Slashdot Mirror
A 30-Picowatt Processor For Sensors
Roland Piquepaille writes "University of Michigan (U-M) researchers have developed an ultra low power microchip which 'uses 30,000 times less power in sleep mode and 10 times less in active mode than comparable chips now on the market.' It only consumes 30 picowatts in sleep mode, which means that a simple watch battery could power the chip for more than 200 years. Of course, this is not a processor for your next computer. It is designed for sensor-based devices such as medical implants, environment monitors or surveillance equipment. However, the design is very clever." Roland's blog has some more information, including a die picture of the chip, known as the Phoenix.
...might want a Beowu ---- oh, forgive me. I know where the door is...
Caveat Utilitor
The lithium CR1216 batteries on my shelf started corroding after 4 years. Several of the AG3/CX41 alkaline batteries began leaking after 5 years. Still untouched, in their wrappers.
Can some one explain to me how this chip is connected to the world?
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
There is some better info farther into the article, but the first thing they say about the chip is rediculous:
"So how did these scientists build this very efficient chip? The answer is extremely simple: they've reduced the battery size. 'Phoenix is the same size as its thin-film battery, marking a major achievement. In most cases, batteries are much larger than the processors they power, drastically expanding the size and cost of the entire system, said David Blaauw, a professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. For instance, the battery in a laptop computer is about 5,000 times larger than the processor and it provides only a few hours of power.'"
So... they made it more efficient by giving it a smaller battery? That is so obviously backwards... They can give it a smaller battery because it's more efficient, but not the other way around... Or did i miss something? The article certainly doesn't help explain anything more if that is really come clever something-something going on...
-Taylor
Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
sounds like it just does automaticly what a micro programed for use with sensors does. Usualy you have a counter in the chip that is driven from a clock pulse derived from the main system clock that generates an interupt (waking the proccesor up) every time it overflows. As each overflow is the same time interval apart this can be used to run a subroutine that checks whether it's time to run the sensing program yet. If it is the sending program is run and the proccesor goes back to sleep only waking on each interupt. Doing this proccesors can be made that consume nano watts of power. Automating this reduces the versitility of the microcontroller, although if it has resulted in good power savings then cool.
no
What's with all these idiots who think "theoretically" is a synonym for "not really"? This gem in particular:
"Theoretically, the energy stored in a watch battery would be enough to run the Phoenix for 263 years."
Note that it's carefully worded to say "the energy stored in.." not to that a watch battery actually _could_ do this. Because it couldn't. The battery's internal resistance and chemical processes would cause it to drain itself long before you'd ever consume a meaningful portion of that energy.
Only in very specialized applications where you have extremely weak, but continuous sources of power, could you realize any benefit to a picowatt vs a nanowatt of consumption. For batteries or supercaps, the power source will self-discharge at a much higher rate anyway.
Ezekiel 23:20
These 30pW sleep mode CPUs will allow things to go to the next level of minaturisation, but will need reduced cost and will need to prove that they are reliable.
There is a huge issue with power consumption vs stability. Basically, each bit in a CPU holds a certain charge. When you flip the bit and discharge/charge the bit then you're dumping energy which is what results in much of a CPU's power consumption. Storing smaller charge per bit reduces power consumption. But reducing the charge also reduces stability and makes those bits more prone to EMF, leakage etc. Before I'd trust these gizzmos I'd want to see how well they operate at temperature extremes, near microwave ovens, cell phones etc.
Making them work in a lab is one thing, in the real world is quite another.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
I have one item at 10 units of electricity. I have another item using 10 times less electricity. So it uses (10 units * 10 = 100) 100 less units of electricity, for a total of -90 units.
Does that make any kind of sense to any of you?
Wouldn't you want to say 1/10th and 1/30,000th? Or even be cool and say "one order of magnitude" or even "5 orders of magnitude and a third applied to the result".
(please disregard the less/fewer issue here, one thing at a time)
The guy (who admits to not knowing his stuff so perhaps we can forgive him) really hasnt got a clue
The processor is designed specifically for sensors that wake up, do a few calculations and go back to sleep, these type of devices are genrally battery powered and off grid and generally make a decision whether to power up some other device eg to transmit the data. The device would probably be useless for anything involving serious processing, even the processor in an optical mouse would probably wipe the floor with it!
Barring that there are billions (yes billions not millions) of sensor devices out there currently using PIC/AMR/8051 derivatives that may benefit from this technology.
Interestingly we are getting to a level of power where even the most inneficient generator (or a low power radio signal) and a rather small capacitor could power it forever
www.boznz.com Simple solutions to complex problems.
No, it runs an age old Operating System called "Main Loop".
Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
Surely it's a bit of a stretch to call it a "30-picowatt Processor"?
A very long time. I have replaced lithium primary batteries in train equipment that have lasted more than 10 years and still retain most if not all of their power. The batteries are a backup so don;t get used a lot, but the ones used in pacemakers usually last ten or more years. The plain truth here is batteries last as long as the application that they are needed for. Which is why retailers don't sell Lithium chromate batteries to the general masses. Who would ever buy an Duracell when they could own a SAFT Lithium Chromate that lasts 10 time longer?
Adults eat about 2500000-3000000 calories per day.
or better still, when you see RolandP take a weeks break from /.
./ will soon only consist of the editors and Roland...)
(at the current RolandP posting frequency that would mean
What really gets me is that I get suckered in all the time to just take the stories one by one without checking who posted them and after reading the summary I sort of get this sinking feeling, check back and sure enough... It's like being rickrolled only worse.
MP3 Search Engine
> a simple watch battery could power the chip for more than 200 years
Rubbish! Even if you draw ZERO power from a watch battery, it will be totally flat in less than a tenth of this time. They have a 15-20 year shelf life and obviously that will only get worse if you put it in a device that draws power from it. You would need at least 10 batteries to power the device for 200 years.