Energy generation from friction-induced vibration of a piezoelectric beam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Friction-induced vibration (FIV) of continuum beams was first studied. • Energy generation from FIV on a piezoelectric beam was modeled and validated. • Close to resonant vibrations can be achieved in multiple vibration modes. • Milliwatt level power can be harvested by centimeter-size piezoelectric materials. • Materials boosting stick-slip motion at higher FIV modes can enhance power output. The primary challenge in harnessing vibration energy with piezoelectric materials is the discrepancy in frequency between the energy source and the energy generator, which lowers the efficiency of energy harvesting. To address the challenge, a piezoelectric beam under friction-induced vibration (FIV) is designed, modeled, and studied for the first time to realize the pronounced FIV contributing to energy generation by adapting the vibrations of the continuum structure to align close to its resonant frequencies. The Stribeck friction model is applied to characterize the variation of friction based on the relative sliding velocity v r between contacting objects. The analytical solution is derived to solve the dynamic responses, and transient charging simulation validated by the experiment is utilized to assess energy output. Furthermore, parameter studies are conducted based on the validated model with regard to the material properties of the beam and piezoelectric material, electrode connections of piezoelectric patches, and friction model parameters to investigate their influences on energy output. Considering the same dimensional properties, materials with low Young's modulus E and density ρ are desired for the host structure to facilitate large dynamic strain in piezoelectric materials. With an exponential decay factor C = 8, representing optimal material contact interface, pronounced higher FIV mode can be induced leading to higher output power. A root mean square charging power P e RMS of 42.4 mW and a peak instant charging power P e − peak of 263 mW can be achieved. In the current study, the model is implemented on a beam coupled with one piezoelectric patch, which has potential applicability to non-uniform beams with various layouts of piezoelectric patches. The presented model enables efficient optimization of continuum structural design for higher piezoelectric energy generation under friction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".