| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Good comments. I’ll be in
tonight’s meeting, but late … my inputs to the edited goals (late:
just back from vacation) o
Life
expectancy of 10 years, hopefully more –Clarify this … I read it as a standard that is
expected to be in force 10 years until something better comes along. Comments
suggest it refers to how long a power/charge device will work before it fails. o
Same
connector for All device and adapter connections if detached cable Nice idea, but
small format devices won’t work with fat connectors handling 130W …
disagree that this is a workable goal. o
Power
range >10W – 130W delivered power to device and is brand, model, and
year agnostic Agree, assuming this is forward-looking. o
First
adapter must work with last device and last adapter with first device. Standard
Compatibility. Disagree. Allow for upgrades to
standard. Adapter tips could cover turning
the UPAMD to a “dumb-ish” 19V adapter for legacy notebooks. There
may be an analogy with Windows “safe mode” where a new device
operates with an old adapter, but has to forgo certain features. Up for debate. §
Adapter<->Mobile
Device communications required for higher power safety >0.7W (down from 7W
ie 12-14v@50ma) Seems redundant; need communications, period. §
Standard
designed to support Certification testing of adapter and device (and cable) Agree. We’ll
need to tackle the fact that IEEE/UL 60950-1 draws a line at 20V on “limited
power supplies”. o
Continuous
communications growth to support growth of UPAMD capability. Agree o
Basic
power delivery mechanism §
Must
support regular non-battery and battery powered devices
Agreed. Needs careful consideration of
variability of power from “alternative” sources. o
Device
may be capable of being a source as well as a sink of power “May
be capable” … well OK, but optional parts of standards don’t
get much use in my limited experience, especially if they add cost. Need to
understand if there are really devices willing to give up substantial amounts
of their charge. Buddy-charging of notebooks??? Rarely of value? Maybe for kick
starting a fuel cell?? §
To
supply power other devices beyond the USB 10W power range §
Able
to share power for mission critical or business critical applications if
willing o
Make
independent of rapidly changing technology
Agree §
Multiple
battery technologies currently used – no common adapter or battery
voltage §
Consider
isolation to meet medical power needs o
Consider
future mobile device design options This I assume
is related to connectors. Manufacturers should be able to compete on Adapter
form factors. §
Smaller
profiles, headed for 10mm to 5mm? Different shape devices, non-edge usage o
Connector
must not mate with any current designs – product Safety issue – no
confusion Agree
… use dongles to power older designs. o
Apply
KISS principle – Keep It Simple Stupid within the other goals. KIVSS V= Very o Dynamic
communications (power hub may have to reduce power to device A if device B is
later plugged into the same power hub; cloud passes over solar cell … ) o Cost-sensitive
; low-end notebooks, for example, won’t want to carry the cost overhead
of a medical-grade charger. Andy |