Apologies if someone else has already posted this interesting news story:
Wireless charging hotspots lets drones fly forever through in-air recharges
Wireless charging hotspots lets drones fly forever through in-air recharges
Wireless charging hotspots lets drones fly forever through in-air recharges
- Thread starter African wildlife
- Start date
Uhmmm sorry if I sound sceptical, remote wireless charging....? no way, however happy to be proved wrong.
Waylander
Waylander
I don't doubt the technology, wireless charging is nothing new.
I'm just a little confused as to why the drone maintains a hover while charging, surely it would be much more efficient to land while it charges rather than continuously using battery power?
I'm just a little confused as to why the drone maintains a hover while charging, surely it would be much more efficient to land while it charges rather than continuously using battery power?
The system obviously works and is available to purchase. To me, if I were a potential customer (which I'm not), the recharging zone looks as if it's still in the early stages of development or at least has scope to be refined.
But these are a bunch of Russian applied physicists looking ahead. Their anticipated uses are way beyond what almost all of us do as Phantom pilots. It's aimed at commercial autonomous drones that need to stay airborne for extended periods of time.
They've just exhibited at a trade show in Las Vegas a few days ago - and been featured as a news story by Teslarati.com who mainly do updates on SpaceX, Tesla, and The Boring Company. Once upon a time, plenty of people laughed at Elon Musk and SpaceX - yet they successfully launched more rockets into space in 2018 than any other company or country except China. And they've already had their first launch of 2019, with plenty of exciting times very close to happening.
"Big oaks from little acorns grow" - although it's equally as true to say that many startup companies fail.
But these are a bunch of Russian applied physicists looking ahead. Their anticipated uses are way beyond what almost all of us do as Phantom pilots. It's aimed at commercial autonomous drones that need to stay airborne for extended periods of time.
They've just exhibited at a trade show in Las Vegas a few days ago - and been featured as a news story by Teslarati.com who mainly do updates on SpaceX, Tesla, and The Boring Company. Once upon a time, plenty of people laughed at Elon Musk and SpaceX - yet they successfully launched more rockets into space in 2018 than any other company or country except China. And they've already had their first launch of 2019, with plenty of exciting times very close to happening.
"Big oaks from little acorns grow" - although it's equally as true to say that many startup companies fail.
If your suggesting it won’t happen with our toy grade drones then yes, I can’t see it any time soon either. Seemingly it has well and truly happened through- the technology has been demonstrated to work. 10C charge rate.
They don’t land to charge so my guess is the answer to that question is an assumed obvious no.
Yes I read it was an-in-air recharge, but the DJI manual states the batteries will only accept a charge when the temp is between 41 F and 104 F. My batteries typically go to 123 F and higher while flying.
This isn’t a DJI drone. Nothing was said about the battery chemistry or what means might be employed to keep temperatures down. We know it is charging in flight however and might safely assume it isn’t running two seperate batteries to allow cool down before changing so the safe assumption is the battery doesn’t need to cool before charging.
Hi All
As I said earlier, I'm sceptical of the claim of in flight recharging.
Relate the charging of a battery to the gas tank on your car, with some precautions you could continually pump gas into the fuel tank with the engine running, ad-infinitum, but you would need to pump gas into the tank at a rate that matches or exceeds the fuel which is constantly being used.
A battery is similar to that, you can put charge into a battery whilst drawing current from it, but the charge current must exceed the current that is being consumed, I'm not saying that it is not possible, but as "With The Birds" own post, there will be cooling issues with the battery as well as the charging device, OK lots of air flow from the props and heat sinks could take care of that, but as he says what about the chemical reactions in the LiPo battery, I'm no expert, perhaps they have dealt with it.
My point is that the rate of charge must exceed the total current consumed by the drone, but batteries unlike fuel tanks can't take a fast refill ( like F1 race cars used to do, dump a full fuel load in a few seconds ) it takes time to charge a battery, so what will you do, ? hover near the charger for 40 minutes, whats the point...?
Maybe I'm missing something....
Waylander
As I said earlier, I'm sceptical of the claim of in flight recharging.
Relate the charging of a battery to the gas tank on your car, with some precautions you could continually pump gas into the fuel tank with the engine running, ad-infinitum, but you would need to pump gas into the tank at a rate that matches or exceeds the fuel which is constantly being used.
A battery is similar to that, you can put charge into a battery whilst drawing current from it, but the charge current must exceed the current that is being consumed, I'm not saying that it is not possible, but as "With The Birds" own post, there will be cooling issues with the battery as well as the charging device, OK lots of air flow from the props and heat sinks could take care of that, but as he says what about the chemical reactions in the LiPo battery, I'm no expert, perhaps they have dealt with it.
My point is that the rate of charge must exceed the total current consumed by the drone, but batteries unlike fuel tanks can't take a fast refill ( like F1 race cars used to do, dump a full fuel load in a few seconds ) it takes time to charge a battery, so what will you do, ? hover near the charger for 40 minutes, whats the point...?
Maybe I'm missing something....
Waylander
The article claims a charge rate of 10C, this is possible with silicon dominant anode cells. In theory the cells could be charged to 75% capacity (from zero SOC) in 5 minutes. The operating temperature range (charge and discharge) is also significantly greater than for current graphite anode LiION tech. Silicon-dominant anodes also give 50% more capacity than current LiION for the same weight.
So yes- the claimed performance is possible with current technology. Suspect it won’t come cheap though.
The company apparently have a video on their website that’s two hours in length showing a drone continually in the air (including in-air recharging). Yes, in this day and age anything can be faked with CGI, but surely you’re not suggesting this? I’ve seen a shorter video that seemingly shows in-air recharging.
To repeat: the company have this system for sale.....now. So it must work?
You honestly admit that “you’re no expert” - whereas the company is run by Russian applied physicists, who presumably are experts.
Yes I see what they say and yes I understand that this is a developmental device, but what I am finding difficult to grasp is this:-
they have a 26' wide charging loop in which the drone(s) must hover to recharge.
With an output of 12KW the grid could charge 12 - 13 drones ( if each drone consumed 1500 watts during charging ), in such a small space.. to what end, ? and how long does it take to charge, somebody help me out with this, :- "What would you use such a system for...? " Doh..
Waylander
Last edited:
I think you misread the article. The power transmission to the drone during charging peaks at 12 kW, while the drone is using 1.55 kW to hover.
We can easily accept the developers claims on those numbers. 28 minutes flight could be achieved with less than 800wh giving ample margin for a 10C charge rate.
Ah....yes Sar104 you are correct, I did miss read it, I thought it said that 12 Kw was available through the grid, and the drone consumed 1550 W during charging, that's still a lot of power consumed.
What I don't get ( forgive me if I missed something ) is WHY...? whats the point of consuming 1.55 KW just to hover, thats 1.5 bars on an electric heater, or the current consumed by a small electric kettle.
What the article does not say is how long it takes to charge the drone..
The science apart, why do it... why not land in the grid and charge up quicker.
Please some one tell me what it is I am missing, this is not an experimental concept, it's on sale, but I can't for the life in me see why you would want to spend $120 K for such a system... I understand "Near Field", charging systems, and how useful they are for many everyday devices, phones, toothbrushes etc, but this I don't get.. someone clue me in please....
Waylander
The article says it takes just 6 minutes hovering over the grid to get a full charge.
The reason it consumes 1.5kw in a hover would be simply a function of the power required to produce the thrust to keep a 30kg UAV airborne. Look at the Wh a phantom consumes in an hour and it seems reasonable.
Waylander: With The Birds is doing an excellent job answering questions. (Perhaps he'll be offered the job of GET's Australian rep in the future?)
There's more detailed information on the company's website (which, aside, could do with a few improvements regarding presentation and language). The seemingly high cost also includes two large drones in addition to the charging system.
The charging system can service one drone or multiple drones - the latter being a more likely, effective and efficient usage.
Whereas a P4P weighs a mere 1.388 kg (including battery), their drones weigh considerably more as well as being much bigger in size.
This is a world's first, still to see future refining/development. Even the seemingly high cost of today might not seem so much when it's offset against the savings in humans doing the same job. This system is 24/7. I can remember pre-CCTV and other innovations. Costs tumble when a new system is mass produced. Who knows what the future will be like? SpaceX, for example, have rapidly made the idea of expendable rockets seem outdated, wasteful, and eco-unfriendly - something that NASA and others have failed to do in the past 65-70 years.
There's more detailed information on the company's website (which, aside, could do with a few improvements regarding presentation and language). The seemingly high cost also includes two large drones in addition to the charging system.
The charging system can service one drone or multiple drones - the latter being a more likely, effective and efficient usage.
Whereas a P4P weighs a mere 1.388 kg (including battery), their drones weigh considerably more as well as being much bigger in size.
This is a world's first, still to see future refining/development. Even the seemingly high cost of today might not seem so much when it's offset against the savings in humans doing the same job. This system is 24/7. I can remember pre-CCTV and other innovations. Costs tumble when a new system is mass produced. Who knows what the future will be like? SpaceX, for example, have rapidly made the idea of expendable rockets seem outdated, wasteful, and eco-unfriendly - something that NASA and others have failed to do in the past 65-70 years.
I agree on the question of hovering - it's not clear why it would not be better to land. More specifically it's not clear if there is some specific benefit to remaining airborne, since the charging system could, presumably, work just as well in either case.
