Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
AbstractWireless microsensors that monitor and detect activity forces present. An electrical load to the transducer produces one
in factories, farms, military camps, vehicles, hospitals, and the such impeding force (ZE), but only after losing strength in the
human body can save money, energy, and lives [1]. Miniaturized domain translation via coupling factor kC. Source power PS
batteries, unfortunately, exhaust easily, which limit deployment
therefore loses energy in the environment (in Z S in the model of
to few niche markets. Luckily, harnessing ambient energy offers
hope. The challenge is tiny transducers convert only a small Fig. 2a) and kC2ZE to supply output power PE to Z E [3]:
2
fraction of the energy available into the electrical domain, and vS vSk ZE k 2Z
E
. (1)
P
C PS C
the microelectronics that transfer and condition power dissipate E 2 2 2
some of that energy, further reducing the budget on which ZS kC Z
E Z S kC Z
E
ZS kC Z
E
microsystems rely to operate. Improving transducers and As such, substantially low kC values represent such a light
trimming power losses in the system to increase output power is load to the source (i.e., kC2Z E << ZS) that, while PS decreases
therefore of paramount importance. Increasing the electrical minimally, PE rises linearly with ZE, like in Fig. 2b. With
damping force against which transducers work also deserves higher kC values, however, kC2Z E loads PS to the extent that
attention because output power is, fundamentally, the result of PE peaks when kC2ZE equals ZS. This means more electrical
damping. This paper explores how investing energy to increase
damping (ZE) increases PE, but only if the load to the source
electrical damping can boost output power in electromagnetic,
(kC2ZE) is less than of all other damping forces present (ZS).
electrostatic, and piezoelectric transducers.
I. POWERING MICROSYSTEMS Fig. 2. (a) Equivalent transduction model and (b) resulting output power
across electrical damping force ZE for high and low coupling kC values.
applications that can accommodate coupled inductors across VBAT, the latter term of which results from investing I INV . The
short distances thrive today [5][6]. Increasing the damping cycle concludes by investing energy in the positive cycle.
energy can viably extend this distance. B. Performance and Limitations
A. Increasing Electrical Damping As stated earlier, increasing electrical damping force is
Parallel Resonance: LS in Fig. 3 [7] draws magnetic energy worthwhile as long as it does not load L P 's source field
from LP's alternating field (which secondary EMF voltage considerably, that is, as long as kC is low. At 0.06, which is not
vemf.s models) and deposits it into C S until CS's voltage vC uncommon [7], Fig. 5 demonstrates that output power P O
increases only when investment remains below 400 A. At
surpasses the threshold that the diode-bridge rectifier and
lower kC values, like at 0.03, more energy is necessary to
battery establish at 2VD + VBAT. Because the diodes respond in
damp P S (in Fig. 2a), so PO peaks at 750 A. As k C reduces
ns, vC clamps at 2V D + VBAT and additional energy drawn (in the
further, IINV surpasses i L to the extent that conduction losses
form of current iL) flows into VBAT until LS depletes. As
in the circuit due to IINV dominate. As such, investments
LP 's field (i.e., vemf.s) oscillates, CS first discharges into LS (so beyond a lower threshold do not yield gains. What is more, a
vC drops to zero) and then L S charges CS in the negative higher IINV trades energizing time for investment time, which
direction until vC clamps to 2VD V BAT, where additional iL shifts 0.01's peak further to lower investment values.
reaches VBAT. This system, as a result, recycles (i.e., reinvests)
CS's energy back into LS (rather than into VBAT), increasing LS's
energy and the damping force LS imposes on LP's field.
This means that keeping v C as close to CVAR's breakdown considerably lower). Adding intelligence to manage the pre-
voltage (VMAX) throughout the harvesting period generates charge process and the ensuing connection this way, however,
more energy than otherwise, which is why VC harvesting at or requires energy, which represents a loss to the system.
near VMAX spawns more energy than in QC operation, where
C. Performance and Limitations
vC rises and nears VMAX only at the end of the cycle [9].
The major drawback to CCLAMP is its impact on integration.
B. Voltage-clamping Capacitor
Unfortunately, reducing capacitance increases CCLAMP's
Constraining CVAR's voltage with a 2.7 4.2-V li- ion battery voltage variation (through the harvesting phase), so its voltage
[10] through the harvesting cycle is one way of extracting must start further below VMAX (at VINI in Fig. 8) to keep
energy from motion directly into a battery (V BAT). The CCLAMP from breaking down. As a result, C VAR harvests less
advantages of this are that no additional capacitors or energy
energy per cycle, as EOUT in Fig. 8 shows below 100 pF for a
transfers, which are lossy, are necessary. Unfortunately, V BAT 0.35-m CMOS circuit with 40-V devices. Interestingly,
is not the maximum voltage CVAR can sustain, which means increasing CCLAMP when permanently connected to CVAR (e.g.,
CVAR does not draw as much energy as its breakdown voltage above 100 pF in Fig. 8) does not always increase EOUT. This
allows. So, at the cost of silicon or printed-circuit-board (PCB)
happens because TX transfers more charge to raise C CLAMP
area, a large clamping capacitor C CLAMP (of up to 1 nF) that near VMAX, which means additional conduction losses negate
constrains CVAR (e.g., 50 250 pF) above VBAT near VMAX, as in the gains of increased electrical damping forces. The circuit
Fig. 6, can harness sufficient energy to overcome losses in proposed in Fig. 7, however, transfers substantially less energy
an additional energy-transfer phase.
because CCLAMP retains its initial charge through all phases.
SRE and the circuit used to control SRE dissipate power, so To realize this, after CPPK in Fig. 11 senses that vP peaks,
the energy CP requires to charge between VBAT and VBAT MN1MN2 and MN3MN4, which implement SI and SN in Fig.
10, close for LHCP's half resonance period so that CP
every half cycle, which is 2(0.5C P(2VBAT)2) or 4CPVBAT2,
should surpass these losses. In the end, drawing energy from discharges into LH and LH subsequently de-energizes back into
vibrations amounts to damping them. With a rectifier, since the CP. Once CPPK senses that open -circuited C P peaks in the
opposite direction, SI and SN close to discharge CP into LH and
transducer ejects Q OC near VBAT, and output energy per half
SI alone opens to de-energize LH into VBAT through MPDI,
cycle is QOCV BAT, V BAT ultimately limits the electrical which together with CPDI, emulates diode DI.
damping force from which the transducer harvests energy.
B. Battery-decoupled Damping
One way of further increasing electrical damping force is to
decouple VBAT from the transducer. For example, inserting a
buck dcdc converter [16] between the rectifier and V BAT
allows QOC to leave the transducer at a higher voltage (with
more energy). The drawbacks to this are higher cost (in
components, silicon area, and PCB real estate) and conduction
losses (across the switches in the dc-dc converter).
C. Experimental Validation
Fig. 10. Rectifier-free piezoelectric harvester [17]. The prototyped 2-m BiCMOS harvester tunes the time that SI
Instead of requiring more lossy components, the buckboost and SN connect (REINV) externally with vREINV. Unlike in [17],
acdc converterharvester in Fig. 10 [17] decouples V BAT from REINV extends beyond LHCP's quarter resonance period to a
the transducer by embedding a quasi-lossless inductor (LH) into half to reinvest LH's energy back in CP . When REINV is less
its rectifying core. This way, vibrations charge an open-circuited than LHCP's half resonance period, SN opens early and LH
CP to its maximum possible value before discharging C P (with SI drains remnant energy into V BAT via MPDN, which with CP DN,
and SN) into L H (with resonance), and then fully de-energizing implements DN. Once tuned, shaking a 44 13 0.4- mm 3
LH into V BAT (with D N after opening SN). SI and SN similarly piezoelectric transducer charged C P and LH then recycled C P's
discharge CP into LH in the negative half cycle and D I (when SI energy at 1.02 V to pre-charge CP in the opposite direction to
opens) de-energizes LH into VBAT. 0.36 V, as Fig. 12a shows. Vibrations then charged CP further
9322 5
to 1.9 V before LH de-energized CP into CBAT. After 2.5 s of factors of tiny transducers and transponding inductors are
repeated cycles, CBAT charged from 2.68 to 4.36 V, as Fig. 12b substantially low, which means PO is also low. The idea here is
corroborates. Without reinvesting energy, CP charged to 1.4 V to invest energy to raise the electrical damping force against
and 1.2 V to energize CBAT from 2.68 to 4.36 V in 3 s, which which motion, magnetic fields, etc. work. This way,
under similar conditions, means reinvesting energy produced transducers draw more energy from the environment. The
20% more output power. circuit components that transfer the investment, however,
consume power, limiting the extent to which increased
investments raise PO. Still, increasing PO this way, beyond
reducing losses in the system, expands the functional reach of
miniaturized systems to more practical levels.
REFERENCES
[1] G. Chen et al., "Circuit Design Advances for Wireless Sensing
Applications," Proc. IEEE, vol. 98, no. 11, pp. 1808-1827, Nov. 2010.
[2] R.J.M. Vullers et al., "Micropower energy harvesting," Solid-State
Electronics, vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 684 693, Jul. 2009.
[3] S. D. Senturia, "Energy-conserving transducers" in Microsystem Design,
Fig.12. Measured CP and CBAT charge profiles with and without reinvestment. New York: Springer, 2001, pp. 125-145.
[4] P.D. Mitcheson et al., "Architectures for vibration-driven micropower
generators," J. Microelectromech. Syst., vol.13, no. 3, pp. 429- 440, Jun.
D. Performance and Limitations
2004.
Notice CPPK is late in detecting vP's peaks, so before LH can [5] L. Xun and S. Y. Hui, "Simulation study and experimental verification of
de-energize C P, vibrations absorb some of C P's energy (in a universal contactless battery charging platform with localized charging
features," IEEE Trans. Power Electron, vol. 22, pp. 2202-2210, Nov.
both cases shown) . Also note that L H's reinvestment in CP is 2007.
unable to charge C P to 1.02 V because conducting switches [6] M. Kiani and M. Ghovanloo, "An RFID-based closed-loop wireless
(SN and SI) and LH's equivalent series resistance RESR power transmission system for biomedical applications," IEEE Trans.
dissipate some of that energy. This is critical because reducing Circuits Syst. II, vol. 57, pp. 260-264, Apr. 2010.
CP's negative peak voltage has a squared impact on CP's peak [7] M. W. Baker and R. Sarpeshkar, "Feedback analysis and design of RF
energy, which is what the system harvests. power links for low-power bionic systems," IEEE Trans. Biomed.
Circuits Syst., vol. 1, pp. 28-38, 2007.
[8] C. Chih-Jung et al., "A study of loosely coupled coils for wireless power
transfer," IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II, vol. 57, pp. 536-540, Jul. 2010.
[9] S. Meninger et al., "Vibration-to-electric energy conversion," IEEE
Trans. Very Large Scale Integr. (VLSI) Syst., vol. 9, pp. 64-76, Feb.
2001.
[10] E. O. Torres and G. A. Rincon-Mora, "A 0.7-m BiCMOS electrostatic
energy-harvesting system IC," IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 45, pp.
483-496, Feb. 2010.
[11] B. C. Yen and J. H. Lang, "A variable-capacitance vibration-to-electric
energy harvester, " IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, vol. 53, pp. 288-295,
Feb. 2006.
[12] D. Kwon et al., "Harvesting ambient kinetic energy with switched-
Fig. 13. Experimental and simulated output power across investment time.
inductor converters," IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, vol. 58, no. 7,
Interestingly, as the experimental results of Fig. 13a show, pp.15511560, July 2011.
increasing the investment in C P produces diminishing returns [13] H. Lam et al., "Integrated low-loss CMOS active rectifier for wirelessly
in PO. This results because transferring more energy through powered devices," IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II, vol. 53, no. 12, pp.
13781382, Dec. 2006.
the switches and LH's RESR also increases conduction losses to [14] G.K. Ottman et al., "Adaptive piezoelectric energy harvesting circuit for
the point they overwhelm reinvestment gains. Enlarging the wireless remote power supply," IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 17,
FETs to lower their resistances [12] balances losses and no. 5, pp. 669676, Sep. 2002.
therefore raises PO, as the simulated traces of Fig. 13b show. [15] E. Lefeuvre et al., "A comparison between several vibration-powered
With twenty times (20 ) larger FETs for SN and SI (at piezoelectric generators for standalone systems," Sensors and Actuators
72000m/2m), in fact, fully investing CP's positive energy A, vol. 126, pp. 405416, 2006.
[16] Y.K. Ramadass and A.P. Chandrakasan, "An efficient piezoelectric
into the negative phase raised simulated P O by 56% from 47.4 energy harvesting interface circuit using a bias-flip rectifier and shared
W to 74.2 W. Ultimately, however, FET losses vary with inductor," IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 189204, Jan.
input power, process, and temperature, but not mismatch. 2010.
[17] D. Kwon and G.A. Rincn-Mora "A 2-m BiCMOS rectifier-free AC-
VI. CONCLUSIONS DC piezoelectric energy harvester-charger IC," IEEE Trans. Biomedical
Circuits Syst., vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 400409, Dec. 2010.
The experimental results of the piezoelectric transducer and
the simulated results of the electromagnetic and electrostatic
cases show that investing energy into the system increases
output power PO. This is important because the coupling