# Experimentally Verified Analytical Models of Piezoelectric Cantilevers in Different Design Configurations

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Model of Piezoelectric Vibration Energy Harvester

#### 2.1. Bimorph Cantilever Beam with Piezoelectric Layers in Series

_{E}; the remaining portion of piezoelectric layers is not polarized (mentioned as section V

_{R}), and thus is not affected by the piezoelectric effect. A tip mass ${M}_{\mathrm{t}}$ of negligible rotary inertia is attached to the free end of the beam spanning over the length ${L}_{\mathrm{M}\mathrm{t}}$—this section is denoted as V

_{R, Mt}. The bimorph model is reduced to a single DOF model which describes the movement of the bimorph’s free end q relative to the moving clamped end.

_{E}which is affected by the piezoelectric effect, section V

_{R}which is not affected by the piezoelectric effect and section V

_{R, Mt}with distributed tip mass attached, the displacement needs to be a piecewise function defined as

^{*}is the bimorph’s mass per unit of its length defined as

^{*}is bending stiffness of the non-polarized section of the beam (the rest of the beam outside the length ${L}_{\mathrm{E}}$) defined as

_{1,r}. This fact means that beam vibrations are composed mostly of the first vibrational mode and, as a consequence, the beam’s displacement relative to the base movement in all sections (V

_{E}, V

_{R}and V

_{R, Mt}) can be written as

#### 2.1.1. Effect of Chosen Mode Shape Function on Model Output

#### 2.1.2. Single DOF Model of Bimorph Configuration

#### 2.2. Modification of Single DOF Model for Unimorph Configuration

^{*}changes to

^{*}is defined as

## 3. Verification of Analytical Model Based on Experimental Results

#### 3.1. PZT-5A Bimorph with a Full Electrode Length and a Linear Response

_{SC}and the open-circuit frequency f

_{OC}of this coupled electromechanical system. The short-circuit and open-circuit frequency are the first resonant frequencies in case of ${R}_{\mathrm{l}}$ = 0 and ${R}_{\mathrm{l}}$ → ∞, respectively. The match of simulation results with the measured ones for various values of resistive load ${R}_{\mathrm{l}}$ and kinematic excitation at both the short-circuit frequency f

_{SC}and the open-circuit frequency f

_{OC}is shown in Figure 4. Both states correspond with operations slightly below and above the resonance excitation for various values of resistive load, which determine the value of actual resonance frequency.

#### 3.2. PZNN-PLZT Bimorph with Partial Electrode Length and Weak Non-Linear Response

#### 3.3. PVDF Unimorph with a Partial Electrode Length and a Linear Response

_{1,r}= 18.7 Hz) with a constant acceleration amplitude ${a}_{0}$ = 0.035 g. The unimorph had an experimentally determined damping ratio ${b}_{\mathrm{r}}$ = 0.0065 via an analysis of impulse response in the short-circuit state.

#### 3.4. Single DOF Model Parameters of Considered Harvesters

## 4. Comparison of Piezoelectric Materials for Kinetic Energy Harvesting Purposes

#### 4.1. Harmonic Vibrations Case

#### 4.2. Random Vibrations Case

## 5. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Institutional Review Board Statement

## Informed Consent Statement

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Roundy, S.; Wright, P.K.; Rabaey, J. A study of low level vibrations as a power source for wireless sensor nodes. Comput. Commun.
**2003**, 26, 1131–1144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mitcheson, P.D.; Yeatman, E.; Rao, G.K.; Holmes, A.S.; Green, T. Energy Harvesting From Human and Machine Motion for Wireless Electronic Devices. Proc. IEEE
**2008**, 96, 1457–1486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Roundy, S.; Wright, P.K. A piezoelectric vibration based generator for wireless electronics. Smart Mater. Struct.
**2004**, 13, 1131–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Hadas, Z.; Smilek, J.; Rubes, O. Analyses of electromagnetic and piezoelectric systems for efficient vibration energy harvesting. In Smart Sensors, Actuators, and MEMS VIII; Fonseca, L., Prunnila, M., Peiner, E., Eds.; SPIE MICROTECHNOLOGIES: Barcelona, Spain, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Gljušćić, P.; Zelenika, S.; Blažević, D.; Kamenar, E. Kinetic energy harvesting for wearable medical sensors. Sensors
**2019**, 19, 4922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Bai, Y.; Tofel, P.; Hadas, Z.; Smilek, J.; Lošák, P.; Skarvada, P.; Macku, R. Investigation of a cantilever structured piezoelectric energy harvester used for wearable devices with random vibration input. Mech. Syst. Signal Process.
**2018**, 106, 303–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Paulo, J.; Gaspar, P.D. Review and future trend of energy harvesting methods for portable medical devices. In WCE 2010—World Congress on Engineering 2010; Ao, S.I., Gelman, L., Hukins, D., Eds.; IAENG Society of Electrical Engineering: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Zelenika, S.; Hadas, Z.; Bader, S.; Becker, T.; Gljušćić, P.; Hlinka, J.; Janak, L.; Kamenar, E.; Ksica, F.; Kyratsi, T.; et al. Energy Harvesting Technologies for Structural Health Monitoring of Airplane Components—A Review. Sensors
**2020**, 20, 6685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Duarte, F.; Ferreira, A. Energy harvesting on railway tracks: State-of-the-art. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Transp.
**2017**, 170, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cahill, P.; Hanley, C.; Jaksic, V.; Mathewson, A.; Pakrashi, V. Energy harvesting for monitoring bridges over their operational life. In Proceedings of the 8th European Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring, EWSHM 2016, Bilbao, Spain, 5–8 July 2016; Volume 4, pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar]
- Bowen, C.R.; Kim, H.A.; Weaver, P.M.; Dunn, S. Piezoelectric and ferroelectric materials and structures for energy harvesting applications. Energy Environ. Sci.
**2014**, 7, 25–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Panda, P.K.; Sahoo, B. PZT to lead free piezo ceramics: A review. Ferroelectrics
**2015**, 474, 128–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bai, Y.; Tofel, P.; Palosaari, J.; Jantunen, H.; Juuti, J. A Game Changer: A Multifunctional Perovskite Exhibiting Giant Ferroelectricity and Narrow Bandgap with Potential Application in a Truly Monolithic Multienergy Harvester or Sensor. Adv. Mater.
**2017**, 29, 1700767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Tofel, P.; Machu, Z.; Chlup, Z.; Hadraba, H.; Drdlik, D.; Sevecek, O.; Majer, Z.; Holcman, V.; Hadas, Z. Novel layered architecture based on Al
_{2}O_{3}/ZrO_{2}/BaTiO_{3}for SMART piezoceramic electromechanical converters. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top.**2019**, 228, 1575–1588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Pozzi, M.; Canziani, A.; Durazo-Cardenas, I.; Zhu, M. Experimental characterisation of macro fibre composites and monolithic piezoelectric transducers for strain energy harvesting. In Smart Structures (NDE); Kundu, T., Ed.; SPIE: Bellingham, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Sappati, K.K.; Bhadra, S. Piezoelectric polymer and paper substrates: A review. Sensors
**2018**, 18, 3605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version] - Song, J.; Zhao, G.; Li, B.; Wang, J. Design optimization of PVDF-based piezoelectric energy harvesters. Heliyon
**2017**, 3, e00377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Kim, M.; Dugundji, J.; Wardle, B.L. Efficiency of piezoelectric mechanical vibration energy harvesting. Smart Mater. Struct.
**2015**, 24, 055006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Erturk, A.; Inman, D.J. Issues in mathematical modeling of piezoelectric energy harvesters. Smart Mater. Struct. Smart Mater. Struct
**2008**, 17, 065016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Liao, Y.; Liang, J. Maximum power, optimal load, and impedance analysis of piezoelectric vibration energy harvesters. Smart Mater. Struct.
**2018**, 27, 075053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Li, X.; Upadrashta, D.; Yu, K.; Yang, Y. Sandwich piezoelectric energy harvester: Analytical modeling and experimental validation. Energy Convers. Manag.
**2018**, 176, 69–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mendonca, L.S.; Martins, L.T.; Radecker, M.; Bisogno, F.; Killat, D. Normalized Modeling of Piezoelectric Energy Harvester Based on Equivalence Transformation and Unit-Less Parameters. J. Microelectromech. Syst.
**2019**, 28, 666–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Machů, Z.; Ševeček, O.; Hadas, Z.; Kotoul, M. Modeling of electromechanical response and fracture resistance of multilayer piezoelectric energy harvester with residual stresses. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct.
**2020**, 31, 2261–2287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Meitzler, A. 176-1987 IEEE Standard on Piezoelectricity; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Halliday, D.; Resnick, R.; Walker, J. Fundamentals of Physics Extended, 9th ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Erturk, A.; Inman, D.J. An experimentally validated bimorph cantilever model for piezoelectric energy harvesting from base excitations. Smart Mater. Struct.
**2009**, 18, 025009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Reddy, J.N. Energy Principles and Variational Methods in Applied Mechanics; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Flores-Domínguez, M. Modeling of the Bending Stiffness of a Bimaterial Beam by the Approximation of One-Dimensional of Laminated Theory. J. Eng. Res. Appl.
**2014**, 4, 492–497. [Google Scholar] - Zhao, J.; You, Z. Models for 31-Mode PVDF Energy Harvester for Wearable Applications. Sci. World J.
**2014**, 2014, 893496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Hadas, Z.; Rubes, O.; Tofel, P.; Machu, Z.; Riha, D.; Sevecek, O.; Kastyl, J.; Sobola, D.; Castkova, K. Piezoelectric PVDF Elements and Systems for Mechanical Engineering Applications. In Proceedings of the 2020 19th International Conference on Mechatronics—Mechatronika (ME), Prague, Czech Republic, 2–4 December 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Rubes, O.; Machu, Z.; Sevecek, O.; Hadas, Z. Crack Protective Layered Architecture of Lead-Free Piezoelectric Energy Harvester in Bistable Configuration. Sensors
**2020**, 20, 5808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Rubes, O.; Hadas, Z. Design and Simulation of Bistable Piezoceramic Cantilever for Energy Harvesting from Slow Swinging Movement. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 18th International Conference on Power Electronics and Motion Control, PEMC 2018, Budapest, Hungary, 26–30 August 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Rubes, O.; Brablc, M.; Hadas, Z. Nonlinear vibration energy harvester: Design and oscillating stability analyses. Mech. Syst. Signal Process.
**2019**, 125, 170–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fitzgerald, P.C.; Malekjafarian, A.; Bhowmik, B.; Prendergast, L.J.; Cahill, P.; Kim, C.-W.; Hazra, B.; Pakrashi, V.; Obrien, E.J. Scour Damage Detection and Structural Health Monitoring of a Laboratory-Scaled Bridge Using a Vibration Energy Harvesting Device. Sensors
**2019**, 19, 2572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]

**Figure 2.**(

**a**) Comparison between approximation and true mode shape; (

**b**) comparison of slopes between approximation and true mode shape.

**Figure 3.**Comparison of electrical power and velocity of tip mass for both experimental results [26] and analytical model.

**Figure 4.**Peak power values as a function of resistive load upon excitation at short-circuit resonance frequency and the open-circuit resonance frequency.

**Figure 6.**Comparison of generated voltage and velocity of harvester’s tip mass obtained from measurement and developed analytical model for R

_{l}are 1 MΩ and 10 MΩ.

**Figure 8.**PVDF unimorph used in the experiment and a strip of PVDF foil used as the piezoelectric layer.

**Figure 9.**Comparison of output voltage and velocity of tip mass obtained from the measurement and by using the developed analytical model for R

_{l}= 10 MΩ.

**Figure 10.**Comparison of harvested electrical power among the considered materials for various resistive loads upon simple harmonic forcing at the first resonant frequency.

**Figure 11.**(

**a**) Measured acceleration of a random movement of a human wearable and (

**b**) its spectrogram; a comparison of harvested electrical energy from the human forearm movement among (

**c**) the piezoelectric harvesters used in the experiments and (

**d**) the tuned piezoelectric harvesters from Section 4.1 for different values of resistive load.

Harvester Type (Configuration) | L [mm] | ${\mathit{L}}_{\mathbf{E}}$ $\left[\mathbf{mm}\right]$ | ${\mathit{L}}_{\mathbf{Mt}}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\left[\mathbf{mm}\right]$ | B [mm] | ${\mathit{h}}_{\mathbf{s}}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\left[\mathbf{mm}\right]$ | ${\mathit{h}}_{\mathbf{p}}$ $\left[\mathbf{mm}\right]$ | ${\mathit{M}}_{\mathbf{t}}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\left[\mathbf{g}\right]$ |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

PZT-5A (bimorph) | 50.8 | 50.8 | – | 31.8 | 0.14 | 0.26 | 12 |

PZZN-PLZT (bimorph) | 40 | 25 | 15 | 10 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 10 |

PVDF (unimorph) | 71.9 | 49.2 | 4 | 10 | 0.3 | 0.13 | 2.6 |

**Table 2.**Material properties of piezoelectric layers and substrates for each harvester used in experiments.

Harvester Type (Configuration) | Material | Ρ [kg/m ^{3}] | Y [GPa] | ${\mathit{d}}_{31}$ $[\mathbf{C}/\mathbf{N}]$ | ${\mathit{\u03f5}}_{33}^{\mathit{S}}$$/{\mathit{\u03f5}}_{0}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}[-]$ |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

PZT-5A (bimorph) | PZT-5A | 7800 | 66 | –190 × 10^{–12} | 1500 |

Brass shim | 9000 | 105 | – | – | |

PZZN-PLZT (bimorph) | PZNN-PLZT | 7800 | 62.5 | –195 × 10^{–12} | 1850 |

Steel shim | 7850 | 210 | – | – | |

PVDF (unimorph) | PVDF | 1760 | 2 | –19 × 10^{–12} | 12 |

Steel shim | 7850 | 210 | – | – |

Harvester Type | M_{eff}[g] | B_{eff}[Ns/m] | K_{eff}[N/m] | F_{eff}[N/g] | θ_{eff}[N/V] | C_{eq}[F] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

PZT-5A | 14.1 | 2.24 × 10^{–1} | 1218.10 | 1.51 × 10^{–1} | 2.20 × 10^{–3} | 4.12 × 10^{–8} |

PZZN-PLZT | 6.10 | 5.13 × 10^{–2} | 164.56 | 7.90 × 10^{–2} | 6.03 × 10^{–5} | 3.65 × 10^{–9} |

PVDF | 2.90 | 4.40 × 10^{–3} | 40.38 | 3.27 × 10^{–2} | 1.21 × 10^{–6} | 3.08 × 10^{–10} |

**Table 4.**Tuned dimensions of harvesters and their equivalent single DOF model parameters used in the comparison.

Harvester Type(Configuration) | L[mm] | ${\mathit{L}}_{\mathbf{E}}$[mm] | ${\mathit{L}}_{\mathbf{Mt}}$[mm] | B[mm] | ${\mathit{h}}_{\mathbf{s}}$[mm] | ${\mathit{h}}_{\mathbf{p}}$[mm] | ${\mathit{M}}_{\mathbf{t}}$[g] |

PZT-5A (bimorph) | 68.8 | 40 | 5 | 10 | 0.15 | 0.26 | 3.67 |

PZZN-PLZT (bimorph) | 54.3 | 40 | 5 | 10 | 0.15 | 0.26 | 3.99 |

PVDF (unimorph) | 71.9 | 40 | 5 | 40 | 0.3 | 0.13 | 2.60 |

Harvester Type(Configuration) | ${\mathit{M}}_{\mathbf{eff}}$[g] | ${\mathit{B}}_{\mathbf{eff}}$[Ns/m] | ${\mathit{K}}_{\mathbf{eff}}$[N/m] | ${\mathit{f}}_{\mathbf{1}}$[Hz] | ${\mathit{F}}_{\mathbf{eff}}\mathbf{/}\mathbf{g}$[N/1g] | ${\mathit{\theta}}_{\mathbf{eff}}$[N/V] | ${\mathit{C}}_{\mathbf{eq}}$[F] |

PZT-5A (bimorph) | 4.21 | 4.45 × 10^{–2} | 161.25 | 31.13 | 5.02 × 10^{–2} | 5.14 × 10^{–4} | 1.02 × 10^{–8} |

PZZN-PLZT (bimorph) | 4.21 | 4.20 × 10^{–2} | 161.05 | 31.13 | 4.75 × 10^{–2} | 6.36 × 10^{–5} | 4.50 × 10^{–9} |

PVDF (unimorph) | 4.21 | 1.07 × 10^{–2} | 161.25 | 31.13 | 5.40 × 10^{–2} | 5.54 × 10^{–6} | 1.30 × 10^{–9} |

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |

© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Machu, Z.; Rubes, O.; Sevecek, O.; Hadas, Z.
Experimentally Verified Analytical Models of Piezoelectric Cantilevers in Different Design Configurations. *Sensors* **2021**, *21*, 6759.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s21206759

**AMA Style**

Machu Z, Rubes O, Sevecek O, Hadas Z.
Experimentally Verified Analytical Models of Piezoelectric Cantilevers in Different Design Configurations. *Sensors*. 2021; 21(20):6759.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s21206759

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Machu, Zdenek, Ondrej Rubes, Oldrich Sevecek, and Zdenek Hadas.
2021. "Experimentally Verified Analytical Models of Piezoelectric Cantilevers in Different Design Configurations" *Sensors* 21, no. 20: 6759.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s21206759