Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- introduction:overview_of_batteryless_devices [2024/10/22 18:38] – [Embedded Programming vs "Typical" (Application/Enterprise) Programming] ibchadmin
+++ introduction:overview_of_batteryless_devices [2024/12/04 16:58] (current) – [How Batteryless Devices Work] ibchadmin
@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
   - **Matched operation**: the device scales its energy usage based on the current energy received from the source/capacitor.
-It should be noted that the circuit designed above is the simplest implementation: more complicated configurations (such as [[Federated Energy Storage]]) are discussed in their own article.
+It should be noted that the circuit designed above is the simplest implementation: more complex implementations are possible, but beyond the scope of this article.
 Regardless of the energy configuration used, however, it is likely that processing will consume more power than is available in a single cycle: as a result, an intermittent device will often save (checkpoint) the current system state periodically, in order to resume as needed after power loss until the processing is complete.
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 ==== Embedded Programming vs "Typical" (Application/Enterprise) Programming ====
-Most batteryless devices are small, embedded circuits and so face the same limitations in memory, storage, and processing capability shared by their more typical kin.  While there are unique challenges when utilizing an intermittent power source compared to typical embedded devices, some common limitations are also present: certain programming conventions that are suitable for a typical desktop/cloud application (e.g. recursive functions) are impractical or ill-advised in an embedded device, and alternative methods such as bitwise operations must often be used for tracking simple state variables.
+Most batteryless devices are small, embedded circuits and so face the same limitations in memory, storage, and processing capability shared by their more typical kin.  While there are unique challenges when utilizing an intermittent power source compared to typical embedded devices, some common limitations are also present: certain programming conventions that are suitable for a typical desktop/cloud application (e.g. recursive functions) are impractical or ill-advised in an embedded device where memory is limited, and alternative methods such as bitwise operations must often be used for tracking simple state variables.
 ==== Power Storage vs. Response Time ====
@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 By their very nature batteryless systems must reckon with transient, unpredictable power supplies and long periods of downtime.  There are varying ways to approach handling a variable energy supply as noted above, but all intermittent systems must be prepared to handle a complete loss of power in some fashion.  This is further complicated by the fact that most programming languages (and most programs) are designed and built around the assumption of consistent uptime: the relatively short uptime of most intermittent power supplies means a device can spend all its uptime reinitializing (instead of performing useful work) if not properly accounted for.
-To this end, most intermittent devices employ [[checkpointing]] in some fashion, saving the application's current state before power is lost, and using that to resume the same process(es) once sufficient power is available.  Where a checkpoint is taken, as well as what data is saved for the checkpoint itself will depend on the application, power budget, and importance of the checkpointed data.  These checkpoints also require non-volatile memory for storage, each of which has its own unique considerations and drawbacks.
+To this end, most intermittent devices employ [[checkpointing]] in some fashion, saving the application's current state before power is lost, and using that to resume the same process(es) once sufficient power is available.  Where a checkpoint is taken, as well as what data is saved for the checkpoint itself will depend on the application, power budget, and importance of the checkpointed data.  These checkpoints also require [[non-volatile memory]] for storage, each of which has its own unique considerations and drawbacks.
 ==== Timeliness/timing concerns ====
@@ Line 50: / Line 50: @@
 ==== Power restrictions ====
-Total power is considerably more constrained compared to a traditional device: for example, a traditional device may use its MCU to calculate whether a minimum voltage threshold has been reached, but in an intermittent circuit using the MCU in this fashion will often consume too much of the available power to be viable.  Intermittent circuits must be designed not only around intermittent power supplies, but lower ones as well.
+Capacitors can store only a fraction of the energy that a similarly-sized battery can.  This means that power, when it is available, will often be considerably limited and require unique approaches to tackling certain problems that are not faced by battery-powered devices.
+For example, a traditional device may use its MCU to calculate whether a minimum voltage threshold has been reached, but in an intermittent circuit using the MCU in this fashion will often consume too much of the available power to be viable, necessitating a different method to detect when the threshold has been reached.
 ==== Efficiency ====
@@ Line 56: / Line 58: @@
 Compared to a more traditional power or battery-fed circuit, an intermittent device must expend energy and processing time to record state in a non-volatile memory store in order to recover from outages.  This required overhead limits the total amount of work an intermittent device can perform for a given amount of power, relative to a powered device performing a similar function.
+===== References and Further Reading =====
+  * [[https://cacm.acm.org/research/the-internet-of-batteryless-things/|The Internet of Batteryless Things]]