News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by rdlecler1 on Sunday October 21, 2018 @11:16PM (#18271942)
Unlike Theranos which had a lot of non-VC investors uBeam had some of the best. Sound travels in a wave and energy would dissipates exponentially with distance. It made no sense to me how this would work or why these investors got behind this. Insight would be appreciated.
Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by Afrotechmods on Sunday October 21, 2018 @11:24PM (#18271981)
Back when this first started Meredith built a "prototype" in a couple of days which, to a layperson, would appear impressive. There was a function generator with an amplifier sending out ultrasound via an array of transmitters and about a meter away there was an array of receiving transducers that picked up the utlrasound. Then the output from those receiving transducers was rectified with a few diodes to get DC. In this demonstration she had a multimeter showing the voltage at the receiving side, and when she tweaked things just right, she received 5 volts on the receiving side. 5 volts is the standard voltage you'd use to charge a phone, or any other USB powered device, so it was reasoned that she had created a viable system that could charge phones wirelessly.

The problem is that any idiot can get 5 volts out of thin air. You can literally hang up a long bare wire and rectify ambient radio waves and get 5 volts. The trick is getting 5 volts and being able to supply significant amounts of current at the same time i.e. receiving useful amounts of _power_. Power = Volts x Amps and Meredith and her investors simply did not understand the importance of this equation that a freshman in engineering would understand. FOMO kicked in and they threw millions of dollars at her thinking it was going to be the next big thing.

Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by baud147258 on Monday October 22, 2018 @08:38AM (#18274112)
> a freshman in engineering would understand

I don't even think that as a freshman, I would have gotten it. On the other hand, I was pretty loosy on the EM side of things, that's why I then went into software quickly afterward .

Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by illiac_1962 on Monday October 22, 2018 @11:00AM (#18275153)
Wow, so she generated a shitload of charged air and used a child's science experiment to woo some VCs? I think I'm in love. I cannot stop laughing. She could get rich many times over pulling this trick.
Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by foldr on Monday October 22, 2018 @11:21AM (#18275350)
> a shitload of charged air

No, the air isn't holding a charge in Meredith's setup. The setup is essentially a speaker and a microphone, but optimized (somewhat) for energy transmission.

Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by 2_listerine_pls on Sunday October 21, 2018 @11:32PM (#18272000)
> Sound travels in a wave and energy would dissipates exponentially with distance

It's actually possible to transmit sound waves without the exponential decay with "directional sound" [1]. It is produced using a "phased array" [2] of speakers, where each speaker has a different a phase. The point is to create constructive interference in the direction you want the sound beam. Directional speakers have existed for a while and that's probably how uBeam emitters work.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directional_sound

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phased_array

Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by URSpider94 on Monday October 22, 2018 @12:55AM (#18272269)
1. The size of the phased array is directly related to the distance over which you want to maintain focus. In order to focus a beam across a room, you need a hilariously large array.

2. Ultrasound transducers are very inefficient, so you’ll lose a lot of power.

3. Ultrasound transmission will be blocked by a person, or even by a sheet of paper in the way.

4. Even if you do achieve a tight beam, then you either have to actively steer it around, or it’s only good for transmitting power to something sitting still in a specific spot.

5. We don’t really know much about the effects of having watts of ultrasound present in a space with humans 24/7/365.

(And these are just the easy ones)

Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by tzs on Monday October 22, 2018 @06:23AM (#18273468)
Decent efficiency seems possible. These people report 53% efficiency at 1 meter:

Roes, M.G.L.; Hendrix, M.A.M.; Duarte, J.L., "Contactless energy transfer through air by means of ultrasound," IECON 2011 - 37th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society , vol., no., pp.1238,1243, 7-10 Nov. 2011

Abstract: An alternative approach to the wireless transfer of energy is proposed, employing acoustic waves in air. Unlike conventional methods, acoustic energy transfer is able to achieve energy transfer at high efficiencies over distances that are large in comparison to the dimensions of the transmitter and the receiver. This paper gives an overview of the principle and explains the different loss mechanisms that come into play. A theoretically limit on the achievable efficiency is calculated. It exceeds that of a comparable inductively coupled system by an order of magnitude. First preliminary measurements indicate that AET is feasible, although the measured efficiency is lower than the predicted theoretical limit.

They were using small low-power transceivers as their focus (no pun intended) was on large distances compared to transceiver size, and so were only dealing with a few dozen uW power.

Looking at a few of the things that cite them, it seems that low power is where most of the work in ultrasonic power transmission is, aiming for environments where you need to power something small in a location that makes the usual methods problematic, such as implanted biomedical devices. Example: "MEMS Based Broadband Piezoelectric Ultrasonic Energy Harvester (PUEH) for Enabling Self-Powered Implantable Biomedical Devices", https://www.nature.com/articles/srep24946

Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by deepnotderp on Monday October 22, 2018 @12:47AM (#18272242)
Repeat after me: directional radiation is still subject to inverse square law.
Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by danielvf on Monday October 22, 2018 @08:27AM (#18274055)
Agreed in the general case, but what about a laser?
Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by Trevor908 on Monday October 22, 2018 @11:51AM (#18275673)
Only in the far field.
Re:UBeam CEO Meredith Perry steps aside amidst B2B pivot by rdlecler1 on Monday October 22, 2018 @05:27PM (#18278692)
This doesn’t invalidate the important claim here. In your example you are focusing sound not by concentrating it along a beam but by phasing out the signal that is not on the path.