Technology

59219 readers

4663 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

144

submitted 11 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

50 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Researcher has developed, at a cost of less than one dollar, a wireless light switch that runs without batteries, can be installed anywhere on a wall and could reduce the cost of wiring a house by ...::A U of A engineering researcher has developed a wireless light switch that could reduce the cost of wiring a house by as much as 50 per cent.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] surfrock66@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

This article is scant on details. It harvests RF to power/charge low energy devices. What RF bands? Is putting these through a house knocking out bluetooth around it, or existing RF remotes for devices? Or is this some background RF that won't penetrate deep into a house to begin with? There would be "1-2 RF transmitters" to power the whole house...that doesn't seem great, that's a ton of wasted energy emanating in a sphere from the transmitter to hit these devices all over. I'm not sure what problem this is solving, copper wiring cost of extended runs to switches? Isn't this problem going to go away if some system like zigbee got standardized and the switch hardware was baked into the end device itself to be controlled by any of multiple control points?

[–] kae@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'd imagine it's scant on details because it's still a theory. The next phase of the competition is funds to build a proof of concept.

[–] surfrock66@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

For sure, though I question the theory. Directional wireless power I think is feasible, but this sounds like blanketing (1-2 transmitters in a house with no regard for obstacles/direction, per the article). That sounds hugely wasteful, especially given how much more energy power takes vs. signal. I do think a zigbee type solution is the ultimate answer, because even if it goes back to batteries for wall stations, data transmission like that is so much less energy than power that the battery problem becomes null-ish.