ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Design Optimization and Comparison of Cylindrical Electromagnetic Vibration Energy Harvesters.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structural Design and Performance of a Low-Frequency Hybrid Vibration Energy Harvester Based on Piezoelectric-Electromagnetic-Triboelectric Coupling.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Automated Design Methodology for Electromagnetic Energy Harvesters.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Electromagnetic Energy Harvester Targeting Wearable and Biomedical Applications.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Research on the Directional Adaptability of a Self-Adaptive Energy Harvester.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Investigating the coil-magnet structure plays a significant role in the design process of the electromagnetic energy harvester due to the effect on the harvester's performance. In this paper, the performance of four different electromagnetic vibration energy harvesters with cylindrical shapes constrained in the same volume were under investigation. The utilized structures are (i) two opposite polarized magnets spaced by a mild steel; (ii) a Halbach array with three magnets and one coil; (iii) a Halbach array with five magnets and one coil; and (iv) a Halbach array with five magnets and three coils. We utilized a completely automatic optimization procedure with the help of an optimization algorithm implemented in Python, supported by simulations in ANSYS Maxwell and MATLAB Simulink to obtain the maximum output power for each configuration. The simulation results show that the Halbach array with three magnets and one coil is the best for configurations with the Halbach array. Additionally, among all configurations, the harvester with two opposing magnets provides the highest output power and volume power density, while the Halbach array with three magnets and one coil provides the highest mass power density. The paper also demonstrates limitations of using the electromagnetic coupling coefficient as a metric for harvester optimization, if the ultimate goal is maximization of output power.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.