Here's how uBeam actually works:<p>Ubeam emits Ultrasound frequency waves from a base station. These sound waves are converted into mechanical energy by a crystal inside a flash-drive sized dongle attached to the device. The crystal resonates at that sound frequency and the mechanical energy of the vibration is then converted into electricity by the dongle.<p>The shit works. And everyone told her that it couldn't.
As already pointed out, they use ultrasound to beam the energy, and they claim to have filed some patents applications. Alas, there's a ton of prior art in this space, and I wonder how they're going to navigate them.<p>For example, ultrasound is already used to wirelessly charge pacemakers:<p><a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/11/wireless-pacemakers" rel="nofollow">http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/11/wireless-pace...</a><p>And here is a very pertinent patent in this space (2004) that also contains a nice review of prior art:<p><a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=508SAAAAEBAJ&zoom=4&dq=ultrasound%20power%20transmission&pg=PA13#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/patents?id=508SAAAAEBAJ&zoom=4&...</a><p>The central difficulty in this idea, as pointed out in the above patent, is automatically aiming a sufficiently focused beam at the receiver. Otherwise you get killed by 1/rˆ2 power decay. And this is a non-trivial task, which will force them to either go the royalties way or dodge the existing patents.<p>I don't doubt the team can move forward, but I wonder if the undergrads (and their investors) have underestimated the difficulty and history of the problem.<p>That being said, it's refreshing to see folks inspired by real-world problems that don't involve "social".<p>Wishing them best of luck!
Wireless charging/power is something that has been around since Tesla and still not fully taken off.<p>Maybe the Tesla patent expired or they have managed to patent the crystal radio!<p>"uBeam has “several patents” filed regarding its technology for wirelessly charging gadgets such as laptops and smartphones without plugging them into wall outlets or other energy sources, and she is being aided by a team of other people"<p>So they have applied for patents, not been awarded them. Though even if there are prior art/products that already do what they plan on doing they may still get awarded the patents for something that IMHO is in the public domain with the prior work by Tesla and cystal radio's. Not sure how they can expand upon that. But without a product to scrutinise, then there is nothing too see here.
Anyone know how different this is from e.g. powermat?<p>Powermat has no plugs either. By the "closest thing to magic" comments, I would guess uBeam can charge your phone while still in your pocket (whereas powermat and similar systems require ~2mm distance from the charger).<p>Which, if true, is kind of scary -- it means that a bug or bad estimation would target nontrivial energy to your groin (5W charges your average modern phone; that might not sound like a lot, but cellphones are limited to 0.6W so that they don't raise your brain or skin temperature too much, and most phones in most locations use less than 0.1W when talking, about 0.01W on average in standby. 5W is a lot)<p>edit: pressed submit permaturely.
Hardware needs more investment. It's hard work, requires significant seed money just to get rolling, and in my opinion is far more important than the latest web app or similar.<p>It will be interesting to see how this goes. I'm certainly hoping that they can achieve something good.<p>However, as others have said, ultrasound for wireless charging must be horrifically inefficient. It will be interesting to learn more when they've got something working.<p>Not only are you contending with inverse square law (which can probably be negated to some extent by directing the beam of sound) but also losses due to air, losses in picking up the sound waves with a crystal and losses in converting that vibration into electrical energy.<p>If the efficiencies are much below 80%, it'd be a highly impractical method for charging any high power devices. Phones would probably be OK, but laptops with large batteries really wouldn't be.
Every year there is some new gadget at CES that charges wirelessly in some new, innovative way, but is never heard from again. I guess I'll be a believer when I see it for the first time as a consumer somewhere.
Hardware startups are pretty rough, and they're giving this fresh grad (with apparently no track record?) 750k to figure out the technology, design the circuitry/mold, setup manufacturing, distribution and so on. That's sure a lot of faith in the team. Good luck.
How can you disrupt an industry that either does not exist (wireless charging) or one that is highly commoditized (USB chargers) and with no clear path to grow any of it?
The only way it will be disruptive is if it finally catches on. Wireless charging is nothing new. I personally think Palm and then HP did it best, integrating wireless charging with device functionality via API. I am curious what they mean about not plugging it in to ANY energy source.
Is "uBeam" seriously the best they could come up with?<p>At this point, we know nothing about the product, beyond the fact that it raised that much on potential.