Electric power harvesting using piezoelectric materials

Henry A. Sodano, Gyuhae Park, Donald J. Leo, Daniel J. Inman

Center for Intelligent Material Systems and Structures
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0261, USA

ABSTRACT
Piezoelectric materials can be used as mechanisms to transfer ambient vibrations into electrical
energy that can be stored and used to power other devices. With the recent surge of micro scale devices,
Piezoelectric power generation can provide a conventional alternative to traditional power sources used to
operate certain types of sensors/actuators, telemetry, and MEMS devices. In this paper, two types of
piezoelectric materials were experimentally investigated for use as power harvesting devices. The two
types being the commonly used monolithic piezoelectric (PZT) and Macro Fiber Composites (MFC), which
were recently developed at the NASA Langley Center. Our experimental results estimate the efficiency of
these devices and identify the feasibility of their use in real world applications. In general the power
produced by the vibration of a piezoelectric device is on the order of a few milliwatts which is far too little
to power for most applications. Therefore, each the transducer is used to charge nickel metal hydride
batteries of varying sizes to compare their performance and ability of to store electrical power. The results
presented in this paper show the potential of piezoelectric materials for use in power harvesting
applications.
Keywords: Power harvesting, Piezoelectrics, Macro-Fiber Composites

1. INTRODUCTION
Piezoelectric materials form transducers that are able to interchange electrical energy and mechanical
motion or force. These materials, therefore, can be used as mechanisms to transfer ambient motion (usually
vibration) into electrical energy that may be stored and used to power other devices. By implementing
power harvesting devices we can develop portable systems that do not depend on traditional methods for
providing power, such as the battery, which has a limited operating life.
Recent studies, experiments and patents, indicate the feasibility of using PZT devices as power sources.
Umeda, et al1 uses a free-falling ball to impact a plate with a piezoceramic wafer attached to its underside,
and developed an electrical equivalent model of the PZT transforming mechanical impact energy to
electrical power. They also investigated the energy storage characteristics of the PZT with a bridge
rectifier and a capacitor. Starner2 examines the energy available from leg motion of a human being and
surveys other human motion sources of mechanical energy including blood pressure. The author claims 8.4
watts of useable power can be achieved from a PZT mounted in a shoe. Kymissis et al3 examines using a
piezofilm in addition to the ceramic used in reference 2, to provide power to light a bulb in a shoe, entirely
from walking motion. Kimuras US Patent4 centers on the vibration of a small plate, harnessed to provide a
rectified voltage signal. The effort seems to be motivated by providing enough energy to run a small
transmitter fixed to migratory birds for the purpose of transmitting their identification code and location.
This result is also compared to using existing battery technology. Goldfarb et al5 presented a linearized
model of a PZT stack and analyzed the efficiency of it as a power generation device. It was shown that the
maximum efficiency occurs in a low frequency region much lower than the structural resonance of the
stack. The efficiency is also related to the amplitude of the input force due to hysteresis of the PZT. In
addition to the force applied in the poling direction (d33 mode), Clark and Ramsay6 have investigated and
compared it with the transverse force (d31 mode) for a PZT generator. There work showed that the d31

mode has a mechanical advantage in converting applied pressure to working stress for power generation.
They concluded that a 1-cm2 piezoceramic wafer can power MEMS device in the microwatt range. Elvin et
al7 theoretically and experimentally investigates the use of the self-powered strain energy sensors using
PVDF. Their half-rectified circuit was then combined with wireless communication device for human bone
strain monitoring8. Kasyap et al9 formulated a lumped element model to represent the dynamic behavior of
PZT in multiple energy domains using an equivalent circuit. Their model has been experimentally verified
using a 1-d beam structure with the peak power efficiencies of approximately 20%. Gonzalez et al10
analyzed the prospect of piezoelectric based energy conversion, and suggested several issues to raise the
electrical output power of the existing prototypes to the level that can be theoretically obtained. Ottman et
al11 investigated the effects of utilizing a DC-DC converter with an adaptive control algorithm to maximize
power output of the piezoelectric element. There efforts found that in using their adaptive circuit energy
was harvested at over for times the rate of direct charging without a converter.
In this paper a comparison of two types of piezoelectric materials were experimentally investigated for
use as energy transducers. The two types tested were the commonly used monolithic piezoelectric (PZT)
and the Macro Fiber Composite (MFC). The MFC is a revolutionary new actuator which was recently
developed at the NASA Langley Research Center. Due to the MFCs construction using piezofibers, the
overall strength of the material is greatly increased when compared to that of the base material, while
affording the MFC greatly increased flexibility. Furthermore, the interdigitated electrodes offer much
higher force or free displacement than monolithic piezoceramic devices. The efficiency of each material to
change applied mechanical power into usable electric energy was determined for a random disturbance
signal and at the resonance of the test specimen. The feasibility of the devices for charging a rechargeable
battery has been studied. This research is motivated by the fact that power generated by piezoelectric
materials is far smaller than required for the normal operation of most electronics in real field applications.
Further, the time required by PZT to charge power storage devices can take much more time than certain
applications have available. Therefore each of the materials was used to charge a variety of different
capacity nickel metal hydride batteries and the charge time for each is compared. After testing both
piezoelectric materials significant differences in there ability to produces electrical energy were found,
possible reasons contributing to these differences will be discussed.

2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 PZT and MFC Configuration
An aluminum shim with a PSI-5H4E piezoceramic (PZT) from Piezo Systems Inc. bonded to its
surface was used to absorb the vibration energy and convert it to usable electricity. The aluminum plate
was constructed as shown in Figure 1. The thickness of the aluminum plate and the PZT were 0.0025 and
0.0105 inches respectively. The MFC was bonded using double sided tape to a similar aluminum shim. It
must be noted that due to the bonding of the MFC using double sided tape the damping of the plate was
increased and the full mechanical energy was not transmitted. The dimensions of the MFC and the plate
setup are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 1: Size and layout of the PZT plate.

Figure 2: Size and layout of the MFC plate.

2.2 Experimental Setup

Vibration of the PZT and MFC plates was induced by an electromagnetic shaker. The two plates
were configured with cantilever boundary conditions with the shaker providing base motion as shown in
Figure 3. The signal provided to the shaker was a fairly low voltage as to closely follow the amplitude of
the vibration of a car engine. The vibration of an automobile compressor and the plate measured with a
PCB accelerometer (model U352C22) is shown in Figure 4. As seen in Figure 4, the magnitude of
vibration at the base of the plate when excited at the resonant frequency is much less than the vibration of
the compressor while the random signal is comparable. Two different types of signals were given to the
shaker, the first was at the resonance of the plate and the second was a random signal from 0-500 Hz. To
determine the efficiency of the setup a Polytec Laser Vibrometer was used to determine the displacement of
the plate and a PCB force transducer (model 208) was used to measure the applied force. A simple circuit
consisting of a capacitor and full bridge rectifier was used to apply charge to the battery as shown in Figure
5. The large capacitance C before the battery was used to smooth the signal into a DC like voltage for the
battery. Although more complicated circuits could be used this circuit is simple to construct and uses
passive components therefore minimizing losses.

Figure 3: Experimental setup with the MFC plate in a cantilever configuration.

Vibration of Plate Measured with Accelerometer

Vibration of Plate at Resonance Measured with an Accelerometer

0.04

0.03

0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
Acceleration (volts)

Acceleration (volts)

0.01
0
-0.01
-0.02
-0.03

-0.01

-0.02

-0.04
-0.03
-0.05
-0.06

0.5

1.5
2
Time (sec)

2.5

-0.04

3.5

0.2

0.1

0.03

0.08

0.02

0.06

0.01

0.04

0
-0.01
-0.02

-0.06

-0.05

-0.08

1.5
2
Time (sec)

2.5

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.4

1.6

-0.02
-0.04

0.5

-0.04

0.8
Time (sec)

0.02

-0.03

-0.06

0.6

Vibraiton of Plate Measured with an Accelerometer

0.04

Acceleration (volts)

Acceleration (volts)

Vibration of Plate Measured with Accelerometer

0.4

3.5

-0.1

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8
Time (sec)

1.2

Figure 4: Vibration of an automobile compressor compared to magnitude of signal applied to the plate.

Figure 5: Schematic of battery charging circuit.

3.0 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

3.1 Efficiency
The first goal of this work was to determine the efficiency of the setup used in our experiments. To do this
we used a laser vibrometer to measure the displacement of the plate and a force transducer to measure the
applied force. With this data and the voltage output from the piezoelectric, equation 1 was numerically
calculated to determine the average efficiency.

(Vn Vn1 )2 R

n = 2 ((Fn Fn 1 ) (d n d n 1 )) (t n t n 1 )
m

Pout
100% =
Pin

100%

(1)

Were ? is the efficiency, V is the voltage drop across resistance R, F is the force applied to the base of the
plate, d is the displacement of the plate, t is the time increment between data points, n is the data point
index and m is the highest measured point. The efficiency of three input signals was calculated with the
input signals being resonance, chirp and random. The resulting efficiencies are shown in Table 1. For each
signal three measurements were made to show consistency. The efficiency of the PZT plate is low at
resonance because the resonance frequency used was the frequency at which the voltage output was the
highest, not the frequency with the best force in to voltage out characteristics. This lower efficiency is
shown because that is the resonance frequency used to charge a battery.

Table 1: Efficiency of PZT and MFC with three different inputs.

Signal
Resonance

Chirp 0-500 Hz

Random 0-500 Hz

PZT Efficiency (%)

1.1675
2.0777
1.1796
3.927
3.9388
3.8948
3.9369
3.6825
4.2174

MFC Efficiency (%)

0.9442
1.0727
0.8782
2.7421
2.5476
2.6285
0.7636
0.828
0.7366

While the MFC had a voltage far larger than the PZT the power produced was much less. This is because
the construction of the MFC using piezofibers and interdigitated electrodes. Because MFC are constructed
in this fashion the segments of piezoelectric material between each electrode can be considered a small
power source, this is shown in Figure 5. The majority of these small power sources are connected to one
another in series. When two power sources are connected in series the voltages add but the current does
not. For this reason the MFC produces a much higher voltage while the current remains far smaller than
that of the PZT.

Figure 5: Layout of a MFC patch and the equivalent circuit layout.

3.2 Battery Charging Results

Several batteries ranging from 40 mAh to 1000 mAh were charged using the PZT and MFC (The unit
milliamp-hour mAh indicates the capacity of a battery. A 40 mAh capacity means that the battery will
last for 1 hour if subjected to a 40mA discharge current). It was found that the MFC was not capable of
charging a battery unless the disturbance signal was very large. The MFCs inability to charge a battery
occurs because when charging a battery the current must be fairly high (usually one-tenth the batterys
capacity or higher) but as explained previously the MFC does not produce a high current. Therefore the
MFC was unable to charge the batteries and this data will not be presented.
Two signals were applied to the PZT and used to charge the batteries; the first was a resonance signal at 50
Hz and the second was a random signal ranging from 0-500 Hz. The resonance signal was applied at 0.8
volts peak and the random signal was applied at 1.0 volts RMS. As indicated in the previous section the
magnitude of the signals applied to the PZT plate closely follow that of an automobiles compressor. The
time required for the battery to charge past the cell voltage of 1.2 volts was measured in each case. This is
not a complete charge but is about 90% full. The time required to top off the battery is far slower than to
reach this point. For this reason and the inability to detect a full charge due to the absence of a charge
controller compatible with the power output from the PZT this was considered a full charge.
Using the methods outlined, each battery was charged while the voltage on the battery was measured. The
resulting charge time for each battery is shown in Table 2 and plots of the typical battery charging cycle is
shown in Figure 7. Although the larger batteries will reach this level of charge it is doubtful whether the
PZT would supply sufficient current for full charge of these batteries. When comparing the charge times
shown in Table 2, the resonance and random signal have similar times, this is because the voltage applied
to the shaker during the resonance signal was lower than applied during a random signal. A Lower voltage
signal was required during resonance to avoid over straining the PZT. This work provides a platform to
build off of when using piezoelectric materials to charge batteries.

Table 2: Time required charging different sized batteries using a piezoelectric.

Battery Size (mAh)

40
80
200
300
750
1000

Time for Charge at Resonance

1.62 Hours
1.2 Hours
4 Hours
6 Hours
7 Hours
22 Hours

Time for Charge with Random Signal

1.6 Hours
2 Hours
1.2 Hours
5.8 Hours
8.6 Hours
32 Hours

1.2 Volt, 300mAh Battery Charged by PZT with Random Vibration

1.4

1.2

1.2

1
Voltage (volts)

Voltage (volts)

1.2 Volt, 80mAh Battery Charged by PZT with Vibration at Resonance

1.4

0.8

0.6

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.5

1.5
Time (hours)

2.5

1.4

1.2

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.2

0.2

4
5
Time (hours)

4
Time (hours)

0.6

0.4

0.8

0.4

1.2 Volt, 80mAh Battery Charged by PZT with Random Vibration

1.4

Voltage (volts)

Voltage (volts)

1.2 Volt, 750mAh Battery Charged by PZT

4
5
Time (hours)

Figure 7: Typical characteristics of batteries charged with both random and resonant signals applied to a PZT.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents the results of charging various sized batteries using piezoelectrics. The efficiency of
two types of piezoelectric materials was identified. It was found that the MFC produces a high voltage but
substantially less power. A simple method of explaining the cause of the low power output is identified. It
was found that due to the MFCs low current output this material was not well suited for charging batteries.
While the MFC was ineffective, the PZT ability to charge several different size batteries was identified and
the time required charging these batteries to about 90% capacity is given. Future work will incorporate a
charge controller into the circuit to identify time required for a fully charged battery and allow the circuit to
switch between batteries in use and charging in order to maintain a constant power supply.

ACNOLEDGMENTS
This work was sponsored by The National Science Foundation, award# CMS 0120827. The authors
gratefully acknowledge the support.

REFERANCES
1.

Umeda, M., Nakamura, K. amd Ueha, S., 1996, Analysis of the Transformation of Mechanical Impact
Energy to Electrical Energy Using a Piezoelectric Vibrator, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Vol.
35, Part1, No. 5B, May, pp. 3267-3273.

2.

Starner, T., 1996, Human-Powered Wearable Computing, IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 35, pp. 618.

3.

Kymissis, J., Kendall, C., Paradiso, J., Gershenfeld, N., 1998, Parasitic Power Harvesting in Shoes,
Second IEEE International Conference on Wearable Computing, pp. 132-139.

4.

Kimura, M, 1998,Piezoelectric Generation Device, US Patent Number 5,801,475.

5.

Goldfarb, M. and Jones, L. D., 1999. On the Efficiency of Electric Power Generation with
Piezoelectric Ceramic, Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, Vol. 121, pp 566571.

6.

Clark, W. and Ramsay, M. J., 2000. Smart Material Transducers as Power Sources for MEMS
Devices, International Symposium on Smart Structures and Microsystems, Hong Kong.

7.

Elvin, N.G., Elvin, A.A., and Spector, M., 2001, A self-Powered Mechanical Strain Energy Sensor,
Smart Materials and Structures, Vol. 10, pp. 293-299.

8.

Elvin, N.G., Elvin, A.A., and Spector, M., 2000, Implantable bone strain telemetry system and
method, US Patent Specification 6034296.

9.

Kasyap, A., Lim, J., Johnson, D., Horowitz, S., Nishida, T., Ngo, K., Sheplak, M., Cattafesta, L., 2002.
Energy Reclamation from a Vibrating Piezoceramic Composite Beam, Proceedings of 9th
International Congress on Sound and Vibration, Orlando, FL.

10. Gonzalez, J.L., Moll, F., Rubio, A. A prospect on the use of Piezoelectric Effect to Supply Power to
Wearable Electronic Devices, ICMR 2001, Akita, Japan, October 2001, pp. Vol1,202-207.
11. Ottman, G.K., Hofmann, H., Bhatt A. C., Lesieutre, G. A., 2002, Adaptive Piezoelectric Energy
Harvesting Circuit for Wireless, Remote Power Supply, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, Vol.
17, No.5.