Wacky antenna tech greatly reduces power consumption

Robert Hallock 22 Dec, 2008 at 11:51am ET Article published in Tech

battery Electronics PhD student Atif Shamim has disconnected the wires to a cell phone’s antenna and reduced power consumption by up to twelve times in doing so.

The magic stems from electricity’s inherent fascination with getting lost when moving through wires and electrical systems. “This has not been tried before — that the circuits are connected to the antenna wirelessly. They’ve been connected through wires and a bunch of other components. That’s where the power gets lost,” he said.

In exchange for the power-fumbling wires, the external antenna now connects to the internal components via a micro-antenna. When asked about why he undertook the project, Shamim says he was tired of the same battery drain everyone else is. “It’s a common problem. There are so many applications in the iPhone, it’s like a power-sucking machine,” he said.

Published in the upcoming edition of Microwave Journal, Shamim’s invention was credited with “excellent integration of system design, material sciences and electromagnetic antenna design” at the European Wireless Technology Conference.

Comments

22 Dec 2008 ~ 12:42pm Leonardo Somehow, I don't think this will be of any surprise to any long-term electronics engineers who design cell phones. This may just be one of those cases were the ideal technology has been known for a long time but is just not cost effective to mass produce.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 1:14pm Thrax Not likely, since he was able to file a patent for it.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 1:23pm Leonardo Still, I am so jaded by the daily reports of revolutionary technical advances. If just 5% of the world-changing tech discovered/developed/uncovered/patented in the last five years had actually found its way into our lives, our lives would be completely different.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 2:25pm BuddyJ Need a moonshot plz.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 2:40pm primesuspect

Leonardo wrote:

Still, I am so jaded by the daily reports of revolutionary technical advances. If just 5% of the world-changing tech discovered/developed/uncovered/patented in the last five years had actually found its way into our lives, our lives would be completely different.

I'd argue that our lives ARE completely different in the last 5 years. Cell phones, GPS, instant location-based broadcast services such as brightkite and loopt, etc. At this very moment, thrax, for example, can live broadcast video from anywhere in the US, on the internet, and have everyone see it. That's pretty goddamnedridiculously amazing to me.

I look around at the tech in my life, from my 46" 1080p display, to video game systems that connect me with any of my friends anywhere in the world and allow me to play with them instantly, to the incredible mobile tech, flat displays, Twitter (whom I've made TONS of new friends and contacts with) and the ever-amazing speed increases of my own desktop computer.

My life is VERY different from what it was 5 years ago.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 4:00pm MiracleManS I'm more excited now about technology than I have been in a long time. Even more cost effective solar technology, advances in TV technology, and general improvement of household life has been awesome.

I also think a primary problem with our view of technology is our "instant now!" way of getting things. Many of the "breakthrough" work that we see just isn't ready for common/every-day manufacturing. The fact that it might take 10 years would have been looked at as remarkable. By today's standards, we're upset if it takes more than 10 months.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 4:33pm _k I have to go with Leo on this one. I live in the telecom corridor, I go to a school that was founded because TI said "let there be learning" and then there was, I have lost count of how many people from TI and Cisco who have invented/designed new hardware or software that was patented that year and has been sitting around for 20+ years because it wasn't "needed".

None the less I still ackknowlege that there are great advances all the time that we are all using; online gaming, social networking, wireless networks, massive bandwidths. Despite this every week Icrontic brings to the fore front issues of ISPs refusing to keep standards for traffic loads(25% of standard load), price fixing on LCD screens, inappropriate attempts to censor public material despite its acceptance, companies producing sub-standard material costing companies millions. Everyone still needs to make their dollar but this glutenous need is hindering the worlds growth and knowledge.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 4:48pm Leonardo A longer lasting cell battery, a prettier TV picture, more pop tunes on a portable player, a smaller GPS: in aggregate, all of that is revolutionary; individually, any of those things constitute only an incremental improvement.

A longer lasting cellphone batter or 1080P television is not life changing, unless one spends his life in front of the TV or glued to a telephone.

Things that really changed the world: airplane, telegraph, original telephone, electrical power generation, internal combustion engine, antibiotics, microscope, Internet. EDIT: add offset printing press to this - even bigger than the Internet, IMO

What we've seen in the fast 20 years has mainly been the accelerated pace of technological advance, nothing really revolutionary with the exception of the Internet.

In my mind, examples of future, truly revolutionary technologies would be: batteries that can power a medium sized car for 400 miles and recharge in less than one hour; small, nuclear "battery" power plants that can be set up in only a few weeks and power small cities or rural zones; true Internet broadband available anywhere, any time; affordable supersonic air travel; and a medical diagnostic tool such as the "triquarter" in Star Trek.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 6:37pm _k We are getting serious now Star Trek is involved.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 6:47pm Leonardo Have you seen that documentary - forgot what it's called - hosted by William Shatner, in which they point out what "Star Trek" technology has actually been invented and is now in use? It's a great show.
22 Dec 2008 ~ 6:49pm Ryder

Leonardo wrote:

medical diagnostic tool such as the "triquarter" in Star Trek.

Just a small nit pick - "Tricorder"
22 Dec 2008 ~ 7:08pm Leonardo First time I've seen it spelled out. But I can recognize one on sight!
23 Dec 2008 ~ 3:07am Khaos

small, nuclear "battery" power plants that can be set up in only a few weeks and power small cities or rural zones

I saw something about a working prototype for this. I would dig it up, but I'm wicked lazy right now cause it's late.

I think nuclear power and a SMART grid is the way to go. There is so much untapped nuclear power technology that is out there that we haven't even touched in the U.S. since it's been over 30 years since we built our last nuclear power plant. Japan, France and China are building or running some very impressive nuclear power plants these days.

All designed right here in the U.S. of A. Heh... General Electric and Westinghouse design the stuff, mostly. Japan builds it. Everybody but us is using it.

Why we so stupid?

Oh yeah, we have half the world's coal and ALL the world's coal lobbyists. WOOHOO!
23 Dec 2008 ~ 3:39am Leonardo Yes, you are correct about the mini-nuclear power plants. Why aren't they being deployed? No, not the coal industry. The fault lies with the maze of regulations and laws that must be surmounted. Three Mile Island caused legitimate concerns in this country but it also caused a massive, exaggerated knee jerk reaction from which we haven't recovered.
23 Dec 2008 ~ 12:13pm Khaos I totally agree, Leo, but all of that insurmountable fear, and the insurmountable regulation that followed it, was fueled by a PR campaign against nuclear by Big Coal! That's also where the money has come from to fight the new nuclear power plants that have been planned since, using the laws passed at the bequest of coal lobbyists in the 70's to endlessly delay new nuclear power plants and cause the projects to run so far over budget that they're abandoned outright.

The cost for a single nuclear power plant for France, China or Japan is approximately $1 Billion from design to operation, and that includes a 15% "clean-up" cost.

In the U.S., the last time we attempted to build a similar power plant it never even got finished and it cost over $12 Billion!!!!!!

Freakinregoddamndiculous, if you ask me.
23 Dec 2008 ~ 1:28pm DrLiam It only takes one person/company to invest in one of these "ground-breaking" ideas and then everyone jumps on the bandwagon. Being cutting edge = $$$ & company recognition.

So maybe our world needs more small businesses willing to invest in new ideas. Just I thought.
24 Dec 2008 ~ 9:33am j Just because he files a patent doesn't mean much. you could get a patent for picking your nose if you worded it correctly.

Very interesting subject. any links to any details? or a link to the patent
24 Dec 2008 ~ 12:54pm primesuspect And for the sake of disclosure: J has patents in his name, so I trust his word on this issue.
24 Dec 2008 ~ 2:00pm Thrax Actually, it means quite a bit in this case. Patents in Canada and the United States are hand-reviewed for prior art before they are awarded. If he was given a patent for this technology, it's something that no one else has made before.