nexgen graphene heating panels

[Jeremy Harris]

5 minutes ago, Declan52 said:

What will the test results actually show. Will they show what you as a company want to show to provide sales of your product or is it a complete test incorporating all the questions that have been asked here.

In the past some companies that sell a product that rely on independent test results don't fully test everything and leave out certain aspects so their product looks like the all singing all dancing answer to our prayers. 

 

My hope is that the test results will demonstrate the total efficiency, and validate the advertising claim that this is significantly higher than water based heating, such as conventional underfloor heating systems.

 

The easiest way to demonstrate this would be to provide data that shows the electrical input power needed in order to deliver a defined heat output power.  The time taken to reach this steady state isn't important, as it has no bearing on efficiency, as long as there is a linear relationship between input electrical power and heat output power (which there will be for any form of electrical resistance heating).

[SteamyTea]

2 minutes ago, scottishjohn said:

I have used multifoil

Have you read all this:

http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=125&page=1#Item_0

Makes @onoff bathroom an afternoon project

[Clive Osborne]

7 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

 

Thanks, I look forward to reading it in due course.

 

 

Sorry, but I didn't "start" anything.  I only made the point that 1 kW of heat = 1 kW of heat, and the means by which that heat is delivered to a space with a defined heating requirement doesn't matter, as far as the steady state is concerned.

 

 

 

I understand the perceived comfort effect well too, and have commented here several times on how 3G glazing, with 2 low e coated panes, feels subjectively warmer for a given room temperature than 2G glazing with only 1 low e coated pane.  The reason for that is primarily to do with the surface of the body sensing the reduced radiative heat loss through the glazing.

 

Using a black body reference source (emissivity = 1.0) would be normal practice for calibrating instrumentation, but the key factor will be the actual surface emissivity of the decorated wall, ceiling or floor.  A painted surface will have an emissivity of about 0.9 usually, as I'm sure you're aware.

 

 

 

Ok now look at the FIR benefit of a FIR panel at 80 or 90 degrees with the element in aluminium. Then please compare. 

[Clive Osborne]

3 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

 

My hope is that the test results will demonstrate the total efficiency, and validate the advertising claim that this is significantly higher than water based heating, such as conventional underfloor heating systems.

 

The easiest way to demonstrate this would be to provide data that shows the electrical input power needed in order to deliver a defined heat output power.  The time taken to reach this steady state isn't important, as it has no bearing on efficiency, as long as there is a linear relationship between input electrical power and heat output power (which there will be for any form of electrical resistance heating).

You do have to take the FIR factor into effect as well as we spent a lot of time on that. To be fair we do mention the FIR on the savings. We also need to look at our marketing and embrace this part more . 

[Jeremy Harris]

1 minute ago, Clive Osborne said:

Ok now look at the FIR benefit of a FIR panel at 80 or 90 degrees with the element in aluminium. Then please compare. 

 

The material makes absolutely no difference to the emissivity at all.  For example, we used to used matt black painted aluminium temperature controlled spheres as black body reference sources for calibrating bolometer thermal imaging sensors.  They had an emissivity of very close to unity.  Polishing one of those aluminium spheres to a mirror finish would reduce the emissivity to about 0.05.

 

 

[Jeremy Harris]

5 minutes ago, Clive Osborne said:

You do have to take the FIR factor into effect as well as we spent a lot of time on that. To be fair we do mention the FIR on the savings. We also need to look at our marketing and embrace this part more . 

 

What does this have to do with efficiency?

 

I have a feeling that the word "efficiency" may not always be used correctly here.  For any heating system, of any type, efficiency is always, without any exception, the ratio of total power in to useful power output, and will always be less than unity in practice, due to losses that reduce the useful power delivered. 

 

For example, heat pumps may look like over-unity devices, but in reality we usually only measure a small part of the input power, the electrical power in to the device.  Most of the power they deliver comes from heat extracted from the heat exchange medium (usually either air or brine heated up from the ground or a water source).

 

 

[scottishjohn]

19 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

Have you read all this:

http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=125&page=1#Item_0

Makes @onoff bathroom an afternoon project

I used it close to 20 years ago as it seemed the easiest way to stop the cold draft in the crawl space under house getting to the underside of the floor-- i check it every year or so and still there and all joints still happy --had to retape a couple over the years -

the thought of trying to cut and fit normal foam from the underside --did not appeal as i could only get the roam sheet  under there in small bits through the access hole 

 and the cost to get it spray foamed was too much for me + i would never be able to get at any of the services once it had been done --different if it was planned that way when house was built--retro is always a pain ,so compromises have to be made

Edited July 13, 2019 by scottishjohn

[Clive Osborne]

10 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

 

The material makes absolutely no difference to the emissivity at all.  For example, we used to used matt black painted aluminium temperature controlled spheres as black body reference sources for calibrating bolometer thermal imaging sensors.  They had an emissivity of very close to unity.  Polishing one of those aluminium spheres to a mirror finish would reduce the emissivity to about 0.05.

 

 

You are saying far infrared can travel through any metal ? I am not talking transfer of energy. I am purely talking about FIR . So let's assume 100% on a wall painted over compared to behind a metal panel. How much FIR gets through ? 

[Temp]

Its clear from this page...

http://nexgenheating.com/cost-comparison/

 

That the claims are based on the argument that radiant heaters provide equivalent comfort levels at lower air temperatures. That can be true but in my experience radiant heat is more directional than you think. So you feel warmer on the side facing the heater. Fine if all your walls are covered in heaters. Sit at a table and your legs get cold.

 

I'll wait until a housing association rips out gas central heating from their homes and replaces it with heating films and the tenants rave over the reduced bills and improved comfort.

 

 

[Jeremy Harris]

On 13/07/2019 at 10:59, Clive Osborne said:

You are saying far infrared can travel through any metal ? I am not talking transfer of energy. I am purely talking about FIR . So let's assume 100% on a wall painted over compared to behind a metal panel. How much FIR gets through ? 

 

I didn't mention, or refer to, conduction, only emissivity.  As I'm sure you know, the transfer of radiant heat from a warm body, in the specific case of space heating in a house, depends on it's temperature relative to its surroundings and the emissivity of it's surface.  The equation is simple, it's a modified version of the Stefan Boltzmann equation.

 

A matt black aluminium sphere is pretty damned close to s perfect black body, with an emissivity of very close to unity, whereas the same aluminium sphere, with a mirror polished finish, would have an emissivity of about 0.05.  The consequence of these two very different emissivities is that the heat radiated from the polished sphere, for a given temperature differential,  would be a small fraction of the heat radiated from  a matt black aluminium sphere, with the same temperature differential.

[Clive Osborne]

10 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

 

What does this have to do with efficiency?

 

I have a feeling that the word "efficiency" may not always be used correctly here.  For any heating system, of any type, efficiency is always, without any exception, the ratio of total power in to useful power output, and will always be less than unity in practice, due to losses that reduce the useful power delivered. 

 

For example, heat pumps may look like over-unity devices, but in reality we usually only measure a small part of the input power, the electrical power in to the device.  Most of the power they deliver comes from heat extracted from the heat exchange medium (usually either air or brine heated up from the ground or a water source).

 

 

OK I may have got on the defensive based on the original post. To be fair I have mentioned FIR and wavelength v temperature quite a lot. I am a great believer in FIR getting into the body. I have fibromyalgia and nerve damage in my neck. This journey started when I went into a FIR sauna for the first time. I started with panels but could not achieve the same relief. I'm sure you know FIR can be absorbed easily into the body . Its replacing what we lose. I then found temperature made a difference . Anyway without boring everyone that was the start of the business. Then we moved to conductive inks etc. Nexgen is 24 volts because it's so low in resistance unlike heat mats of wire.Anyway it's the weekend and this has made me read all the website for the first time in a very long time. For that I think you. I also still believe water is not a great conductor. Also in my experience  with wet under floor heating they heat the water to between 50C and 80C on the boiler / heat pump then blend it down with cold water to go under the floor. With a heat pump maybe 45C then you have to increase the DHW temp in the cylinder. It used to be once a week over 60C as well for legionella. Then you have some with buffer tanks for heating. Zoning is not always great. I appreciate like everything some installers are better than others. I have seen some shocking installs and some that the pipework looks like art ! 

[Clive Osborne]

On 13/07/2019 at 11:14, JSHarris said:

 

I didn't mention, or refer to, conduction, only emissivity.  As I'm sure you know, the transfer of radiant heat from a warm body, in the specific case of space heating in a house, depends on it's temperature relative to its surroundings and the emissivity of it's surface.  The equation is simple, it's a modified version of the Stefan Boltzmann equation.

 

A matt black aluminium sphere is pretty damned close to s perfect black body, with an emissivity of very close to unity, whereas the same aluminium sphere, with a mirror polished finish, would have an emissivity of about 0.05.  The consequence of these two very different emissivities is that the heat radiated from the polished sphere, for a given temperature differential,  would be a small fraction of the heat radiated from  a matt black aluminium sphere, with the same temperature differential.

Please let's forget heat at this stage just the FIR.Just bare with me on this. Lets assume you are outside the sun is shining I am led in direct sunlight and you are led nearby but  have a 4mm alluminium panel above you. Let's just talk about FIR getting into the body. We know FIR is absorbed easily into the body by up to 30mm . Let's also say there is a gentle breeze.

[Jeremy Harris]

30 minutes ago, Clive Osborne said:

OK I may have got on the defensive based on the original post. To be fair I have mentioned FIR and wavelength v temperature quite a lot. I am a great believer in FIR getting into the body. I have fibromyalgia and nerve damage in my neck. This journey started when I went into a FIR sauna for the first time. I started with panels but could not achieve the same relief. I'm sure you know FIR can be absorbed easily into the body . Its replacing what we lose. I then found temperature made a difference . Anyway without boring everyone that was the start of the business. Then we moved to conductive inks etc. Nexgen is 24 volts because it's so low in resistance unlike heat mats of wire.Anyway it's the weekend and this has made me read all the website for the first time in a very long time. For that I think you. I also still believe water is not a great conductor. Also in my experience  with wet under floor heating they heat the water to between 50C and 80C on the boiler / heat pump then blend it down with cold water to go under the floor. With a heat pump maybe 45C then you have to increase the DHW temp in the cylinder. It used to be once a week over 60C as well for legionella. Then you have some with buffer tanks for heating. Zoning is not always great. I appreciate like everything some installers are better than others. I have seen some shocking installs and some that the pipework looks like art ! 

 

I would agree that the use of radiant heat for medical treatment purposes seems to be pretty well proven.  I seem to remember my mother using one of the pig heat lamps we used on the farm to ease pain as she got older.

 

With regard to wet underfloor heating, then those temperatures look very high indeed, and far from typical.  Our UFH runs at a flow temperature into the floor of about 26°C.  Any higher and the room temperature tends to overshoot the set point, even with a 0.1°C hysteresis thermostat.  The flow temperature only really governs the response time, though and has little or no effect on the heat delivered to the room.  That is determined by the floor surface temperature and the emissivity of the floor covering, as the majority of the heat delivered by wet UFH is also radiant, with only a small percentage being transmitted to the room by convection.  In our case the floor surface temperature never exceeds about 22.5°C, although in theory it might need to get as high as 23.2°C in order to maintain a 21°C room temperature when it's -10°C outside, and there is no incidental heat gain contributing to the total heat input.

 

Legionella is not applicable to wet heating, as the system is sealed.  We have no legionella treatment at all, as there is no connection between the sealed low temperature UFH loop and the domestic hot water system.  This is the normal arrangement, as the UFH loop will always contain potentially toxic inhibitor and antifreeze, so must remain isolated from any domestic hot water supply.

[Clive Osborne]

49 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

 

My hope is that the test results will demonstrate the total efficiency, and validate the advertising claim that this is significantly higher than water based heating, such as conventional underfloor heating systems.

 

The easiest way to demonstrate this would be to provide data that shows the electrical input power needed in order to deliver a defined heat output power.  The time taken to reach this steady state isn't important, as it has no bearing on efficiency, as long as there is a linear relationship between input electrical power and heat output power (which there will be for any form of electrical resistance heating).

Water based could be radiators heating by convection 

[Clive Osborne]

1 minute ago, JSHarris said:

 

I would agree that the use of radiant heat for medical treatment purposes seems to be pretty well proven.  I seem to remember my mother using one of the pig heat lamps we used on the farm to ease pain as she got older.

 

With regard to wet underfloor heating, then those temperatures look very high indeed, and far from typical.  Our UFH runs at a flow temperature into the floor of about 26°C.  Any higher and the room temperature tends to overshoot the set point, even with a 0.1°C hysteresis thermostat.  The flow temperature only really governs the response time, though and has little or no effect on the heat delivered to the room.  That is determined by the floor surface temperature and the emissivity of the floor covering, as the majority of the heat delivered by wet UFH is also radiant, with only a small percentage being transmitted to the room by convection.  In our case the floor surface temperature never exceeds about 22.5°C, although in theory it might need to get as high as 23.2°C in order to maintain a 21°C room temperature when it's -10°C outside, and there is not incidental heat gain contributing to the total heat input.

 

Legionella is not applicable to wet heating, as the system is sealed.  We have no legionella treatment at all, as there is no connection between the sealed low temperature UFH loop and the domestic hot water system.  This is the normal arrangement, as the UFH loop will always contain potentially toxic inhibitor and antifreeze, so much remain isolated from any domestic hot water supply.

The point is you use the same system for hot water ? Do you use a buffer tank ? How is hot water heated ? How many air changes per hour.

[Clive Osborne]

Just now, Clive Osborne said:

The point is you use the same system for hot water ? Do you use a buffer tank ? How is hot water heated ? How many air changes per hour.

We also compare to heating air not other types of radiant heating.  Now I am in danger of being divorced have a great weekend. I apologise if I went off half cocked. But after spending a lot time and money I took your original post personally. 

[Jeremy Harris]

On 13/07/2019 at 11:25, Clive Osborne said:

Please let's forget heat at this stage just the FIR.Just bare with me on this. Lets assume you are outside the sun is shining I am led in direct sunlight and you are led nearby but  have a 4mm alluminium panel above you. Let's just talk about FIR getting into the body. We know FIR is absorbed easily into the body by up to 30mm . Let's also say there is a gentle breeze.

 

For your specific case the conditions are very different from inside a closed space.  Outside, where the differential temperature, as far as radiated heat is concerned, is very high (because the sky temperature is extremely low, not far off absolute zero) then the heat radiated by the aluminium plate will be close to that given by the normal (unmodified) Stefan Boltzmann equation.

 

The temperature that the aluminium plate is heated to by solar radiation depends on the insolation and the sun-facing emissivity of the plate, as Kirchoff's law of thermal radiation applies.  If the plate was matt black then it would reach a high temperature, if it were polished to a mirror finish then it would reach a much lower temperature.

 

Someone underneath the plate would feel the heat re-radiated from the plate, and again this would depend on the temperature of the plate and the emissivity of the underside face.  The re-radiated heat from the underside of a matt black plate would be very much greater than that from a polished plate.

 

The bottom line is that, for this case, the amount of heat radiated from the underside of the aluminium plate would be extremely dependent on the emissivity of both sides of the plate.  Emissivity would dominate the level of radiated heat, much as it will from any heated surface.

[Jeremy Harris]

17 minutes ago, Clive Osborne said:

The point is you use the same system for hot water ? Do you use a buffer tank ? How is hot water heated ? How many air changes per hour.

 

Air changes per hour has no relevance at all, as ventilation heat loss is simply one element of the total heat loss for any heated enclosed space, and has no more, or less, significance that the thermal conductivity of the structure.

 

The hot water system is always isolated from the UFH, without exception.  It has to be, as I mentioned in the earlier post.  The use of a buffer tank makes no difference to the efficiency, either, as any buffer would always be within the heated envelope.

 

We preheat hot water to ~35°C to 40°C using a plate heat exchanger, then increase the temperature up to about 55°C using a thermal store.  This means that incoming cold water is flash heated to hot water, just like it would be in a combi boiler. with no body of stored hot water.  There is no requirement (or practical means to provide) legionella treatment, as there is no stored body of hot water to heat up.

[Clive Osborne]

On 13/07/2019 at 11:37, JSHarris said:

 

For your specific case the conditions are very different from inside a closed space.  Outside, where the differential temperature, as far as radiated heat is concerned, is very high (because the sky temperature is extremely low, not far off absolute zero) then the heat radiated by the alumium plate will be close to that given by the normal (unmodified) Stefan Boltzmann equation.

 

The temperature that the aluminium plate is heated to by solar radiation depends on the insolation and the sun-facing emissivity of the plate.  If the plate was matt black then it would reach a high temperature, if it were polished to a mirror finish then it would reach a much lower temperature.

 

Someone underneath the plate would feel the heat re-radiated from the plate, and again this would depend on the temperature of the plate and the emissivity of the underside face.  The re-radiated heat from the underside of a matt black plate would be very much greater than that from a polished plate.

 

The bottom line is that, for this case, the amount of heat radiated from the underside of the aluminium plate would be extremely dependent on the emissivity of both sides of the plate.  Emissivity would dominate the level of radiated heat, much as it will from any heated surface.

As I said and please bare with me. I am only interested in this scenario about FIR. Not heat I am trying to paint a picture of the benefits of far infrared. Not at high temp behind a panel but directly on walls or ceilings which is how we always recommend for it to be fitted just skimmed or painted.It works perfectly well as radiant heat particularly under carpet.

[Clive Osborne]

5 hours ago, Nickfromwales said:

Hi Clive.

I'm afraid that is not the case, and have real-world experience of fitting wet heating systems in 'passive' standard dwellings ( so speak from experience ). The heat output from UFH in a decent sized slab is very mild-mannered and very easy to control if set up correctly. You would, for eg, have less overall comfort from a heater that switches on / off vs one that stays at a chosen set temp, plus not having the slab means you cannot load-shift off low rate electricity as you have no thermal storage from such an emitter as the panels you mention. You are a slave to whatever rate of electricity is available at any particular time when you heat via such mediums. 

Any inefficiencies from the wet system are soon absorbed by the many benefits of it, load-shifting for one, but also a house with a cool / cold floor is not very pleasant in a residential dwelling IMHO, but the panels would have some appeal in other retro-fit situations I'm sure ( where the higher running costs are outweighed by convenience ).

 

In short, you would also end up with "too much heat", locally to the panels, when trying to heat a whole room with them, so 6 and two 3's I'm afraid.

 

We will always have 'thermal mass'..........

Hmmmm, is that Jeremy's drone I can see from my window. "INCOMING!!!!!!!"

Nick I am afraid you are the few not the many regarding knowledge.  For example recently I have consulted with a build of 200 new houses average about 120 sq meter most terraced or linked terrace. All specified mains gas , still best option from a running cost viewpoint and wet underfloor heating. They specified 12KW mits. ASHPs. Go figure 

In a housing charity in London new flats close passive 70 square mtrs two bed . Wanting me to put a 500 watt panel on bathroom walls ( We just up voltage to 48 volt DC to get power/temp) But nothing else in the whole flat. It will never drop below 19 degrees apparently. I declined to bid. All electric with plenty of solar panels so it should have been ideal for us.

My assumption was on that basis they and no air changes they were all going to die.Or with air changes it wouldn't stay at 19 degrees for the next 20 years which is our warranty 

[Jeremy Harris]

26 minutes ago, Clive Osborne said:

As I said and please bare with me. I am only interested in this scenario about FIR. Not heat I am trying to paint a picture of the benefits of far infrared. Not at high temp behind a panel but directly on walls or ceilings which is how we always recommend for it to be fitted just skimmed or painted.It works perfectly well as radiant heat particularly under carpet.

 

I think the key issue here is understanding just how heat is transmitted from any body that is at a warmer temperature than closed surroundings.  The latter is very important, as the unmodified Stefan Boltzmann equation relates only to radiated heat from a body that is at a temperature above absolute zero.  For all practical space heating situations, the radiated heat from any emitter will be very significantly impacted by the temperature of the surrounding surfaces. 

 

Things are further complicated in that any heated surface will also conduct heat into the air surrounding it, and heat will also be convected through the air surrounding the heated surface, depending to some degree on the orientation of it.  Because the Stefan Boltzmann equation applies only to a heated body in a vacuum, where conduction and convection cannot occur, it will tend to give a result is pretty inaccurate when trying to determine the radiated heat output from a real-world surface within an air filled closed space, like a room.  To add to the complexity of the way heat is transported around a closed space, surfaces within the room will be heated by radiation from the heated surface, and by conduction from the warmed air in the room.  Those heated surfaces will then radiate, conduct and convect heat, so setting up some pretty complicated heat transfer paths.

 

In the case of any heated panel fitted within a finished wall, ceiling or floor, the amount of heat that is radiated from it (in Watts) will depend only on the temperature differential between it and the surrounding surfaces and the emissivity of the finished wall, floor or ceiling.  Generally, painted or papered finishes on walls and ceilings are likely to have an emissivity of around 0.9, so using that should give a reasonably accurate estimate of heat output for any given temperature differential.  Some account also needs to be made for heat that will be conducted and convected from the heated surface, too.  This will only be a relatively small proportion of the total heat output, in the case of a low temperature heated surface, but nevertheless needs to be included in any calculation.   It's worth noting that most of the heat emitted by wet underfloor heating is radiated, too.

 

 

[Clive Osborne]

1 hour ago, ProDave said:

So are you now eventually saying, that the key to your energy saving claims are as I suggested earlier that you keep the ROOM temperature lower and achieve comfort for the occupants by the radiant heat they receive directly?

 

If so, then why not just state that claim in plain English, and then people might believe a system that can achieve comfort for occupants while maintaining a lower room temperature could actually cost less to run.

 

EDIT  As Steamy Tea says, that would make a low running cost claim true, but it would still not make the heaters "more efficient"

Well I have been banging on about FIR wavelength,  temperature etc. To be fair and I have apologised but the original post on here some what annoyed me. As did being in the same thread and compared to a electric heater company that sell direct to old people at very high prices. Also we are not a panel we are a 0.48mm film. We have test results coming regarding comparisons but I already know it will be better by some distance. If that was not bad enough then compared to a 1950s heater annoyed me also. Anyway a bit too much red mist came down. Results will be posted.

[Jeremy Harris]

31 minutes ago, Clive Osborne said:

Well I have been banging on about FIR wavelength,  temperature etc. To be fair and I have apologised but the original post on here some what annoyed me. As did being in the same thread and compared to a electric heater company that sell direct to old people at very high prices. Also we are not a panel we are a 0.48mm film. We have test results coming regarding comparisons but I already know it will be better by some distance. If that was not bad enough then compared to a 1950s heater annoyed me also. Anyway a bit too much red mist came down. Results will be posted.

 

The intention was not to insult you, or your company at all, just to point out the fact (and it is a fact, not an opinion) that 1 kW of heat emitted from a 1950's single bar electric heater is absolutely identical to 1 kW of heat emitted from any other near-zero loss heating system.

 

All this talk about wavelength etc is irrelevant, as space heating a house is a pretty much steady state requirement, where all surfaces will reach an equilibrium temperature and the heat input power needed to maintain a given room temperature will have to match the heat loss power from the fabric of the building (and that heat loss power includes all forms of heat loss, so conduction through the floor, walls and roof, as well as ventilation heat loss).

 

All that matters, as far as efficiency is concerned, is the ratio of the input power to the heat output power.

[epsilonGreedy]

25 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

The intention was not to insult you, or your company at all, just to point out the fact (and it is a fact, not an opinion) that 1 kW of heat emitted from a 1950's single bar electric heater is absolutely identical to 1 kW of heat emitted from any other near-zero loss heating system.

 

All this talk about wavelength etc is irrelevant, as space heating a house is a pretty much steady state requirement...

 

 

I think you have just claimed a microwave cooker offers no advantage over a conventional oven.

 

If the objective of a house heating system is not to illustrate Newtonian conservation of energy or Victorian vintage laws of thermodynamics but is instead the objective is happy content humans then the company might be offering an "efficiency" gain. The notion of graphene coated walls glowing with IR rays bathing householders is interesting, though I suspect, as with any graphene based product, the promise will never be fulfilled. 

[Clive Osborne]

3 minutes ago, epsilonGreedy said:

 

I think you have just claimed a microwave cooker offers no advantage over a conventional oven.

 

If the objective of a house heating system is not to illustrate Newtonian conservation of energy or Victorian vintage laws of thermodynamics but is instead the objective is happy content humans then the company might be offering an "efficiency" gain. The notion of graphene coated walls glowing with IR rays bathing householders is interesting, though I suspect, as with any graphene based product, the promise will never be fulfilled. 

We only use a small amount of graphene in comparison to graphite and other things in the mix. I think this probably explains our objective a lot better than I did !