Skip to main content

Table 7 Comparison of nanomechanical energy harvesting methods in terms of pros and cons, performance, techniques for efficient utilization, and challenges

From: Additively manufactured nano-mechanical energy harvesting systems: advancements, potential applications, challenges and future perspectives

Comparison/ types

Electromagnetic

Piezoelectric

Triboelectric

Pros

No requirement of contacts [106]

No requirement of voltage source [106]

Smaller mechanical damping [106]

Higher current [107]

Operation is durable and robust [107]

Lower impedance [108]

Smaller mechanical damping [106]

No need for a voltage source [106]

Higher capacitance [107]

No requirement of mechanical stoppers [106]

High energy density [106]

High output voltage (2–10 V) [106]

Flexibility in device structure [109]

Higher power density [110]

Can operate at lower frequencies [109]

Easy to fabricate with nanoscale size [109]

High energy conversion efficiencies [110]

Cons

Low efficiency at low frequency [107]

Difficult miniaturization [111]

High coil losses [112]

Lower efficiency [112]

Complex integration [106]

Lower output voltage [106]

Low current and high impedance [108]

Incompatible for CMOS process [111]

Poor coupling at microscale [106]

Difficult to integrate [106]

Requirement of special piezoelectric materials [112]

Can be self-discharged at lower frequencies [111]

Durability is not good [110]

The mechanism is not fully understood [110]

High voltage and low current [109]

Challenging to be integrated [110]

Electrostatic charge accumulation

Strategies for effective energy harvesting

Frequency up-conversion [113]

Sprung eccentric rotor [114]

Elimination of spring [115]

Spring clockwork mechanism [116]

Induce non-linearity [117]

Induce non-linearity [118]

Proper circuit management [119]

Frequency up-conversion [120]

Use a double pendulum system [121]

Development of core–shell structure [122]

Design an ultrathin and flexible structure [123]

To use single-electrode mode

Use liquid metal electrode [124]

Use of air-cushion mechanism [124]

Optimal locations for biomechanical energy harvesting

Center of gravity of upper body [125]

Wrist movements [126]

Knee movements [127]

Feet motion [128]

Legs and arms [113]

Movements of arms and legs [121]

Human feet [129]

Palms and fingers [130]

Relaxation and contraction of lung and cardiac muscles [131]

Human skin [132]

Clothes [133]

Hand tapping [132]

Range of power output on nano-scale

0.5‒32 mW [113, 128, 134]

0.0002‒45.6 mW [121, 135, 136]

0.3‒4.67 mW [133]

Challenges

Difficult miniaturizing [137]

Difficulties in integration [138]

Design of flexible system [139]

Toxicity of piezoelectric materials

Ultralow frequencies of human motions [140]

Requirements of complex human movements [141]

Rigidity and brittleness of Piezoelectric materials [142]

Need of surface modifications

Humidity challenges

The inflexibility of the electrode [143]

Biocompatibility [144]

Washability [122]