A call on 240w adapter

[Gu_tally]

and a lot of high quality 240w PD cables are a bit expansive and thic. so I guess it need good strength to keep the power in place. plots thicken.

[Kyle_Reis]

@James3

Didn’t FW know this?

Yes.

In their announcement of the 180W adapter Framework stated that:

If you have a Graphics Module installed, set your OS to maximum performance mode, and run a sustained heavy load, it is possible to draw from the battery while plugged in. If that doesn’t sound like a good tradeoff to you, the Framework Laptop 16 supports 240W USB PD 3.1 power adapters too, so you can configure your DIY Edition without a power adapter and bring your own 240W one instead.

@James3

There must be a good reason why they only make a 180W power brick.

In their announcement of the 180W adapter Framework stated that it was about compactness:

We needed to solve for the tricky task of creating an adapter small and portable enough to be a great fit for the Framework Laptop 16 in an integrated graphics configuration while also outputting enough power to handle the Graphics Module with a discrete GPU. 180W covers the majority of use cases while still being extremely compact.

@James3

For example, hardly any USB-C cables are spec for 240W power over them so how would the laptop know the cable is good enough before asking for the power?

The USB-C spec requires that all cables above 60W are required to have an e-marker, which is a chip built-in to the cable that tells the power supply how much power the cable is rated to handle.

Furthermore the USB-C standard only allows cables that are rated for 60w (with no e-marker), 100w (with a 100w e-marker), or 240w (with a 240w e-marker). So any cable that works at 180w must have a 240w e-marker and should be able to safely handle 240w.

@James3

I guess someone actually testing a 240W power supply over USB-C to the FW16 laptop would at least verify FW statements that is can support it.

The charging hardware Framework is using is rated for up to 65V. 240w is only 48v so the hardware does support it. Furthermore the open source embedded controller firmware also has support for it.

So the only part that can’t be verified without actually having the power supply is that the BIOS supports it. However if the BIOS somehow prevented support for 240w power supplies that could be resolved with a BIOS update.

[James3]

If any cable above 60w has this e-marker. Is there a command on Linux or Windows that lets me read this e-marker?

[Kyle_Reis]

I am not aware of any.

I did find this Reddit thread where someone is asking that same question, it sounds like the OS does have access to e-marker info but no information on how you can test it. https://www.reddit.com/r/UsbCHardware/comments/hd2y9y/reading_emarkers_from_consumer_hardware/

[Kyle_Reis]

@anon81945988

The laptop and hence the BIOS is never connected to 240V only the power unit output which in this case would be 48V… Maybe you missed type. From what I have read of your posts you are uite knowledgeable.

I made no mention of 240V.

I said 240w (that’s a “w”) to refer to the 240w USB-C standard which operates at 48v 5a.

[Gu_tally]

bummer
Kickstarter declined
I shall try indigogo or gofundme?

[jared_kidd]

@Gu_tally

Once again, Huaqiangbei is on its way to save the community.

This image looks like a direct clone/copy of the Shargeek 100. Good luck with the adapter. But I wouldn’t put my money on a company that clones other products.

[Gu_tally]

the fact that shargeek powerbank itself is a clone of another product. YZX 钢 11 (T11). the board design is exactly the same. it is just not for sell globally and didn’t care about the look of the product.
Shargeek just put a fancy shell on it and marketed it to the absolute.
Don’t get fooled by that company. a lot of company that focus on international market is milking a lot from China domestic DIYers and didn’t credit their contribution.

[Gu_tally]

the battery bank here is entirely their own board design and people requested them to make a transparent shell because it looks geeky.

[Alan_Pearce]

@Kyle_Reis

@James3

There must be a good reason why they only make a 180W power brick.

In their announcement of the 180W adapter Framework stated that it was about compactness:

We needed to solve for the tricky task of creating an adapter small and portable enough to be a great fit for the Framework Laptop 16 in an integrated graphics configuration while also outputting enough power to handle the Graphics Module with a discrete GPU. 180W covers the majority of use cases while still being extremely compact.

The other reason they made a 180W charger instead of 240W is that at the time of design the highest power PD chips available would support only 180W. I have not heard that chips capable of 240W are available - maybe this is why the kickstarter was refused.

How heavy are those 240W power bricks in the amazon link further back? The FW 180W is some 300 odd grams without cables (I don’t recall the exact figure) and it is quite a solid brick. All the 240W bricks I could see in the Amazon link have both input and output cables permanently attached which makes packing them a pain - remember these are supposed to be for portable use, not desk use as someone posted above.

When I first saw the proposed details of this 240W unit I thought (from the initial description given) that the manufacturer was going to take a 240W brick they were alreay making, and add a 240W PD 3.1 board inside it so it would have a USB-C connector in the case just like the FW unit. It appears the PD unit is to be external, not internal to the supply, so my Dragons Den reaction is “I’m out”.

[Jimster480]

They are not so expensive these days. I bought a 2 pack for $10 on amazon and it is legit and works well.

[Bill_Fleming]

It would be nice if this adapter allowed passthrough access to either the USB 2 or 3 signals from the laptop. Currently there appears to be 0 products that can pass through even the 140W or 180W with USB running so you end up completely losing one of the USB ports to the framework charger. Even if the USB spec isn’t high end you would want to be able to at least connect a mouse/keyboard into the charger so that when you plug in the laptop to the charger on the desk you also get the USB/Keyboard on the same USB port. Would also be nice to get a single Display Port 1.4 as part of a premium adapter option.

[Christian_Elsner]

The power lines are going to be at 48V, that will be a very sparky but short fun for your keyboard.
To get this working you’d need a dock - maybe a bit much for a DIY project.

[Klay_Hart]

I think a 240W dock would be pretty cool to have. I’ve used my FW16 with some of the USB-C docks at work (I don’t know what the output is) and it’s awesome only having to use one cable to hook up 2 displays and some peripherals while also charging the laptop. I’m also not running the GPU or CPU very hard for those so no need for my 180W charger (mostly work/email through a browser). I would like a dock with 240W PD for home so I could game without worry of draining the battery. I saw a post earlier talking about an idea for a Framework dock with expansion cards for ports. Luckily none of the games I’ve played so far on my FW16 drain my battery while plugged in with my 180W so that’s a future problem.

To get back on topic I’d like for a portable 240W charger for when I’m out of town. It would likely be needed for a future Framework GPU. Like I said I’m doing fine with the current 180W charger. So I can wait for a bigger company to release one. I do really like how small and light my 180W is compared to my old laptop’s 165W charger. Plus having the cable to the laptop be detachable is great!

[Ekkehard_F]

The 180W charger is framework branded, but made by Chicony. It is not listed on their product page, but that company has been around a long time. If they see the demand, they should come up with a product. As it’s still 5A, just a higher voltage, it might even fit in the existing case. Without the dGPU, I don’t need even the 180W charger (albeit having two of them).

[Alan_Pearce]

@Ekkehard_F

The 180W charger is framework branded, but made by Chicony. It is not listed on their product page, but that company has been around a long time. If they see the demand, they should come up with a product. As it’s still 5A, just a higher voltage, it might even fit in the existing case. Without the dGPU, I don’t need even the 180W charger (albeit having two of them).

I doubt it will fit in the same case as the 180W. Don’t forget that a 240W supply is a third more power than a 180W supply, so the magnetic components will need to be a third bigger - and equivalently heavier, so the total weight will probably go up about 25% on the existing 180W supply. Now it may be possible to reduce the magnetics by operating the switching part at a higher frequency, but that affects the losses in the semiconductors used, creates problems with spike filtering and requires more specialised winding methods on the transformer, so there will be limited gains going that route. All up I would expect the supply to be similar in the larger two dimensions and around 50% thicker, and 25% heavier.

What would be great though is if they could add a USB-A port for phone or other older device charging as well, at a fixed output current capability that doesn’t take away from the 240W. Older devices are going to be around for a significant length of time and it isn’t always convenient to charge them by plugging into the laptop and occupying a port there.

[Jacob2]

I’ll back a kickstarter for a 240w PD3.1 supply. Given the lack of laptops needing 240w PD on the market, this may be the only way to get one soon. I have no doubt that current suppliers in China can make one, they just don’t have a market for it. The Framework 16 is brand new and the only commercial device that can use it right now. That will likely change in 12-24 months, if your patient, but I’d like to cook a grilled cheese on the chassis while running FurMark, so someone send me a link. I’ve wasted money on far sketchier crowd funding endeavors.

[Michael_Spano]

Devils advocate here…

Instead of trying to create a USB C 240 watt charger would it be possible to create a module that would convert USB C to a barrel connector or similar and just get a 240 W charger that is already available?

[jared_kidd]

@Michael_Spano

Instead of trying to create a USB C 240 watt charger would it be possible to create a module that would convert USB C to a barrel connector or similar and just get a 240 W charger that is already available?

That’s already what this project is. They explained it in one of their posts above. This an adapter, not a charger.

[Michael_Spano]

ah I must have missed that. Thanks for the clarification