Ultrawideband Signal Passes Data Through Walls 139
writertype writes "You may already be familiar with ultrawideband; UWB technology has been specifically talked about and designed to replace wired USB connections for over a year. Due to its high bandwidth, it's also been considered as an A/V cable replacement. The problem is that UWB radio performance degrades precipitously, effectively confining it to a single room. Until now, that is. Startup TZero says its UWB implementation provides high throughput through walls. Will this be an effective competitor to 802.11n?"
3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows Admin Tools [intelliadmin.com]
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:1)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:2)
Hmm not much difference at all in the propagation between 5 MHz signals and 705 MHz signals.
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:1)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:1)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:1)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:4, Informative)
It is line-of-sight w.r.t. buildings, but there was a group of trees inbetween. The signal had to pass trough maybe 20 meters of foilage.
The link barely worked. Sometimes 6 Mbps, sometimes 12 Mbps.
Relocating one of the endpoints so that those trees were out of the way (actual position lower than it was, now just skimming a building) improved the signal by about 20dB.
Result: 54Mbps link and power output decreased by 5-6dB (by TPC). Could probably gain another 6dB by having more clearance above the building.
I really did not expect this, comparing with results on 2.4 GHz.
You are right that allowed ERP on 2.4 is lower, but I think there would have been a big difference in path loss in this case.
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:2, Insightful)
If the trees were dense and the power ouput the same then 2.4GHz would win out.
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:4, Funny)
Oh Microwave. Now your usb harddrive will save your data and cook your eggs all at once
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:2)
And your testes if you are a man
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:1)
I don't know enough about UWB yet for this to be more than fantastical speculation - but if this range of frequency can be reflected and refracted like light it would seem
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:1, Funny)
What? Like an antenna
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:1)
yes, somewhat. However in this case it would be an antenna between two rooms without anything being used to boost the signal. No power, completely passive, but allowing the UWB to flow freely between the rooms (where the wall would otherwise block the signal).
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:2)
Yeah. Two antennas.
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:2, Funny)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:1)
When you put it that way I guess so
It would be somewhat like running antennas around - but these elements could be completely passive, requiring no power to propagate the signal betwe
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:2, Funny)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:3, Funny)
Punch a whole what?
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:1, Offtopic)
Me too, cuz I'm his lawyer.
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes. That is commonly called "waveguide". It operates exacty like a fiber-optic cable, but at the wavelength of these signals.
Of course, the wavelength being 3-10cm it needs to be physically larger than the fiber for 800nm wavelength "light".
Waveguide often has an air dielectricum, and the dimensions for this wavelength would be slightly smaller than the wavelength. This makes it a bit less practi
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:2)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:2)
The thin metalization used to block infrared is also very effective at blocking radio signals.
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:5, Informative)
The 'going through walls' part is a bit of a tempest in a teapot. That will come when the RF aspects of UWB are better designed.
Can't we just... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Can't we just... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:3, Informative)
Uhh... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log_periodic_antenna [wikipedia.org] ... T&M gear uses that type. They are not so much of a high directional gain, but they offer very flat frequency/gain characteristic. For GHz range it would be couple of inches for the largest dipole in the set. All in all, resonably good antena for this could be etched on a small PCB.
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:2)
Re:3.1GHZ Has trouble going through walls (Score:3, Funny)
Well, we can always hope for a breakthrough with 802.11d, e, i, k, l, m, o, p, q, r, s, t, u, v, w, x, y, or z.
Getting Crowded (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Getting Crowded (Score:3, Interesting)
The only reason UWB has even started being considered by regulators in most countries was the assumption that it will be limited to a line of sight.
UWB that goes through walls will make all the early fears resurface once more and delay regulatory approval for UWB where necessary.
Frankly some of the pushers of competing tech like 802.11n should invest into this technology ASAP.
Re:Getting Crowded (Score:2)
Re:Getting Crowded (Score:2)
Re:Getting Crowded (Score:3, Insightful)
All I know is that this would have been great to have when I was retrofitting my home for cable last year. That was a pain...
Re:Getting Crowded (Score:2)
Dish Subscribers (Score:2)
Re:Getting Crowded (Score:2)
Re:Getting Crowded (Score:2)
Quick response... (Score:5, Informative)
Um, no. 802.11n has significantly greater range (as a spec, at least). Plus, if this company is claiming to have developed it, I don't think they will just give it up for free. 802.11n is a public standard.
So, no. ;-)
Different markets (Score:3, Informative)
WPAN (Personal Area Networks), like Bluetooth or ZigBee, aim at a different market than WLAN (WiFi). For a WPAN, it may be advantageous to have a shorter range to reduce interference.
Extending the range to blur the
Re:Quick response... (Score:3, Informative)
UWB is not designed for long range, it is meant for very low power rich message passing
Neither are proprietary
I agree that 802.11n and UWB will not dethrone one another, because they are not really equivalent or competeting.
What's the security (Score:1)
Wikipedia??!? (Score:2)
Anybody know this yet? I can't find it on wikipedia...
Why do people insist on treating Wikipedia as a reliable source of information?? Use your favorite search engine, find an authoritative source, and be on your way.
A quick Google search for "UWB" && "ultra wide band" reveals a number of good sources, including Intel and the UWB Forum. But hey, since those apparently aren't good enough, Wikipedia is the second link on the first page of results. Go nuts.
You fail Reading Comprehension 101 (Score:2)
Mostly because it IS a reliable source of information.
It will not be a reliable source until there is some sort of thorough vetting process to ensure people who write about topic X actually have some background in topic X.
but I ask here on
No, you ask on
Like your useless post.
You mean the post that told you exactly how to find U
Other uses (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.uwb.org/RadarVision2i/rv2iperf.htm [uwb.org]
That is a pretty primitive picture, some of the stuff in labs is quite a bit more advanced.
BTW, is anyone noticing font corruption on that page in Firefox?
Re:Other uses (Score:1)
Font corruption (Score:1)
Sorry. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't know about you chaps (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I don't know about you chaps (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I don't know about you chaps (Score:1)
Re:I don't know about you chaps (Score:2)
Too early...come on, its been almost 5 years.
Re:I don't know about you chaps (Score:2)
Re:I don't know about you chaps (Score:1)
Yea yea yea... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yea, yea, yea... That sounds so desperately trying to hype it up. Just a month ago we were discussing that current digital A/V *cables* can't handle high enough resolutions for some larger (resolution) monitors out there, which requires two or even four DVI cables.
We've discussed also how the new standard introduced, is just as bad (despite claims to "scale indefinitely", in theory, with other equipment and all that..).
Now this is of course gonna replace everything, including food and water in one year. Therefore buy our shares and give us venture capital. Screw it.
The problem is that UWB radio performance degrades precipitously, effectively confining it to a single room. Until now, that is. Startup TZero says its UWB implementation provides high throughput through walls. Will this be an effective competitor to 802.11n?
I don't get it: we have enough problems with people logging into our wifi networks because it passes through walls already (even if it's password protected and so on, it can be hacked into), and now they found a way to do the same with UWB? I kinda like it in my room only, neighbours will have to buy theirs.
Of course not. (Score:3, Informative)
Damn, time to upgrade (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Damn, time to upgrade (Score:1)
Re:Damn, time to upgrade (Score:2)
Why aren't I using it yet? (Score:2)
I'd love to have all of my A/V electronics connected wirelessly. I don't care if it would only work within one room for now cause all of my stuff's in one room, probably like most people. So why isn't this commonplace yet? I hate all the wires running around my living room.
Re:Why aren't I using it yet? (Score:2)
Go on do it. Reminds me of the inventors of X-Rays. They wanted to scan everything and make X-Ray movies from it, since it's so neat to see inside of a living creature: mice, cats, dogs... themselves too. There's hours and hours of movie material of them trying it when their wear rings, watches and all sort of non-sense.
Mos
building construction (Score:3, Interesting)
i would imagine a large enough office building would benefit from a repeater system like some ham and commercial radio systems already use...
Re:building construction (Score:2)
Repeaters were part of the "big picture" when it came to cellular phone service & buildings. Guess what never happened?
Hammer (Score:2)
n is still better (Score:4, Insightful)
MIMO Myth (Score:3, Informative)
If you actually crunch through the math, increasing the number of antennas basically increases the theoretical capacity of the wireless channel, meaning faster transmission speeds over the same distance/attenuation/power. So the extra antennas aren't in case one antenna fails, it's to increase transmission speeds.
Why do you need it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Personally, in 99% of the cases, I'd be more than happy to have my USB signals stay put where nobody but me can read them... despite the assurance about "security being mandatory" we all know that in most cases if a signal can be picked up, it can be hacked.
The only reason I might want something that passes through walls is if I decided to stick a media server, etc in the closet, and have it controlled by a local device connected by UWB... and either a wireless or hardwired connection for the video.
No Data (Score:4, Insightful)
Since the high frequency makes it *very* less able to go around objects, how did they do it indeed?
Were they able to use EIT ?
BTW, they did not speak about the degradation pattens in the article.
Any ideas on the same?
Re:No Data (Score:3, Funny)
Fix the drawback (Score:2, Insightful)
I hope this UWB - being a successor of USB - has connectors that work "upside-down". Oh wait...
Re:Fix the drawback (Score:1)
Re:Fix the drawback (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Fix the drawback (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Fix the drawback (Score:2)
On the other hand, I can't think of a better alternative, other than basic audio jacks that are rotationally symetrical. But that design
Re:Fix the drawback (Score:2)
I can. Something with a plug whose shape indicates which direction it needs to be plugged and with a fairly standard pattern to the direction that the socket is mounted. Examples include Firewire, VGA, old fashioned serial/parallel, SCSI...even PS2 (a
Re:Fix the drawback (Score:2)
Re:Fix the drawback (Score:1)
This should be easy to make into a concentric design, like audio plugs. That way
you just plug it in, no orientation required. You could even, you know, rotate the
connector in the socket [gasp]. I did not moderate but I also think the gp is
insightful.
Re:Fix the drawback (Score:2)
Great! (Score:1)
Oh wait!
UWB could be quite simple to implement but ... (Score:1, Insightful)
Any kind of wireless communication pushes up the general noise level. If the communication is restricted to a certain bandwidth, the noise affects other users of the same bandwidth. On the other hand, uwb will affect people
"10-4 Good Buddy" (Score:3, Interesting)
(same for BPL Internet)
mommy! (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, sweety - thats just the Ultawideband USB, now with extra radiation!
Oooo, it feels like progress! But my hair is falling out!
Thats ok honey, thats how you know it's working!
TZero name already taken (Score:3, Interesting)
The TZero name is already taken. Anyway, I'd much rather have this TZero [acpropulsion.com].
UWB not so scalable... (Score:3, Insightful)
Ye Gods, I hope not. UWB is absolutely terrific so long as a limited number of people use it -- but it's one of those solutions that sound great until you multiply by 10,000,000 installed devices -- then everyone's radio noise floor goes up, stealing bandwidth (range, really) from things like FM music, shortwave, air traffic control, and emergency services. By that time it's too late, because you can't track down and eliminate 10^7 devices -- short of nuking the city centers.
Surround sound without the wires? (Score:2)
Re:Power? (Score:2)
Great! (Score:1)
Re:Radio through walls???!?!?!?!!!! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Radio through walls???!?!?!?!!!! (Score:1)
Re:Radio through walls???!?!?!?!!!! (Score:1)
Re:Radio through walls???!?!?!?!!!! (Score:1)
"You can now listen to this Station Live on the Internet!" they proudly proclaim, as I listen to the radio station, live, while I drive my car.
Re:What about bluetooth? (Score:4, Insightful)
You may ask why we can't have one all encompassing protocol - the answer, cost. Bluetooth is the cheapest, GPRS and WiFi cost more. So for a BT headset the cost would rocket up if it had to do be fully compliant with a new protocol.
Anyway, in the grand scheme it's all a bit pointless. There's more interesting things in life, like mountains, women and fast cars. Who cares about wireless!
Re:What about bluetooth? (Score:1)
Re:What about bluetooth? (Score:2)
You describe bluetooth as:
It was purely a personal wireless protocol, short range between paired objects.
The average usb cable is 5 feet. The average A/V cable is 3 feet. Short range: check.
Cables go from one object to another object. Paired: check.
The only spot BT can come up short is throughput -- but then why not a "Bluetooth 2" a faster backwards compatible spec that is to Bluetooth what USB2 is to USB?
Not that I have any dislike of UWB or anything, bu
Re:What about bluetooth? (Score:2)
Re:What about bluetooth? (Score:2)
Your ideas interest me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Re:What about bluetooth? (Score:1)
Wow, and I thought it was bad when my computer just made my thighs hot!
Re:What about bluetooth? (Score:1)
Re:Health Hazards? (Score:1)