Single-Tube and Multi-Turn Coil Near-Field Wireless Power Transfer for Low-Power Home Appliances
Clicks: 257
ID: 110677
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
257 views
29 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #86 of 220 articles by views in energies
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 220 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Single-tube loop coil (STLC) and multi-turn copper wire coil (MTCWC) wireless power transfer (WPT) methods are proposed in this study to overcome the challenges of battery life during low-power home appliance operations. Transfer power, efficiency, and distance are investigated for charging mobile devices on the basis of the two proposed systems. The transfer distances of 1–15 cm are considered because the practicality of this range has been proven to be reliable in the current work on mobile device battery charging. For STLC, the Li-ion battery is charged with total system efficiencies of 86.45%, 77.08%, and 52.08%, without a load, at distances of 2, 6, and 15 cm, respectively. When the system is loaded with 100 Ω at the corresponding distances, the transfer efficiencies are reduced to 80.66%, 66.66%, and 47.04%. For MTCWC, the battery is charged with total system efficiencies of 88.54%, 75%, and 52.08%, without a load, at the same distances of 2, 6, and 15 cm. When the system is loaded with 100 Ω at the corresponding distances, the transfer efficiencies are drastically reduced to 39.52%, 33.6%, and 15.13%. The contrasting results, between the STLC and MTCWC methods, are produced because of the misalignment between their transmitters and receiver coils. In addition, the diameter of the MTCWC is smaller than that of the STLC. The output power of the proposed system can charge the latest smartphone in the market, with generated output powers of 5 W (STLC) and 2 W (MTCWC). The above WPT methods are compared with other WPT methods in the literature.
| Reference Key |
jawad2018energiessingle-tube
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Aqeel Mahmood Jawad;Rosdiadee Nordin;Sadik Kamel Gharghan;Haider Mahmood Jawad;Mahamod Ismail;Mahmood Jawad Abu-AlShaeer;Jawad, Aqeel Mahmood;Nordin, Rosdiadee;Gharghan, Sadik Kamel;Jawad, Haider Mahmood;Ismail, Mahamod;Abu-AlShaeer, Mahmood Jawad; |
| Journal | energies |
| Year | 2018 |
| DOI |
10.3390/en11081969
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.