Is the prospect of raindrop powered sensors an innovative step too far?

and nowas large-scale hydro-generation looks to move downstreamout of our rivers and our estuaries and further out into our open seasit is hardly surprising that researchers are examining the energy-harvesting potential of another stage of the water cycle – rainfall.

" Sensor technology is big business and with energy prices on the rise it is...  

Articles in the popular press lauded the innovative rain energy research coming out of the Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) in GrenobleFranceand surmised that piezoelectric materialswhich convert mechanical strain into electrical energycould supplement large-scale solar power by generating energy both night and day. Thisthe press sayswill mitigate the efficiency problems that continue to suppress solar power’s widespread commercial application.

The tagline to this press supposition is that Jean-Jacques Chaillout and the CEA research team will first prove the raindrop concept in wireless industrial sensors that will detect and report limescale build-upwhich reduces the efficiency of nuclear power station cooling towers. And then comes the solar revolution.

Chaillout confirms his droplet-powered limescale sensor is unique; he knows of no prior work to harvest the mechanical force of raindropshoweverhe plays down the press’ idea of twinning it with solar devices: "The efficiency difference is too high to exploit them both together" he says.

Over-egging the piezoelectric pudding has become something of a norm; many innovative devices are heralded as solutions for large-scale application – only the truth often turns out differently – the opportunities remain interesting but seriously narrowed. Nowlet’s examine Chaillout’s research; when he thinks it will come to fruition; and if the application of raindrop power in sensors is still an innovative step too far.

Writing in

In the theory portion of their research the team concludes that effective energy recovery from raindrops requires a piezoelectric material that is very thinnot pre-stressedand that has a slightly smaller diameter than the maximum diameter of the impacting drop. The team classified droplets into two categories: drizzle raindrops (1mm in diameter) and larger downpour raindrops (5mm in diameter).

Drizzle drops have an impact energy of 2µJ whereas downpour drops have an impact energy of 1mJ (Fig.1). Computer simulations indicate that 25µm thick piezoelectric materials most-efficiently recover energy across a range of raindrop sizes. Despite this optimisationthe system in practice (Fig.2) only makes around one microwatt of power available from the smallest dropswhich Chaillout says is enough to power the RF transmission of one digital bit for 10m: "Our system can be used for low rate transmission" he says.

This is quite low. What is the principle limitation of Chaillout’s device? And what can be done to improve it? "The principle limitation is the energy quantity of a raindropfollowed by the low efficiency of piezoelectric materials." He says this low efficiency does not matter as the team is not interested in exploiting rain and solar combined: "We will exploit our system in an industrial environment with no light but where the number and energy of the drops is higher. In this nuclear chimney environment operators need to measure the lime evolution and our system can power the sensor to do that."

Chaillout is looking for a collaborative partner to help prove the device in an industrial setting: "It’s a new way to power sensors in special environments." If the collaboration begins it will take about two years to build the first industrial prototype."

The team will now take the time to improve the efficiency of their system and build the prototype.

The idea is certainly innovative. Wireless sensors are revolutionising the industrial landscape – allowing operators to collect data from devices that we’re previously either technically or financially impossible to wire up. Such innovation will improve both plant safety and maintenance. Howeverdespite these advantagesRoy Freelandceo of Southampton University spin-out Perpetuumcasts doubt on the viability of piezoelectric sensors.

"The problem with energy harvesting is that you can produce a small amount of power relatively easilythe problem is producing enough power for it to be useful." Freeland says that piezoelectric devices are not always the most practical choice for energy-harvesting sensors.

As discussed abovethe energy available from CEA’s harvester is enough to transmit a digital bit of information across 10meters. Freeland compares it to the vibration-energy harvesting devices they build at Perpetuum: "Using magnets and coilswe're sending 10kb of information 100 to 200m."

"Our researchers examined piezoelectrics but felt that for practical energy harvesting a coil and a magnet is the way to go." (Fig.3)

Sowhat does Freeland see as the main limits of piezoelectrics when it comes to industrial sensors? "Piezoelectric devices wear out quickly" he says. "You may have a material that survives 200million cycleswhich sounds a lotbut at 50hz vibration that’s only 2 to 3monthsthen the material fractures and becomes useless."

This is in direct opposition to one of the key selling points of industrialbatterylesswireless sensors: they can be left in isolation and will not need regularcostlybattery replacement or maintenance. Piezoelectric devices do not currently tick this box. Even if the materials used to build piezoelectric devices become more robustFreeland does not predict a sea change in energy harvesting: "The materials have to be improved a great deal and I still think they will never rival a coil and magnet in the sense that it’s completely reliable and it’s already possible to achieve close to maximum energy transduction efficiency."

And this is the nub of Freeland’s point: he believes that energy harvesting concepts should be challenged. "The concept may work" he says"and it may generate electricitybut is it the most sensible and efficient way of doing the job? It is quite easy to harvest small amounts of energy from almost anything: walking across a spongy flooror attaching a knee brace to your legbut neither are the most practical methods available. If you want a human to produce electricity from motion then you’re better off giving them a bicycle with a dynamo. Strapping something to someone’s leg and charging a mobile phone may sound great but it’s an awful lot easier to give them a crank handle device that turns a small generator. These devices get a lot of attention because they sound so innovative."

Sohe disagrees with CEA’s rainpower concept? "Not entirely. In a cooling tower you have a consistent flow of water and a massive volume. It’s logical. But having said that I wouldn’t be surprised if it is easier to collect water higher up the cooling tower and channel it through a paddle wheel that generates power for a wireless sensor."

Freeland preaches a cautious approach and he may be right to do so. The US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency funded development of a piezoelectric device that would harvesting the impact energy of a marching soldier's boot to power personnel equipment.  Efforts to innovate such system were abandoned due to impracticality.

Wireless sensors will certainly find mass applicationthey are already being used to monitor assetsreduce pipelinesand drain bearings - cheap and continuous process monitoringplant safetyand pre-emptive maintanance will follow en masse.  It seems howeverthat while piezoelectric divices are cetainly innovative they require further optimisation before they are considered commercially viable in this field.

"