By

Diala Uchenna
Supervisor: Prof. Z.Q. Lang

 Introduction
Theory of design
System analysis and design using the Output Frequency Response
Function (OFRF) method
Design validation
Simulations and results
Conclusions

 VEH : Vibration-based Energy harvester

EM : Electromagnetic
OFRF: Output Frequency Response Function
Sdof: Single-degree-of-freedom

 Nonlinear springs have been used extensively to increase the range of

excitation frequency over which VEH operate.
In this study, it will be shown that nonlinear harvesters with cubic EM
damping can harvest significantly more power at resonance, compared to
an equivalent linear harvester.
This is valid when the harvester is excited below its maximum excitation
level, as set by the maximum throw (relative displacement) of the
harvester device.
This study also concerns the design of an optimal cubic damping
coefficient to enable the absorption of a desired harvester power.
The OFRF concept is employed.

 Given an sdof system with governing equation

mz (t ) c1 z (t ) c3 z (t ) kz (t ) my (t )
3

z (t )

m(t )

c1 () c3 ()

y (t )

Assuming harmonic excitation, y (t ) Ysin(t )

mz (t ) c1 z (t ) c3 z (t )3 kz (t ) m 2Ysin(t )
Harvester relative displacement amplitude thus becomes;
3

m 2Y

k m 2

c1 c3 3 Z 2
4

The linearised equivalent damping is thus:

3
ceq c3 2 Z 2
4

 The average power absorbed by the damping system is given as:

Pave

Pc1

Pave

1
c1
2

Pc3
2

3
c3
8

where
c1 = linear damper coefficient, c3 = nonlinear damper coefficient
m = Mass, k = suspension stiffness, z ( t )= relativedisplacement of harvester
y ( t )= basedisplacement, Y = dispalcement amplitude,

= baseexcitation frequency,

Pc = average power absorbed bylinear damper, Pc = average power absorbed bycubicdamper

1
3
Pave = average power absorbed bydamping system

 The OFRF for the governing equation

mz (t ) c1 z (t ) c3 z (t )3 kz (t ) m 2Ysin(t )
was obtained as:

Z ( j ) 0 ( j ) c3 1 ( j ) c32 2 ( j ) c35 5 ( j ) c36 6 ( j ) c37 7 ( j )

which can be written as

Z ( j; c3 ) P0 c3 P1 c32 P2

c312 P12 c313 P13 c314 P14

NB: In the nonlinear harvester design, it is assumed the harvester system has
no constrain on its relative displacement.

 Therefore the OFRF of the average power absorbed by the cubic EM damper is obtained as

3
4
4
Pc3 c3 Z ( j ; c3 )
8
3
Pc3 c3 4 Q0 c3Q1 c32Q2
8

Pc3 K c3Q0 c32Q1 c33Q2

1
Pc3 c3Q0 c32Q1 c33Q2
K

c327Q27 c328Q28
c328Q27 c329Q28

c328Q27 c329Q28

3
where, K 4
8

For a desired harvester power, the optimal cubic damping coefficient can be obtained by solving the
polynomial above for C3.
This yields 29 roots which could be real or complex conjugate pairs.
However the desired parameter must be real and non-negative, hence the minimum non-negative
solution is obtained.

Cubic damping
coefficient
(Ns^3/m^3)

Desired harvester
power (mW)

Actual harvester
power (mW)

% Error

0.1

6.43

-0.072

0.045

5.6

5.44

0.029

0.035

4.5

4.36

0.031

0.02

2.61

0.13

Average Power for Linear vs Nonlinear Energy Harvester

Nonlinear Energy Harvester: Relative Displacement transmissibility system with cubic damping

16
Linear: Analytical
Nonlinear: Numerical
Nonlinear (OFRF): Analytical

14

0.9
Linear: Analytical
Nonlinear: Numerical
Nonlinear (OFRF): Analytical

12

0.7
10

0.6

Pave/Pmax

Relative Displacement Transmissibility (dB)

0.8

0.5

0.4
6

0.3
4

0.2
2

0.1

0.5

1.5

2
2.5
3
Nondimensional Frequency ( )

3.5

4.5

Graph of relative displacement, Z of harvester against

frequency, when Y= Ymax

0.5

1.5

3
2.5
2
Nondimensional Frequency ( )

3.5

4.5

Graph of average power absorbed by dampers against

frequency, when Y= Ymax

Nonlinear Energy Harvester: Relative Displacement transmissibility system for Y = 0.1Ymax

30

Nonlinear Energy Harvester: Relative Displacement transmissibility system for Y = 0.1Ymax

0.035

25

Linear: Analytical
Nonlinear: Numerical
Nonlinear (OFRF): Analytical

Relative Displacement Transmissibility (dB)

25

0.03

20

0.025

Pave/Pmax

Relative Displacement Transmissibility (dB)

Average harvested Power when Y = 0.1Ymax

0.04

30

15

0.02

0.015
10

0.01
5

Linear: Analytical
Nonlinear: Numerical
Nonlinear (OFRF): Analytical
20

15

10

0.005

5
0

0.5

1.5

2
2.5
3
Nondimensional Frequency ( )

3.5

4.5

0.5

Graph of relative displacement, Z of harvester against

frequency, when Y= 0.1Ymax

1.5

0.5

2
2.5
3
Nondimensional Frequency ( )

1.5

3.5

2
2.5
3
Nondimensional Frequency ( )

3.5

4.5

Graph of average power absorbed by dampers against

frequency ,when Y= 0.1Ymax

4.5

1.3

1.2

5
1.1

OFRF

Average Power, Pave C (W)

3

Relative displacement, Z (m)

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

Numerical

Numerical
OFRF
0.5

1
0.4

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35
3

0.4

0.45

Nonlinear damping coefficient, C3 (Ns /m )

Graph of relative displacement, Z against nonlinear cubic

damping coefficient, C3

0.5

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35
3

0.4

0.45

Nonlinear cubic damping coefficients, C 3 (Ns /m )

Graph of average power absorbed by cubic damper

against nonlinear cubic damping coefficient, C3

0.5

 It has been shown that nonlinear harvesters with cubic EM damping

can harvest significantly more power at resonance, compared to an
equivalent linear harvester.
Also, using the OFRF, an optimal cubic damping coefficient can be
obtained for a desired harvester Power.