MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1543656953 · doi:10.3390/s150612218

Microfabrication and Integration of a Sol-Gel PZT Folded Spring Energy Harvester

2015· article· en· W1543656953 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Lueke, Ahmed O. Badr, Edmond Lou, Walied A. Moussa

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Energy Harvesting Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsEnergy harvestingMicrofabricationVoltageBattery (electricity)Electrical engineeringRectificationPower managementElectronic engineeringPower (physics)EngineeringAutomotive engineeringFabrication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the methodology and challenges experienced in the microfabrication, packaging, and integration of a fixed-fixed folded spring piezoelectric energy harvester. A variety of challenges were overcome in the fabrication of the energy harvesters, such as the diagnosis and rectification of sol-gel PZT film quality and adhesion issues. A packaging and integration methodology was developed to allow for the characterizing the harvesters under a base vibration. The conditioning circuitry developed allowed for a complete energy harvesting system, consisting a harvester, a voltage doubler, a voltage regulator and a NiMH battery. A feasibility study was undertaken with the designed conditioning circuitry to determine the effect of the input parameters on the overall performance of the circuit. It was found that the maximum efficiency does not correlate to the maximum charging current supplied to the battery. The efficiency and charging current must be balanced to achieve a high output and a reasonable output current. The development of the complete energy harvesting system allows for the direct integration of the energy harvesting technology into existing power management schemes for wireless sensing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicInnovative Energy Harvesting TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207