Harnessing energy from piezioelectric roadways

  • Thread starter Thread starter fireseed
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the potential energy harvesting from piezoelectric crystals embedded in roadways, particularly how much voltage can be generated by the pressure from vehicles. It highlights that while piezoelectric materials can produce significant voltage under pressure, the actual energy harvested may be minimal due to losses in vehicle efficiency and the road's structural integrity. Concerns are raised about the practicality and cost-effectiveness of such systems, as the energy generated may not offset the additional fuel consumption required for vehicles to navigate any induced road deformation. The conversation also touches on alternative methods for energy harvesting, such as using air hoses to convert mechanical pressure into electricity. Overall, the feasibility of piezoelectric roadways remains questionable, with doubts about their ability to provide a net energy gain.
fireseed
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am trying to determine how much energy can be, in ideal circumstances, harvested from piezoelectric crystals that draw pressure from being buried in roadways.
To start, we found a basic fact on Wikipedia;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectric

"...a 1 cm cube of quartz with 2 kN (500 lbf) of correctly applied force can produce a voltage of 12,500 V."

Using what means and understanding we possess, we determined so far that;
-that the average wheel on a car would be roughly 5 kN
-that .20m of a wheel touches the ground on average with an area of 0.034m^2

Now based on my understanding of piezoelectricity, I am not sure as to whether time would have to be factored in as well or not. So basically if we could come up with some kind of a unit measurement/equation to determine how much voltage a 1 cm cube of quartz would put off with the force of the average vehicle going at an average speed, we could then extrapolate that to conclude exactly how much power could be generated from a roadway of any given length and thus the overall energy potential of piezoelectricity as a whole.

Overall, we'll have one more sound fact to give hope to the world that could be.
But I seem to have taken this equation as far as I can on my own at the time, so I need someone's help.
Anything at all would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Voltage alone doesn't really tell you anything useful about the energy available - you'd need a current. And note, conservation of energy applies: any energy generated by the crystals has to come from the car engine and not much of a car's energy is lost as rolling resistance on a road.
 
So then is there any direction you could suggest that I look into further my progress with this question?
 
From talking to people who use the piezeo sensors for speed/traffic measurements - very little signal is generated because of the road surface material over the top of the sensors.
They have to do some pretty complex signal processing to even detect a car.
 
fireseed said:
So then is there any direction you could suggest that I look into further my progress with this question?
Well, I guess you could pick an arbitrary deflection (it's up to you to design it, right?) and calculate based on that. Ie, try these numbers:

A car weighs 5000N
You design your device to deflect 1m, like a spring
The contact patch is 20 cm long and the car is moving at 10 m/sec (so the contact area is changed 50 times a second)
 
You don't get something for nothing. I am guessing that the energy you get would be offset by losses elsewhere like loss of gas mileage in all the vehicles that travel the road. So if you expect to harvest free energy I doubt it will work.
 
nottheone said:
You don't get something for nothing. I am guessing that the energy you get would be offset by losses elsewhere like loss of gas mileage in all the vehicles that travel the road. So if you expect to harvest free energy I doubt it will work.

The cars are already deforming the road surface without any reclamation of that energy. It would be no different than trying to generate energy from the sound the tires produce: they're going to be making noise whether you do something with that noise or not. The real problem is whether the cost of engineering and installing any such system is paid for by the energy produced.
 
What about something even simpler like specially designed 1/2 inch air hoses, that when ran over, take the mechanical pressure applied, and force air out, and transfer that into electric energy? Wouldn't that be simple enough to work?
 
zoobyshoe said:
The cars are already deforming the road surface without any reclamation of that energy. It would be no different than trying to generate energy from the sound the tires produce: they're going to be making noise whether you do something with that noise or not. The real problem is whether the cost of engineering and installing any such system is paid for by the energy produced.

The roads have to handle relatively heavy loads like tractor trailers, they aren't deforming much with a car or it would really sag under a truck. And if they are already sagging then they would have to sag an additional amount for the piezo wouldn't they?
 
  • #10
fireseed said:
What about something even simpler like specially designed 1/2 inch air hoses, that when ran over, take the mechanical pressure applied, and force air out, and transfer that into electric energy? Wouldn't that be simple enough to work?

That would definitely kill gas mileage, no net gain.
 
  • #11
nottheone said:
The roads have to handle relatively heavy loads like tractor trailers, they aren't deforming much with a car or it would really sag under a truck. And if they are already sagging then they would have to sag an additional amount for the piezo wouldn't they?

Well, this is not quite right as you would just exchange some part of the road for piezos, so you just switch from deforming concrete, where most energy used for the deformation will finally end up as a slight increase in temperature towards deforming piezos, where you can harvest a little bit of the energy. Nevertheless I think the amount of energy you can get is far too small to make the use of expensive piezos sensible. Also the change of temperature between summer and winter should be a great problem at most locations.

However piezos have been used to harvest energy in other locations. Although I think this is more or less a marketing gag, there is a club in the netherlands, which uses a dancefloor with piezos: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/w...html?_r=3&pagewanted=2&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
 
  • #12
Cthugha said:
Well, this is not quite right as you would just exchange some part of the road for piezos, so you just switch from deforming concrete, where most energy used for the deformation will finally end up as a slight increase in temperature towards deforming piezos, where you can harvest a little bit of the energy.
Yes. The amount of deformation, the actual deflection from the previous dimension required to produce voltage, is very slight but requires a lot of pressure, proportionately, to accomplish. Crystals are very hard. You can scratch glass with a quartz crystal.
 
  • #13
russ_watters said:
Well, I guess you could pick an arbitrary deflection (it's up to you to design it, right?) and calculate based on that. Ie, try these numbers:

A car weighs 5000N
You design your device to deflect 1m, like a spring
The contact patch is 20 cm long and the car is moving at 10 m/sec (so the contact area is changed 50 times a second)

Do I understand this correctly -- a 1 m deflection? Wouldn't a cm be more reasonable? The car has to push the device down by this distance, and then "climb" up out of the depression in the road that has been created. As a driver, I doubt I'm willing to tolerate more than a cm or 2.

Of course, the car must consume more gas to climb out of the dip in the road, which I guess is the whole point. If you really want to burn gasoline/petrol to generate electricity, you might as well buy a generator.
 
  • #14
Redbelly98 said:
Do I understand this correctly -- a 1 m deflection? Wouldn't a cm be more reasonable? The car has to push the device down by this distance, and then "climb" up out of the depression in the road that has been created. As a driver, I doubt I'm willing to tolerate more than a cm or 2.

Of course, the car must consume more gas to climb out of the dip in the road, which I guess is the whole point. If you really want to burn gasoline/petrol to generate electricity, you might as well buy a generator.
I'd be amazed if the deflection required anything on the order of a milimeter much less a centimeter.
 
Back
Top