Improving the performance of a piezoelectric energy harvester using a variable thickness beam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, researchers have shown a growing interest in the possibility of harvesting mechanical energy from vibrating structures. A common way to proceed consists of using the direct piezoelectric effect of a bimorph cantilever beam with integrated piezoelectric elements. Several studies focused on the development of analytical models describing the electromechanical coupling. Historically, most of these models have been limited to simple structures such as a constant cross-section cantilever beam harvester. This paper studies the effect of a variable thickness beam harvester on its electromechanical performance. A semi-analytical mechanical model was developed using Rayleigh–Ritz approximations with a trigonometric functions set. The model was next validated by a finite element (FE) modeling. Numerical simulations were then performed for different beam slope angles in order to find the optimum for a given maximal strain across the piezoelectric elements. For the case under study, it is shown that tapered beams lead to a more uniform strain distribution across the piezoelectric material and increase the harvesting performance by a factor of 3.6.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".