Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Power Open Source Patents Transportation

Wireless Charging Tech Adopted By Ford, Chrysler, and Toyota Goes Open Source 75

An anonymous reader writes: The in-vehicle wireless charging technology adopted by Ford, Chrysler, Dodge, RAM, and Toyota has been released to the public domain without royalties or licenses. This technology that you probably never heard of before is in 12 vehicles; more vehicles than all the other wireless charging standards combined. The open standard web page shows schematics, app notes, and certification information to get companies to make compatible wireless charging products.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wireless Charging Tech Adopted By Ford, Chrysler, and Toyota Goes Open Source

Comments Filter:
  • Oh lord... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14, 2015 @07:57AM (#49688413)

    Ultimate Safety: No electromagnetic fields to fear. Zero risk of cancer!

    Holy shit I facepalmed.

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Nabeel_co ( 1045054 )

      The thing that pisses me off most about the whole "Cell phones/EMFs cause cancer" thing is that it takes attention away from what damage they really do.

      Very few people know that it's actually been proven that Cell phones cause bone density loss, especially in older people. So if you are always keeping your cell phone in the same pocket for many years, years down the line, that hip has a high chance of becoming frail because the mild heating affect of the EM can cause premature cell death.

      Of course people ar

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        "Proven" except that the study [nih.gov] says it's not statistically significant.

        • Hmm, Interesting. Well then I guess even that's out the window!

          The only reason I had given that theory any credit in the past was because I know someone who was suffering bone loss on the one side of their hip, and the doctor had said that it was due to the cell phone.

          I went home and researched it, and low and behold these studies were being conducted, and the info seemed to suggest at that time that there was a link, but that was a good 6-7 years ago... I didn't bother checking for new developments.

          My bad.

      • Feel like comparing the occasional study that keeps the EMF-from-electrical-fields meme going to the long-established data on cancer from benzene derivatives?

  • Not Wireless (Score:5, Informative)

    by Cytotoxic ( 245301 ) on Thursday May 14, 2015 @08:01AM (#49688459)

    This is not exactly wireless... It is not "hard wired' in that you don't plug in a cable. The technology uses a system of electric strips of alternating polarity and a pattern of contact pickups on the device to connect to the strips. It is cool, and should be much better than wireless in terms of efficiency.

    • 15v or 19v watch how many companies will put a cheap LDO to get it down to a usable voltage like IDK say 5v. When it's in a case that then connects to USB. Watch as 2/3 to 3/4 goes into waste heat before even hitting the phone. What phones directly support this "standard". Looks like Car companies want to sell ya some cheap metal strips and call it a feature.

    • This is not exactly wireless... It is not "hard wired' in that you don't plug in a cable. The technology uses a system of electric strips of alternating polarity and a pattern of contact pickups on the device to connect to the strips. It is cool, and should be much better than wireless in terms of efficiency.

      Exactly. This is a wired technology. The device needs to make electrical contact with the charging pad strips. Just because it doesn't require a traditional cable or plug doesn't change that fact. The open dots alliance page actually refers to it as "wire-free" technology, referring to the fact that you don't need a cable. The article writers are misunderstanding the technology and substituting wireless for cable free.

      It would be interesting to see just how this technology works. After all, you won't

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14, 2015 @08:08AM (#49688499)

    It's essentially a tweaked version of a portable phone charger. But instead of two contacts in the caddy/base station, there are a series of points arranged so it can be placed in any position. Still plenty of chances for shorting.

    "Safety – No electromagnetic fields are used. Zero risk of cancer claimed." -- Metal contacts will do that
    "High Power – The technology can deliver up to 160 Watts" -- It could do more or less depending on how the manufacturer designs it
    "Power Diversity – High and low power devices can operate side-by-side on a pad" -- This is a function of the thing being charged.
    "Bulk Charging – A pad will charge as many devices as will fit on its surface" -- Well done. They've learned about parallel circuits.
    "High Efficiency – Efficiency is nearly 100%" -- touching the contacts togeth/er will do that
    "Low Cost – The technology is inherently low-cost." -- What about reliability

    • Yeah, my mouse had similar tech. You dropped it into a cradle and it would charge...

      Unfortunately, it had the nasty problem of the contacts corroding or wearing off, preventing it from charging. Given that it was corroding in a mostly temperature and humidity controlled environment, I won't give good odds to these things lasting in a hot and muggy car.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Lack of device support makes it all pointless. Many devices already have Qi and users are happy with it. We don't need another standard that will be dead in a few years.

  • From their site: Guaranteed Safe – No electromagnetic fields are used. Zero risk of cancer.

    Random Placement – Devices receive power at any position or orientation on a pad.

    High Power – The technology can deliver up to 160 Watts

    Power Diversity – High and low power devices can operate side-by-side on a pad

    Bulk Charging – A pad will charge as many devices as will fit on its surface

    High Efficiency – Efficiency is nearly 100%

    Low Cost – The technology is inhere

    • by Anonymous Coward

      no electromagnetic fields? You mean there is no current at all or that they are stupid?

    • It's better, in its way, in that it can deliver a lot more power. It would be great for laptops on desktops, or in this case, rear seat tray tables. More cars are going more towards luxury of late because it's a place where automakers can compete while spending relatively little money (they're spending a bit on R&D of cheaper soft-touch materials, basically, which they can use across their ranges) and the US crash test "safety" regulations as written really encourage larger cars, it's very difficult to

    • From their site: Guaranteed Safe -- No electromagnetic fields

      Wait ... what? They're going to charge my phone, with electricity, with no electromagnetic fields involved?

      Now, I'm not rocket surgeon, but I'm pretty much sure that sets off my bullshit detectors.

      What are they charging the phone with? Unicorn farts?

      • The main bullshit is in the reason they listed that, not in the tech. This is not a wireless charging solution, it "merely" has a few of the advantages of wireless charging and does not have some of the disadvantages like efficiency and triggering the EM radiation allergy tinfoil hatters.

        It merely eliminates the need for precise orientation when plugging in. Therefore it should be relatively easy to use it to charge a car automatically, with a charging pad under the car (with automatically retracting prote

  • by rossdee ( 243626 ) on Thursday May 14, 2015 @08:13AM (#49688517)

    if you put your tinfoil hat on that charging surface?

    • if you put your tinfoil hat on that charging surface?

      You turn into one of the lizard people which you already knew.

  • I was trying to figure out what cars they had that can be charged. Turns out it was the other way around, the car will charge your cellphone.

    What was wrong with the QI standard?

    • by slew ( 2918 )

      Qi (the current spec) basically induction coil based and limited to about 5 watts. It is AC in nature and thus in a car requires DC->AC (and the associated losses) from the electrical system, then AC->DC rectification (and associated losses) on the device being charged.

      AFAIKT, the open dots alliance is a dc charging system (with a diode rectifier bridge to handle the polarity swap) capable of up to 160 watts. Presumably there would be less loss leaving things DC and fewer components required on the

      • The major losses are not in the DC-AC conversion nor in the AC-DC conversion. Both are usually done with high efficiency. The losses are in bridging the 1 mm air gap between the transmitting coil and the receiving coil and the presence of any other conducting material nearby. You see when the Qi charger (or whatever tech) transmits it's power over that gap some of it leaks out through the side. That leaking field starts to induce current in whatever conducting material it encounters. Those are your losses a

    • The car companies felt QI wasn't good enough, and that they needed a better more car friendly charging standard. So they came up with something almost entirely less useful than QI. I suppose the benefit is that you will be able to get QI chargers that hook up to this and therefore don't need the USB cable hanging in front of the car stereo anymore.

  • There's a really annoying trend lately of people completely misusing the term "Open Source". By definition, for something to be "Open Source", there must be some source code somewhere in it (and term only applies to that part). Calling a pure hardware system "open source" makes no sense whatsoever.

    The word "open" works just fine there all by itself. There is no need to embellish it with the nonsensical "source".

    • There's a really annoying trend lately of people completely misusing the term "Open Source". By definition, for something to be "Open Source", there must be some source code somewhere in it (and term only applies to that part). Calling a pure hardware system "open source" makes no sense whatsoever.

      The term "Open Source" was preceded by the same term in the intelligence community, meaning a source who provided valuable information to opposing parties in a conflict. A well-known, public, commercial entity of this type would be Jane's. So the issue is a fairly confused one.

      Nerds have long enjoyed muddying the waters of language, both with willingness to hack grammar and to coin new words and phrases. For example, the oft-demonstrated belief that all nouns can be verbed, and all verbs can be nouned. We'v

  • Qi has been around for quite some time. My last 3 phones have supported it and i love it

    If i want to use OpenDots I have to buy a new phone (none on market atm), a few new charging plates (none on market atm) and a car that supports it (a few on market)?

    OpenDots is not as safe (try spilling your drink on the pad :)) and is not supported by a single phone at the moment, while Qi has ~50 phones with built in support on sale at the moment and hundreds more that accommodate Qi via accessories (i.e. Qi enable
  • Would love to see this technology used at long distant bus stations. Instead of having busses idling, running the engine, the parking spot would have an induction charger that could be used power things like A/C and possibly an engine warmer, when it is cold.

  • Coupled with a 4 way bridge, there is not a whole lot of tech here. I do not even see how it stays in place ya know while driving.

    • It doesn't need to stay in place. In fact in TFA the tech is used in a racetrack for model cars. The rectifiers are there so the polarity of the input of each dot can switch without the output changing. If you make the alternating strips pad big enough it will be able to handle a lot of shifting around during driving. If you place it into a tray so the phone bumps into the edge of the tray before loosing contact with the pad then you've got the major problems solved unless you drive so aggressively everythi

      • A tray implies that it's sitting screen up pretty much parallel to the ground. Thats fine for listening to music and voice commands. It's horrid for GPS or passenger infotainment where you want it mounted to the dash, headrest, seatback, etc.

        Granted car companies love selling GPS nav and infotainment packages for a couple k that are outdated in a few years.

        • Qi has the same problem. You can simply build it into a generic GSM support clip to solve that. This solves the alignment issue so you don't have to plug in the connector.

  • Chrysler/Dodge/RAM are one company.

    Shill much?

Remember, even if you win the rat race -- you're still a rat.

Working...