Arduino has a library for quickly and easily setting up a simple web server on an ESP8622-based board, and [Tomaž] found that power consumption on an ESP-01 can be reduced a considerable amount by simply inserting a 1 ms delay in the right place. The reason this works isn’t because of some strange bug or oddball feature — it’s really just a side effect of how the hardware operates under the hood.
[Tomaž] uses the “hello world” example from ESP8266WebServer to explain. In it, the main loop essentially consists of calling server.handleClient() forever. That process checks for incoming HTTP connections, handles them, sends responses, exits — and then does it all over again. A simple web server like this one spends most of its time waiting.
A far more efficient way to handle things would be to launch server.handleClient() only when an incoming network connection calls for it, and put the hardware to sleep whenever that is not happening. However, that level of control just isn’t possible in the context of the Arduino’s ESP8266WebServer library.
So what’s to be done? The next best thing turns out to be a simple delay(1) statement right after each server.handleClient() call in the main loop.
Why does this work? Adding delay(1) actually causes the CPU to spend the vast majority of its time in that one millisecond loop. And counting microseconds turns out to be a far less demanding task, power-wise, than checking for incoming network requests about a hundred thousand times per second. In [Tomaž]’s tests, that one millisecond delay reduced idle power consumption at 3.3 V from roughly 230 mW to around 70 mW — about 60% — while only delaying the web server’s response times by 6-8 milliseconds.
For simple web server applications, this is is for sure a good trick to keep in mind. There are also much more advanced techniques for saving power on ESP8266-based boards; from boards that barely sip a single microamp while sleeping, to coin-cell powered boards that go so far as to modify the TCP/IP stack to help squeeze every bit of power savings possible.
The metal pads in question seem to be far too thin and structurally unsound, as one can readily spot, their cross-section is dwarfed by the cross-section of cables soldered to them. This would create a segment of increased resistance and heat loss, exacerbated by any flexing of the thick and unwieldy cabling. Due to the metal being so thin, the stress points seem quite flimsy, as one of the metal pads straight up broke off during disassembly of the connector.
