2019
DOI: 10.1007/s00419-019-01636-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nonlinear analysis of piezoelectric wind energy harvesters with different geometrical shapes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Nowak et al (2020) studied the optimal aspect ratio of the cantilever beam using a static method. The research results of Wang et al (2019) and Salmani and Rahimi (2018) showed that designing a beam with exponentially varying shapes can obtain the largest power density and reduce the cost of the energy harvester. These studies reveal the main geometric relationships affecting the output power of the piezoelectric cantilever beam.…”
Section: Optimization Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Nowak et al (2020) studied the optimal aspect ratio of the cantilever beam using a static method. The research results of Wang et al (2019) and Salmani and Rahimi (2018) showed that designing a beam with exponentially varying shapes can obtain the largest power density and reduce the cost of the energy harvester. These studies reveal the main geometric relationships affecting the output power of the piezoelectric cantilever beam.…”
Section: Optimization Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the optimization of GPEH, there are limited results for piezoelectric cantilever beams. Wang et al (2019) first compared the output power of three variable-section piezoelectric cantilever beams in GPEH. However, there are many optimizations in the base vibration energy harvester regarding the geometry of piezoelectric cantilever beams.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the figure, b is the width of the PVEH, l b is the length of the gap between the fixed edge of the PVEH and the left-side edge of the tip mass, l t is half the length of the tip mass, l p is the length of the piezoelectric material layer and the epoxy adhesive layer, and h t , h p , h e , and h b are the heights of the single tip mass, the piezoelectric material, the epoxy adhesive, and the beam, respectively. In a miniature harvester structure, the point mass approximation may not be applicable if the length of the tip mass is nonnegligible when compared with the beam length; therefore, in a manner similar to previous studies (Mak et al, 2011; Wang et al, 2020), this study considers a tip mass dimension to determine the kinetic energy. Additionally, this study incorporates an epoxy adhesive layer during modeling of the PVEH because the epoxy adhesive layer thickness increases the piezoelectric coupling coefficient when 2 h e is nonnegligible in comparison to h b + h p (Asanuma and Komatsuzaki, 2020).…”
Section: Pveh Structure and Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many works have been done to consider the piezoelectric energy harvester when a cubic bluff body is attached to the tip of the beam. The aerodynamic force in this category of works is due to galloping phenomena (Ewere and Wang, 2014;Rezaei and Talebitooti, 2019;Seyed-Aghazadeh et al, 2020;Wang et al, 2020;Zhao et al, 2012Zhao et al, , 2016Zhao et al, , 2019. Unlike VIV that exhibits large amplitudes only when the vortex-shedding frequency is near the structure's natural frequency (lock-in or synchronization), the galloping phenomenon exhibits large amplitudes after a critical speed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%