ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Parametric Aerodynamic Study of Galloping Piezoelectric Energy Harvester with Arcuate Protruding and Depressed Features.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study explores the potential effect of a cross-sectional shape with an arcuate protruding and depressed features on the performance. The geometric configurations include two feature types (protruding and depressed), each with six distinct perimeter arrangements and three depths per arrangement, yielding thirty-six different cross-sectional shapes for systematic evaluation. The aerodynamic characteristics and electrical performance are numerically analyzed, using a computational fluid dynamics model and a distributed parameter electromechanical coupling model, respectively. A smooth protruding feature on the front, top, or bottom side suppresses the electrical output; however, when located on the rear side, it significantly increases the slope of the power versus wind speed curve. Depressed features on the rear, top, or bottom side only reduce the critical wind speed and the power enhancement positively correlates with the feature depth. Compared to a square, a harvester with depressed feature on both top and bottom sides exhibits a significant jump in power at the critical wind speed, greatly improving the power. These findings provide important design guidelines for structural optimization of galloping piezoelectric energy harvesters, enabling them to match the wind energy distribution characteristics of specific regions with optimal performance.
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.