4.8 Article

Characterisation of aeroelastic harvester efficiency by measuring transient growth of oscillations

期刊

APPLIED ENERGY
卷 268, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115014

关键词

Galloping; Energy Harvesting; Curved blade; Aerodynamics

资金

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/N509796/1]
  2. Daiwa AngloJapanese Foundation [6842/13830]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With growing demand for small autonomous electrical devices, such as those in wireless sensor networks, energy harvesting has attracted interest with the promise of low maintenance and sustainable power sources. Galloping energy harvesters utilise the fluid-structure interaction to transform kinetic energy in fluid flow into electrical energy. The performance of galloping energy harvesters depends on the geometry of the tip, with the structure of the flow around the tip defining the nature of fluid-structure interaction and hence the potential efficiency of the device. In this work the curved blade tip geometry is investigated. To experimentally characterise the performance of the harvester, a method utilising the free oscillation transient is developed. The method avoids implementation of a transduction mechanism and hence optimisation of the associated parameters. The developed method is generic and can be applied to other energy generators. The power coefficient of curved blades of different curvatures is measured and the optimal range identified. The maximum coefficient of performance of the curved blade harvester occurs at tip speed ratios from 0.32 to 0.74 and reaches 0.08, which is 3 to 4 times lower than Savonius turbines, the best performing devices at similar Reynolds numbers. The square prism geometry is used as a comparator and found to have a coefficient of performance 10 times less than the curved blade. Flow visualisations confirm the curved blade to act as an airfoil in the highest performing cases, hence future tip shapes should be developed to promote flow attachment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据