Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Power Wireless Networking Technology

Wireless Tech Company Finds Way To Charge Drones In Flight 66

Global Energy Transmission (GET) co-founder William Kallamn says his wireless tech company has found a way to create a "power cloud" that can charge a drone while it's in flight. "The system comprises a ground-based power station with a frame of wires positioned in a roughly circular shape," reports Futurism. "When turned on, this creates an electromagnetic field in the air near the station. A drone equipped with a special antennae charges by flying into the range of the power cloud." From the report: Eight minutes of charge time translates to 30 minutes of flight. One of GET's power stations and two customized drones, each capable of carrying 7 kilograms (15.4 pounds), currently costs $120,000. It's hard to overstate the potential for drones to change our world, but for seemingly every positive use for the machines (package delivery, search and rescue operations), there's a negative one to consider (military weaponry, citizen surveillance). So, sure, a drone that never needs to land would be amazingly beneficial for moviemaking and sports coverage -- two uses Kallman notes in [an interview with entertainment vlogger David Fordham] -- but it's hard to imagine military or government officials wouldn't be highly interested in GET's drone charging tech as well.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wireless Tech Company Finds Way To Charge Drones In Flight

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    A hundred and eighteen years before its time.

    • Imagine such towers all over the place. Drone delivery is going to get exciting. https://www.damninteresting.co... [damninteresting.com]
      • by Shaitan ( 22585 )

        Don't hold your breath. This probably has some troubling interactions with RF.

        • Don't hold your breath. This probably has some troubling interactions with RF.

          Pretty much this. There are some big issues with efficiencies - near field and far field RF physics has not been invalidated that I know of. The amount of power that is needed to flood a narrow field with enough joules of energy to charge at a rate that allows 30 minutes of flying time with 8 minutes of charge time is about as impressive a feat as I can imagine.

          To the point that Ima calling provisional bullshit. This sounds the same level of believability as the devices that magically condense incredible

    • A hundred and eighteen years before its time.

      We still don't have those, because they don't allow you to limit the charging volume to a small area which you can ensure nobody is stealing power from you in.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        no, we don't have them because they're incredibly inefficient transfers of energy

        • No they aren't. The coupling only happens when there is a load, driving it without something actively pulling power requires practically nothing.
      • Nonsense. The problem with these technologies is getting enough range, not people a large distance away stealing your watts

        With resonant technologies, if you're roughly 3 times the diameter of the coils away, then the power you can receive is largely negligible fraction of the transmission power, and it only goes down from there. With beamed technologies, they actually have to point a beam at you.

        In either case, with sensible positioning of the equipment, it's a non issue.

        • A Tesla coil alone (as in a real one, not some flashy sparking abomination) can get a range of hundreds of miles easily. If you had a network of them acting in unison (e.g. Tesla's Wardenclyffe project) you could use the resonant cavity between the Earth and ionosphere to power every terrestrial device remotely.

          The issue is entirely due to the fact you can't monetize such formats of power distribution.
  • Time efficiency (Score:4, Interesting)

    by CaptQuark ( 2706165 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @02:14AM (#57935892)
    Eight minutes of hovering in a charging field vs 30 seconds to land and replace the batteries. I guess a fully autonomous vehicle might benefit from hands-off recharging.

    ---
    • Re:Time efficiency (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @02:31AM (#57935912)

      A fully autonomous drone could land and recharge at a ground station for a heck of a lot less than $120,000.

      • Re:Time efficiency (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Joce640k ( 829181 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @05:08AM (#57936234) Homepage

        Yep. A $5 inductive charger would do it.

        And ... why would you hover when charging? That's wasted power (8 minutes of flight time)

        Nothing about this passes the sniff test.

      • by RobinH ( 124750 )
        If I had a fleet of commercial (and expensive) drones buzzing around making me money and the wireless charging made programming easier (don't have to dock exactly to a charging port) and caused less wear and tear on the landing struts, etc., then I would probably be interested in $120,000 wireless charging solution.
        • (don't have to dock exactly to a charging port)

          Have your use a modern drone? I have a DJI Mavic. Landing within an inch is easy even for a human.

          ... and caused less wear and tear on the landing struts, etc.

          Is this supposed to be sarcasm? Or are you actually serious? 8 minutes of hovering will cause more wear on parts that actually matter.

          I would probably be interested in $120,000 wireless charging solution.

          You may want to apply to be a financial analyst for DoD. They would love you.

        • If I had a fleet of commercial (and expensive) drones buzzing around making me money and the wireless charging made programming easier (don't have to dock exactly to a charging port) and caused less wear and tear on the landing struts, etc., then I would probably be interested in $120,000 wireless charging solution.

          I'd be really interested in perpetual energy too.

      • Exactly.

        They are being obtuse about the charging distance too. The best spec I can find is "dozens of meters" [getcorp.com] on their site. The specification page [getcorp.com] indicates very little (despite being the obvious place to put a charging distance spec) but it does say the "Charge Spot Diameter" is "up to 8 meters". So, assuming dozens is 2 dozen, the device needs to hover within about a 25 ft diameter region up to 80 ft or so up. That isn't even always above treetop level.

        In addition, the flight time carrying a load is only

  • by mentil ( 1748130 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @03:07AM (#57935986)

    Shouldn't the inverse square law mean that the further the drone is from the power station, the slower it'd charge? The '8 minutes of charging for 30 minutes of airtime' depends completely on battery tech, weight of the drone, and how far it is off the ground. I suspect that recharging faster than it discharges requires the drone to hover a few feet over the power station, in which case it'd be faster to land and plug in. This would hardly enable it to remain high up in the air while recharging at a significant rate. Using beamforming to zap it with microwaves might be more effective.

  • Hello, sir!
  • by technosaurus ( 1704630 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @03:13AM (#57935992)
    Tesla's did it. Tesla's did it.
  • by no-body ( 127863 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @03:15AM (#57935994)
    that those "wireless" thingies don't go the glyphosate way. Strong interests pushing potential damages under the carpet because ... and at the end, there is damage to health.
  • Does GET sleep under power lines?
  • Wireless power grid? Great idea.

    What could possible go wrong with that .... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Quiet_Earth_(film) [wikipedia.org]

  • I'm not aware of a drone that can fly for 30 min after it's plugged into a wall charger for 8 min.
  • Militaries will not be interested. What's the point if your drone has to return to a base station? The US military is already experimenting with laser charged drones, where they can beam power out kilometres to charge the thing without interrupting its spying/unexpected death from the skies thing.

  • Descent has been doing this since 1995.

  • Read between the lines and this is not about hobby drones, it is about autonomous hunter-killer and 24/7 surveillance drones. True black ops autonomy means never having to be serviced by a human. No humans involved, nobody to interfere or screw things up. These things could be launched once and then never return, and operate invisibly for a decade charging themselves autonomously any time they need to.

Whoever dies with the most toys wins.

Working...