Author Topic: The uBeam FAQ  (Read 231521 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Cyberdragon

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 863
  • Country: us
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1125 on: November 19, 2017, 11:47:52 AM »
And what possible reason could there be for spending money on an ASIC at this early stage? It's only ultrasonic - nothing that couldn't be handled by an FPGA/DSP and off-the-shelf analogue parts. $20M buys a lot of those.

No, it's so they can have some proprietary bullshit integrated into it like every garbage hippie IOT product. It must force you into some overpriced cloud service that steals all of your data and spies on you dressing. >:D
*BZZZZZZAAAAAP*
Voltamort strikes again!
Explodingus - someone who frequently causes accidental explosions
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2860
  • Country: gb
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1126 on: November 19, 2017, 11:57:26 AM »
And what possible reason could there be for spending money on an ASIC at this early stage? It's only ultrasonic - nothing that couldn't be handled by an FPGA/DSP and off-the-shelf analogue parts. $20M buys a lot of those.
Is the ASIC to do the signal processing, or is it a power device to drive the huge number of transmitter cells they have (or even combine energy from the array of receivers at the phone)?
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 24746
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1127 on: November 19, 2017, 12:03:20 PM »
Disclaimer @ 52:22, for just 1 sec. :-DD

Well spotted!

 

Offline brainwash

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 422
  • Country: de
    • Hack Correlation
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1128 on: November 19, 2017, 12:29:36 PM »
And what possible reason could there be for spending money on an ASIC at this early stage? It's only ultrasonic - nothing that couldn't be handled by an FPGA/DSP and off-the-shelf analogue parts. $20M buys a lot of those.
Is the ASIC to do the signal processing, or is it a power device to drive the huge number of transmitter cells they have (or even combine energy from the array of receivers at the phone)?

As far as I understood, the ASIC design houses the transducers. Note, they are transducers/transceiver, with a possible intent of data transfer. I guess Nyquist was also a linear thinker...
 

Offline StillTrying

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1014
  • Country: gb
  • 100% Brand New and High Quality, in theory.
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1129 on: November 19, 2017, 01:02:56 PM »
There's an in-car transmitter? :scared: :scared: :scared:

It's @ 26:00. I can't copy from VLC.

25 Amps drawn off the battery to trickle charge a phone, yep that'll work.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2017, 01:15:11 PM by StillTrying »
 

Offline Richard Crowley

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3450
  • Country: us
  • KE7GKP
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1130 on: November 19, 2017, 02:22:47 PM »
Disclaimer @ 52:22, for just 1 sec. :-DD
That looks exactly like the boilerplate disclaimer that the US Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) requires of ALL companies. Nothing remarkable to see here, move along.
 

Offline PaulReynolds

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 65
  • Country: us
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1131 on: November 21, 2017, 04:23:46 AM »
Disclaimer @ 52:22, for just 1 sec. :-DD
That looks exactly like the boilerplate disclaimer that the US Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) requires of ALL companies. Nothing remarkable to see here, move along.

Agreed. It's absolutely standard.
 

Offline PaulReynolds

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 65
  • Country: us
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1132 on: November 21, 2017, 04:25:39 AM »
So after all this time all they can show is they are "talking to" a number of unspecified companies.

Hmm, I can't find it, but it has to be there. Can someone point me to Apple on this list? :)
« Last Edit: November 21, 2017, 07:16:30 AM by PaulReynolds »
 

Offline StillTrying

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1014
  • Country: gb
  • 100% Brand New and High Quality, in theory.
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1133 on: November 21, 2017, 09:37:38 AM »
You've got to :-DD haven't you, they've already missed the 2017 Q4 millstone, any bets on the others.




Online amspire

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3210
  • Country: au
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1134 on: November 21, 2017, 04:08:48 PM »
I love the picture of the uBeam soundbar along the bottom of the monitor.

I can't wait to be able to work all day directly in front of a 150dBm ultrasonic transmitter.

I can finally get rid of my $1 micro USB charging cable!
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6991
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1135 on: November 21, 2017, 05:48:33 PM »
I love the picture of the uBeam soundbar along the bottom of the monitor.

I can't wait to be able to work all day directly in front of a 150dBm ultrasonic transmitter.

...that costs about $5 a day to run (sum of transmitter power and aircon upgrade).

I can finally get rid of my $1 micro USB charging cable!

And the batteries in your mouse.

PS: I wonder how big the new uBeam mouses will be?
 

Offline sdpkom

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 4
  • Country: de
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1136 on: November 21, 2017, 09:08:36 PM »
How big the uBeam mouse will be.... Simple enough...


The transmitter sends out a collimated beam of 1KW/M^2, e.g. 0.1W per cm^2 of optical power.
There's some range, which means about 50% loss (Air is lossy), and conversion of ultrasound to electricity can be done at some 10% efficiency (commercial 1-2%)
Recievers have to work at some angles, I believe 45 degrees is minimal, so you need to reduce this by 30% more.
So that's about 3mW per cm^2 receiver, or 20mW/Inch^2


A mouse consumes about 1mW of power to run it and process the data, so the receiver can be small enough.

Now do the same for a phone.... A phone uses 5W to charge.... so you will need some 250 Inch^2 to charge it, you will need a 20" screen phablets (or phaTVs?) will easily accomodate it.
 

Online Cyberdragon

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 863
  • Country: us
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1137 on: November 22, 2017, 02:05:26 AM »
If they're so damn sure it will charge a phone, why don't they try to power that desk lamp too? >:D :-DD
*BZZZZZZAAAAAP*
Voltamort strikes again!
Explodingus - someone who frequently causes accidental explosions
 

Offline mikerj

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1355
  • Country: gb
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1138 on: November 22, 2017, 03:23:46 AM »
I can finally get rid of my $1 micro USB charging cable!

 :-+ The sooner we embrace single digit power efficiencies for consumer electronics, the sooner practical fusion power generation will have to happen.  She's doing the world a favour, really.

I wonder if she's approached Tesla for EV chargers yet?
 

Offline PaulReynolds

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 65
  • Country: us
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1139 on: November 22, 2017, 03:55:58 AM »
How big the uBeam mouse will be.... Simple enough...


The transmitter sends out a collimated beam of 1KW/M^2, e.g. 0.1W per cm^2 of optical power.
There's some range, which means about 50% loss (Air is lossy), and conversion of ultrasound to electricity can be done at some 10% efficiency (commercial 1-2%)
Recievers have to work at some angles, I believe 45 degrees is minimal, so you need to reduce this by 30% more.
So that's about 3mW per cm^2 receiver, or 20mW/Inch^2


A mouse consumes about 1mW of power to run it and process the data, so the receiver can be small enough.

Now do the same for a phone.... A phone uses 5W to charge.... so you will need some 250 Inch^2 to charge it, you will need a 20" screen phablets (or phaTVs?) will easily accomodate it.

Not sure how you get that number for the phone. If at 150 dB that needs 0.005m^2 to get 5W, let's be super generous and say 10W with 50% efficiency of receive conversion, so 0.01m. An iPhone X is about 7.5 by 15cm so 0.01125m^2.

Wow, isn't that lucky. 150 dB works out perfectly, under perfect conditions and a receive efficiency similar to what you see in one of those pitch graphs, to charge an iPhone X rapidly. So if conditions aren't perfect, or 150dB is deemed unsafe, or receive efficiency can't approach 50%, then it's downhill from there.

Oh, and that's from a 0.33m^2 transmitter, say at 50% efficiency, so 666W used, so <1% efficiency.

 
The following users thanked this post: sdpkom

Online Cyberdragon

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 863
  • Country: us
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1140 on: November 22, 2017, 04:54:40 AM »
I can finally get rid of my $1 micro USB charging cable!

 :-+ The sooner we embrace single digit power efficiencies for consumer electronics, the sooner practical fusion power generation will have to happen.  She's doing the world a favour, really.

I wonder if she's approached Tesla for EV chargers yet?

I think fusion, even wireless power might eventually become a reality. It won't be through sound waves though.
*BZZZZZZAAAAAP*
Voltamort strikes again!
Explodingus - someone who frequently causes accidental explosions
 
The following users thanked this post: sdpkom

Offline sdpkom

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 4
  • Country: de
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1141 on: November 22, 2017, 07:46:21 PM »
How big the uBeam mouse will be.... Simple enough...


The transmitter sends out a collimated beam of 1KW/M^2, e.g. 0.1W per cm^2 of optical power.
There's some range, which means about 50% loss (Air is lossy), and conversion of ultrasound to electricity can be done at some 10% efficiency (commercial 1-2%)
Recievers have to work at some angles, I believe 45 degrees is minimal, so you need to reduce this by 30% more.
So that's about 3mW per cm^2 receiver, or 20mW/Inch^2


A mouse consumes about 1mW of power to run it and process the data, so the receiver can be small enough.

Now do the same for a phone.... A phone uses 5W to charge.... so you will need some 250 Inch^2 to charge it, you will need a 20" screen phablets (or phaTVs?) will easily accomodate it.

Not sure how you get that number for the phone. If at 150 dB that needs 0.005m^2 to get 5W, let's be super generous and say 10W with 50% efficiency of receive conversion, so 0.01m. An iPhone X is about 7.5 by 15cm so 0.01125m^2.

Wow, isn't that lucky. 150 dB works out perfectly, under perfect conditions and a receive efficiency similar to what you see in one of those pitch graphs, to charge an iPhone X rapidly. So if conditions aren't perfect, or 150dB is deemed unsafe, or receive efficiency can't approach 50%, then it's downhill from there.

Oh, and that's from a 0.33m^2 transmitter, say at 50% efficiency, so 666W used, so <1% efficiency.

Unlike you, I'm not an ultrasound expert, so....
But I'm a practical person.... and believe products should be designed to be working, not to be lab experiments published in a research paper.

For a phone to charge, you need 5W of power, in normal conditions, that are actually competitive to available solutions, e.g. better compared to a Qi pad or usb cable.

The way I interpret the above is working when tilted to some degree (45 degrees sounds reasonable, although I would prefer 60-70)
At some distance (say 5-10 feet)
Even at 100% humidity, and cold/hot weather.
A phone that's as clean as a normal phone is, possibly with some of the area obscured.
It has to be safe, legal, and not annoying (to me, my kids or my pets, also, for it to be in my livingroom, it should not make a fan noise)

the number 1KW/M^2 is taken from uBeam's ppt, it's comparable to 150dB
I know it's possible to focus that power to a smaller spot with a phased array, but considering uBeam must be transmitting at a safe level (I'll take their word 150dB is safe and legal, althogh I know it to be not true), the beam cannot exceed this level at any point, in any weather conditions. So, if attenuation for dry air for 10-20dB higher compared to moist air, then the power density at the receiver can't exceed ~140dB acoustic.

Taking into account your 50% conversion efficiency (I believe you, although I never seen anything close) that's equivalent to 5mW/cm^2

The effective area of iPhone X tilted at 45 degrees is 70 cm^2 - that's not enough (if it were enough a solar cell would be enough to keep the phone charged, no transmitter needed).

at 5mW/cm^2 you need 1000 cm^2, taking 45 degrees phone tilt into account you need 1400cm^2

Considering phones are ~1-2 length/width ratio, that's ~35cm X 70 cm phone.

The diagonal of the screen would be almost 31 Inch.

If you're willing to charge a bit slower on a humid day.... I think 20 Inch would be enough.


 

Offline rt

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 44
  • Country: ie
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1142 on: November 22, 2017, 09:19:36 PM »
It has to be safe, legal, and not annoying (to me, my kids or my pets, also, for it to be in my livingroom, it should not make a fan noise)

the number 1KW/M^2 is taken from uBeam's ppt, it's comparable to 150dB

Don't worry.  After charging you phone at 150dB you DEFINITELY won't hear any fan noise  >:D

Please remember, Paul is doing generous calculations with reasonable/optimistic assumptions to show that this is impractical and extremely inefficient as proposed.  Arguing over small changes in assumptions doesn't change the essential message!

rt
 
The following users thanked this post: PaulReynolds

Offline StillTrying

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1014
  • Country: gb
  • 100% Brand New and High Quality, in theory.
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1143 on: November 23, 2017, 12:50:13 AM »
I love the picture of the uBeam soundbar along the bottom of the monitor.
I can't wait to be able to work all day directly in front of a 150dBm ultrasonic transmitter.

Don't worry, the uBean sound bar will only transmit the US power in narrow beams to devices actively requesting power using the uBean proprietary white rectangle power request protocol, - so everything will be fine. :horse:
« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 12:52:04 AM by StillTrying »
 

Offline PaulReynolds

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 65
  • Country: us
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1144 on: November 23, 2017, 05:19:17 AM »

Not sure how you get that number for the phone. If at 150 dB that needs 0.005m^2 to get 5W, let's be super generous and say 10W with 50% efficiency of receive conversion, so 0.01m. An iPhone X is about 7.5 by 15cm so 0.01125m^2.


Unlike you, I'm not an ultrasound expert, so....
But I'm a practical person.... and believe products should be designed to be working, not to be lab experiments published in a research paper.

Thanks for explaining the methodology. It's mostly correct but what I suggest you look at is not the system from the Transmitter to the Receiver, but vice versa - the receiver is the fixed size, instead the question is "what's the size of transmitter needed to provide this power?". uBeam have stated the transmitter is 60x60cm for their "up to 8 Watts at 1 meter" chart, and somewhere between a small amount and all of that area can be used to target a phone. Even though there is loss between the transmitter and receiver, more transmit area can be applied to compensate for that loss and maintain the same power incident on the receiver, up until the point you run out of transmit area. Power delivered remains constant, but you lose efficiency - and that's the number that's hidden unless you go digging.

So I think you've run your numbers backwards. You've more done a "how much transmit area do I need to power a phone sized area at 5W?". You've come up with 1400 cm^2. The uBeam full panel is 3600 m^2. Ballpark similar, especially if you think they limit drive to 145dB (3x less power)

Once again we come back to the same point, which is - of course you can transmit power ultrasonically, but what about safety, efficiency, cost, and practicality?

And, as someone else points out, I tend to give calculations here that give best case numbers to a) keep it simple and b) show even in best case it's not great. Believe me, I know the difference between research and a practical product.


 
The following users thanked this post: sdpkom

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 24746
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1145 on: November 23, 2017, 08:35:21 AM »
I wonder if she's approached Tesla for EV chargers yet?

I waiting for the announcement of uBeam transmitters on power poles beside the road for charging cars.
Can someone please troll tweet Meredith with that idea to see if it's practical?  ;D
Makes sense after all, the power infrastructure is already there, and their beamforming tech has got to be great for targeting passing cars!
 
The following users thanked this post: sdpkom

Online Cerebus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1900
  • Country: gb
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1146 on: November 23, 2017, 09:11:04 AM »
Makes sense after all, the power infrastructure is already there, and their beamforming tech has got to be great for targeting passing cars!

And it cuts out the need to drive to the take-away for fast food - fresh flash fried squirrels will be literally falling out of the trees.
Anybody got a syringe I can use to squeeze the magic smoke back into this?
 

Offline mikeselectricstuff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10199
  • Country: gb
    • Mike's Electric Stuff
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1147 on: November 23, 2017, 10:47:40 AM »
I wonder if she's approached Tesla for EV chargers yet?

I waiting for the announcement of uBeam transmitters on power poles beside the road for charging cars.

Powered by the solar frickin' roadways, obviously.
Youtube channel:Taking wierd stuff apart. Very apart.
Mike's Electric Stuff: High voltage, vintage electronics etc.
Day Job: Mostly LEDs
 

Online Cyberdragon

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 863
  • Country: us
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1148 on: November 23, 2017, 01:06:22 PM »
I wonder if she's approached Tesla for EV chargers yet?

I waiting for the announcement of uBeam transmitters on power poles beside the road for charging cars.
Can someone please troll tweet Meredith with that idea to see if it's practical?  ;D
Makes sense after all, the power infrastructure is already there, and their beamforming tech has got to be great for targeting passing cars!

Someone drives by in a Tesla truck and the pole transformer just explodes. >:D
*BZZZZZZAAAAAP*
Voltamort strikes again!
Explodingus - someone who frequently causes accidental explosions
 

Offline sdpkom

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 4
  • Country: de
Re: The uBeam FAQ
« Reply #1149 on: November 23, 2017, 09:44:16 PM »

Not sure how you get that number for the phone. If at 150 dB that needs 0.005m^2 to get 5W, let's be super generous and say 10W with 50% efficiency of receive conversion, so 0.01m. An iPhone X is about 7.5 by 15cm so 0.01125m^2.



...  more transmit area can be applied to compensate for that loss and maintain the same power incident on the receiver, up until the point you run out of transmit area.

I'm not sure this is true,
Assuming some level power, say 145dB, 150dB, whatever.... is deemed unsafe
The power level at the receiver side cannot exceed this safe limit, can it?

So If the effective phone size is 70cm^2, and the maximal power density that's still safe (on either side) is 150dB than 7W can really be transmitted.

But...

Assume the transmitter is actually transmitting a few watts in 0% humidity.
A day later, a receiver receives 1% of the power,  can the transmitter increase it's output 100X?

It can't, for two reasons
1. To do that it must know what is the exact reason for the decline in received power is, if the reason is that my body absorbs 99% of the power I hope it's not going to increase it. Knowing the exact reason why something delivers less power, takes a human a day's work in the lab and is beyond the current capabilities of devices.
2. Such dynamic range means your costs are X100 higher, if your "dry day" cost is anywhere above $10, your wet day costs are sky high.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf