An important factor which makes it difficult to capture the power consumption of a wireless node in one number is the time the node is active and sending information.
Thanks to Würth Electronik GmbH and Enables (EU funded research infrastructure project coordinated by Tyndall National Institute), who generated the graph attached. Please consider that the graph was generated more than 3 years ago and taking Moore’s Law into account you can divide the power consumption numbers by a factor of 2-4. In the meantime, also energy harvesters have become more efficient.
Area-A shows the typical power consumption of different ICT devices and systems whilst Area-B, shows IoT edge devices versus the power that can be generated from energy harvesters.
Another important factor which makes it difficult to capture the power consumption of a wireless node in one number is the time the node is active and sending information. If the operating cycle is low frequency there is more time to capture the ambient energy and store it until required clearly if the node is more frequently active there is less time to capture energy. Besides that, the data rate, distance and type of communication link (e.g., Zigbee, BLE, Wifi LoRA, NB-IoT etc.) already show a range between 150 uW to 400mW. Given this is what energy harvesters can generate, having the flexibility of using multiple harvesters of different kinds will contribute to the design of reliable autonomous wireless sensor nodes.
Design Services companies need to be able to deal with cyclical market conditions. One of the instruments pointed at were R&D grants. R&D grants are in fact a multiple edged sword. They provide a second revenue stream, obviously still tied to engineering resources, but driven by the R&D programs.
One of the challenges that comes with design services is the cyclical nature of the services business. When the economy tightens and corporates are watching their operational expenses, the first step will be to halt any external contracts/contractors which are not deemed absolutely essential.
Whereas the earlier (staircase) model is a good approach in scaling up revenue and creating new revenue streams, the foundation of the company is still based on the service model: headcount continues to be the main driver (typically up to 60-70% of revenue). In terms of (enterprise) valuation the additional revenue streams, however, will already make a significant difference.