Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Power Transportation Wireless Networking

Researchers Have Developed a Way To Wirelessly Charge Vehicles On the Road (jalopnik.com) 146

Posted by BeauHD from the no-cables-required dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Jalopnik: [R]esearchers at Cornell University, led by Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering Khurram Afridi, have developed technology that would allow vehicles to be charged on the road while in motion. It would essentially turn U.S. roadways into wireless chargers. Afrindi says he has been working on the tech for the last seven years. Here's how it would work, according to Afrindi via Business Insider: "'Highways would have a charging lane, sort of like a high occupancy lane,' Afridi told Insider. 'If you were running out of battery you would move into the charging lane. It would be able to identify which car went into the lane and it would later send you a bill.' The science behind Afridi's project goes back over 100 years to Nikola Tesla, the inventor who used alternating electric fields to power lights without plugging them in. Afridi's technology would embed special metal plates in the road that are connected to a powerline and a high frequency inverter. The plates will create alternating electric fields that attract and repel a pair of matching plates attached to the bottom of the EV.No need to worry about stopping to charge unless you're down for the night. They have run into a problem, however. They can't seem to find the parts that can handle the high levels of power needed to charge vehicles enough while they are in motion. It would have to be a material that's not only weatherproof but able to withstand high voltage and heat from the passing vehicles."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Researchers Have Developed a Way To Wirelessly Charge Vehicles On the Road More

Researchers Have Developed a Way To Wirelessly Charge Vehicles On the Road

Comments Filter:

  • Also... (Score:5, Funny)

    by 14erCleaner ( 745600 ) <FourteenerCleaner@yahoo.com> on Wednesday May 12, 2021 @05:54PM (#61378520) Homepage Journal
    It'll erase your phone's memory, stop your pacemaker, and probably fry your car's electronics.

    • Re: Also... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by kenh ( 9056 ) on Wednesday May 12, 2021 @11:56PM (#61379302) Homepage Journal

      I think it sounds very efficient and practical. /sarc

      So if a car disables its self-identifier and drafts behind a car that is paying for electricity, both will charge and only one will get a bill.

      We're really talking snout turning charging on snd off in reasonable sized chunks based on rfid tags shooting down the road at 60-90 MPH?

      Better to handle line toll lanes, just Bill every car that gets into the charging lane based on toll tags passing readers.

    • I have to wonder if, after driving a mile in the charging lane if you can collect enough electricity to at least offset the electricity used to drive that one mile, let alone get, say, two miles worth of electricity in a one mile drive.

      How efficient is this? If it, say, 20% efficient, your paying at least 5x the value of the electricity you are actually collecting (plus overhead).

      • Re: Also... (Score:4, Informative)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Thursday May 13, 2021 @03:33AM (#61379568) Homepage Journal

        Bjorn Nyland has some real-world data here: https://docs.google.com/spread... [google.com]

        Let's say 200Wh/km at 120 kph (75mph) as a nice round number. So a total of 24kWh/h, or 24kW of energy delivered to the car after losses while in that lane. Doable but pushing it, especially since for wireless transmission to work it has to be AC.

        The numbers look a bit better at 60 kph but still unlikely to prevent your battery going down as you drive.

        Seems pointless really, just add more chargers along routes and people can stop for 15 minutes to take a break and top up.

        • Wall chargers ( https://www.tesla.com/support/... [tesla.com] ) give you 45 miles range for each 60 minutes charge time. If we assume a car has a 20% charge (of 300 mile range) and travels over 60 miles of charger road at 60 MPH AND we assume the charger road is 100% as efficient as a wall charger you'll end your 60 mile journey with 15% charge (45 mile range)... BUT, is the charger road that efficient?

          Waste of money/resources.

        • Lets say, it only replenishes 75% of the energy you use, you still extend your range greatly. Especially if it was for trucks. On the other hand in Germany we are testing overhead contact lines for electric driven trucks. Similar to those used by trains.

      • Wireless transmission in a garage is 80% effective. There is no reason on a road it is less.
        Your question however is right: do you get more energy than you use per mile driven, or not.

        • > Wireless transmission in a garage is 80% effective. There is no reason on a road it is less.

          With no moving components, a relatively small scale, and no exposure to the outdoors. I've seen that kind of proposal frequently in the software and hardware worlds, and they usually break down very quickly in the most elementary tests.

  • They also developed a Star Trek transporter (Score:4, Insightful)

    by magzteel ( 5013587 ) on Wednesday May 12, 2021 @05:59PM (#61378538)

    They also developed a Star Trek transporter.

    They have run into a problem, however. They can't seem to find the parts to build it and make it work in the real world.

    And they are still waiting for Admiral Archer's prize beagle to rematerialize

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mark-t ( 151149 )
      Your skepticism is not warranted. The technology to implement wireless charging facilitated by vehicle movement is very old, and a crude implementation is obvious to anyone who has even a high school level of physics background.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Antique Geekmeister ( 740220 )

        The age of the equations do not guarantee the soundness of physical implementations, anymore than they guarantee fusion power or refining sea water for tritium. A "crude implementation" of many physical principles is straightforward. Scaling it up to a highly reliable, safe, and scalable system is not so trivial.

        The leakage of the signal to other vehicles nearby is invitable. Given the amounts of power, and therefore the amount of current in the charging system, electomechanical coupling with the moving veh

        • This. Wireless charging using high-frequency energy can be achieved, but the practical implementation will be difficult and uneconomical. But that isn't even the biggest problem for this sort of tech. The real problem will be inefficiency compared to plugging in, which is getting faster and faster, and batteries which will be able to run a car longer and longer. I think at some point a new way of fraying tin will enable high-surface area/low volume super capacitors that will outlast the rest of the car, hav

        • Scaling it up to a highly reliable, safe, and scalable system is not so trivial.
          In this case it actually is.

          The only problem, and that seems to be solved: is billing.

          Seriously, if you can not make a wireless power transfer with spare parts from your garage, the only excuse I accept is: you have no garage.

      • The technology to construct a Space Elevator is also well established. We just need to find a material strong enough to construct the tether.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by mark-t ( 151149 )

          The technology to construct a space elevator is dependent on the availability of a material that is stronger than anything that has yet been discovered. The technology to implement wireless charging of a moving vehicle is not dependent on any undiscovered technologies or substances. Again, this is literally high-school physics shit.

          Take a magnet, move it near a coil of wire, and presto, you generate a current, which can be used to charge battery for as long as you are moving the wire through the magne

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by lsllll ( 830002 )

            You appear to be trolling your physics knowledge pretty well. If only your engineering was up to par, you'd be set.

            As others have said, there are issues of safety, scale, and efficiency, among others. What you're saying is akin to "Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world." On book and on an exam? Yes. In real world? No.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by mark-t ( 151149 )
              No, what I'm saying is that comparing technologies that do not exist at all to technologies which *do* exist, and not simply on paper or in books, is like comparing apples and ball bearings.

            • On book and on an exam? Yes. In real world? No.
              But you do know we already have wireless charging roads?
              Or don't you?

              Seriously, get a damn clue about physics. I do not care about you knowing how exactly a modern CPU is working.

              But having no basic clue about physics is inexcusable in our modern world.

          • The technology to construct a space elevator is dependent on the availability of a material that is stronger than anything that has yet been discovered. The technology to implement wireless charging of a moving vehicle is not dependent on any undiscovered technologies or substances. Again, this is literally high-school physics shit.

            Take a magnet, move it near a coil of wire, and presto, you generate a current, which can be used to charge battery for as long as you are moving the wire through the magnetic field.

            No magic, and no futuristic technology of any kind required.

            You are right - it is very simple.

            So are lot of other ideas that end up being utterly impractical.

            But since you're an expert - all over the world, there are electric trolleys, trains and buses.

            Explain to us why such a simple technology like wireless power was not used, with the transport vehicles getting their electricity from overhead wires.

            Or are these engineers who designed the system victims of not paying attention in high school?

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by mark-t ( 151149 )

              In practice, it doesn't scale very well.

              But existing technologies that don't scale well is a totally different phenomenon to technologies that don't exist at all.

              • In practice, it doesn't scale very well.

                But existing technologies that don't scale well is a totally different phenomenon to technologies that don't exist at all.

                Sure. But this story is speaking of electrifying roadways using wisdom from Tesla.

                Which is pretty much a high Frequency transformer. Which as Tesla discovered, works in a lab environment, but not outside of it.

                And that's the issue I have with these outfits. If they are doing the "flying car we'll all be driving in the future, I can dismiss it as a bit of fun.

                But damn, back of the envelope calculations show it is a non-starter. If only for electromagnetic exposure limits. We once had these sort of prop

            • Reminds me of "infinite transmission" automotive nutjobs who think horsepower is more important than torque because they can "fabricate" a transmission to make any small gas engine with no torque able to pull massive semi truck loads around and it just doesn't exist in the real world.

              Case wants to split apart as these magical multiplications happen and it also transmits forces the opposite direction as loads shift which would forcefully rev the engine up and down in an oscillating fashion.

              So the world tows

              • Horsepower and torque are essentially the same thing.

                Well, sort of.

                Horsepower is torque "times" rpm. (Obviously that's not the exact mathematical equation, but it's essentially just lacking proper dimension handling; the physics is accurate.)

                So "horsepower is more essential than torque" just means "you can always rev it higher if you need to". Which is actually true, until it isn't, because at a given point mechanical friction is eating away efficiency and material longevity more than you'll like, or you ge

              • Reminds me of "infinite transmission" automotive nutjobs who think horsepower is more important than torque because they can "fabricate" a transmission to make any small gas engine with no torque able to pull massive semi truck loads around and it just doesn't exist in the real world.

                On Youtube, Greg's airplanes and automobiles has some great analysis of this sort of thing. He does a lot of stuff on WW2 airplanes and his analysis is top notch. I forget the specific video where he speaks of how torque vs horsepower is addressed. But his stuff is so intelligent that just going through everything is worth it.

                So the world tows with big diesel engines and realistic transmission ratios. Life goes on.

                Some people despite all the knowledge in the world have no wisdom on how to apply it practically. So much optimism, I think it was their schooling.

                Yes - it is really hard to beat practical applications. Science class is good and all, but engineering is where the rubber hits the road, so to speak.

                The thing that they are missing

          • Two words: energy conservation.

            Moving a wire in a magnetic field will generate an electric field that opposes that motion. So you'll have to move it against resistance - the larger the more current your setup is designed to generate. You're converting mechanical movement in electricity. (Think: conventional generator, dynamo etc).

            So no, moving a car in a charging lane like that will not charge your battery more than it discharges.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by mark-t ( 151149 )
              Did you see anywhere where I alleged that that it would?

              • Maybe I misunderstood your post? Your post sounds to me like you're ridiculing the wireless charging idea because it's not far enogh thr status of idea, essentially meaning zero added value, because the same idea has been thought of (you claim?) by moving a wire in a magnetic field. Is that it?

                Well if yes, without the allegation you talk about, your analogy of the wirelessly charging car to the moving wire in a magetic field doesn't make sense.

                The trick in the new technology is moving the power wirelessly,

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by mark-t ( 151149 )

                  As I said, even high-school physics would give a person enough to go on to see how you could generate energy directly from the kinetic motion of a vehicle.

                  Now clearly, as you have pointed out, this trivial implementation would involve stealing energy from the vehicle and otherwise slowing it down. This is how regenerative braking in electric vehicles works, in fact, and is contactless, producing no physical wear or tear on any braking components on its own (although physical brakes must still be used to

            • So no, moving a car in a charging lane like that will not charge your battery more than it discharges.
              If you used a permanent magnet in the road you would be right. But we are talking about current flowing under the road and being transmitted into the car: so you are wrong :P

      • Your skepticism is not warranted. The technology to implement wireless charging facilitated by vehicle movement is very old, and a crude implementation is obvious to anyone who has even a high school level of physics background.

        And going beyond High school science is a whole world of impediments to implementation.

        Cost, efficiency, localized effects and simple logistics come into play. How much current will be passing through the system, will any and all cars be allowed to use it simultaneously? The physics is dead simple - be it a simple transformer, or Tesla's "Tower" - wireless charging has been demonstrated and there is a rather good reason it isn't used other than for toy operations like charging phones.

        So unless there i

      • How efficient could this possibly be?

        Have they even built a small, one mile circular test track to drive over and observe the efficiency of such a thing? The car doesn't need to even be electric, just put a battery pack on an ICE car and mount a charging plate under it and start driving and observe the real-world charge rate.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by mark-t ( 151149 )

          Probably not very.

          But if I see no reason why this could not stand to double or even triple the pure electric range of a vehicle charging this way... and isn't that still a good thing?

    • They shoulda used a red shirt to test. Everyone knows theyre expendable.

    • They obviously havent received the new catalog from Electronic Service Unit No 16 :)

  • > They have run into a problem, however. They can't seem to find the parts that can handle the high levels of power needed to charge vehicles enough while they are in motion. It would have to be a material that's not only weatherproof but able to withstand high voltage and heat from the passing vehicles.

    Yeah, and good luck installing this 'charging lane'. I'm sure CalTrans will get right on that, starts with the guy that holds the Slow/Stop sign - one side for the drivers on the road the other side for

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by crow ( 16139 )

      That's about the only part of this that isn't a big problem. They can implement some system where any car can drive in the lane, but only cars that request the power will be charged. But for all the other reasons people are pointing out, this is as real as solar road surfaces.

    • Maybe the cars could deploy a pole out of its roof to make contact with an energized screen over the road, like a bumper car at the state fair?

  • Easy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rlp ( 11898 ) on Wednesday May 12, 2021 @06:12PM (#61378586)

    Replace roads with metal tracks. Replace car wheels with metal wheels that fit onto the tracks. Add a third metal rail for power distribution, and oh yeah ... link the vehicles together with a special coupling. I better go patent this before someone else thinks of it ...

    • Replace roads with metal tracks. Replace car wheels with metal wheels that fit onto the tracks.

      I had a similar idea. Just build the roads like a Carrera Toy Race Track. The car would have normal tire wheels. When driving on powered roads, metal contacts would drop down from the car to provide electricity to the car from the slots . . . and also keep the car on course. No need to touch the steering wheel!

      Hey, this also makes them autonomous . . . kinda sorta.

  • All depends on (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cygnusvis ( 6168614 ) on Wednesday May 12, 2021 @06:15PM (#61378598)
    Infrastructure spending in the USA which wont happen.

    • Re:All depends on (Score:4, Insightful)

      by GodfatherofSoul ( 174979 ) on Wednesday May 12, 2021 @11:51PM (#61379296)

      Haven’t you been paying attention? The new thing is paying private industry twice as much to develop the infrastructure and establish a monopoly they can leverage to charge us even more in the future.

  • A bit misleading, isn't it? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by djbckr ( 673156 ) on Wednesday May 12, 2021 @06:34PM (#61378678)

    They have run into a problem, however. They can't seem to find the parts that can handle the high levels of power needed to charge vehicles enough while they are in motion. It would have to be a material that's not only weatherproof but able to withstand high voltage and heat from the passing vehicles."

    So.... in other words, they haven't figured out how to do it for the real world. *Sigh*

    • Hey if they can build that, then maybe highway based 802.11 wifi. No more dead zones! Woohoo!

      • I have a fiber line running 100 yards from my house, the nearest interstate or US highway or even State Road is 2 miles away

    • They have run into a problem, however. They can't seem to find the parts that can handle the high levels of power needed to charge vehicles enough while they are in motion. It would have to be a material that's not only weatherproof but able to withstand high voltage and heat from the passing vehicles."

      So.... in other words, they haven't figured out how to do it for the real world. *Sigh*

      I wonder what their plan is to max out available current? Keeping in mind that it would be horribly inefficient, they will have to almost unlimited current available, or throttle it back during periods of high demand - maybe they'll have big nuc reactors every mile or so. Maybe in 20 years when fusion will work. Maybe we'll figure out how to utilize zero point energy.

      And we might come to understand why High tension wires are so damn high off the ground. although maybe the St Elmo's fire can be used to li

  • Roads are really hard to build to last, much more if you put a wireless charger in them.
  • Ah, I get it. Their device must operate at 0K so the heat from passing vehicles is a problem. I would bet there are many other problems with this so-called "research" at Cornell's engineering department.

  • Funded by Big Oil? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by crow ( 16139 ) on Wednesday May 12, 2021 @06:59PM (#61378726) Homepage Journal

    This is exactly the sort of story oil companies want to see. "Electric cars will be great once this new technology solves the big problem." The solution will never happen, but that's not the point. The key isn't that the solution isn't real, it's that the problem isn't real.

    EV ranges are to the point where most people are just fine plugging in at night and never worrying about it. High speed charging networks are fast enough for longer trips. There simply isn't any demand for the proposed solution, even if it worked, just like there isn't demand for battery swapping stations.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      For anyone still doubting this here is Bjorn Nyland's real-world 1000km test spreadsheet:

      https://docs.google.com/spread... [google.com]

      He does the test in Norway, so it's cold and often wet or with some snow on the ground. The fastest one, the Kia Ceed, is a hybrid so ran on dino juice most of the time. As you can see several EVs are not far behind it, including some fairly affordable ones.

      He subtracted time spent eating and going to the bathroom from the fossil time so realistically it's not going to be faster for most

    • This entire range discussion also misses one of the biggest issues facing people who think they may have range anxiety: driver fatigue. It is at no point safe to drive continuously for more than 2 hours without at least a 15min break. Maybe having a car with lower range can drive some better behaviours on the road as people are forced to actually sit down at gas station and clear their mind.

      • "It is at no point safe to drive continuously for more than 2 hours without at least a 15min break."

        Says who? Every accident I've been in happened in urban environments. I've done many 2+ hour trips and never had an accident during one of those trips. I suspect >98% accidents occur on trips that are less than 2 hours.

        • Says who?

          Countless studies. Which is why many countries publish official guidelines on driving distance and fatigue. Also why the EC published regulations on it for long haul truckers (though they doubled everything rather than 20min for 2 hours they went 40min for 4 hours.

          Every accident I've been in happened in urban environments. I suspect >98% accidents occur on trips that are less than 2 hours.

          I'm not sure why you think this is relevant to the discussion. We talking specifically about people who are afraid that they can't drive 500miles without charging. Urban environment isn't even remotely related.

          I've done many 2+ hour trips and never had an accident during one of those trips.

          I wanted to address this truly fuckin

          • "Countless studies"

            Excellent comeback. Almost as scientific as "people think", "a lot of people are saying", and the timeless classic "word on the street is...".

            I understand my personal experiences are anecdotal, but they aren't unreasonable assumptions.

            According to this, US truckers can drive 11 hours straight without a break. That's so much more than 2 hours that it seems crazy for the DOT to allow an action that "countless studies" have deem to be "at no point safe". - https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/site... [dot.gov]

            Ev

  • Where it is safe from wheel travel. Tin foil hat required for all passengers.

    Just embed permanent magnets in the road with alternating polarity and we get free charging! Nothing can go wrong with that...

  • About 7 to 10 kW (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Smidge204 ( 605297 ) on Wednesday May 12, 2021 @07:14PM (#61378758) Journal

    The typical car cruising at highway speeds (65mph) needs something on the order of 10kW to maintain that speed.

    If we assume 100 foot spacing - that's only one second between cars and let's be honest that's more separation than you'll actually get - that's 52 cars per mile per lane.

    So 520kW per lane just for cruising, potentially, and at that power level you're just breaking even.

    I don't see this scaling too well.
    =Smidge=

    • My Tesla needs 230Wh per mile at 60MPH. That is about 13kW.

      The simple solution would be to rent and tow an external power source for long-distance trips. It could be a diesel generator, extra battery pack, or what ever.

    • So 520kW per lane just for cruising, potentially, and at that power level you're just breaking even.

      Actually - provided your math is accurate - it scales quite nicely.
      10 miles -> 5MW
      100 miles - 50MW

      No idea why you think it does not scale.

  • All you need to do to charge wirelessly in any existing EV is loop a rope through the front tow rings found on almost any car and throw the other end over a pickup tow hitch. Regen brake your battery full in no time while you fly down the highway at 65mph.

  • On one hand, what happens in earthquake-prone areas, areas that flood, or have other road-damaging events?

    Also, by the time this even comes close to real world use, won't we have made a breakthrough or two in battery density and charging speeds, thus making much of this redundant?

  • Look, I'm a fan of BEVs but this idea will die a few seconds after someone releases the cost per km for such a system.

  • So thereâ(TM)s a moving magnetic field that charges a battery that drives a motor to move the car at that same speed?

    You know what else is linear and has a moving magnetic field and is designed to move things? A linear motor! Why donâ(TM)t they just slap a magnet under the car so that it becomes the ârotorâ(TM)?

    That technically doesnâ(TM)t charge the battery, but it extends the carâ(TM)s range and thatâ(TM)s what counts.

    Thinking about it, how will they ever make this cost-

  • It is not that long since someone came up with the idea of roads-with-solar-panels; there was quite a bit of hype, whereas some of us who have dabbled in economic analyses, would have a gut reaction that this cannot possibly be viable with current level of technology.

    And guess what, turns out that was exactly right, and there is a reason you are no longer hearing about this concept. According to a half-random hit [greentechmedia.com] from a Google search on Solar Roadways, "After years of trial projects, a handful of “sol

  • I know this is techdirt and actually reading the article is frowned upon, but for this article, the lack is quite telling. People seem to think that they're describing high frequency transformers. They're not. The proposed scheme is effectively radio transmitters embedded in the road, aimed upwards, while the vehicles have rectennas on the bottom to collect the power. But as the article states, they don't know of any substance that can handle both the power and environmental requirements. So it's another so

  • "They can't seem to find the parts that can handle the high levels of power needed to charge vehicles enough while they are in motion. "
    So they have NOT developed anything.

  • Forget charging, and just make the road into a linear induction motor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

Slashdot Top Deals

So... did you ever wonder, do garbagemen take showers before they go to work?

Close