| General > General Technical Chat |
| The uBeam FAQ |
| << < (298/396) > >> |
| Howardlong:
--- Quote from: StillTrying on January 21, 2019, 04:46:14 pm ---"you’d need to live in that house for 407 years for the wireless power energy bill to begin “costing” you." So the 407 years come down to about 4 years, even less if you include the cost of the transmitters and medical bills. :palm: --- End quote --- Forget about 407 or even 4 years: "Real wireless power is power delivered over air, without wires or charging pads, to a device or sensor automatically, without any user intervention. It can be managed and secured via the cloud" Because we all know about the history of extended longevity that cloud based solutions offer. :palm: |
| PaulReynolds:
--- Quote from: sdpkom on January 21, 2019, 02:20:53 pm --- --- Quote from: PaulReynolds on January 20, 2019, 06:37:38 pm ---Speaking of Ossia, they're really pushing their phone cases, which is interesting because as far as I can see they don't even have an FCC ID with which to apply for Part 18 approval. I'm wondering if they're going to pull a "we only supply the component, it's the final product vendor that has to get regulatory compliance". --- End quote --- Ossia had a webinar in December, available (still, go download it fast, before they remove it) on their website. On ~33:50 they say the transmitter is 10W. But according to them, these limits are for data communication, not for Ossia. I almost understood that since it's not communications - it's safe. the FCC, the entire microwave oven industry, car radars, and even Energous don't seem agree. also claims in the same webinar 3W @ 5M BTW, if they can send >1W to >3-4 meters away, they can probably duplicate the Wi-Charge trains or something similar, even with no line of sight. --- End quote --- They also claim over 2W at 10 meters, and have a larger transmitter they claim to get useful power to 30 meters. Useful info, they go with 16x16 antenna in their ceiling tile (60 by 60 cm), and seem to be going with 1/3 wavelength pitch or so in the phased array. There's simply no way they don't exceed SAR limits. I expect they are going to claim their time-reversal method means there's zero exposure except at the target, which is horseshit unless they've got some physics defying antenna. I spoke to senior people at Ossia a couple of years ago, they knew that industrial IoT charging was mostly what was viable, and not much more. What he's saying here, they're now drinking their own Kool-aid. This is an example of the tech startup version of Gresham's law, where bad money drives out good. Without an authority stomping on the bullshit, the other players have to lower themselves to the same level as the worst actor. I'm going to have to do an article on Ossia here. |
| sdpkom:
its the famous engineering situation - pick any two You can have range and power but not be compatible with FCC - that's Ossia You can have range and FCC compatibility - but not power - that's powercast you can have power and FCC compatibility - but not range - that's humavox I guess, no one really goes that path, because Qi wins. The Energous short range system is no power, no range, but FCC compatibility. The Energous mid range system is bit but not enough power, a bit but not enough range, a bit (and barely enough) FCC compatibility, which is probably the optimum in this field, but is not enough for the market. With non RF technologies, it's a different situation, I guess. |
| PaulReynolds:
--- Quote from: sdpkom on January 22, 2019, 07:06:14 am ---its the famous engineering situation - pick any two You can have range and power but not be compatible with FCC - that's Ossia You can have range and FCC compatibility - but not power - that's powercast you can have power and FCC compatibility - but not range - that's humavox I guess, no one really goes that path, because Qi wins. The Energous short range system is no power, no range, but FCC compatibility. The Energous mid range system is bit but not enough power, a bit but not enough range, a bit (and barely enough) FCC compatibility, which is probably the optimum in this field, but is not enough for the market. With non RF technologies, it's a different situation, I guess. --- End quote --- I like that- mind if I pinch that concept for a future blog post? |
| sdpkom:
No problem |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |