RE: ANNOUNCE: Linux UWB and Wireless USB project

["Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com>]

>From: Alan Cox [mailto:alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk]
>
>Ar Llu, 2006-06-05 am 13:31 -0700, ysgrifennodd Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky:
>> For what I know (and I could be wrong) max is around -40dBm/MHz
>> in the US. I am no expert in the nitty-gritty radio details, but
>> I've been told that is 3000 times less emissions than a common
>> cellphone, around .1 uW? [this is where my knowledge about radio
>> *really* fades].
>
>Life is never that simple. The total emissions of UWB are pretty low
but
>their spread across the wide frequency range makes them incredibly low
>on any frequency - so very unlikely to interfere.
>
>The total emissions across the set of frequencies as a sum (with
>emphasis on some frequency ranges such as 2.4-2.5GHz) apparently
matters
>much more than the emissions at one frequency for things like human
>exposure.

Right -- I asked our local radio wizard (so I could get more details)
and taking into account that each band is 1584 MHz wide at a max of
-41.3 dBm/Mhz, it yields something like 117 uW per band. He also added 
that once you consider all the fine points it goes down to 100uW per
band 
(-10dBm).

To answer Pavel's question on hardware power consumption, I don't really

know -- too early to tell; however, whoever architected the technology
was keeping in mind a target market similar to bluetooth's, really small
devices and embedded, home entertainment, cell phones, printers, cameras
and the like; it'll be pretty low.

-- Inaky
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/