As a result of the European Union’s push for greater repairability of consumer devices like smartphones, Apple sees itself forced to make the batteries in the iPhone user-replaceable by 2027. Reportedly, this has led Apple to look at using electroadhesion rather than conventional adhesives which require either heat, isopropyl alcohol, violence, or all of the above to release. Although details are scarce, it seems that the general idea would be that the battery is wrapped in metal, which, together with the inside of the metal case, would allow for the creation of a cationic/anionic pair capable of permanent adhesion with the application of a low-voltage DC current.

This is not an entirely wild idea. Tesa has already commercialized it in the electrical debonding form of its Debonding on Demand product. This uses a tape that’s applied to one side of the (metal) surfaces, with a 5 bar pressure being applied for 5 seconds. Afterwards, the two parts can be released again without residue as shown in the above image. This involves applying a 12V DC voltage for 60 seconds, with the two parts afterward removable without force.

Tesa markets this right alongside the pull tab adhesive strips which are currently all the rage in smartphones, with the opinions on pull strips during battery replacement strongly divided. A bottle of IPA is always good to have nearby when a pull tab inevitably snaps off and you have to pry the battery loose. In that regard electroadhesion for debonding would make life significantly easier since the times when batteries were not a structural part of smartphones are unlikely to return no matter how much we might miss them.

We covered electroadhesion previously, as you can make just about anything stick to anything, including biological tissues to graphite and metal, with potentially interesting applications in robotics and medicine.

Have you ever tired of playing with your latest robot invention and wished you could just eat it? Well, that’s exactly what a team of researchers is investigating. There is a fully funded research initiative (not an April Fools’ joke, as far as we know) delving into the possibilities of edible electronics and mechanical systems used in robotics. The team, led by EPFL in Switzerland, combines food process engineering, printed and molecular electronics, and soft robotics to create fully functional and practical robots that can be consumed at the end of their lifespan. While the concept of food-based robots may seem unusual, the potential applications in medicine and reducing waste during food delivery are significant driving factors behind this idea.

The Robofood project (some articles are paywalled!) has clearly made some inroads into the many components needed. Take, for example, batteries. Normally, ingesting a battery would result in a trip to the emergency room, but an edible battery can be made from an anode of riboflavin (found in almonds and egg whites) and a cathode of quercetin, as we covered a while ago. The team proposed another battery using activated charcoal (AC) electrodes on a gelatin substrate. Water is split into its constituent oxygen and hydrogen by applying a voltage to the structure. These gasses adsorb into the AC surface and later recombine back into the water, providing a usable one-volt output for ten minutes with a similar charge time. This simple structure is reusable and, once expired, dissolves harmlessly in (simulated) gastric fluid in twenty minutes. Such a device could potentially power a GI-tract exploratory robot or other sensor devices.

But what use is power without control? (as some car tyre advert once said) Microfluidic control circuits can be created using a stack of edible materials, primarily oleogels, like ethyl cellulose, mixed with an organic oil such as olive oil. A microfluidic NOT gate combines a pressure-controlled switch with a fluid resistor as the ‘pull-up’. The switch has a horizontal flow channel with a blockage that is cleared when a control pressure is applied. As every electronic engineer knows, once you have a controlled switch and a resistor, you can build NOT gates and all the other logic functions, flip-flops, and memories. Although they are very slow, the control components are importantly edible.

Edible electronics don’t feature here often, but we did dig up this simple edible chocolate bunny that screams when you bite it. Who wouldn’t want one of those?

Do you have a 5 V device you want to run 24/7, no matter whether you have electricity? Not to worry – Linear Technology has made a perfect IC for you, the LTC4040; with the perfect assortment of features, except perhaps for the hefty price tag.

[Lukilukeskywalker] has shared a PCB for us to review – a LTC4040-based stamp you can drop onto your PCB whenever you want a LTC4040 design. It’s a really nice module to see designed – things like LiFePO4 support make this IC a perfect solution for many hacker usecases. For instance, are you designing a custom Pi HAT? Drop this module to give your HAT the UPS capability for barely any PCB effort. if your Pi or any other single-board computer needs just a little bit of custom sauce, this module spices it up alright!

This one is a well-designed module! I almost feel like producing a couple of these, just to make sure I have them handy. If you like the LTC4040, given its numerous features and all, this is also not the only board in town – here’s yet another LTC4040 board that has two 18650 holders, and referencing its PCB design will help me today in this review, you can take a look at it too!

Now, having looked at this PCB for a fair bit, it has a few things that we really do want to take care of. Part of today’s review will be connector selection, another would be the module form-factor, some layout, and some suggestions on sizing the passives – the rows of 1206 components are pretty, but they’re also potentially a problem. Let’s waste no time and delve in.

Battery Wireup And Formfactor

The battery connector uses JST-SH, one pin for VBAT and one for GND. The problem with this is that the module is capable of 2.5 A at 5 V = 12 W. At 3.6 V, that’s 4 A if not more and JST-SH is only rated for 1 A per pin. Using this module with a battery as-intended will melt things. You could add a bigger connector like the standard JST-PH, but that’d increase the module size, and my assessment is that this board doesn’t have to be larger than it already is.

Thankfully, this is an open-source module, so we can change its pinout easily enough, adding pins for the battery into the mix. Currently, this board feels breadboardable, but it isn’t quite – it’s pretty wide, so it will take two breadboards to handle, and a breadboard would also probably be disappointed with the pin amount required. With that in mind, adding pins at the top looks convenient enough.

In general, shuffling the pins around will help a fair bit. My hunch is to make the module’s castellations asymmetric, say, do 7-5-5-5 – one side with seven pins, three sides with five pins. It might not look as perfect, but what’s important is that it will be way way harder to mount incorrectly, something I’ve done with a module of my own design – that was not fun to fix. If you are worried about having enough pins to fill the resulting 22-pin combination, it’s always great to just add GND, doubly so for a power-related module!

Adding more castellations also helps us shuffle the pinout around, freeing up the routing – let’s go through the pins and see what that could help with.

Pinout Changes

The schematic is seriously nice looking – every single block is nicely framed and has its description listed neatly. Comparing it with reference schematic, it looks pretty good!

There’s a few nits to pick. For instance, BST_OFF and CHG_OFF need to be grounded for the IC to work – datasheet page 10. You could ground them through a resistor and pull them onto a castellation, but you can’t leave them floating. This is not easy to notice, however, unless you go through the pins one by one and recheck their wiring; I noticed it because I was looking at the board, saw two unconnected pins and decided to check.

My hunch is that, first, all the pins were given power names, and then two of them were missed as not connected anywhere, which is an understandable mistake to make.

Let’s keep with the schematic style – add two more connectors, one 5-pin and one 7-pin, rearrange the pinout, and keep them in their own nicely delineated area. The 7-pin connector gets the battery pins and a healthy dose of ground, and as for the 5 extra pins at the bottom, they’ll serve as extra ground pins, and give us shuffling slots for pins that are best routed southward.

Components And Placement

Having 1206 resistors on such a module is a double-edged sword. On one hand, given the adjustability, you definitely want resistors that you’d be able to replace easily, so 0402 is not a great option. However, 1206 can actually be harder to replace with a soldering iron, since you need to heat up both sides. The writing is more readable on 1206, no doubt, and it’s also nice that this module is optimized by size. Still, for the sake of routability, I will start by replacing the LEDs and LED resistors with 0603 components – those are resistors you will not be expected to replace, anyway.

Also, I have a hunch that a few components need to be moved around. First one is the RProg, no doubt – it’s in the way of the switching path, going right under the SW polygon. Then, I will rotate the Rsense resistor so that it’s oriented vertically – it feels like that should make the VIN track less awkward, and show whether there’s any space to be freed on the left.

Resistors replaced, a few components moved, and here’s where the fun begins. The IGATE track is specifically designated in the datasheet as pretty sensitive, to the point the PDF talks about leakage from this track to the other tracks – it is a FET gate driver output, after all. Having it snake all around power tracks feels uncomfortable I’d like to refactor these FETs a bit, and see if I can make the IGATE track a bit more straightforward, perhaps also make the space usage on the left more optimized. While doing that, I will be shuffling pins between the castellated edges every now and then.

After a bit of shuffling and component rerouting, it felt like I wasn’t getting anywhere. It was time to try and reconstruct the circuit in the way it could make sense, prioritizing the power path and starting with it. For that, I pulled out both FETs, current sense resistor and the feedback divider out of the circuit, and tried rearranging them until it looked like they would work.

Following quite a few attempts at placing the components, I had to settle on the last one. I_GATE took quite a detour, though I did route it via-less in the end; VIN and CLN went on the bottom layer to give room to I_GATE (and be able to cross each other), and all the non-sensitive signals went into vias so that they could be routed outside of the switching area. It turned out the pinout is seriously not conducive to a neat layout; I suppose, some chips are just like that. Perhaps, it was that the gate driver only could’ve had been located on this particular, so that’s why the IGATE pin is on the opposite side of where the FET could be, instead of it, say, being next to V_SYS outputs.

Post-Redesign Clarity

Is the board better now? In many ways, yes; in some ways, no. I don’t know that it’s necessarily prettier, if that makes sense, there were certainly things about the board’s original state that were seriously nice. The package chosen for the FETs definitely didn’t help routing with my I_GATE target in mind, giving no leeway to route things between pins; if I were to change them to DFN8, I could indeed more easily provide a VSYS guard track that the datasheet suggests you use for I_GATE.

I’ve also rearranged the pinout quite a bit. That does mean the STATUS/POWER side distinction of the original board no longer works, but now pins don’t have to go across the board, cutting GND in half. After looking into the datasheet, I didn’t find any use for the CSN pin being broken out, since it’s just a sense resistor net; that space is now occupied by a GND pin, and there’s one less track to route out.

There’s now a good few GND pins on the board – way more than you might feel like you need; the right header feels particularly empty. If you wanted, you could add a Maxim I2C LiIon fuel gauge onto the board, since there’s now enough space in the top right, and quite a few free pins on the right. This would let your UPS-powered device also query the UPS’s status, for one. Of course, such things can always be added onto the actual board that the module would mount onto.

I also removed designators about things that felt too generic – specifically, resistors that only have one possible value and won’t need to be replaced, like LED resistors and pullups for mode selection jumpers. All in all, this board is now a little easier to work with, and perhaps, its ground distribution is a little better.

This module’s idea, and both its authors and my implementation are seriously cool! I hope I’ve helped make it cooler, if at least in the battery connector department. Both the pre-review and post-review versions are open-source, so you can also base your own castellated module off this board if you desire – it’s a good reference design for both LTC4040 and also self-made castellated modules. It’s only 30 mm x 30 mm, too, so it will be very cheap to get made. I hope my input can make this module all that cooler, and, at this point, I want to make a board around this module – stay tuned!

As usual, if you would like a design review for your board, submit a tip to us with [design review] in the title, linking to your board files. KiCad design files strongly preferred, both repository-stored files (GitHub/GitLab/etc) and shady Google Drive/Dropbox/etc .zip links are accepted.

Unless you’re living in a bicycle paradise like the Netherlands, most people will choose to add some sort of illumination to their bicycle to help drivers take note that there’s something other than a car using the road. Generally, simple flashing LEDs for both the front and the rear is a pretty good start, but it doesn’t hurt to add a few more lights to the bicycle or increase their brightness. On the other hand, if you want to add some style to your bicycle lighting system then this persistence of vision (POV) display called the BikeBeamer from [locxter] might be just the thing.

The display uses four LED strips, each housed in their own 3D printed case which are installed at 90-degree angles from one another in between the spokes of a standard bicycle wheel. An ESP32 sits at the base of one of the strips and is responsible for storing the image and directing the four displays. This is a little more complex than a standard POV display as it’s also capable of keeping up with the changing rotational speeds of the bicycle wheels when in use. The design also incorporates batteries so that no wires need to route from the bike frame to the spinning wheels.

This is an ongoing project for [locxter] as well, meaning that there are some planned upgrades even to this model that should be in the pipe for the future. Improving the efficiency of the code will hopefully allow for more complex images and even animations to be displayed in the future, and there are also some plans to improve the PCB as well with all surface-mount components. There are a few other ways to upgrade your bike’s lighting as well, and we could recommend this heads-up headlight display to get started.

For those willing to put some elbow grease into it, there is an almost unlimited supply of 18650 lithium ion batteries around for cheap (or free) just waiting to be put into a battery pack of some sort. Old laptop and power tool batteries are prime sources, as these often fail because of one bad cell while the others are still perfectly usable. [limpkin] built a few of these battery packs and now that he’s built a few, he’s back with a new project that allows him to use four custom packs simultaneously.

The problem with using different battery packs in parallel is that unless the batteries are charged to similar voltages, they could generate a very high and potentially dangerous amount of current when connected in parallel. This circuit board, powered by a small ATtiny microcontroller, has four XT-60 connectors for batteries and a fifth for output. It then watches for current draw from each of the batteries and, using a set of solid-state relays, makes sure that no dangerous overcurrent conditions occur if the batteries are connected with mismatched voltages. The code for the microcontroller is available on this GitHub page as well.

Using an array of batteries with a balancing system like this has a number of uses, from ebikes to off-grid power solutions, and of course if you build your own packs you’ll also want to build a cell balancer of some sort as well. Batteries go outsidelectrical e the realm of theory and into that of chemistry, so we’ll also provide a general warning about working in potentially dangerous situations without specialized knowledge, but you can see how [limpkin] built his original packs here if you want to take a look at one person’s strategy for repurposing old cells.

For small electronics projects, prototyping a design on a breadboard is a must to iron out kinks in the design and ensure everything works properly before a final version is created. The power supply for the breadboard is often overlooked, with newcomers to electronics sometimes using a 9V battery and regulator or a cheap USB supply to get a quick 5V source. We might eventually move on to hacking together an ATX power supply, or the more affluent among us might spring for a variable, regulated bench supply, but this power supply built specifically for breadboards might thread the needle for this use case much better than other options.

The unique supply is hosted on a small PCB with two breakout rails that connect directly to the positive and negative pins on a standard-sized breadboard. The power supply has two outputs, each of which can output up to 24V DC and both are adjustable by potentiometers. To maintain high efficiency and lower component sizes, a switch-mode design is used to provide variable DC voltage. A three-digit, seven-segment display at the top of the board keeps track of whichever output the user selects, and the supply itself can be powered by a number of inputs, including USB-C or lithium batteries.

As an upgrade to one’s own janky power supply (seen here in a project to upgrade the BIOS in an old laptop) this is an excellent step up, and of course comes in a form factor that fits into our current design contest. Of course, if you need a little more current delivering capabilities, there are some modern ATX modifications that can provide a fairly robust benchtop supply without too much expense. You can find some more information about this power supply on the project’s Kickstarter page.

The robotic revolution is currently happening, although for the time being it seems as though most of the robots are still being generally helpful to humanity, whether that help is on an assembly line, help growing food, or help transporting us from place to place. They’ve even showed up in our homes, although it’s not quite the Jetsons-like future yet as they mostly help do cleaning tasks. There are companies that will sell things like robotic vacuum cleaners but [Clay Builds] wanted one of his own so he converted a shop vac instead.

The shop vac sits in a laser-cut plywood frame and rolls on an axle powered by windshield wiper motors. Power is provided from a questionable e-bike battery which drives the motors and control electronics. A beefy inverter is also added to power the four horsepower vacuum cleaner motor. The robot has the ability to sense collisions with walls and other obstacles, and changes its path in a semi-random way in order to provide the most amount of cleaning coverage for whatever floor it happens to be rolling on.

There are a few things keeping this build from replacing anyone’s Roomba, though. Due to the less-than-reputable battery, [Clay Builds] doesn’t want to leave the robot unattended and this turned out to be a good practice when he found another part of the build, a set of power resistors meant to limit current going to the vacuum, starting to smoke and melt some of the project enclosure. We can always think of more dangerous tools to attach a robotic platform to, though.

One of the greatest things about the hacker ecosystem is that whole standing-on-the-shoulders-of-giants thing. Somebody makes something and shares it, and then someone else takes that thing and remixes it, sometimes making it objectively better. For their T3rminal cyberdeck, [calebholloway08] was inspired by a number of projects and came up with something that looks simply fantastic.

Whether you want to call this beauty a cyberdeck or a mobile PC, the guts are what you might expect — a Raspberry Pi 4, an affordable mini keyboard, and a touch screen. But this one took some doing, as in [calebholloway08] had to do a little bit of surgery on the Pi 4, the PiSugar S plus power supply platform, and the display. But you shouldn’t let that stop you from standing on the shoulders of giants, as [calebholloway08] provides (or guides you towards) clear instructions for all three mods.

One thing [calebhollway08] would have done differently was to use something other than a 18650 battery for power, like a 21700. The question is, what will you do differently?

Maybe this is a little too small for you. If so, check out this EMP-protected cyberdeck.

Battery technology is the major limiting factor for the large-scale adoption of electric vehicles and grid-level energy storage. Marginal improvements have been made for lithium cells in the past decade but the technology has arguably been fairly stagnant, at least on massive industrial scales. At smaller levels there have been some more outside-of-the-box developments for things like embedded systems and, at least in the case of this battery that can recharge itself, implantable batteries for medical devices.

The tiny battery uses sodium and gold for the anode and cathode, and takes oxygen from the body to complete the chemical reaction. With a virtually unlimited supply of oxygen available to it, the battery essentially never needs to be replaced or recharged. In lab tests, it took a bit of time for the implant site to heal before there was a reliable oxygen supply, though, but once healing was complete the battery’s performance leveled off.

Currently the tiny batteries have only been tested in rats as a proof-of-concept to demonstrate the chemistry and electricity generation capabilities, but there didn’t appear to be any adverse consequences. Technology like this could be a big improvement for implanted devices like pacemakers if it can scale up, and could even help fight diseases and improve healing times. For some more background on implantable devices, [Dan Maloney] catches us up on the difficulties of building and powering replacement hearts for humans.