Semiwiki on LinkedIn Semiwiki on Facebook Semiwiki on Twitter Register / Log in 
Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/passive-wi-fi-10x-faster-1000x-lower-power-than-bluetooth.7424/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021770
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Passive Wi-Fi -- 10x faster, 1000x lower power than Bluetooth

B

Brad Pierce

Member
“Our passive Wi-Fi devices now talk up to 11 megabits per second,” said Kellogg. For comparison’s sake, that’s 11 times faster than Bluetooth. One of the main selling points of devices communicating via Bluetooth rather than Wi-Fi has been Bluetooth’s comparatively low energy consumption. But Passive Wi-Fi is 1,000 times more energy efficient than Bluetooth, and the network can be secured like any Wi-Fi signal can, unlike Bluetooth.
Click to expand...

Passive Wi-Fi Could Make Your Internet 1, Times More Efficient | WIRED
 
Brad - this is interesting but from what I have read about back-scatter-based WiFi, the range is very short. I don't remember the number but something like 13' comes to mind. Competitive with BT on range but not so much with WiFi unless you have repeaters everywhere.
 
I know that in the world of road bikes that many of the computers and sensors are using either ANT+ or Blue Tooth LE for wireless communications. At least one company called SRAM even has created their own wireless protocol for derailleurs.

15_sram_etap_toss_build.jpg


It looks like each market segment will choose the best wireless protocol for the task at hand, or if needed created their own proprietary protocol like SRAM did.
 
Don Dingee said:
Not "backscatter" at all as I think of it in ionospheric OTH radar systems. This is essentially passive RFID harvesting Wi-Fi signals - and their testing only went to 3m. Does have some merit as it greatly reduces power and cost of a endpoint on Wi-Fi at very short ranges.

http://iotwifi.cs.washington.edu/files/wifiBackscatter.pdf
Click to expand...

Hi Don - about halfway down the article they talk about backscatter:

That “reflection” happens via a process called “backscatter,” and the students at UW have created Wi-Fi equipment that sends out a signal via backscatter instead of using a full radio signal.

​
But certainly this is not off the ionosphere
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top