Too bad its not a blurred video so we could de-convolve it. :-(
Steve
https://www.linkedin.com/in/larrypendergrass/
Another CTO of uBeam has left, for Keysight this time where real practical engineering happens
At least he lasted 17 months, that's impressive.
If I were him I'd be very glad to be putting the nonsense behind me, and count myself lucky to be getting back into the real engineering left behind six years ago.
About Theranos, an interesting parallel:
The SEC summed up what was wrong with Ms Holmes and Theranos in a damning report: "Innovators who seek to revolutionise and disrupt an industry must tell investors the truth about what their technology can do today - not just what they hope it might do someday."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43415967
Which part of the word "show" am I failing to understand?
here's it's copycat-Kill it before it spwans-
http://www.wi-charge.com/ they're trying to seek indian citizen's funding.kill it before that.
At least they specify what power they claim to deliver over what distance.
The video showed a phone sleeve with about a 2cm^2 aperture.
Assuming maximum IR is 1kW/m^2, then you'll get 0.2W into a 2cm^2 aperture, but then their own white paper says you need 2W to power a smartphone. That 2W I'd say is too high.
Looking at it another way, 0.2W is about 70mA of charging current. A common battery capacity of a phone is 2400mAh, so it'd take 34 hours to charge, assuming the phone wasn't taking any juice in standby, and that it would even consider charging at that rate.
Let's be generous and say a 2400mAh battery lasts about 10 days in standby, or 240 hours, so the phone standby current draw is 10mA, so net charging current is 60mA, or a 40 hour charge time in standby.
I'm sceptical that this charging rate is enough to gain general acceptance for the prime use case of call phones, but it seems a more practical and cheaper solution compared to uBeam, although I don't know how their beamforming works, I assume it'd be with mechanically adjusted lenses, which begs the question about the complexity for multiple targets.
If on the other hand it used a sleeve with a 5cm x 10 cm aperture on the back of the device, the charge rate would by 25 times that of a 2cm^2 aperture shown in the video, leading to a far more respectable 1.6 hour charge time.
Irrespective, just like uBeam and Energous, I'd say they're a very long way from delivering a useful practical product that fits the significant market they've hoodwinked their investors with.
And how do you use it? To power a Qi pad of course!
Your calculation also assumes that the receiver is perfectly angled with the transmitter. With the use case they show, phone flat on the table, sender somewhere over the kitchen bench, you'll have less power available per unit of surface.
I really don't get how they can say they send 2W of power on such small surfaces and still pretend it's safe. I'd never try and put my hand between the phone and the sender. (I'll admit it's not a common use case... unless you'd like to.... pick up your phone for example?)
Your calculation also assumes that the receiver is perfectly angled with the transmitter. With the use case they show, phone flat on the table, sender somewhere over the kitchen bench, you'll have less power available per unit of surface.
I really don't get how they can say they send 2W of power on such small surfaces and still pretend it's safe. I'd never try and put my hand between the phone and the sender. (I'll admit it's not a common use case... unless you'd like to.... pick up your phone for example?)
Indeed, I agree, I was deliberately giving them the benefit of the doubt! The point is is if it isn't practical in even the best case scenarios, it's a non-starter, unless the point is to extract money from poorly informed or educated investors.
The modus operandi is exactly the same as we've seen before, promise the world on a stick, with fancy marketing and well produced videos, but be permanently just 18 months off from being production ready with what you promised.
still,even if it's 0.2wt laser,the most efficient solar cell is only efficient upto 44%
and what happens if the laser bending mechanism fails or someone somehow gets his face in the path of laser without the machine noticing it?
The modus operandi is exactly the same as we've seen before, promise the world on a stick, with fancy marketing and well produced videos, but be permanently just 18 months off from being production ready with what you promised.
You can live full time for many years on someone else's dime like this. Then when it fails, rinse and repeat using your new found fame like Meredith's. After all, wasn't she supposed to be the next Elon Musk?
http://fortune.com/2015/07/29/ubeam-meredith-perry-wireless-charging/I mean, it's Fortune magazine...
https://twitter.com/meredithperry/status/977102334294605824
Translate(str)
Translating:
Hello, we would like to rot more women's brains to decrease the overall intelligence of the female population.
Isn't hiring based on gender illegal in the USA anyway?
It would be nice to bring down SJWs with their own weapons in a courtroom.
.....
Isn't hiring based on gender illegal in the USA anyway?
It would be nice to bring down SJWs with their own weapons in a courtroom.
Aw com'on, this is a technology debunking thread on an engineering forum. Over tired of trying to pull them into non-techno directions. The blog suffers from it.
.....
Isn't hiring based on gender illegal in the USA anyway?
It would be nice to bring down SJWs with their own weapons in a courtroom.
Aw com'on, this is a technology debunking thread on an engineering forum. Over tired of trying to pull them into non-techno directions. The blog suffers from it.
It does get a bit wearing doesn't it.
I've often wondered if the people who like to moan about "SJWs" at every turn would quieten down if we pointed out at every opportunity that the natural counterpart to the SJW must be the Anti-social Injustice Coward?
Aw com'on, this is a technology debunking thread on an engineering forum. Over tired of trying to pull them into non-techno directions. The blog suffers from it.
What does that mean?
I read that as a slip and assumed, just from context, they meant 'forum' rather than 'blog'.
yes, the forum. I meant to say the EEVblog forum, then goofed up