hahah! I do that all the time! XD
Well, that question is better answered by someone such as @Satur9
I’m well versed in coding and bodymod, but just a meddler in proper electronics. 
I got a reply from the seller, seems that what I originally thought about the safe operating temperature range is correct. The display can be changed between -10°C and 60°C actually, and will damage if it reaches a temperature above 70°C.
4 Likes
ohhh, those are great news!
By the looks of it, should be safe within the body (as expected).
I’ve also dug a bit deeper into the sauna angle:
a traditional sauna will generally range between 70-90 °C.
Whilst while within a sauna your body temperature shouldn’t go higher than 1 or 2 degrees, your skin might fluctuate a bit, quickly raising about 6 degrees.
But then, and this is the good indicator for us, it tends to plateau around 42 degrees.
That’s when you’re all red and blood rushes to the superficial vessels to keep your body temperature stable.
Btw, I’m no expert here so if anyone knows best, please do correct me!
That said, there are still a couple questions unanswered on this topic:
-
How would the implant itself behave to the external heat? i.e. will it heat up faster than the body can regulate the skin? will it absorb heat like a sheet of metal would?
-
implanting a flat surface with no inner holes will interrupt all the Capillaries above it. so new ones will need to be formed coming from around the implant’s borders. This might affect the thermoregulation of that area similarly to how some badly burned regions do.
for the first question, the closest parallel I can trace here is about piercings… which don’t usually bother me in a sauna, but they are many times thicker and keep mostly outside of the body, so I wouldn’t rely on this.
Here another good (and also destructive test) would be to take an e-paper display to a sauna similar to how you’ll do at the gym.
Also, another option is to just accept that with such an implant you’ll never want to go into a sauna or volcanic pool again. 
Just being thorough.
2 Likes
I’m back after taking a ‘break’ of a week. Unfortunately I was very sick last week, but luckily I have recovered now. I managed to rewrite the driver to use external storage chips. Turns out I2C based storage just cannot keep up with the speed required for a fast image update, so SPI storage it is.
Unfortunately I could not test any of the destructive tests yet since I have been at home for the entire week. Might actually do that tomorrow. Also the chicken skin test is still on the planning, and I hope that gives us some positive results.
I will see how the display survives a destructive test, and when I order new displays I will make sure to get the smaller sizes as well to see if a small display could also work.
5 Likes
Glad to hear you’re fine now!
Looking forward for your results!
Okay I did some testing, before I went to do some exercises I did some stress testing by bending the display in all directions.
It seems like I already permanently damaged the display, since now there are some vertical stripes over the display that do not show the correct colour any more.
I also tried to bend it 120 degrees or something, and now there are some permanent spots on the display that do not change colour correctly any more.
I’m not sure if I was to harsh on it, or if these kinds of motions can be expected from normal use.
End result is that I probably have to get some new displays to test them in a real scenario by using tape or something.
3 Likes
my hunch is that you damaged the matrix used to set the ink capsules and not the capsules themselves.The trick will be to try to create a device that can set the ink alignment in the capsules independently from the display… once you can do that, this type of testing will be relevant. right now it’s not really providing much useful data.
4 Likes
If I am not mistaken, the eink display can be easily damaged by breaking the ink capsules, they are small enough, but if you put a load on them at a certain angle, they will simply burst and there will be no use of such a device, because instead of a picture you will have a spot. Also, this display has a bad quality, the fact that the eink contain a liquid, which can freeze and if you live in a country with cold winters - it will not be the best solution. However, freezing will occur only at the highest death most likely
1 Like
Why do you think it’s a low quality display?
I put it through some serious torture before it finally broke (I was just being too stupid with it trying out each possible flex that a human couldn’t normally make).
People on this forum seem to steer towards putting ink capsules into the skin instead of the display as a whole solution, why is that?
I’m also a bit scared for the moving around within the skin, but maybe some anchor points would fix this?
Edit: would using a smaller flex display be more preferable for a smooth implantation procedure?
1 Like
I definitely think that would be preferable.
As evidenced by most implantees preferring a small glass capsule, the vast majority of people don’t like large areas of tissue separation for the install or later during normal use. The idea of “E-ink tattoo” seems so neat and clean that people naturally gravitate towards it. I think the execution of that would be extremely difficult or impossible, but I have to admit if it could be done it would be preferable.
Your plan for direct implantation of a pre-made display seems much more attainable, but it’s big so it makes people uncomfortable
2 Likes
Why do you think it’s a low quality display?
My native language is not English, and I used a translator that didn’t translate correctly, and I didn’t even check the translation. What I meant was that the display has the unpleasant property.
I’m far from an expert in this field, but I do know some information about these displays. Putting it in your hand is not the best solution simply because it can burst/leak. You won’t get liquid in your blood, but you won’t get an image anymore.
Also keep in mind that your tan will greatly affect the readability of the display
Check, I don’t even have an implant myself yet.
I’m still planning on getting an xSIID with a green LED, but I need to find someone in the Netherlands to install it for me.
I can imagine that people are kind of afraid for such a large implant, I got to admit that I did not fully think this through myself yet.
This might be a difficult question, but what would be the maximum size of an implant you would feel comfortable with personally?
Yes I thought about this already, my skin tone is very light but I’m not even sure yet how to properly test this for myself.
If you have any suggestions on how to do this please let me know.
I was also planning on doing the chicken skin test, but I should probably have done this before ruining the display 
2 Likes
Oh I’m definitely not the right person to ask. My personal preference is whatever I can get away with. If I could become 70% metal and advanced composites tomorrow I would.
I think from a functional standpoint the limits are:
- What kind of tools/expertise will be necessary for the install. Most people don’t have access to a ripperdoc level bodymod artist, so the market for the implant will reflect that availability
- How much tissue can be separated without experiencing vascular problems. I’m trying to keep the bodybytes implant less than 4 x 3cm because of those limitations.
4 Likes
If I could become 100% metal and FR4 tomorrow, I would…
I should probably befriend a surgeon or two…
2 Likes
as I understood, and please correct me if I’m wrong… @hugovantriet was planning on implanting the e-ink device as it is, with only additive changes to it.
For this use I believe these tests provided good data.
The route of developing a device able to set the capsules independently of the Matrix is one which could potentially make “e-ink tattoos” viable.
For that route I agree this data is irrelevant. but I don’t think that’s what was being chased by the OP.
Because implanting the whole display…
- is a huge disruption to the skin.
- implant and healing are far more complex.
- size is limited.
- power consumption is bigger (changing image issues for example)
- requires additional electronics to be implanted
While achieving actual e-ink “ink” would allow for
- custom shapes
- standard implantation procedure (tattooing)
- zero power consumption
- no additional electronics being implanted
but ultimately, this:
Under the skin?
We had an implant available which was slightly bigger than an 1-inch disk.
For me, the odds of making that stick, have no complications. and then not break while under the skin were minimal…
As we can see by the stories from people with it, My guess seems accurate.
But my issue has more to do with the area directly covered.
i.e. I would potentially cover my entire head or arm if I trusted the design to be bio compatible.
which means… “not be a simple rectangle”.
2 Likes
This is correct, please tell me if this is not realistic or even dangerous.
Because this display is quite large it might be a good option to switch to a smaller flex e-paper display.
Currently I’m looking for possible replacements, and I found a 32x37mm one.
Sadly I think I destroyed the other display during the torture testing, so the skin experiment has to wait until I get a replacement part.
Also from now on I should think first before I do stuff, because those screens are not cheap and I’m a broke student.
2 Likes
Dangerous?
Ermm… have you checked the forum name?
Jokes aside… it’s as dangerous as any other larger procedure. I would argue less dangerous than a boob job, as a “ball park figure” analogy.
We’re talking about some pretty advanced body modification, which does incur in risks. and then there’s the experimental aspect.
now…
Realistic?
I believe that if the stress issues can be resolved, we will find another 5 hurdles.
Which can all be overcome somehow… Leading to an implantable solution.
So… yes, I think it’s realistic.
But as I said before, I personally would rather try the e-ink approach instead.
Which also has a lot of hurdles by itself, as already pointed out!
Sad, yes.
But at least it got you to re-evaluate a lot, and that’s positive growth.
For example, I can see a big change on the tone of your posts:
Before the test you were tackling people’s suggestions almost as “you’re not getting what I want to do”. Now you’re the one asking the questions. That’s gonna come handy for you! ^^
2 Likes
I assume you are talking about the injecting of the e-paper capsules idea here.
Issue is: I do have experience with microchips and electronics and circuit design, I do not have any experience with anything that comes close to tattooing technology.
It’s even worse than that, I’m totally new to the whole idea of implanting technology into the human body!
It does interest me a lot however and I’m always willing to learn new stuff.
If the injecting of the e-paper capsules is the better solution, I’m not sure if I’m the right guy for the job to be honest.
I did not intent to shoot any ideas or suggestions down that were given, I’m really grateful for them!
Because English is not my primary language I just wanted to make sure that I worded my ideas correctly so that everyone understood my intentions.
2 Likes
yes. but…
Not without first making sure they are biocompatible, have the correct size, are immersed in the correct medium, etc… and that I already have a device able to set their image from afar. (few cm afar is enough)
I wouldn’t say it’s a “better solution”.
There are advantages to implanting a display (if that becomes feasible).
For example, you could just remove the implant if you tire of it. Will leave a scar and some barely noticeably soggy skin, but that’s it.
an e-ink tattoo would be there forever.
You can upgrade the technology by replacing the implant…
etc…
There are merits for both approaches.
I just personally wouldn’t implant a whole display because given my lifestyle, I wouldn’t trust it to last under my skin.
Oh, don’t get me wrong. You did sound grateful!
Your replies were always coming from a good place. As proof, you can see how many people were replying! ^^