Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBP] Questions on 11-25/0783, MAC Comparison for Active AMP Operation

Thanks for following up Sebastian

  1. Some may argue that these power consumption numbers are design specific. I learned that I could not even pass an SP asking for -26dBm as a harvesting threshold for AMP tags. The group was not interested in specifying even an EH threshold. If you have good references for your power numbers, it is a very good start IMO.
  2. Always good to start from a single tag analysis. Hopefully. The conclusions will not be blurred at multi tag analysis.
  3. IMO, any Sync, will cost power and extra or higher performance circuitry. I am not saying that it is not cost effective but maybe a factor.

 

Best

Dror

 

From: Sebastian Max <sebastian.max@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 6:08 PM
To: Dror Regev (A) <dror.regev@xxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: AW: Questions on 11-25/0783, MAC Comparison for Active AMP Operation

 

Hi Dror,

 

Thanks! Please find my replies in blue.

 

  1. I also think the power numbers were a little exaggerated

 

I think it would be helpful to agree on some basic values. My assumption was

 

P_active = 1mW, for 1ms – for the average power consumption of the complete device, not only the radio. This is based on the table of sensors in [2].

 

P_listening = 10µW – I learned that this might be an order of magnitude off when using a receiver with lower sensitivity (-55dBm threshold and not -95dBm).

 

P_sleep = 100nW – Also for the complete device, based on the table in [2]. I did not receive further feedback on this value.

 

  1. Agree with Solomon that different tags at different spatial scenarios, see different conditions and constraints that needs to be considered.

 

Fully agree that it becomes more complex/interesting for multiple tags. For simplicity I’ve started with the simplest scenario, i.e., just one tag. I’m planning to look further into multi-tag scenarios.

 

  1. I wanted to ask about the Synch. And learned at the end that you have no solution 😊. I don’t believe that there is a simple or “cheap” solution.

 

With the adapted power consumption for the listen mode the problem might be less severe. I need to check my calculations. For sure, we need to avoid using the 2.4GHz channel too often without any receiver that is listening.

 

Thanks,

Sebastian

 

From: Sebastian Max <00000f8b4e8623cb-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 3:43 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBP] Questions on 11-25/0783, MAC Comparison for Active AMP Operation

 

Dear Chuanfeng, Dror, Solomon, Weijie, Venkatesh, Rakesh,

 

Thanks for your interest in my presentation, sorry that there was not more time to discuss. Could you post your question here or just contact me offline?

 

Thanks,

Sebastian

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBP list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBP&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBP list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBP&A=1