wireless electricity

conchubhar1

any info on this?

appaerently tesla really believed in it - how come it isnt used today, widely widely used

thanks

davelerave

its available now .connect your cooker live cable to big antenna .put the egg in the pan and wait for lightning strike

Dexterm99

Intel have been involved with this for sometime. google 'wireless power intel' and you can see what they are up to.

Davy

Its along the same lines, but they are looking at charging phones wireless using the masts.

.G.

davelerave wrote: »

its available now .connect your cooker live cable to big antenna .put the egg in the pan and wait for lightning strike

LOL:D:D

chughes

Davy wrote: »

Its along the same lines, but they are looking at charging phones wireless using the masts.

How can it be along the same lines if it's wireless ??:D

2011

Here is electricity without wires:




Or perhaps this is what you are talking about:

http://www.solidresource.com/~brain/wirelessa.html

DublinDilbert

conchubhar1 wrote: »

any info on this?

appaerently tesla really believed in it - how come it isnt used today, widely widely used

thanks

It is widely used, in most RFID systems the RFID chip is powered up by the reader. Most cars have an imobiliser chip which is read this way.

Its very hard to transfer a significant amount of power via "free space"... this is why its used for low power applications...

irishmover

Very old thread but couldn't find a newer one.

It's almost here.

http://www.gizmag.com/witricity-wireless-charging-ces/30333/

We have the technology. Tesla allegedly could have made it work. He sold most of his designs to fund research including to Edison.
Nobody wanted to fund free electricity.
There's huge tranmission losses on the modern system and it's highly difficult to meter for large scale localisation.

I believe wirelessly charging phones will be available commercially in the next year or so.

Bruthal

If people are going to include charging phones etc through induction, then perhaps a closer look at a standard transformer might reveal wireless connection from primary to secondary.

As in its really no different. Not real progress towards wireless electrical transmission in thst example, simply a transformer without the solid link of an iron core for a low power application.

irishmover

Bruthal wrote: »

If people are going to include charging phones etc through induction, then perhaps a closer look at a standard transformer might reveal wireless connection from primary to secondary.

As in its really no different. Not real progress towards wireless electrical transmission in thst example, simply a transformer without the solid link of an iron core for a low power application.

They've powered tv's microwaves together in a home with one source.

Also have recharged an electric car. It's a little bit bigger than recharging an iPhone.

Zen65

conchubhar1 wrote: »

any info on this?

appaerently tesla really believed in it - how come it isnt used today, widely widely used

thanks

My electric toothbrush is recharged wirelessly, and it's not all that new. Transferring power on a large scale wirelessly is a very different proposition, and usually only applies well in the case of close proximity, such that a magnetic linkage can be used between two cores.

Bruthal

irishmover wrote: »

Also have recharged an electric car. It's a little bit bigger than recharging an iPhone.

Still little more than a transformer with no iron core. The iron core allows up to high 98 or more percent efficiency.

Highly unlikely such efficiency exists in electric car charging, which is still using inductive coupling.

This type of coupling could of course be used to power much larger items than phones. But it will still simply be a coreless transformer, suffering from high losses.

But wireless electricity? Like powering something a mile away maybe?

irishmover

Bruthal wrote: »

Still little more than a transformer with no iron core. The iron core allows up to high 98 or more percent efficiency.

Highly unlikely such efficiency exists in electric car charging, which is still using inductive coupling.

This type of coupling could of course be used to power much larger items than phones. But it will still simply be a coreless transformer, suffering from high losses.

But wireless electricity? Like powering something a mile away maybe?

Being able to recharge your car and power all appliances etc without wires throughout your home isn't wireless electricity now?

Having my phone sat in my pocket, or tv hung on a wall with no sockets being powered/charged for me is wireless technology and not to be dismissed.

Not to mention buses having a 10 min stop at a bus stop scheduled in to its timetable so it can recharge it's batteries without the use of wires.

We might not be close to worldwide wireless electricity but domestic and public transport wireless electricity technology isn't far off.

And not to be dismissed either..

Bruthal

irishmover wrote: »

Being able to recharge your car and power all appliances etc without wires throughout your home isn't wireless electricity now?

It will be wireless when there are no wires from generator to socket, imo.

Having my phone sat in my pocket, or tv hung on a wall with no sockets being powered/charged for me is wireless technology and not to be dismissed.

Not dismissing anything. But is wireless link in the chain = wireless electricity?

Not to mention buses having a 10 min stop at a bus stop scheduled in to its timetable so it can recharge it's batteries without the use of wires.

I'd say most of the electricity route has wires.

We might not be close to worldwide wireless electricity but domestic and public transport wireless electricity technology isn't far off.

Well like I said, the wireless items you mention so far are simply induction based. Nothing new there.

Depends on what the op meant by wireless electricity. If you see charging an item without having to plug it in, as the dawn of wireless electricity, that's fair enough.

I have a feeling the op was asking in terms of electrical wireless transmission rather than close proximity coreless induction coupling.

testicle

Sir Liamalot wrote: »

I believe wirelessly charging phones will be available commercially in the next year or so.

They already are...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qi_(inductive_power_standard)

irishmover

Bruthal wrote: »

It will be wireless when there are no wires from generator to socket, imo.


Not dismissing anything. But is wireless link in the chain = wireless electricity?


I'd say most of the electricity route has wires.


Well like I said, the wireless items you mention so far are simply induction based. Nothing new there.

Depends on what the op meant by wireless electricity. If you see charging an item without having to plug it in, as the dawn of wireless electricity, that's fair enough.

I have a feeling the op was asking in terms of electrical wireless transmission rather than close proximity coreless induction coupling.

Sorry my bad, I meant without having to plug the appliance into the wall.

Well is WiFI really wireless internet? It would be a little hypocritical to say you connect your laptop to your router 'wirelessly' when there's still wired involved. For me there's no difference between the current evolution of wireless electricity and wireless internet. Having a central hub in your house where all your electronics can power off is no different to having a router in your house with WiFi and running your laptop/iPad/iPhone etc off.

The 'new' thing is a hub capable of powering all of these devices and then power your car. I haven't heard much about this until the last year and considering it's not consumer available I'd class it as new. Plus there's break throughs in electric bus transport which is definitely new as it's not being used widely yet, and then there's mobile 'wireless' charging of cars etc.

Adapting on current technology and enhancing it to make it capable of such things shouldn't be cast aside either.

What would you call wireless internet and wireless electricity in both of there current forms?

Bruthal

irishmover wrote: »

Sorry my bad, I meant without having to plug the appliance into the wall.

Well is WiFI really wireless internet? It would be a little hypocritical to say you connect your laptop to your router 'wirelessly' when there's still wired involved. For me there's no difference between the current evolution of wireless electricity and wireless internet. Having a central hub in your house where all your electronics can power off is no different to having a router in your house with WiFi and running your laptop/iPad/iPhone etc off.

The 'new' thing is a hub capable of powering all of these devices and then power your car. I haven't heard much about this until the last year and considering it's not consumer available I'd class it as new. Plus there's break throughs in electric bus transport which is definitely new as it's not being used widely yet, and then there's mobile 'wireless' charging of cars etc.

Adapting on current technology and enhancing it to make it capable of such things shouldn't be cast aside either.

What would you call wireless internet and wireless electricity in both of there current forms?

If you had to sit your laptop within 6 inches of the router to get it to work, would you call that wireless internet?

If you can carry your lead free electric kettle around the house and place it anywhere, and boil water in it, then we can compare it to WiFi.

The likes of charging a car without leads is nothing new in terms of technology. It is simply existing knowledge being used because an application has arose for it, ie. viable rechargeable cars.

I'm with Bruthal on the how wireless is wireless theory. If it's subjective to an inverse square return relationship on distance from an inductive coil then it's not progress. ...or it is but only on the part of low energy appliances.

Phones could benefit from kinetic charging or my favourite is just a larger battery.

Saw a kinetic dance floor once, it lights LED's as people dance on it. Never seen it working....it was unpacked, had technical difficulties and was shipped back to Germany before the punters knew what they were missing. The same company were bidding to install the drivers under public walkways in large cities.

Rick Hall

irishmover wrote: »

What would you call wireless internet and wireless electricity in both of there current forms?

Wireless internet is just radio, & that's hardly new tech.

irishmover

Bruthal wrote: »

If you had to sit your laptop within 6 inches of the router to get it to work, would you call that wireless internet?

If you can carry your lead free electric kettle around the house and place it anywhere, and boil water in it, then we can compare it to WiFi.

The likes of charging a car without leads is nothing new in terms of technology. It is simply existing knowledge being used because an application has arose for it, ie. viable rechargeable cars.

Well alright but what these companies are saying will be available in 2015 is a hub like a router. That will have a range on two floors of a house (so capable of going through walls) and provide 'wireless' electricity throughout the whole house from the one centralized location. So as you were saying, capable of walking around the house with your kettle still boiling away.

Let me see if I can find it, but that was why I made the comparison as these companies claim it's coming next year.

Bruthal

Yes the inverse square to distance stuff would make boiling a wireless electric kettle interesting.

Ever see an eco-burco?
Hippies drinking cold tea!

irishmover

Rick Hall wrote: »

Wireless internet is just radio, & that's hardly new tech.

You missed the point. It's still called wireless even though cables are still required.

I find broken cables easier to remedy that wireless controls.

Bruthal

irishmover wrote: »

Well alright but what these companies are saying will be available in 2015 is a hub like a router. That will have a range on two floors of a house (so capable of going through walls) and provide 'wireless' electricity throughout the whole house from the one centralized location. So as you were saying, capable of walking around the house with your kettle still boiling away.

As long as we are not boiling along with it:D

irishmover

Sir Liamalot wrote: »

I find broken cables easier to remedy that wireless controls.

Depends on where the broken cable is and whether you're an electrician or have a degree in computer science

...and room density, atmospheric conditions, software compatibility, line of sight etc. etc..
I like copper me.

Bruthal

Rick Hall wrote: »

Wireless internet is just radio, & that's hardly new tech.

It was a definition of what we would deem as wireless that he was making, which was a valid point.

Rick Hall

irishmover wrote: »

You missed the point. It's still called wireless even though cables are still required.

The "wireless" part you refer to is the wifi in your house. There's no reason this can't be extended further, & often is, with fixed wireless or mobile access to a comunications mast. The bandwidth available would be better than a long twisted-pair phone line.

This mast probably then uses wireless links for backhaul. Could be made wireless back to the point of "generation" i.e. the internet server.

I'm not trying to be argumentative but signal would be better on correctly gauged cable or fiber optic.
I think there's a huge engineering jump between wireless signal and wireless power. For example the vid. I posted is really just amplified signal. The problem with modern wireless power is it gets exponetially weaker the more it has to travel.

irishmover

Bruthal wrote: »

If you had to sit your laptop within 6 inches of the router to get it to work, would you call that wireless internet?

If you can carry your lead free electric kettle around the house and place it anywhere, and boil water in it, then we can compare it to WiFi.

The likes of charging a car without leads is nothing new in terms of technology. It is simply existing knowledge being used because an application has arose for it, ie. viable rechargeable cars.

Just to get back to this. Witricity are claiming they can operate a main hub to provide power, meters away wirelessly, but their website doesn't say whether it can power multiple objects or just one. They also mention the use of repeaters (so just like radio repeaters).

The video I seen a few days ago showed a Witricity hub being able to power numerous electronics on different levels of the house from the one hub with a few repeaters used. Didn't watch it on youtube was on the auld tv box. Done a search on it but cant find it. They also showed a diagram showing the magnetic field covering the entire two story house.

Only video I could see close to this was this one from a little over a year ago but it's not close to what Wifi can do.

irishmover

Sir Liamalot wrote: »

I'm not trying to be argumentative but signal would be better on correctly gauged cable or fiber optic.
I think there's a huge engineering jump between wireless signal and wireless power. For example the vid. I posted is really just amplified signal. The problem with modern wireless power is it gets exponetially weaker the more it has to travel.

It's the exact same with radio waves etc. ofcourse.

I suppose we see a decent amount of inefficiency with Wifi so it's probably quite easy to anticipate (and I've just read) that these hubs would require more electricity to charge your phone than having it plugged in.

So it's quite easy to expect that if this became a common power source in most homes we'd be looking at a rapid rise in power consumption in the world. Which we really don't need.

I use about 5kW/h a week
Most of that is a washing machine.