Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21
  1. #1
    Jeremiah started this thread.
    Jeremiah's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor

    Member since
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    437
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 381 Times in 138 Posts

    To Break or Not Breakdown A Transformer (Using Some Math)

    I have about 400 pounds of transformers in my basement that I have not broken apart (ranging from tiny to 40 pounds). I finally decided to use my training (I teach math) to figure out how much copper must be in a transformer to make money.

    Skip this part if you're not interested in the math
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Lets start with some abbreviations
    Let x = the weight of copper
    Let y = the weight of steel
    Let z = your payout
    Let the coefficients be your payout per pound

    Thus, using prices from my local scrap yard my equations would be

    .28(x + y) = z (amount paid not breaking down the transformer)
    2.9x + .09y = z (amount paid by breaking down the transformer)


    So the question becomes, how much copper needs to be in a transformer in order to make money.

    More formally 2.9x + .09y > .28(x + y)
    Or, rounding a bit, y < 13.79x

    Let’s start with a 10 pound transformer and find the break even point. Ignoring any loss of weight in the breakdown process we have



    X + Y = 10 lbs
    Or y = -x + 10


    Setting y = -x + 10 equal to 13.79x

    -x + 10 = 13.79x
    X = .676 pounds

    Meaning, out of a 10 pound transformer, if you get .676pounds of copper (leaving 9.324 pounds of steel) you will break even. Anything less than .676 pounds, you will loose money by breaking it down.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thus, for a 10 pounds transformer (at my yards prices) you need 6.76% copper recovery.

    Here are the numbers for various weights you need to break even.

    1 Pound Transformer = .67% or .0067 pounds of copper
    5 Pound Transformer = 3.38% or .338 pounds of copper
    10 Pound transformer = 6.76% or .676 pounds of copper
    20 Pound Transformer = 13.5% or 1.35 pounds of copper

  2. The Following 6 Users say Thank You for This Post by Jeremiah:



  3. #2
    SMF Badges of Honor



    Member since
    Feb 2012
    Location
    OK
    Posts
    5,728
    Thanks
    6,814
    Thanked 3,464 Times in 1,989 Posts
    cool! (i'm just glad i'm not still in school ; )

  4. #3
    parrothead's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Treasure Coast, FL
    Posts
    2,416
    Thanks
    667
    Thanked 2,067 Times in 953 Posts
    Well, I think a lot of people have stated that 10% is the norm, so this backs that up. Now the question is, is the size of the unit enough to warrant the time spent. If we can deduce that 10% is the norm, we need an equasion that gives the dollar per hour that one wishes to maintain based on the initial weight of the transformer.

    That is your assignment for tomorrow. I am thinking that the time involved versus money earned will somewhat follow the same scale as the size of the transformer. This could be interesting.

    Say a 5 ounce transformer takes 1/2 the time as a 5 pound transformer which is 10 times the reward rather than just double. I think we need some more data on this.

    I love this stuff. Math, physics, and economics. COOL! Keep going teach. We need more info.
    "64K should be enough for anybody." - Bill Gates 1981
    http://www.treasurecoastelectronicrecycling.com/

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to parrothead for This Post:


  6. #4
    Jeremiah started this thread.
    Jeremiah's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor

    Member since
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    437
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 381 Times in 138 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by parrothead View Post
    Well, I think a lot of people have stated that 10% is the norm, so this backs that up. Now the question is, is the size of the unit enough to warrant the time spent. If we can deduce that 10% is the norm, we need an equasion that gives the dollar per hour that one wishes to maintain based on the initial weight of the transformer.

    That is your assignment for tomorrow. I am thinking that the time involved versus money earned will somewhat follow the same scale as the size of the transformer. This could be interesting.

    Say a 5 ounce transformer takes 1/2 the time as a 5 pound transformer which is 10 times the reward rather than just double. I think we need some more data on this.

    I love this stuff. Math, physics, and economics. COOL! Keep going teach. We need more info.
    Yep, there is still more work to do here. We also need to adjust any break down for the loss of weight during breakdown. Pullling out glue, paper, loss of metal dust, etc. and then, as you suggested, account for the implicit costs of time.

    After that, we need some expiermentation to calculate the average weight of copper in a 1, 5, 10, 20 pound transformer. Maybe we can all chip in to do this. I have 5 different 10 pound transformers that i can find the average. Anyone have 5 different 1 pound, 5pound & 20 pound tranfromers they would be willing to break down and weigh?

  7. #5
    Jeremiah started this thread.
    Jeremiah's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor

    Member since
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    437
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 381 Times in 138 Posts
    I can also do this for finger cards vs cutting fingers, ram vs cutting fingers (this should solidify what everyone has stated that you actually loose money), electric motors, etc. I'm currently in planning stages for writing my next book, this one on e-waste recycling. I want to tackle the majority of every issue that is discuessed on the forums.

  8. The Following 2 Users say Thank You for This Post by Jeremiah:


  9. #6
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    177
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 153 Times in 70 Posts
    I like loose money but I hate to lose money.

  10. #7
    corycouch's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Dec 2011
    Location
    jonesboro ar
    Posts
    1,405
    Thanks
    3,766
    Thanked 1,988 Times in 746 Posts
    it wasnt as scientific, but we done the same thing with acr last week, turned out that per unit unclean went for $21 and clean went for $22 per unit, these were all from hotels and all the same size, so for my time its not worth it for the extra $1

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to corycouch for This Post:


  12. #8
    SMF Badges of Honor

    Member since
    Apr 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    436
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked 393 Times in 167 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremiah View Post
    I have about 400 pounds of transformers in my basement that I have not broken apart (ranging from tiny to 40 pounds). I finally decided to use my training (I teach math) to figure out how much copper must be in a transformer to make money.

    Skip this part if you're not interested in the math
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Lets start with some abbreviations
    Let x = the weight of copper
    Let y = the weight of steel
    Let z = your payout
    Let the coefficients be your payout per pound

    Thus, using prices from my local scrap yard my equations would be

    .28(x + y) = z (amount paid not breaking down the transformer)
    2.9x + .09y = z (amount paid by breaking down the transformer)


    So the question becomes, how much copper needs to be in a transformer in order to make money.

    More formally 2.9x + .09y > .28(x + y)
    Or, rounding a bit, y < 13.79x

    Let’s start with a 10 pound transformer and find the break even point. Ignoring any loss of weight in the breakdown process we have

    X + Y = 10 lbs
    Or y = -x + 10


    Setting y = -x + 10 equal to 13.79x

    -x + 10 = 13.79x
    X = .676 pounds

    Meaning, out of a 10 pound transformer, if you get .676pounds of copper (leaving 9.324 pounds of steel) you will break even. Anything less than .676 pounds, you will loose money by breaking it down.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thus, for a 10 pounds transformer (at my yards prices) you need 6.76% copper recovery.

    Here are the numbers for various weights you need to break even.

    1 Pound Transformer = .67% or .0067 pounds of copper
    5 Pound Transformer = 3.38% or .338 pounds of copper
    10 Pound transformer = 6.76% or .676 pounds of copper
    20 Pound Transformer = 13.5% or 1.35 pounds of copper
    Cool!
    You will also have to form a separate equation for transformer that have a aluminum wire or aluminum and copper wire

    .40z + .09y > .28(z + y) "alu wire"
    2.9x + .40z + .09y > .28(x + y + z) "alu and copper wire"

    When will your book be ready I would love to check it out.

    Ive been meaning to post a thread showing what has more return: selling HD boards separate from HD or selling the whole HD with the board. This has been covered in some other threads saying the board has about 7-8% of the weight so....

    Hard Drive Boards $10.25/lb
    Hard Drives with Board: $1.10/lb
    Hard Drives without Board $.42/lb

    Let's say that we have 100lbs of HD.

    without taking board off: 100 x 1.10 = $110
    taking board off: (8 x 10.25) + (92 x .42)= 82 + 38.64= $120.64

    So... $10.64 more to separate the board on 100lbs


    Jeremiah, keep up the good work!

  13. #9
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Northeast MN
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 21 Times in 15 Posts
    Your %'s are wrong. They should all be the same.

    Also if you want to do any DOE (design of experiments) based on price, you should express weight as a dimensionless ratio (removes a variable). Prices can also probably be expressed dimensionlessly.

    This is likely going to be a small sample size perhaps using Bayesian statistics (a prior) is appropriate to increase the sample size.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Amnelson for This Post:


  15. #10
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Florence,Co
    Posts
    240
    Thanks
    93
    Thanked 161 Times in 86 Posts
    Actually spend time breaking down what ever you wish to analyze. The proper tools and skill coupled with experience really determine the break even point. You should also include an "entertainment multi tasking coefficient" to include time spent watching T.V. while doing mindless "cleaning" of recyclable materials. Many years of data run through a modal analysis would be the only way to provide a meaningful set of equations by which to evaluate the "tipping point" of a recovery operation.

  16. #11
    mikeinreco's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TENNESSEE
    Posts
    4,977
    Thanks
    1,257
    Thanked 5,023 Times in 2,350 Posts
    Wouldn't time be better utilized doing other things (Gathering more scrap, breaking down higher yield items) Seems there are more profitable things than breaking down these little annoying transformers.....If they are good size and not alot of glue, resin or whatever it is I say go for it

  17. #12
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Nov 2011
    Location
    boise, ID
    Posts
    1,605
    Thanks
    469
    Thanked 1,462 Times in 668 Posts
    Cory, are you talking about the PTAC's out of the rooms? I would have to question your math on them if so.

  18. #13
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 14 Times in 8 Posts
    I get a great deal of satisfaction breaking things that someone else made, and trying to figure out how it all worked to achieve the final product. Reverse engineering with a hatchet or hammer.

  19. #14
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    May 2012
    Location
    SC - NC State Line
    Posts
    220
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 120 Times in 76 Posts
    lol, i keep it fairly simple, as I SUCK at math. if the transformer is the size that comes out of a microwave or bigger, I break it down ... if it isnt, i scrap it whole.

  20. #15
    Jeremiah started this thread.
    Jeremiah's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor

    Member since
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    437
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 381 Times in 138 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Amnelson View Post
    Your %'s are wrong. They should all be the same.

    Not sure why you would think the percentages would be the same for a break even point? The copper/steel ratio may be the same, as this is really a function of transformer type and various transformers may yield various copper/steel ratios. None of this has to do with your break even point. The math is correct.

    You would have to elaborate the rest of your post. My statistics is very solid as my graduate studies were in probability and econometrics but I'm not sure why you would want to incorporate a dimensionaliss variable like pi into a model about weight

  21. #16
    Jeremiah started this thread.
    Jeremiah's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor

    Member since
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    437
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 381 Times in 138 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Area67 View Post
    Actually spend time breaking down what ever you wish to analyze. The proper tools and skill coupled with experience really determine the break even point. You should also include an "entertainment multi tasking coefficient" to include time spent watching T.V. while doing mindless "cleaning" of recyclable materials. Many years of data run through a modal analysis would be the only way to provide a meaningful set of equations by which to evaluate the "tipping point" of a recovery operation.
    Your right to assume that breakdown time is a function of personal skill but this has nothing to do with your breakeven point as the math above does not incorporate break-down time. The point of the math shown is that it is a fact that if you break-down a 10 pound transformer with less than .676pounds of copper within it you will loose money as compared with selling the unit whole (using the prices stated)

  22. #17
    parrothead's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Treasure Coast, FL
    Posts
    2,416
    Thanks
    667
    Thanked 2,067 Times in 953 Posts
    I love this thread!

  23. The Following 3 Users say Thank You for This Post by parrothead:


  24. #18
    SMF Badges of Honor

    Member since
    Apr 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    436
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked 393 Times in 167 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremiah View Post
    Not sure why you would think the percentages would be the same for a break even point? The copper/steel ratio may be the same, as this is really a function of transformer type and various transformers may yield various copper/steel ratios. None of this has to do with your break even point. The math is correct.

    You would have to elaborate the rest of your post. My statistics is very solid as my graduate studies were in probability and econometrics but I'm not sure why you would want to incorporate a dimensionaliss variable like pi into a model about weight
    Not that it is that important but, I would have to agree with Amnelson. I believe that math on the bottom of your comment is incorrect where it says:

    "1 Pound Transformer = .67% or .0067 pounds of copper
    5 Pound Transformer = 3.38% or .338 pounds of copper
    10 Pound transformer = 6.76% or .676 pounds of copper
    20 Pound Transformer = 13.5% or 1.35 pounds of copper"

    .0067 is incorrect for the pounds of copper in the 1 pound transformer. I think you meant to put .067 lbs. All of the percentages are incorrect except for the 10lb transformer. So, everything looked right that you wrote except the last portion at the end and correct me if I'm wrong. Oh and your last comment you spelled "your" when I think you meant "you're".

    Good thing this is a web forum and things dont have to be exact. I make similar mistakes all the time.

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to mrsamsonite for This Post:


  26. #19
    SMF Badges of Honor


    Member since
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Northeast MN
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 21 Times in 15 Posts
    My undergrad was Mech. Engineering so x,y,z confuses me so I changed the variable names so I could do my math easier.

    Grad school was AI/MI/Robotics/C++ but mostly was Image Processing (using MI principles ... Bayesian Statistics, Neural Nets etc etc etc). However
    it was mostly practical (for research) implement algorithm -> make it fast -> test. My largest success was simplifying a pair of polynomial time algorithms
    into linear time algorithms.

    Pc = copper price
    Ps = steel price
    Pt = Transformer price

    Wc = copper weight
    Ws = steel weight
    Wt = transformer weight

    Tvb = value transformer broken
    Tvu = value transformer unbroken

    Tvb = Wc * Pc + Ws * Ps
    Tvu = Wt * Pt

    Pt = Tvu / Wt

    Wt = Wc + Ws
    Ws = Wt - Wc

    Rc = copper steel ratio
    Rc = Wc/Wt

    Tvb = Wc * Pc + Ws * Ps
    substitution for Ws
    Tvb = Wc * Pc + (Wt - Wc) * Ps
    Divide equation by Wt
    Tvb / Wt = Wc/Wt * Pc + (1 - Wc/Wt) * Ps
    substition
    Pt = Rc * Pc + (1 - Rc) * Ps
    Solve for Rc
    Rc = (Pt - Ps) / (Pc - Ps)

    Using your prices
    Rc = (0.28 - 0.09) / (2.9 - 0.09)
    Rc = 0.0676
    Rc = 6.76%

    Break even point for all weights is 6.76% copper.

    When I am saying dimensionless, I mean price and/or weight ratios. The reason I reccommended it was two fold. One, it makes the analysis
    of a transformer breakdown independent of its weight or of the current market (useful for future markets). Two, when graphing the results,
    its easier to graph with fewer variables, hence my desire to use dimensionless numbers.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to Amnelson for This Post:


  28. #20
    Jeremiah started this thread.
    Jeremiah's Avatar
    SMF Badges of Honor

    Member since
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    437
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 381 Times in 138 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Amnelson View Post
    My undergrad was Mech. Engineering so x,y,z confuses me so I changed the variable names so I could do my math easier.

    Grad school was AI/MI/Robotics/C++ but mostly was Image Processing (using MI principles ... Bayesian Statistics, Neural Nets etc etc etc). However
    it was mostly practical (for research) implement algorithm -> make it fast -> test. My largest success was simplifying a pair of polynomial time algorithms
    into linear time algorithms.

    Pc = copper price
    Ps = steel price
    Pt = Transformer price

    Wc = copper weight
    Ws = steel weight
    Wt = transformer weight

    Tvb = value transformer broken
    Tvu = value transformer unbroken

    Tvb = Wc * Pc + Ws * Ps
    Tvu = Wt * Pt

    Pt = Tvu / Wt

    Wt = Wc + Ws
    Ws = Wt - Wc

    Rc = copper steel ratio
    Rc = Wc/Wt

    Tvb = Wc * Pc + Ws * Ps
    substitution for Ws
    Tvb = Wc * Pc + (Wt - Wc) * Ps
    Divide equation by Wt
    Tvb / Wt = Wc/Wt * Pc + (1 - Wc/Wt) * Ps
    substition
    Pt = Rc * Pc + (1 - Rc) * Ps
    Solve for Rc
    Rc = (Pt - Ps) / (Pc - Ps)

    Using your prices
    Rc = (0.28 - 0.09) / (2.9 - 0.09)
    Rc = 0.0676
    Rc = 6.76%

    Break even point for all weights is 6.76% copper.

    When I am saying dimensionless, I mean price and/or weight ratios. The reason I reccommended it was two fold. One, it makes the analysis
    of a transformer breakdown independent of its weight or of the current market (useful for future markets). Two, when graphing the results,
    its easier to graph with fewer variables, hence my desire to use dimensionless numbers.
    Well, I’ll be! I'm getting rusty!

    Thank you for pointing this out. I remember noticing something fishy when I was getting the same copper ratio for 1 pound and 10 pound transformers. I was trying to set up the constraints to create an optimization type of problem when it occurred to me that the we could simply set the equations equal to each other, I should have corresponded setting equations equal with yielding the same ratio, but as you can see at the end, my math gets sloppy


  29. Similar threads on the Scrap Metal Forum

    1. Transformer
      By Copper Head in forum A Day in the Life of a Scrapper
      Replies: 38
      Last Post: 07-25-2014, 12:26 PM
    2. Transformer question
      By tsmith53149 in forum Scrap Metal Questions and Answers
      Replies: 19
      Last Post: 11-16-2012, 12:10 AM
    3. I got this out of a transformer...
      By NMatheson in forum Scrap Metal Questions and Answers
      Replies: 8
      Last Post: 05-23-2012, 10:36 PM
    4. New Record For Transformer Size--for me :)
      By Jeremiah in forum General Electronics Recycling
      Replies: 21
      Last Post: 04-02-2012, 08:26 AM
    5. Copper Transformer
      By Big Tex in forum Scrap Metal Prices
      Replies: 7
      Last Post: 03-07-2012, 10:43 PM

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

 
Browse the Most Recent Threads
On SMF In THIS CATEGORY.





OR

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

The Scrap Metal Forum

    The Scrap Metal Forum is the #1 scrap metal recycling community in the world. Here we talk about the scrap metal business, making money, where we connect with other scrappers, scrap yards and more.

SMF on Facebook and Twitter

Twitter Facebook