Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

bothsidesofthetable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 70 posts

Re: Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

#11

Post by johnw »

There's noway that this is going to be practical within the current laws of physics. You can't use a wide beam to cover an area because the amount of energy available drops by orders of magnitude the further you get from the transmitter. If you used a focussed beam (which is what they are suggesting) then you need a separate beam that tracks and follows the location of each device. So to cover a very small area you'd need multiple transmitters tracking and beaming sound to the exact location of each device. And the transmitters are going to have to be very close by, and then there are all the obstacles between your pocket and the transmitter that will block the beam. You might as well just use an inductive charger. But still, just like solar freaking roadways and perpetual motion machines we want to believe and since most people don't understand the science these ridiculous and impossible ideas draw people in again and again.

There's a more in depth analysis of why this won't work here: http://www.eevblog.com/2014/08/07/ubeam-ultrasonic-wireless-...

Re: Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

#12

Post by mikeyouse »

7Figures2Commas wrote: post #8

The back story of this company is intriguing. The founders presented a prototype way back in 2011 at the D9 conference[1], and apparently weren't able to get any traction until they found a believer in Scott Nolan at Founders Fund[2]. Interestingly, Nolan seemed most impressed by the company's distribution plans: > Mr. Nolan said Ms. Perry had shown that chain stores and some “quick-service restaurants” were eager to…

I don't know who keeps that [3] blog or his credentials, but as an admitted appeal to authority, the CTO of uBeam (dual BS & MS from MIT) also ran some numbers before joining the company. As did Andreessen Horowitz's due diligence team before investing, which I'd imagine has a physicist or two in waiting.

One obvious shortcoming in [3]'s analysis is assuming that you'd still need 5W of charging power if you could wirelessly charge. Delivering 1/50th of that power is probably enough to maintain a charge throughout the day and people spend ~95% of their time in reliable locations that could support wireless charging (home, car, office, etc.)

Re: Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

#13

Post by codexon »

I don't understand how this could be patented.

Surely someone else has thought about using transducers to transmit power a long time ago?

I see a similar patent here filed in 2003 that covers ultrasound transducers for wireless power transfer.

http://www.google.com/patents/US6798716

Re: Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

#14

Post by pocketstar »

I am skeptical of the claimed safety of uBeam. The FDA does not advocate the safety of ultrasound.

From the article: "Was it safe? Well … for starters it is just an inaudible soundwave being transferred – as in the kind also used for women during pregnancy."

From the FDA: "Even though there are no known risks of ultrasound imaging, it can produce effects on the body. When ultrasound enters the body, it heats the tissues slightly. In some cases, it can also produce small pockets of gas in body fluids or tissues (cavitation). The long-term effects of tissue heating and cavitation are not known. Because of the particular concern for fetal exposures, national and international organizations have advocated prudent use of ultrasound imaging. Furthermore, the use of diagnostic ultrasound for non-medical purposes such as fetal keepsake videos has been discouraged."[0]

[0]http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmitt...

Re: Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

#16

Post by ekianjo »

pocketstar wrote: post #14

I am skeptical of the claimed safety of uBeam. The FDA does not advocate the safety of ultrasound. From the article: "Was it safe? Well … for starters it is just an inaudible soundwave being transferred – as in the kind also used for women during pregnancy." From the FDA: "Even though there are no known risks of ultrasound imaging, it can produce effects on the body. When ultrasound enters the body, it heats the tiss…

The whole article is making optimistic assumptions about just everything. Is that actually a PR piece?

Re: Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

#17

Post by domdip »

johnw wrote: post #11

There's noway that this is going to be practical within the current laws of physics. You can't use a wide beam to cover an area because the amount of energy available drops by orders of magnitude the further you get from the transmitter. If you used a focussed beam (which is what they are suggesting) then you need a separate beam that tracks and follows the location of each device. So to cover a very small area you'd…

Well, in principle you can divide one transmitter's attention to several devices over time. (Either by changing the direction of the antenna, or more sophisticatedly via beamforming.)

Otherwise I agree with you. Even the tone of this article is unconvincing. I wonder what Andreessen’s due diligence team was thinking, maybe the patents have value?

Re: Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

#18

Post by malandrew »

I was really hoping there was more hear about the technology, specifically what they are doing differently and the backgrounds of the engineers making this a reality. The process of raising money and getting buy-in is far less interesting than demos showing how much electricity is going into the transmitter and how much is being received by the receivers, especially under the conditions he says they can deal with (movement, etc). This is one of those ideas that fails or succeeds on the technology. As background, talent, gumption and charisma of the non-technical people is irrelevant if the technology isn't there.

It's a very strong sell from a VC without evidence. If they can do some of the things claimed, wouldn't you let the evidence speak for itself?

Re: Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

#19

Post by desdiv »

mikeyouse wrote: post #7

For those wondering about if it would be audible and if the technology would impact pets, here's the receiver's patent application: http://www.google.com/patents/US20120299541 The frequency range they list in examples for applications are from 40kHz to 110kHz. This actually does overlap with the hearing ranges of dogs and cats somewhat. Wiki lists the dog hearing range from 40Hz to 60kHz and the cat range from 55Hz t…

>Humans should be safe though since a common number for the high-end of human hearing is 20kHz.

That doesn't mean it's safe for humans, it just means it's inaudible to humans. In many circumstances, an imperceivable threat is far more dangerous than a perceivable one. Laser is one example. If a visible laser beam hits your eyes, your blink reflex will kick in and (hopefully) save you in time. But a laser beam outside the human visual spectrum will literally burn your retina out before you figure out what's going on.

Re: Audacious Plan to Make Electricity as Easy as WiFi

#20

Post by headgasket »

ekianjo wrote: post #16
pocketstar wrote: post #14

I am skeptical of the claimed safety of uBeam. The FDA does not advocate the safety of ultrasound. From the article: "Was it safe? Well … for starters it is just an inaudible soundwave being transferred – as in the kind also used for women during pregnancy." From the FDA: "Even though there are no known risks of ultrasound imaging, it can produce effects on the body. When ultrasound enters the body, it heats the tiss…

The whole article is making optimistic assumptions about just everything. Is that actually a PR piece?

I think the distinction of what is a PR piece and what is not has kind of blurred dramatically recently, dont you?

It's an interesting concept to beam power via ultrasound, but it sure sounds optimistic at any realistic distance, or to make it as prevalent as wifi.

Maybe there's a killer use case only the initiated (VCs and management) know of of? Otherwise it seems like a long shot for 10M.

Post reply on HN