Why Do Non-Mechanical Systems Like Batteries and LEDs Wear Out?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter SkepticJ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mystery Systems
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mechanisms behind the wear and failure of non-mechanical systems such as batteries, LEDs, and other electronic components. Participants explore various factors contributing to the degradation of these systems, including chemical reactions, electrical activity, and material properties, without reaching a consensus on specific causes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that while mechanical systems wear out due to physical wear, non-mechanical systems like batteries and LEDs also experience failure, prompting a question about the underlying reasons.
  • Another participant suggests that different types of non-mechanical systems fail for various reasons, such as bad ballasts in fluorescent lights or degradation of electrolytic capacitors due to oxide layer formation or electrolyte breakdown.
  • It is mentioned that even in systems without moving parts, atomic and subatomic activities, such as corrosion from small electrical currents, can lead to failure.
  • A participant raises a specific question about the failure mechanisms of phosphorescent materials and sulfur lamps, questioning what reactions occur inside these systems that lead to their eventual failure.
  • One participant provides a calculation regarding the potential contamination of a sulfur lamp over its lifespan, suggesting that even a sealed system can accumulate contaminants over time.
  • A question is posed about the longevity of semiconductor devices under continuous use, speculating on the effects of fluctuating microcurrents on the material's band structure.
  • Electromigration is identified as a significant issue for semiconductor devices, where high currents can physically displace metallic contacts, leading to device failure.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the mechanisms of failure in non-mechanical systems, and the discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on specific causes or explanations.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of detailed exploration into specific chemical reactions or material properties that lead to failure, as well as assumptions about the ideal conditions of systems being discussed.

SkepticJ
Messages
243
Reaction score
1
I understand why mechanical systems that are not capable of self repair wear out, but for years now I've been totally puzzled as to why things which do not have wearing parts wear out, such as - phosphores, rechargable batteries, capacitors, fluorecent lights, electrodes, vacuum tubes, electroluminescent plastics, LEDs and so on. I understand why incandescent bulbs burn out though - because the tungsten filament subliminates under the intense heat until a place on the filament gets thin enough that the filament snaps in two, breaking the electrical circuit and putting the light out.
So, why do they?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Different reasons. For instance, fluorescents can die bacause of a bad ballast or starter or even a broken filament. Electrolytic capacitors fail when electrical contact between the electrode and electrolyte is broken. This can happen if the electrode forms an oxide layer or if the electrolyte degrades (especially with high temperatures) or if anyone of a handfull of other unlikely events occurs.

In short, and being poetic, things eventually fail because everything in the world will react with everything else in the world, given enough time.
 
Because there are no moving parts on a macroscopic scale does not mean there isn't a storm of activity on the atomic and subatomic scale. Even small amounts of electrical current will cause corrosion of parts.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Because there are no moving parts on a macroscopic scale does not mean there isn't a storm of activity on the atomic and subatomic scale. Even small amounts of electrical current will cause corrosion of parts.

Ah, thanks. :)

That doesn't explain what kills phosphores though. Also not why the bulb part of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_lamp" goes out. There's nothing inside the inert glass container but sulfur and argon, what is reacting inside to ruin it after 60,000 hours?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SkepticJ said:
There's nothing inside the inert glass container but sulfur and argon, what is reacting inside to ruin it after 60,000 hours?
Ain't no such thing as a truly isolated system!

Specific outgassing rate of air through glass is at least 10^{-9} mbar/cm2-sec.
Surface area of bulb = 100cm2 say
60,000 hrs = about 200 million sec

If your bulb started out at absolute vacuum, it would end up with about 20mbar worth of air in it at the end of its rated life, assuming all joints and seals are perfect and have no leaks. That's a 2% contamination.
 
btw if you buy a pc today, and use it non-stop everyday, how many years does it take normally for the chips, transistors (and all p-n junctions) to get "corroded" by the fluctuating microcurrent? because these streams of electrons eventually destroy the band structure of the material won't it?

(neglect the hard drive, because it is mechanical)
 
One of the biggest problems with long-term use of semiconductor devices is electromigration. When you have relatively high currents passing through small areas, over time, the electrons act as a type of "wind," physically moving the metallic contacts of the devices and creating shorts and opens.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K