. Since CFCs were banned a long time ago, the o-zone hole has begun to shrink. It'll be gone in about 50 years.

Re:Ozone production FTW (4, Funny)

eggnoglatte (1047660) | about 7 years ago | (#20232285)

What the heck is "o-zone"? Ozone [wikipedia.org] is a molecule, not some kind of atmospheric zone; that would be the ozone layer, i.e. the atmospheric layer with a high natural concentration of ... wait for it ... ozone.

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

fractalVisionz (989785) | about 7 years ago | (#20232341)

Actually Ozone is a pollutant: (from Wikipedia)

"Ground-level ozone is an air pollutant with harmful effects on the respiratory systems of animals. Ozone in the upper atmosphere filters potentially damaging ultraviolet light from reaching the Earth's surface." -- Ozone [wikipedia.org]

So in reality, these tiny ionic breezes produce Ozone which stays at ground level, harming humans and animals. Thus, this is not exactly the best thing. Now if we could only find a way to take all the produced ground level O3 (Ozone) and put it in the upper atmosphere.

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

eggnoglatte (1047660) | about 7 years ago | (#20232411)

I never said it wasn't a pollutant. I just pointed out that it is a molecule rather than a spatial region.

Re:Ozone production FTW (0, Redundant)

felipekk (1007591) | about 7 years ago | (#20232789)

Now if we could only find a way to take all the produced ground level O3 (Ozone) and put it in the upper atmosphere.

Maybe the series of tubes we use nowadays for the internet can help. And then we would have an internet link close to the outer space!

Re:Ozone production FTW (2, Funny)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | about 7 years ago | (#20233769)

I think we'd need a giant space truck, not a series of tubes. Space ain't the place to go waving internets around.

Re:Ozone production FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20232805)

Well, there is an O-Zone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O-Zone [wikipedia.org] ), but if that's what the parent is referring to, their post is... disturbing.

Re:Ozone production FTW (2, Funny)

bigdavesmith (928732) | about 7 years ago | (#20232933)

Slashdot is not the proper place for a comprehensive discussion of the o-zone.

Those of you over 18 might want to check out this clip [youtube.com] though, if you're not sure exactly what the o-zone is.

Re:Ozone production FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20233911)

Oh, I figured you were talking about this. [youtube.com]

Posted as Anonymous Coward for good reasons :-p

CFCs and HCFCs (2, Informative)

Enderandrew (866215) | about 7 years ago | (#20232339)

HCFCs still burn a hole into the ozone layer, and the full damage from released CFCs and HCFCs can take up to 50 years as it is a chain reaction. I worked on air conditioners in the military and had to become EPA certified on the stuff. I got the "Universal" license from the EPA. The biggest offender in this area is still the US government. While most civilian vehicles have newer HCFC-based air conditioners, the military does not. And not everyone has banned CFCs fully yet.

From the Wikipedia:

"By the year 2010 CFCs should be completely eliminated from developing countries as well."

Re:CFCs and HCFCs (2, Interesting)

Zonekeeper (458060) | about 7 years ago | (#20232835)

And as a result, air conditioners have to work that much harder in order to cool us off. And don't go spouting nonsense about how they work just as good. B.S. Got in an older Toyota the other day that still had the old refrigerant in it, and the air it throws out of this little 4 banger is WAY colder than any new car I've been in, and that is several makes and models. I mean this thing would put icicles on you, and where I live its 100F out these days. Save the ozone one way (which is such crap...) and drive up energy consumption and create more smog, etc. at the same time. A win-win, wouldn't you say? What crap.

Re:CFCs and HCFCs (1)

got2liv4him (966133) | about 7 years ago | (#20232863)

Just ask your local car repairman to use r-409a or r-414b (hotshot). It will make it a refrigerator!

Re:CFCs and HCFCs (4, Informative)

evilviper (135110) | about 7 years ago | (#20233267)

And don't go spouting nonsense about how they work just as good. B.S. Got in an older Toyota the other day that still had the old refrigerant in it, and the air it throws out of this little 4 banger is WAY colder than any new car I've been in, and that is several makes and models.

That's completely idiotic.

The fact that a certain car has a more powerful A/C is because it was designed to be more powerful, NOT because of the refrigerant. No doubt your old Toyota's A/C demands far more power to operate than any of the newer ones you've compared it with.

There is a difference between refrigerants, but it's a very small one, and couldn't REMOTELY account for your magical little story there. In fact, air conditioners have been getting more and more energy efficient over the years, at the same time that refrigerants have been getting less toxic.

Re:CFCs and HCFCs (2, Insightful)

got2liv4him (966133) | about 7 years ago | (#20232837)

Unfortunately, they are working on banning hcfc's as well. And all civilian have been required to use hfc's since '95. (you probably just got mixed up). Europe is already talking about banning hfc's. I am interested to know what they plan on using, propane?, co2?, ammonia. How do we know that the ozone layer doesn't naturally? I mean it closed back up, and I highly doubt it was because we stopped using r-12 and r-502. Seriously, how do we know that the hole was caused by cfc's, I would think if it was and the cfc's somehow defied gravity and got up to the ozone layer there would be multiple holes? P. S. I work on a/c's.

CO2 is the environmentally friendly option (1)

dominux (731134) | about 7 years ago | (#20233401)

but the car manufacturers are not so keen because it requires some very scary pressures. They tend not to like customers to blow up when they crash (because then the customers can't come back and buy another car)

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

Hucko (998827) | about 7 years ago | (#20232605)

Dude! You have time traveled and don't even know it! Its 2007! Recreate the steps over the past few days and you may get back. P.S. Take a copy of this [kernel.org] back with you. Heck, just take this [ftp.free.fr] & this [alllotto.com] & this [lotteryusa.com] . on the understanding you will get us our flying car, buy NVidia and release the code.

Damn I can't think of any major science/tech developments it would be good to have back in 2004... :s/P

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

Repossessed (1117929) | about 7 years ago | (#20233115)

You forgot to tell him to buy Google stock.

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

Hucko (998827) | about 7 years ago | (#20233641)

damn me and my memory...

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

Carbon016 (1129067) | about 7 years ago | (#20231925)

Ground-level ozone is a pollutant and therefore bad.

Re:Ozone production FTW (2, Informative)

E++99 (880734) | about 7 years ago | (#20232069)

Ground-level ozone is a pollutant and therefore bad.

I think you mean it's bad and therefore a pollutant.

Re:Ozone production FTW (3, Funny)

Tatisimo (1061320) | about 7 years ago | (#20232097)

If we dig down some, the ground level ozone we're making will be above us, therefore, making a new, lower ozone layer. Time to move underground, my fellow human beings!

Re:Ozone production FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20233899)

sweet im with you
everyone start digging

Re:Ozone production FTW (2, Informative)

scruff323 (840369) | about 7 years ago | (#20232129)

Actually ozone is a problem in the lower atmosphere. Ozone is very harmful to breathe and can be a problem on hot days in cities. You are talking about the ozone holes in the upper atmosphere, which is a different problem. If these things were to produce ozone (which i doubt), they would actually be harmful and not helpful as the ozone would not patch the ozone hole.

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

Pyrion (525584) | about 7 years ago | (#20232979)

Yeah, lower-atmosphere ozone is called "smog."

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

DaveWick79 (939388) | about 7 years ago | (#20232211)

Considering that the trend is toward making chips with smaller transistors that operate at less voltage and thus at lower temperatures, I don't think that having a few of these ozone-emitting devices around will create a pollution problem. In fact, ozone has quite a beneficial property in correct quantities, including cancer therapy, mold or smoke eradication, even water treatment (most high end swimming pools use ozone rather than very harmful chemicals such as chlorine).

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

kyrio (1091003) | about 7 years ago | (#20232271)

Ozone is poisonous to breath, stop promoting your incorrect and deadly information.

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

kyrio (1091003) | about 7 years ago | (#20232311)

*breathe

Re:Ozone production FTW (2, Informative)

DaveWick79 (939388) | about 7 years ago | (#20232523)

And you're just promoting the mostly incorrect nonsense you've heard. Yes, ozone in high quantities can be harmful. Do you even know what ozone is? It's 0^3, which is a highly unstable form of oxygen which quickly breaks down into stable 0^2 and 0^1. The 0^1 has properties which cause it to seek to bond to harmful molecules. This is what makes it useful for water treatment, air treatment, and blood treatment. Unless it is in such high quantities that it starts bonding to good molecules, it is not harmful, but beneficial.

Re:Ozone production FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20232763)

Fir trees don't like ozone, in any concentration. Ain't too good for people, either. Sure, it has its uses, but it's a pollutant when it's below oh, 30,000 feet.

Re:Ozone production FTW (2, Insightful)

Rakishi (759894) | about 7 years ago | (#20232273)

In fact, ozone has quite a beneficial property in correct quantities, including cancer therapy, mold or smoke eradication, even water treatment (most high end swimming pools use ozone rather than very harmful chemicals such as chlorine).
...All except one of those involve killing living organisms. Rat poison is also damn useful but I wouldn't want it in the air or eating it.

Re:Ozone production FTW (2, Interesting)

BobNET (119675) | about 7 years ago | (#20232429)

Rat poison is also damn useful but I wouldn't want it in the air or eating it.

You would if you had a reason to prevent your blood from clotting (a stroke, for example). Coumadin is just a drug company's brand-name for warfarin, a chemical used in some rat poisons (although I wouldn't want to take the stuff intended for the rats either)...

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

fbjon (692006) | about 7 years ago | (#20233731)

Warfarin will kill a human as well by bleeding you to death, if you take enough of it.

Re:Ozone production FTW (1)

ultranova (717540) | about 7 years ago | (#20233931)

Warfarin will kill a human as well by bleeding you to death, if you take enough of it.

Water will kill you as well by disturbing the electrolyte balance in your blood and therefore stopping your heart if you drink too much of it. There is absolutely no substance in existence which won't kill you if misused in sufficient quantities.

Re:Ozone production FTW (2, Informative)

compro01 (777531) | about 7 years ago | (#20232475)

or eating it.

several people do eat it on the advise of their doctor. (warfarin [wikipedia.org] ). at the proper dosage, it is quite useful for preventing blood clots.

Re:High Altitude Airships FTW (0, Offtopic)

sanman2 (928866) | about 7 years ago | (#20232383)

Actually, I'd read that ion-wind technology could be used as a propulsion mechanism for large high-altitude airships. Hey, then you could produce ozone while meeting people's transportation needs at the same time.

Maybe a suped-up version of one of those Aeroscraft thingies could feature this.

Re:High Altitude Airships FTW (2, Funny)

Jotaigna (749859) | about 7 years ago | (#20233437)

that would be like getting a woolen jumper big enough and a comb long enough to power your computer with static electricity.

Ozone My Arse (1)

Yourself (264000) | about 7 years ago | (#20232907)

Ozone is triatomic oxygen... O3. Its created when sufficient energy is applied to O2 to split the atom into monoatomic oxygen, and the resulting O1's each combine with an O2. The characteristic smell is caused by ions resulting from the process, not the ozone itself. Ionic generators used for air purification merely add electrons to air molecules and to particles in the air. Negatively charged molecules are then attracted to positive electrodes. The energy required to ionize the air is not sufficient to split O2 molecules. If you think you smell ozone, its just ions. SOME ionic air cleaners also sanitize the air, by flowing it past a UV light. This process Does produce ozone. From engineers whose business is designing sewage treatment plants, I learned that ozone for sanitizing the water is made using intense UV light. Its the same process as occurs in the upper atmosphere.

first fail (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20231845)

pissing into the sea of piss

Great! (2)

quicks0rt (983047) | about 7 years ago | (#20231853)

"However I wonder how much ozone one of these things produces."

Great! We solved the global warming. Let's get cranking.

Re:Great! (1)

mastermemorex (1119537) | about 7 years ago | (#20232053)

Not only ozoone, but also it contributes to the global warming with a 250% of efficiency.

Great! My room will never be so hot in winter thanks to the new micro toste. I wonder if it is also a multipurpose device and I can make fried eggs on the cpu!

Re:Great! (1)

Brad1138 (590148) | about 7 years ago | (#20232231)

Currently parent is "(Score:0, Redundant)".

That really isn't fair. If you look at the time stamp it is 1 minute behind the previous (first) post. He probably clicked reply before there were any posts and the previous post was submitted very shortly before his. If 2 or more posts are submitted more or less at the same time, the 2nd shouldn't be penalized for being a few seconds behind. If the posted time showed a 5+ minute difference then "redundant" would be justified.

If I don't, someone else will.... (5, Funny)

ZeroFactorial (1025676) | about 7 years ago | (#20231855)

Cool!

Re:If I don't, someone else will.... (1)

timeOday (582209) | about 7 years ago | (#20232731)

Actually this is a way for chips to give off *even more* heat. In fact it might be a good technology for hair dryers.

Re:If I don't, someone else will.... (1)

greenguy (162630) | about 7 years ago | (#20232795)

I don't know why no one has done this. The ultimate way to make a chip cool:

Name it "Fonzie."

ozone (3, Informative)

TheSHAD0W (258774) | about 7 years ago | (#20231899)

FWIS The "ionic wind" takes place inside a sealed chamber, no ozone would be leaking out.

Re:ozone (2, Insightful)

ricebowl (999467) | about 7 years ago | (#20231993)

FWIS The "ionic wind" takes place inside a sealed chamber, no ozone would be leaking out.

I'm possibly being naive, and I've yet to read the featured article, but if the ionic wind is inside a sealed chamber how does it aid cooling? Surely the sealed chamber would simply grow warmer over time and become a thermal insulator?

If I'm being dumb please don't hesitate to retort or point out the flaws in my thinking...

Re:ozone (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20232083)

Simple heat transfer.

1. Heat is transferred from processor to "sealed chamber" through a contact (most likely metal) with a good heat transfer capability.
2. Heat is then transferred to the air within the "sealed chamber" to the air current residing within the chamber.
3. Air is replaced with cool air as hot air is transferred out of the case.

This creates a heat pipe of sorts (though water or anti-freeze is replaced with the air, which won't harm electronics and should be quieter, since the system has no moving parts), unlike current cooling systems which simply blow hot air away from the CPU but where it inevitably recycles through the case to some degree.

Re:ozone (1)

WallaceAndGromit (910755) | about 7 years ago | (#20232095)

Normally the bottom of the heat sink and the processor are roughly at equal temperatures (assuming you use a good thermal compound that does not have a large deltaT across it).

Now if you put something in between the heat sink and the processor that actively forces heat flow from the processor to the heat sink, you can make the bottom of the heat sink hotter than the processor, which makes the processor cooler, and which in turn makes the heat sink more effective since it is running hotter. (Wow, that was a nice run on sentence)

Re:ozone (1)

Tmack (593755) | about 7 years ago | (#20233133)

Normally the bottom of the heat sink and the processor are roughly at equal temperatures (assuming you use a good thermal compound that does not have a large deltaT across it).

Now if you put something in between the heat sink and the processor that actively forces heat flow from the processor to the heat sink, you can make the bottom of the heat sink hotter than the processor, which makes the processor cooler, and which in turn makes the heat sink more effective since it is running hotter. (Wow, that was a nice run on sentence)

Congrats, you just described a peltier cooler, something completely different than this "sealed chamber" theory. Basically, yes, a sealed chamber would turn into a great insulator since convection is orders of magnitude less efficient than conduction, thus heating its insides until the cpu overheats. Think sealing your case completely and turning off all fans.

Tm

Re:ozone (5, Informative)

radl33t (900691) | about 7 years ago | (#20232315)

You are quite right. The AC has no idea what he is talking about. If only his grasp of "simple heat transfer" matched his arrogance. This is not a sealed chamber. The ions impart momentum to a near wall flow and destroy the boundary layer. Good mixing at the wall = good heat transfer! (The article says as much) These Purdue dudes have a lot of neat electronics cooling stuff going on. I had the pleasure of getting the whole delivery at a seminar last Fall.

Re:ozone (1)

Tyger (126248) | about 7 years ago | (#20231997)

Where do you see that? The article describes how it works with fans to reduce the effect where the air closest to the chip moves the least. The ionic wind is the "last mile" of cooling, in that description. If you enclose it in something and point a fan at that, you still have the issue that the fan air doesn't move much close to the now enclosed cooling device. Not only that, it would probably make cooling worse by acting as an insulator.

Sharper Image CPU cooler? (1)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | about 7 years ago | (#20232013)

Not unless you cool your CPU with an Ionic Breeze [sharperimage.com] !

Re:Sharper Image CPU cooler? (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | about 7 years ago | (#20232375)

I saw a homemade hack someone did to do this very thing with an "ionic breeze" from Sharper Image to cool a case. It was a near silent cooling system, which makes me wonder how different that hack was from what the Purdue students discovered.

Ozone at ground level does not help anyway (1)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | about 7 years ago | (#20232263)

The ozone is needed at high altitude to provide a shield. At low altitudes ozone is bad stuff to have around and is highly damaging.

Ozone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20231901)

On the one hand, ground level ozone is a problem. It is one of the prime constituants of smog. The ozone that protects us is much higher in the atmosphere.

On the other hand, ozone is extremely reactive. Ozone generated in your computer probably won't make it out of your house. Besides that, some people deliberately generate ions to purify the air. I really wouldn't worry about the ozone.

Re:Ozone (1)

kyrio (1091003) | about 7 years ago | (#20232337)

Those ion air filters are a scam, they work about as well as your monitor does at cleaning the air. Also, the ozone they create is deadly, good thing though, because morons who buy them without doing even a tiny amount of research, and thinking the advetizing point of "produces ozone!!!1111!" is great, deserve to die from the polluted air they are creating.

Blanket statement isn't true (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20232597)

We have had an electrostatic air filter for about thirty years. It does an amazing job of cleaning the air. It definately keeps the old allergies at bay. I get a good night's sleep when I'm at home. If I'm on the road, I tend to puff up. We have a carbon filter right after the es filter. You can easily tell the places where the air bypasses the ES elements because you can see quite a dust buildup on the carbon elements at those points.

Were you aware that the best way to de-stink a place is to use air ionizers. They're the favorite of disaster clean-up specialists and marijuana grow-ops everywhere.

Ionized air may or may not be healthy but air ionizers certainly can remove junk from the air and really do improve the smell of a place.

Re:Blanket statement isn't true (1)

Jaime2 (824950) | about 7 years ago | (#20232917)

Hmmmm.... When consumer reports tested the Sharper Image Ionic Breeze air purifiers, it found them nearly useless. They gave them such a bad review that the share price of Sharper Image went down 9%. Sharper Image took them to court for libel and lost. They lost so bad that they were forced to pay Consumer Union's legal fees. http://www.aircleaners.com/sharperimage2.phtml [aircleaners.com]

BTW, most allergens collect on surfaces, they don't float around in the air. Pet dander is most notorious for this, but other allergens behave the same way. Most doctor's recommend that allergy sufferers don't spend their money on air filters. An excerpt from the web site of the Asthsma and Allergy Foundation of America ( http://www.aafa.org/display.cfm?id=9&sub=18&cont=2 22 [aafa.org] ):

Air filters are worth considering, but not as a solution to your asthma or allergy problems by themselves. In fact, research studies disagree on whether or not filters give much added relief in a clean and well-ventilated home.

Well, as the article clearly shows (1)

gaffle (1126429) | about 7 years ago | (#20231913)

Red to blue = good!

Re:Well, as the article clearly shows (1, Troll)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 7 years ago | (#20232169)

Bah, that picture is so photoshoppped. Can't believe anything you see these days.

Re:Well, as the article clearly shows (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20232355)

This is a shoop. I can tell by the pixels, and by having seen quite a few shoops in my time.

Didn't we already do this one? (4, Informative)

John Sokol (109591) | about 7 years ago | (#20231977)

From Sep 17, 2006
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/ 17/2134250 [slashdot.org]

Ionic Cooling For Your Computer
master0ne writes, "We (the folks over at InventGeek) have produced the first ionic cooling system for your high-end gaming system. This system produces absolutely no noise and in fact has no moving parts at all. While this is a proof of concept, it demonstrates that you can get the CFM you need to cool a system efficiently with no moving parts and no increase in power consumption."
And another post
From Jan 3, 2007
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/ 03/1951256 [slashdot.org]

Ionic Winds Chilling Your Computer
Iddo Genuth writes to mention The Future of Things online magazine is reporting that Kronos Advanced Technologies in cooperation with Intel and the University of Washington claims to have developed a new type of ultra-thin, silent cooling technology for processors. The piece covers many of the cooling technologies currently available, how their new corona discharge cooler works, and a short interview with several of the key team members.
And my reply on that one.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=21484 8&threshold=0&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=174537 66 [slashdot.org]

One was using the Ionic Breeze technique to provide just a slight air flow, but it increases the efficiency of the heat sink but a large amount. Problem that they fail to mention is the heatsink really attracts dust, just like the ionic breaze, so you need to get in there with a brush quite often.

Below is a link to many of the prototypes I built. I don't have a photo of the ionic version, but it was just the desktop unit with the large aluminum heatsinks with a plastic duct/ shield was added and a set of fine wires was run across the bottom of the large aluminum heat sinks with -6000V DC on it.
The aluminum heat sinks were grounded.
Here is another reply from Jonathan Walther

Give John Sokol the credit (Score:3, Informative)
by Jonathan Walther (676089) Alter Relationship on Wednesday January 03, @09:00PM (#17452802)
Back in 2002 when John Sokol was designing the first, and still the most efficient silent computer, we discussed the ionic air cooling. I think it was Bill Drury who first mentioned it. We put it off as a possible future direction to go. It didn't seem like it would be nearly as productive a direction as the thermal ground technology John developed. Time has proven John right; his thermal plane and thermal ground patents will revolutionize the computer industry fairly soon now. As a director of Nisvara, I can't reveal more than that at this time. But if you want a silent computer with no moving parts and even lower power consumption than these "coronal discharge" guys are claiming, get in touch with John Sokol.

Re:Didn't we already do this one? (4, Insightful)

Tyger (126248) | about 7 years ago | (#20232021)

And if you RTFA, you'd see that this has as much in common with those past articles as a desktop fan pointed at a CPU has with a heatsink with a fan attached.

Re:Didn't we already do this one? (1)

John Sokol (109591) | about 7 years ago | (#20232489)

I did RTFA. It's just a matter of semantics.

They are talking about a CPU with a heatsink and ionic wind cooling.

This is more or less the same as a heatsink with an Ionic Breeze pointed at it.
OR am I missing something?

As far as I can see, there vague article is more or less the same as those other articles and what I had already developed and tested in 2003 or so.

 

Re:Didn't we already do this one? (2, Interesting)

Repossessed (1117929) | about 7 years ago | (#20233241)

It looks more like they're using ionic cooling to replace the heatsink instead of replacing the fan. I have to wonder what kind of cooling you could get if you used all three though.

Re:Didn't we already do this one? (1)

brunascle (994197) | about 7 years ago | (#20232617)

also, this one [slashdot.org] , which points to an article i also submitted a day before.

Re:Didn't we already do this one? (1)

brunascle (994197) | about 7 years ago | (#20232685)

nope, that's not it. the article it points to is on the same site, but this [technologyreview.com] is the article i was thinking of.

Re:Didn't we already do this one? (1)

John Sokol (109591) | about 7 years ago | (#20232693)

"Innovative Ion Trap on a Semiconductor"

Nope, that link was something different. These using Ion's for quantum computing,

the parent article here and those other ones, were just using the air currents generated by a high voltage electric fields in air.
It's actually very crude technology.

New Technology? (2, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | about 7 years ago | (#20232091)

Hmm then what is this 'Ionic breeze' thing sitting beside me that is blowing air around my room with no fans or other moving parts? Or the industrial electrostatic cleaners that have been around for decades longer?

New application of really old technology would be a bit more accurate.

Re:New Technology? (1)

texsupport958 (1138509) | about 7 years ago | (#20232247)

the "anti-gravity lifter" [americanantigravity.com] on a recent mythbusters worked on this concept (makes thrust. no anti-grav)

Re:New Technology? (1)

kyrio (1091003) | about 7 years ago | (#20232385)

lol, "ionic breeze" thing. Enjoy your early death.

Re:New Technology? (1)

AngelofDeath-02 (550129) | about 7 years ago | (#20233747)

The ozone quantity drops dramatically when you are farther away from the unit.

These things may be harmful if they are 1 foot away from you, and are below limits at 3 feet, but really... who sticks that close to an air purifier? The filter ones are obnoxiously loud, where this unit isn't, but still.. The ozone levels in a ppm sense go way down the farther away you are.

Even if a unit was at my feet while sitting, I'm a minimum of 3 feet away, closer to 4 or 5 - depending on height.

I'd normally put it in a clear part of my room and let it do it's thing..

Also, if your room is well ventilated, the ozone is even less of a problem.

Re:New Technology? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about 7 years ago | (#20232479)

Or the ionic flying machine from popular mechanics in the 70's that flopped terribly?

Re:New Technology? (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 7 years ago | (#20233659)

Subject: New Technology
"Hmm then what is this 'Ionic breeze' thing sitting beside me that is blowing air around my room with no fans or other moving parts?"
That would be the thing sitting beside you , not the thing integrated into the silicon of your computer.

To extend your non-sequiter jet planes were not new technology when they were created because paper airplanes already existed.

Only delaying the inevitable (1)

kylemonger (686302) | about 7 years ago | (#20232121)

Chips are eventually going to require cryo-like gear to keep it from roasting. We're not going to have that kind of equipment in our homes so it'll be back to time-sharing to run whatever CPU chewing bloatware we're running by then.

Re:Only delaying the inevitable (1)

mrraven (129238) | about 7 years ago | (#20232261)

I for one welcome our google overmind metaverse overlords.

Re:Only delaying the inevitable (1)

click2005 (921437) | about 7 years ago | (#20232295)

Or chips will go the other way.. so small you end up putting them in everything. Clothing made of millions of nano-cpus that get power through body movement. Or keep it suspended in a liquid. Drink a glass of Intel PentiYummy (it uses fat cells for energy so it aids dieting) and get a few days of super cpu power.

Re:Only delaying the inevitable (1)

Tatisimo (1061320) | about 7 years ago | (#20232387)

I can only imagine: "I'm not fat, I'm a power house! Now fetch me another King Sized Whopper, I need it for light bulbs."

Re:Only delaying the inevitable (3, Informative)

Enderandrew (866215) | about 7 years ago | (#20232409)

Actually most people are buying these powerful, speedy processors that underclock themselves to cut down on power and heat. Both AMD and Intel have been very mindful of power and heat consumption lately. Literally processors have more power than what we're throwing at them. Clock-speed has not been racing upwards significantly the past few years, but power consumption has been going down and efficiency going up.

Ironic wind? (2, Funny)

Omnifarious (11933) | about 7 years ago | (#20232141)

Does this mean now that our computers may have yet another thing that can go wrong? They might break wind.

like this bit (1)

snarkh (118018) | about 7 years ago | (#20232149)

The new cooling technology could be introduced in computers within three years if researchers are able to miniaturize it and make the system rugged enough, Garimella said.


Which pretty much applies to any other technology.

Power (5, Interesting)

umberto unity (1142849) | about 7 years ago | (#20232191)

The problem is the power consumption on this thing. If you assume that they want to move all the air in a small region around the wire even once per second, say 10mm x 1mm x 1cm, to use the dimension quoted in TFA and nominal orders of magnitude for chip size and wire thickness, that corresponds to something ~ 10^-5 moles of air. Since Nitrogen has an ionization energy of 1402.3 kJ/mol (Wikipedia), that means if you want to move that quantity of air every second, you need at least something around 15W. That's even assuming you perfectly convert electrical energy into removing electrons from air molecules, and it's just to ionize the air, neglecting the extra energy it then takes to get the ions moving (we'll pretend the fan does all that, even though that would mean that our device isn't doing jack).

I don't know how much energy my laptop uses, but my power adapter is 65W, so 15 seems non-negligible.

Re:Power (1)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about 7 years ago | (#20232335)

Your analysis assumes only the ions are moved, so the entire atmosphere being moved must be ionized.

In fact a single ion carries an enormous number of unionized molecules with it.

Re:Power (1)

umberto unity (1142849) | about 7 years ago | (#20232379)

actually my analysis assumed none of the ions were moved at all, just ionized.

Re:Power (1)

Inverted Intellect (950622) | about 7 years ago | (#20232735)

a single ion carries an enormous number of unionized molecules with it.

Oh. So you need unionized molecules to produce a decent amount of work then? I sure hope this new movement can overcome all the inertia preventing it. Otherwise the situation will become quite heated.

Re:Power (1)

Shadyman (939863) | about 7 years ago | (#20233477)

Sorry, it looks like your <b> tag is sticking. I'll get someone from tech support to fix it right away.

Re:Power (2, Funny)

billster0808 (739783) | about 7 years ago | (#20233081)

Molecules have their own unions now? Next thing you know they'll be asking for health coverage!

Re:Power (1)

llamaxing (895844) | about 7 years ago | (#20233381)

Or worse yet, dental coverage! I mean, think about it. When was the last time you heard about particulate matter getting routine checkups? The plaque buildup, gingivitis, stained teeth... let's just hope they're not smokers!

Re:Power (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20233695)

Molecules are unionizing? and you thought Hoffa had power...

Re:Power (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20232371)

Well, your average desktop usually has a 300-600 W power supply. 15W is negligible when it comes to cooling, really. Heck, if it performs somewhere between a traditional heatsink and liquid cooling and uses up less than 50W, you'll see quite a large market for it among gamers who want to overclock decently but are too wary of liquid cooling to use it.

Re:Power (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | about 7 years ago | (#20232829)

It seems to be another solution in search of a need. I expect that this will find a niche somewhere. I just don't see the value. I have a perfectly stable, fan/air cooled, four core, 3GHz computer and I really don't hear it unless I put my ear within a foot of it. There is no "looming threat" to advances in computing technology, at least in the personal computer realm. Not so much in much of the server realm either, because companies are starting to look at their power bills.

This article suggests thinner notebooks, but I just don't see that there either, notebooks run hot enough, and it's not as if heat sinks are a significant weight or size factor, the batteries are usually far heavier.

ionic wind? is this real... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20232269)

or are they just blowing hot air?

ESD issue? (2, Informative)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about 7 years ago | (#20232389)

This technology looks like it might deposit a large electric charge on the surface of the chip. This will have to be dissipated, before it dissipates itself by creating an electrostatic discharge on (or capacitively coupled to) one of the chips interconnects.

To avoid this the insulating passivation layer will probably have to be topped by an additional conductive layer. This layer, in turn, will increase the capacitive load on the interconnects and likely require additional chip power to switch them.

I expect it will still be a big net improvement. But deploying it won't be trivial.

Re:ESD issue? (1)

ChrisMaple (607946) | about 7 years ago | (#20232623)

Many chips have whole planes dedicated almost entirely to power supply or ground. No new layer required, so no additional capacitance.

down the road... (1)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | about 7 years ago | (#20232527)

Link this technology with an optical chipset and see how much faster it goes! Insane idea. It could work.

Fact catches fiction (2, Funny)

SEWilco (27983) | about 7 years ago | (#20233105)

Science fiction movies have been showing us for years that future computers spew fountains of sparks at the slightest disturbance. And soon they will.

Re:Fact catches fiction (1)

The Master Control P (655590) | about 7 years ago | (#20233489)

Hehe, that always cracks me up...

Star Trek: Where every console and corridor is apparently lined with C4.

Power consumption, anyone?? (1, Insightful)

wvmarle (1070040) | about 7 years ago | (#20233229)

Now this is all interesting and so, but what about making those chips be a bit more power efficient for starters? I mean save some remaining high-end applications, modern processing power is enough. More than enough for 99% of the applications.

It'd be nice if the CPUs would become more power efficient, that has so many advantages: lower power bills, saving the environment, longer battery life for laptops, silent computers for less need of cooling, etc. For now it seems every new incarnation of the major CPUs (Intel, AMD) is wasting only more power!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>