How Wireless Meshing Could Save Energy
An anonymous reader writes "EE Times reports that the future of industrial automation lies in wireless mesh sensor networks. From the article: 'It is the holy grail of the factory floor: hundreds of sensors wirelessly connected, monitoring motors for problems and drastically reducing energy consumption -- all with the precision and rhythm of a philharmonic orchestra.' (Other articles here(1), here(2), and here(3).)"
My dad told me stories of Back In The Day(tm) when AM radio stations would broadcast at 300,000 watts, or more, and streetlights would be lit by the radiant energy. Can't imagine that did people much good living near the antennas...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
...welcome our new job-stealing wireless mechanical overlords.
Seriously, though, this would make my job a whole lot easier...monitoring the operation of a pair of 8MW generators (or a host of other equipment) from a single location vice constantly hopping around from point-to-point looking at every little gage and meter gets real old, real fast.
Given all the slashdot stories about Wardriving and the like, how secure would these networks be? What prevents a competor with a wireless broadcast anteanna from parking in range of your factory, and sending false signals telling your machines to idle?
END COMMUNICATION
Safty and reliability are absolutes in industrial control.
A machine like a bottler goes down at pepsi, and they are losing $250k/min when that machine isn't running. Or a pharmacutical company drops a batch worth $3 million. And now that I've climbed in or on huge presses, mixing tanks, 6ft. fans, high preasure steam, and poison vapors... I wouldn't trust thier function to a wireless web.
I can see where this would be great for remote/hazardess sensors and transmittion, but not anytime soon for control. Hell, we still extensivly use rs232 over ethernet.
I am billdar, and I approve this message.
This is pretty sweet. This way, you don't have to waste more energy by putting a transformer onto the motor's circuit. The best part is that it uses energy that you're normally wasting anyway.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
The electric charactaristics of a machine change when it's broken. I don't really understand how putting sensors everywhere will improve that situation rather than just managing eletronic load. For that matter, doesn't wireless need much energy?
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
Therefore I don't have high hopes for energy saving via a new energy saving system. I can see visions of technicians rushing around in gas-guzzling trucks to go install/upgrade/repair sensors. Once all the sums are done I don't expect an energy saving.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
but retrofitting is going to be a big flop
Actually the whole point of this work is to retrofit the factory floors (or other places using large motors). According to Wayne Manges, you're looking at $20 to $50 per foot to install wiring, so a $200 wireless sensor would be cost effective compared to running wire. The system could pay for itself by flagging one motor that is having problems before it fails - DOE's hope is that you can also tell tha the motor is chewing up electricity at an excessive rate.