←back to thread

183 points gmays | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jayyhu ◴[] No.41900019[source]
Reading the article, it looks like so far they only have a working resettable fuse (a passive device), and only hypothesize that a transistor was possible with the copper-infused PLA filament. So no actual working active electronics.

And from the paper linked in the article[1], it seems the actual breakthrough is the discovery that copper-infused PLA filament exhibits a PTC-effect, which is noteworthy, but definitely not "3D-Printed Active Electronics" newsworthy.

[1] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17452759.2024.2...

replies(7): >>41901011 #>>41901082 #>>41901266 #>>41901359 #>>41901714 #>>41901793 #>>41905509 #
IanCal ◴[] No.41901266[source]
Hang on, can you explain why this is passive and not active?

> Harnessing the described phenomenon, we created the first semiconductor-free active electronic devices fully 3D printed via material extrusion. We demonstrate this breakthrough through the implementation of monolithically 3D-printed logic gates.

replies(1): >>41901725 #
magicalhippo ◴[] No.41901725[source]
They've created a Polymeric Positive Temperature Coefficient (PPTC) device. As it heats up the resistance gets very high very abruptly.

While it is non-linear, diodes are also considered passive devices[2], as active is taken to mean electrical control of current flow.

In this case one could induce current control through thermal means, ie an adjacent heating element, and if you potted that in a box I guess you could argue the box is an active device. But not the PPTC itself.

[1]: https://m.littelfuse.com/~/media/electronics/technical_paper...

[2]: https://wiki.analog.com/university/courses/electronics/text/...

replies(3): >>41902110 #>>41902468 #>>41902615 #
amelius ◴[] No.41902110[source]
> active is taken to mean electrical control of current flow

Is a transformer an active device? Asking because current in one loop can control current in the other loop.

From there, are two copper wires an active device?

replies(2): >>41902549 #>>41902703 #
adrian_b ◴[] No.41902549{3}[source]
The current in one transformer loop does not control the current in the other loop.

The power from one loop is transferred into the other, there is no control. The same for two copper wires.

"Control" means that you can determine the value of the power in some circuit by consuming less power to do this. If you have to use the same power, not less, then you are the provider of power, not someone in control, i.e. this is the difference between bosses and the workers commanded by them. The bosses do not lift heavy parcels themselves, they order to some worker to do that.

A device that apparently looks like a transformer but it is an active device is the magnetic amplifier. There are 2 differences from a transformer, the magnetic core is saturable during normal operation (any magnetic core is saturable at a high enough magnetic field, but when that happens in a transformer this means that the transformer has failed, which leads to overcurrents that would destroy the equipment unless a protection is triggered), and the second difference is that the control coil has a very high number of turns, so that a very small current can saturate the magnetic core.

In a magnetic amplifier, the output coil is inserted in an AC circuit where the power must be controlled. When the core is not saturated, the impedance of the coil is high and the output AC current is low. When the core is saturated, the impedance of the coil is low and the output AC current is high. Whether the magnetic core is saturated or not is controlled with a very small current and power on the control coil, which makes this an active device.

Magnetic amplifiers have been heavily used during WWII, especially by the Germans, who had improved them, and they continued to be used for a few decades after the end of WWII, when USA had captured the German technology, because of their very high reliability, until the transistor amplifiers have become reliable enough.

replies(1): >>41903797 #
amelius ◴[] No.41903797{4}[source]
> The current in one transformer loop does not control the current in the other loop.

You are right about the power, but the current in one loop __does__ control the current in the other loop.

replies(2): >>41904617 #>>41907419 #
1. magicalhippo ◴[] No.41907419{5}[source]
We say a changing current in one coil of a transformer induces a current in the other coil. It does not control the current of the other coil.

Any induced current is superimposed on top of whatever is already there on the other side. This is different from controlling the current.

For example, you couldn't block DC current passing through the secondary side regardless what you did on the primary side.

replies(1): >>41912049 #
2. amelius ◴[] No.41912049[source]
Imagine i have a pencil which I'm holding in my hand. With my hand, I can control the position of the tip of the pencil. Now imagine the pencil is made of rubber. I can still control the position of the tip, but e.g. a strong wind can cause the pencil to flex and so the control is not perfect. But it is still control.

I don't see how this is fundamentally different from controlling the current through a transformer.