yay or nay on wireless charging

[John105]

Wireless charging works well for low amp applications. It would not work well when charging a vehicle battery because the rate of charge can be very high at times (typically at start up after the battery voltage is lower than desired). Plus, there are times when the loads on a vehicle battery necessitate high current flow (such as electric cooling fans coming on). Also, the predominant vehicle battery tech is lead acid or agm; both a flooded cell type design and not Li-Ion such as cell phones. Your example is moot because the two situations are not really comparable due to amp-rate charge and discharge demands.


Clothes dryers are convection items; they heat the air, which in turn dries the clothes. We'll leave the gas dryers out of this and concentrate on the electric ones ... They already are a device that uses a sense of induction to transfer heat indirectly from the coils to the clothes. In the scenario of charging a cell phone battery, the goal is to charge the battery voltage up, and the byproduct of wasted energy is sensible heat; that's true waste because heat is generally useless to a battery. But in the scenario of a clothes dryer, there is no voltage to store in clothes; the entire goal of the dryer is to use sensible heat to evaporate moisture from the clothes. The goal here is not energy transfer by voltage, but energy transfer by heat. In a layman's sense, the clothes dryer already is a "wireless" device; so again your example is moot.


I get what you're aiming at, but your aim is poor and your targets are poorly chosen. Wireless charging is a matter of convenience, and those conveniences sometimes come at a cost to some other part of the equation (in this case, efficiency). Further, there are other topics yet to be considered, such as the physical contact of the charge cord into the phone port. How many times has someone carelessly ripped their cord from the phone port in haste, only to damage the cord and/or phone port? Further, ports can become dirty with debris or particulate, and prohibit charging all together until cleaned. Neither of these is a problem with an induction charger. So again, convenience of induction charging may, in some situations, outweigh the slight inefficiencies of the charging process.

Not everything has to be taken in a literal sense. When doing so, it’s a lot of effort expended and becomes moot. Like the heat generated with wireless charging. Lighten up!

 

[Thermo1223]

Been wireless charging since the first android phone had it. Sits on the charger on my desk, at work most of the time. It is scheduled to charge slow overnight, so it is 100% by 6:30AM.

Can fast charging affect the battery? Sure but it wouldn't matter if I was doing that wireless of wired. The battery is going to degrade over time regardless by my own use. I have a wired one for the vehicles because it's easier. We also do not use cradles in the cars because I think those are a distraction.

 

[John105]

Been wireless charging since the first android phone had it. Sits on the charger on my desk, at work most of the time. It is scheduled to charge slow overnight, so it is 100% by 6:30AM.

Can fast charging affect the battery? Sure but it wouldn't matter if I was doing that wireless of wired. The battery is going to degrade over time regardless by my own use. I have a wired one for the vehicles because it's easier. We also do not use cradles in the cars because I think those are a distraction.

Probably it’s like a canine with high cholesterol. The canine isn’t going to live long enough to need treatment for high cholesterol.

We often like what we like and that’s the end of the story. I think this topic is a matter of preference. I’m sure our next vehicle will offer it, and my wife will use it, while I will not.

 

[supton]

I’m sure our next vehicle will offer it, and my wife will use it, while I will not.

Interesting—come to think of it, I think our Camry doesn’t have it, and it wouldn’t matter, the wife would still plug in, as she likes the Apple car play. She downloaded the google app so as to have nav through her phone to the car’s display, which I’m not sure if it would work well via BT.

I can’t stand the infotainment system in my car, so I only plug the phone in if it’s about to die. But I haven’t gone anywhere where I need nav either (I downloaded google maps for the area too, tried it once, of course I’ve forgotten how to use it—about to dig my Garmin out and use that instead, lol).

 

[72C10]

Wireless to save the charging ports.

 

[zzyzzx]

I want wireless charging on my next phone to use as a backup in case the wired port has issues.

 

[Thermo1223]

Probably it’s like a canine with high cholesterol. The canine isn’t going to live long enough to need treatment for high cholesterol.

We often like what we like and that’s the end of the story. I think this topic is a matter of preference. I’m sure our next vehicle will offer it, and my wife will use it, while I will not.

It really is, same like the Android vs. iPhone debate, preference. The Tiguan has a spot for it but it's inconvenient and my wife fills that area with junk anyway.

Interesting—come to think of it, I think our Camry doesn’t have it, and it wouldn’t matter, the wife would still plug in, as she likes the Apple car play. She downloaded the google app so as to have nav through her phone to the car’s display, which I’m not sure if it would work well via BT.

I can’t stand the infotainment system in my car, so I only plug the phone in if it’s about to die. But I haven’t gone anywhere where I need nav either (I downloaded google maps for the area too, tried it once, of course I’ve forgotten how to use it—about to dig my Garmin out and use that instead, lol).

Apple/Android car apps can work wirelessly but it depends on the car. Some use WiFi, some use BT I think. Regardless, she can use the maps on her phone and transmit just the audio to the car via BT. If a cable is not present but having it right on the infotainment system is clutch and prevents somewhat distracted driving IMO.

 

[alarmguy]

one of the reason i liked the iphone i have is wireless charging . seems to work really well. i noticed that a large amount of people i know that have iphones still seem to wire charge their phones . Some say the battery last longer . i know it can't be the price of wireless charger because there are plenty of under $20 ones all over amazon

So do you do wired or wireless charging. if wired, what is the reason for it

Wife uses wireless for her iPhone 13.
I use wire and a lower powered adapter 12 watt for the same exact phone. I reason I use wire is I dont like heating the battery up the way wireless does.

Both our Apple Watches use wireless of course and wow they charge stupid fast but I think the 25 watt charger is nuts. The watch gets pretty darn warm to hot. It's been two years now and maybe wish I bought a lower power for that one too but I didnt. I suspect I will need a battery in the next 12 months. Useful battery is now at 84%

It's only a matter of time that wireless charging comes to EVs. (maybe)

 

[alarmguy]

I use wireless charging when I can because I like to keep my phones a long time and the constant plugging/unplugging can damage the port which I've had happen to me before.

It's also far easier on the battery to charge at a slower rate, my galaxy will charge very fast on a wire which is nice in an emergency but not great for battery life.

The slower rate is better, yes, agree on the USB port and why I am so angry that the EU forced Apple to go back to it.
Heat kills batteries

 

[racer12306]

So basically minimize heat, that's nothing new.

I'd suggest charging it at night, with the old school 5w Apple charger and turn on charging optimization.

I'll periodically use MagSafe charging (magnetic wireless) when using GPS on longer trips. And I have a high watt charger at work if for some reason I need battery, but I'm usually only using 50% or less of my battery in a day.

My 2 year old phone is at 94% battery health.

If I'm at 94% health after 2 years, and it's linear, I'll be around 88% at 4 years and 82% at 6 years. 82% battery health is still plenty usable but will be getting a little long in the tooth as a whole for the phone.

My posts from this thread

Proper phone charging

Don't use your phone while it is charging and other things to know to do it right. https://www.idropnews.com/how-to/what-do-i-need-to-charge-my-iphone-15/202155/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_campaign=112023&utm_term=Newsletter

bobistheoilguy.com

BTW, the multiquote works across tabs which is pretty cool

 

[supton]

It's only a matter of time that wireless charging comes to EVs. (maybe)

The problem with wireless charging is that the path has to be really short. Magnetic field drops off proportional to distance squared. You could do it, but the surfaces would wind up being millimeters apart. Stray leakage fields would probably be a hazard to anyone with a pacemaker nearby. And of course, whatever it is coupling too has to be, well, free of stray ferrous metal. Sheetmetal behind it may be good (as a concentrator and/or return path), then again, depending on the frequency that metal may have to be something other than steel (to avoid eddy losses in the steel itself, there’s a reason why transformer cores are either laminated layers of steel, or ferrites).

Anything is possible, buy my little mind can’t comprehend how, not for a car.

JMHO.

 

[oldgrayman]

We have both types in the house and I use whichever one is closest to me at the time .

 

[alarmguy]

The problem with wireless charging is that the path has to be really short. Magnetic field drops off proportional to distance squared. You could do it, but the surfaces would wind up being millimeters apart. Stray leakage fields would probably be a hazard to anyone with a pacemaker nearby. And of course, whatever it is coupling too has to be, well, free of stray ferrous metal. Sheetmetal behind it may be good (as a concentrator and/or return path), then again, depending on the frequency that metal may have to be something other than steel (to avoid eddy losses in the steel itself, there’s a reason why transformer cores are either laminated layers of steel, or ferrites).

Anything is possible, buy my little mind can’t comprehend how, not for a car.

JMHO.

I think it's already been tested, this is a more recent story I found but I remember reading it in a review a while back because they commented it made the battery hot. If I find it Ill let you you know
But this is one of many on the subject. Actually I am going to start a new thread, 2 days ago Tesla released some news
Recent =

Wireless EV Charging Is Coming: Here's How It Works

Ready to swap a bulky electric vehicle charging setup for a wireless mat? Automakers and companies like WiTricity are making it happen. Here's what you need to know.

www.pcmag.com

2 years back,

Wireless electric vehicle charging explained

Ditching the cable

www.techradar.com

I just started a thread in the EV section.

Wireless EV Charging is only a matter of time, its been known for years now but Tesla just ...

Tesla announces wireless charging coming to EVs. It was just a matter of time, the industry, including BMW have been working on it for years now. https://electrek.co/2023/12/18/tesla-confirms-wireless-inductive-electric-car-home-charger/ It's not just Tesla, it's been in the media for years...

bobistheoilguy.com

 

[supton]

Pretty much matches up what I said--has to be really close.

I like this bit:

Energy flows from the pad to the vehicle through a magnetic field, or between two "magnetically coupled resonating coils," according to IEEE. That enables a wireless power transfer (WTP) between the pad on the ground and a receiver inside the vehicle.

"This receiver goes in the car and puts DC energy directly into the battery. It sits over the on-board charger," says Barzdukas.

I don't know of an AC battery, you can pulse current into them, or you can charge with pure DC, but typically we think of them as DC devices--thus, all chargers are outputting DC to the battery. Secondly, the coupling mechanism of the wireless charging is at its heart AC. Methinks the talking head was trying to appeal to those who are interested in DC charging (instead of connecting AC wall power to the car).

I'm dubious that it makes the battery hot--more like, makes the receiver hot. High current circulating here (see the bit about resonating?), depending on the frequency, IR loss may be high. Unless if stray magnetic field was coupling into the battery, or if they really were hitting high charging levels for some reason.

 

[bunnspecial]

I've used a Qi-type charging pad for years on and off.

On one hand, I appreciate the convenience of being able to lay my phone on the charger. I also like that I'm saving wear and tear on the charging point. In the past, I often used Otterbox cases that had rubber flaps for the charging port, and I appreciated not putting the wear and tear on those too.

On the other hand, especially in a case, positioning can be touchy. You have to make sure it's actually charging, and a slight bump can mess it up. It can be anywhere from inconvenient to a big problem(depending on how much you used your phone the day before and what you have planned for the day) to wake up with your phone not having charged the night before. For now I'm back to wired charging.

I keep meaning to get a Magsafe adapter, and the case I have now is supposed to be Magsafe compatible. I understand its positioning is a lot more "positive" and it looks to me like it's basically a larger version of the Apple Watch charger. Watch charging is reliable IME as long as you make sure you actually feel the watch "snap" into place on the charger, and it hold securely enough that it's not likely to come off unless you intentionally disrupt it.

 

[y_p_w]

The problem with wireless charging is that the path has to be really short. Magnetic field drops off proportional to distance squared. You could do it, but the surfaces would wind up being millimeters apart. Stray leakage fields would probably be a hazard to anyone with a pacemaker nearby. And of course, whatever it is coupling too has to be, well, free of stray ferrous metal. Sheetmetal behind it may be good (as a concentrator and/or return path), then again, depending on the frequency that metal may have to be something other than steel (to avoid eddy losses in the steel itself, there’s a reason why transformer cores are either laminated layers of steel, or ferrites).

Anything is possible, buy my little mind can’t comprehend how, not for a car.

JMHO.

 

[y_p_w]

imho nay. It would have to be inefficient using common sense (did we all sleep through HS physics). Would we want to wirelessly charge our gasoline powered vehicle batteries? Seems to be a gimmick imho--is there anyone in the world who is too lazy to plug a cable in? It's really a ostentatious sign of development, class, and opulence. Kind of like when someone buys a winter jacket for $1,800 and wears it to church or the office. Don't tell me you can't think of 3 brands that fit that bill, and you don't know anyone who wears them.

I'm waiting for wireless clothes drying--that would be the ultimate display of I don't care how much energy I waste, I'm a rock star.

The current method of charging car batteries (as a load on an alternator) is rather inefficient.

 

[John105]

The current method of charging car batteries (as a load on an alternator) is rather inefficient.

Maybe Germans do it better? My car has a Bosch IBS sensor and for whatever reason the battery is now 12 years old. My understanding is there’s an algorithm which charges the battery less as it ages. Unfortunately I replaced the original at 5 unnecessarily. Wife’s aunt similar car she kept her original battery 15 years.

 

[supton]

The current method of charging car batteries (as a load on an alternator) is rather inefficient.

How do you figure? I'm not sure what the conversion efficiency is, but I thought we had conversion rates up past 75% if not higher for mechanical to electrical energy conversion. Still means a fair amount of cooling of course, made harder by being under hood.

Now, going from chemical energy (gasoline) to mechanical energy (as created by ICE), yeah that bit is not particularly good, so the stack of losses from gas tank to battery is not exceptionally good.

Maybe Germans do it better? My car has a Bosch IBS sensor and for whatever reason the battery is now 12 years old. My understanding is there’s an algorithm which charges the battery less as it ages. Unfortunately I replaced the original at 5 unnecessarily. Wife’s aunt similar car she kept her original battery 15 years.

Not the same thing. Inefficient does not mean shorter battery life. It's a question of, how much mechanical energy was converted into electrical energy, the percentage thereof. The alternator could be 5% or 95% yet the battery could last 1 year or 10, all depending on the charging algorithm used (under or overcharging).

 

[y_p_w]

Maybe Germans do it better? My car has a Bosch IBS sensor and for whatever reason the battery is now 12 years old. My understanding is there’s an algorithm which charges the battery less as it ages. Unfortunately I replaced the original at 5 unnecessarily. Wife’s aunt similar car she kept her original battery 15 years.

I’m not thinking about longevity. I said efficiency. A lot about ICE cars is inefficient. 12 V power is available as a convenience, but it’s way inefficient. The heat is just waste heat, but if we had to rely on that without driving, it’s also extremely inefficient.