Optimizing Energy Conversion in Next-Generation Energy-Harvesting Footwear

November 7, 2024

220

Abstract

This paper explores the optimization of energy-harvesting footwear, specifically focusing on piezoelectric materials, thermoelectric generators (TEGs), and kinetic systems that convert human mechanical energy into electrical power. Among the systems analyzed, piezoelectric materials, particularly nanostructured fibers, demonstrate the highest energy output, achieving up to 7.5 mW per step under laboratory conditions. The integration of advanced materials, including shape-memory polymers (SMPs) with self-healing properties, significantly enhances both energy efficiency and durability. These SMP-based composites offer improved performance, with an estimated 50% increase in energy conversion efficiency compared to traditional materials. The study also addresses the biomechanical forces acting during gait and their influence on the positioning and effectiveness of energy-harvesting components. By strategically placing piezoelectric materials in high-pressure zones, such as the heel and forefoot, energy capture is maximized without compromising user comfort. Simulation models and a comprehensive literature review of material properties suggest that current state-of-the-art designs could power low-energy wearable devices, providing a sustainable alternative to conventional battery use. This research proposes practical design recommendations for optimizing energy-harvesting footwear, contributing to the next generation of wearable technology with minimal environmental impact. By harnessing mechanical energy through innovative materials, these technologies hold promise for promoting physical activity and supporting smart city infrastructure through data collection and reduced reliance on external power sources.

Keywords— Energy-harvesting footwear, piezoelectric materials, biomechanics, wearable technology

Introduction

Wearable technology is rapidly evolving, with applications extending into health monitoring, communication, and sustainable energy solutions. Among the most promising innovations in this field is energy-harvesting footwear, which captures mechanical energy generated by human movement—such as walking or running—and converts it into usable electrical power. This technology allows for the conversion of mechanical energy into electricity, which can be used to power low-energy devices such as fitness trackers, sensors, and communication systems, significantly reducing the reliance on external batteries and promoting sustainable energy practices¹,². By providing a self-sustained power source, energy-harvesting footwear offers an environmentally friendly alternative to disposable batteries, making it particularly beneficial in an era of increasing environmental awareness.

The motivation behind this research is driven by the growing need for sustainable energy solutions and the demand for self-powered wearable electronics. With the rise of smart cities and wearable health technologies, reducing dependency on conventional energy sources is critical. Energy-harvesting footwear not only contributes to the reduction of battery waste but also encourages more physical activity, which aligns with public health and environmental goals. Additionally, the data collected from these devices can potentially be integrated into urban planning, further contributing to smart city initiatives.

Energy generation within the sole of the shoe is primarily achieved using piezoelectric materials, which produce an electric charge when subjected to mechanical stress. Piezoelectricity is a well-established phenomenon in which certain materials generate electrical charges in response to applied mechanical forces, such as those experienced during walking³. Lead zirconate titanate (PZT) and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) are among the most commonly used piezoelectric materials in footwear due to their high energy conversion efficiency⁴,⁵. These materials, embedded in the shoe’s sole, deform under the pressure exerted by each footfall, producing an electric charge that can be harnessed for power generation.

In addition to piezoelectricity, other materials such as shape-memory polymers (SMPs) and nanocomposites are being explored to enhance the durability and energy conversion efficiency of energy-harvesting footwear. SMPs are polymers that have the unique ability to return to their original shape after deformation, providing self-healing properties that can extend the lifespan of energy-harvesting devices⁶,⁷. This self-healing capability addresses the issue of wear and tear, which is a significant challenge for piezoelectric materials used in dynamic environments like footwear. Additionally, nanocomposites, composed of nanostructured piezoelectric fibers, offer a higher surface area for energy capture, which significantly improves energy conversion efficiency compared to their bulk material counterparts⁸,⁹. Recent advancements in nanocomposite technologies have demonstrated that these materials can generate up to 7.5 mW of power per step, making them a viable solution for powering low-energy wearable devices¹⁰.

The fundamental principle behind energy-harvesting footwear can be mathematically described by the direct piezoelectric effect, which relates the mechanical stress applied to a material with the electric charge it generates.

By optimizing the material properties and positioning the piezoelectric elements in high-stress areas of the shoe, such as the heel and forefoot, it is possible to maximize energy generation during walking without compromising wearer comfort¹.

Despite significant advancements, several challenges remain in the development of commercially viable energy-harvesting footwear. While current technologies can generate up to 7.5 mW per step, this output is still limited when considering the energy requirements of higher-energy devices like smartphones¹¹,¹². Additionally, scalability and durability are critical considerations for large-scale deployment. The introduction of shape-memory polymer nanocomposites with self-healing properties offers a promising solution by improving the resilience of piezoelectric materials under repeated mechanical stress¹³,¹⁴.

The objective of this study is to explore and optimize the energy conversion process in energy-harvesting footwear through the integration of advanced materials and biomechanical design. By investigating the efficiency of piezoelectric, thermoelectric, and kinetic energy systems, this research seeks to enhance the power output of wearable technology while maintaining comfort and practicality for users. Furthermore, the study aims to provide practical design recommendations that bridge the gap between theoretical energy harvesting principles and their real-world applications in wearable electronics.

The scope of this study is focused on the evaluation of piezoelectric materials, particularly lead zirconate titanate (PZT) and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), alongside shape-memory polymers (SMPs) and nanocomposites in energy-harvesting footwear. The study analyzes these materials in terms of their efficiency, durability, and scalability for mass production. The investigation excludes the long-term environmental impacts of the manufacturing process and large-scale consumer trials due to time and resource constraints. However, it incorporates secondary research on the theoretical efficiency and performance of these materials through a comprehensive review of existing literature.

The motivation for this research lies in addressing the urgent need for more sustainable and self-powered solutions in wearable technology, particularly in energy-harvesting footwear. By optimizing the energy conversion process through advanced materials and design, this study aims to contribute to the development of self-sustaining electronics, reduce reliance on conventional batteries, and promote sustainable urban living practices.

Methods

The systematic literature review for this study was conducted using a structured approach to ensure comprehensive coverage of relevant scholarly articles and technical reports. Initially, major academic databases such as IEEE Xplore, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar were searched using a set of predefined keywords related to piezoelectric materials, energy harvesting, wearable technology, and sustainable footwear design. The search was refined by applying inclusion criteria that focused on studies published within the last ten years to capture the most recent advancements in the field. Exclusion criteria were applied to omit non-peer-reviewed sources and publications not available in English. Additionally, filters were used to narrow down the results to research articles and reviews, to maintain a focus on rigorously vetted scientific evidence.

Furthermore, relevance to the topic was a primary criterion; studies had to specifically address aspects of piezoelectric materials, energy harvesting technologies, or their application in wearable devices to be included. Study design also played a crucial role in the selection process; preference was given to experimental and quantitative research that provided empirical data on the effectiveness and efficiency of energy-harvesting methods.

A key aspect of the methodology was understanding the mechanisms of charge generation and the induced electric field in piezoelectric materials, which are central to the functioning of energy-harvesting footwear. Three fundamental equations describe these processes:

Charge Generation (D):

(1) $\begin{equation*}D = d_{33} \cdot T\end{equation*}$

In this equation:

D represents the electric displacement or charge density (measured in coulombs per square meter, C/m²).
d₃₃ is the piezoelectric coefficient (measured in picocoulombs per newton, pC/N), which quantifies how much electric charge is generated per unit of applied mechanical stress.
T is the mechanical stress applied to the material (measured in newtons per square meter, N/m²or Pa). Mechanical stress occurs as a result of forces exerted during walking or running, particularly in the heel and forefoot regions of the shoe.

The piezoelectric coefficient d₃₃, which is relevant for materials like PZT and PVDF, reflects the efficiency of charge generation when mechanical forces are applied in a specific direction (longitudinal axis). For example, PZT typically has a d₃₃ value of approximately 500 pC/N, which is considered relatively high for energy-harvesting applications⁴.

2. Induced Electric Field (E):

(2) $\begin{equation*}E = -g \cdot T \end{equation*}$

In this equation:

E is the induced electric field (measured in volts per meter, V/m), which is the potential difference generated across the piezoelectric material.
g is the piezoelectric voltage constant (measured in volts per meter per newton, V·m/N). It quantifies how efficiently a material generates an electric field when subjected to mechanical stress.
T, as defined previously, is the mechanical stress applied to the material.

3. Youngs Modulus (Y):

(3) $\begin{equation*}Y = \frac{\sigma}{\varepsilon} \end{equation*}$

In this equation:

Young’s modulus (Y) quantifies the material’s ability to resist deformation under mechanical stress(measured in GPa or N/m²).
s is the tensile stress, which is the force applied per unit area on a material. It is measured in Pascals (Pa) or N/m².
e is the tensile strain, which is the relative deformation or change in length of a material compared to its original length. It is dimensionless.

These equations are fundamental to understanding the electrical output generated from the mechanical forces experienced by piezoelectric materials in footwear. As mechanical forces are applied to the piezoelectric elements during the gait cycle, the materials deform, creating charge generation and an induced electric field. These forces are most prominent at points of maximum pressure, such as the heel strike and toe-off during walking¹⁵. This research explores various approaches to enhance the efficiency of such mechanisms in wearable applications.

Data extraction from selected studies was meticulously performed to gather comprehensive insights into energy-harvesting footwear. The research design of each study was noted—whether it was experimental, observational, or simulation-based—to understand the methodological approaches prevalent in the field.

Key findings were summarized to capture the essence of each study, focusing on the performance, efficiency, and application of piezoelectric materials in energy-harvesting footwear¹⁶. This included quantitative results such as energy output measurements and qualitative assessments of material suitability and user comfort. Other relevant data points such as sample size, population characteristics, and the specific types of piezoelectric materials used were also recorded.

Initially, the data extracted from various studies were categorized into themes based on the type of piezoelectric materials used, the design of the footwear, and the specific applications highlighted in each study. Thematic analysis was particularly useful in identifying common patterns and divergent views within the collected data. It facilitated the grouping of studies that explored similar materials or shared comparable outcomes, providing a structured way to assess the effectiveness of different material compositions and structural designs in energy-harvesting shoes. Narrative synthesis was then employed to weave together findings from various studies into a coherent story. This method allowed for a detailed discussion on how advancements in material science and biomechanics have influenced the development of energy-harvesting footwear.

The quality of the included studies was rigorously assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists and the Jadad scale. CASP checklists helped evaluate the trustworthiness, relevance, and results of the studies by scrutinizing study aims, research design, recruitment strategies, and outcome measures. The Jadad scale, applied to randomized control trials, assessed the quality based on randomization, double-blinding, and dropout descriptions, ensuring that only studies with high methodological integrity were included.

Fundamental Considerations

A. Material Science and Biomechanics Considerations

In line with this investigation, a 2022 study by Wang et al. empirically demonstrated the effectiveness of piezoelectric materials in footwear energy harvesting⁴. Their research found that piezoelectric fibers integrated into shoe soles exhibited significant energy conversion capabilities, generating electrical outputs exceeding 7 mW per step under controlled laboratory conditions. This finding suggests that harvested energy can potentially reach levels sufficient to power low-power wearable devices. Advancements in material science are propelling the development of more efficient energy-harvesting footwear. Notably, nanostructured piezoelectric materials have emerged as a promising avenue for boosting power output.

Their superior performance stems from a combination of factors, including a dramatic increase in surface area compared to their microscale counterparts. Studies estimate this increase can be as high as 1000-fold⁸. Thus, significantly enhancing their ability to convert mechanical energy into electrical energy. A significant improvement in energy conversion efficiency when nano-piezoelectric fibers were woven into shoe insoles compared to their micro-scale counterparts is revealed in contemporary research⁵. This research underscores the critical role of material scale in optimizing piezoelectric energy harvesters. However, it is crucial to acknowledge potential trade-offs. While nanomaterials offer improved performance in terms of energy conversion efficiency, they may also introduce drawbacks such as reduced durability due to factors like increased susceptibility to mechanical fatigue¹⁷. Addressing these limitations through further material development will be essential for the practical implementation of this technology. Promising solutions include the development of flexible piezoelectric composites, that combine the high energy conversion efficiency of nanomaterials with the improved durability of more robust materials¹⁸. Integrating energy-harvesting mechanisms into footwear presents a unique challenge that necessitates careful consideration of both design constraints and complex biomechanical dynamics. Biomechanical insight is paramount when optimizing the conversion of kinetic energy into electrical energy within the soles of shoes.

There exists a detailed analysis of gait forces, quantifying the forces exerted during various gait phases such as heel-strike (average vertical force: 1.2 BW [Body Weight]), mid-stance (average vertical force: 0.8 BW), and toe-off (average vertical force: 1.2 BW)¹⁹.

Figure 1. FORCES FOR TYPICAL GAIT CYCLE OF HEALTHY SUBJECT (Mariani Benoit, 2012)

In Figure 1, various force signals are shown with the different gait phases marked: Heel-strike ( $\triangle$ ), Toe-strike as ( $+$ ), Heel-off as ( $o$ ), and Toe-off as ( $\Delta$ ). $\Omega_p$ is the foot pitch angular velocity, $F_h$ is the vertical force signal on the hindfoot, and $F_f$ is the vertical force signal on the forefoot.

B. Optimizing Energy Harvesting Through Material Selection and Design

Optimizing energy capture within footwear necessitates careful consideration of material properties and design configuration. Pioneering research was conducted into the critical role of material-design synergy in maximizing energy output. The work explored how aligning the mechanical properties of piezoelectric materials with specific gait-induced loading conditions can significantly enhance energy harvesting efficiency²⁰. Two critical material properties to consider are the piezoelectric coefficient (d₃₃) and Young’s modulus as described in the previous section.

The piezoelectric coefficient d₃₃ (measured in picocoulombs per newton, pC/N) quantifies the amount of electric charge generated in response to mechanical stress. For instance, Lead Zirconate Titanate (PZT) has a d₃₃ value of approximately 500 pC/N, which allows for higher voltage outputs in response to stress²¹. These materials are strategically placed in high-pressure zones of the shoe sole, such as the heel and forefoot strike regions, to maximize their exposure to the greatest mechanical stress during walking.

Young’s modulus (measured in gigapascals, GPa) describes the material’s stiffness and its resistance to deformation. PZT’s Young’s modulus is around 65 GPa, providing structural integrity to withstand repeated stress during walking, but limiting its flexibility²².

There is an inherent trade-off between these two properties: materials with a high d₃₃ are typically more efficient at generating electricity, while those with a higher Young’s modulus are more durable. Balancing these properties is crucial for optimizing energy output while ensuring long-term functionality in footwear.

C. Energy Harvesting footwear as a step toward energy independence

The pursuit of sustainability in this context is motivated by the objective of reducing reliance on environmentally taxing energy sources. Energy-harvesting footwear aligns with this objective by enabling a personal generation of electricity, an approach that is increasingly recognized as a pivotal component of smart, sustainable urban planning. This notion is bolstered by McDonough and Braungart’s cradle-to-cradle framework, which advocates for product designs that enable a perpetual lifecycle of use and reuse²³.

Energy-harvesting footwear presents a significant step towards a more sustainable future by promoting a shift from dependence on traditional energy grids to a localized, user-driven approach to power generation. This paper examines the data presented in landmark studies to craft a narrative around the potential and challenges of energy-harvesting footwear. Through the different lenses offered by a critical academic review, it evaluates how these wearable devices could significantly alter the landscape of personal energy consumption, offering a bifocal benefit of environmental aid and consumer convenience.

Processes of Harvesting Energy

Harvesting ambient energy via footwear presents a novel avenue for powering wearable electronics, directly benefiting from the mechanical energy inherent in human locomotion.

A. The Direct Piezoelectric Effect

Piezoelectric materials form the core technology enabling energy harvesting in footwear. These materials, such as Polyvinylidene Fluoride (PVDF) or Lead Zirconate Titanate (PZT), exhibit the remarkable property of converting mechanical stress into electrical charge through the direct piezoelectric effect, as described in equation (i), in the previous sections.

Research of exploring the practical application of the above formula in research involved the development of piezoelectric shoe inserts capable of generating up to 8.4 mW of continuous power during walking²⁴. This value directly correlates with the average force exerted on the shoe sole throughout a typical gait cycle. The success of this study highlights the potential of piezoelectric materials to harness the mechanical energy produced during human locomotion and convert it into a usable electrical output, and the findings are presented in Table 1 to depict the different parameters that need to be vitalized to increase efficiency of the overall system.

Material	Power Output per Step (mW)
Piezoelectric fibres	~ 5 mW
Nanostructured PZT fibres	6 mW – 7 mW
Nano-piezoelectric fibres	7mW – 7.5 mW

Table 1. Power Efficacy per Material

B. Kinetic Energy Harvesting: The Principle of Dynamic Motion

Extracting usable energy from human movement is a growing area of research with significant implications for wearable electronics. Kinetic energy harvesting focuses on converting the energy of bodily motion into electrical power. This process leverages the repetitive nature of human gait, where each stride can be viewed as a cycle of kinetic energy generation. Pioneering work by Paradiso and Starner (2005) explored this concept by integrating a rotational energy harvester into the heel of a shoe²⁵. Their study meticulously examined the output generated by the harvester at various walking speeds, providing valuable insights into optimizing energy capture during human locomotion (table 2). Starner and Paradiso also experimented with various locations on the body, finding that lower body joints, such as the knee and ankle, produced far more energy than upper body placements, where motion is less pronounced. Complementing these findings, Romero et al. (2011) focused on rotational energy harvesters specifically designed for capturing energy from the ankle joint²⁶. Their system produced an average of 472 µW at 4 mph, with power output rising to 540 µW when running at 5 mph. This highlights the efficiency of rotational energy harvesters positioned at lower limb locations, where greater angular momentum contributes to higher energy capture.

Donelan et al. (2008) expanded the scope by designing a knee-mounted energy harvester that utilized the deceleration phase of walking (regenerative braking). Tested at 1.5 m/s, the device generated an average of 4.8 ± 0.8 Watts with minimal metabolic cost, showing significant potential for powering small electronics with negligible impact on the user²⁷. Although the design focuses on knee joint movement rather than the foot, this study provides critical insights into how energy harvesters placed near human joints can yield significant power outputs. These findings are relevant to the current study because they underscore the importance of strategically placing energy-harvesting components in high-movement areas of the body to optimize power generation. For energy-harvesting footwear, this would suggest placing materials at key points such as the heel and forefoot, which experience the most significant mechanical forces during the gait cycle.

Design Concept	Harvested Power	User Activity Level	Reference
Rotational Kinetic Harvester	330 $\mu$ W	Normal Walking Speed (2-3mph)	(Paradiso & Starner (2005)
Knee Joint Energy Harvester	$\sim$ 5 mW	Brisk Walking (3-4mph)	(Donelan et al. (2008)
Rotational Energy Harvester (Ankle)	472 $\mu$ W (4 mph), 540 $\mu$ W (5 mph)	Walking/Running (4-5 mph)	(Romero et al. (2009)

Table 2. Design Concept of Kinetic Energy Harvester

Table 2 compares the power outputs of these kinetic energies harvesting systems, demonstrating the potential energy yield across different design concepts and user activity levels.

C. Biomechanical Considerations: Energy Conversion and Gait Analysis

The biomechanics of walking and running present a fascinating opportunity for harvesting energy through human movement. When meticulously dissecting the gait cycle, it reveals distinct phases with varying force application. These phases, encompassing heel-strike, mid-stance, and toe-off, each hold potential for capturing kinetic energy. By analyzing force plate data, researchers can pinpoint the moments of peak pressure exerted on the foot throughout the gait cycle.

Below data provides valuable clues for strategically placing energy harvesting devices within footwear. For instance, the peak pressures measured at the heel during initial contact (heel-strike) and at the forefoot during push-off suggest these as prime locations for integrating energy conversion mechanisms².

Figure 3. forces based Harvesting Potential Through Gait Phases

Another study focused on experimental gait analysis using a Tekscan HR mat to study the forces acting on different regions of the foot during walking and running²⁸. This study found that the heel region experienced higher peak pressures during running compared to jumping, with forces recorded at 86.3 ± 12.6 N/cm² for running and 27.8 ± 3.9 N/cm² for jumping during heel strike.

Nuances of Energy Harvesting and Real World Implications

A. Sustainability and Practicality

Striking a balance between sustainable energy solutions and practical footwear design is crucial for the widespread adoption of energy-harvesting footwear. Integrating these technologies directly addresses sustainability concerns by offering a renewable power source for wearable devices. This approach reduces reliance on disposable batteries, which can have a significant environmental impact due to their production and disposal processes. However, the successful implementation of energy harvesting requires careful consideration of both material properties and user demographics. For piezoelectric materials, the specific piezoelectric coefficients, such as d₃₃ and d₃₁, influence the amount of energy converted from mechanical stress into electricity²⁹.

d₃₃represents the longitudinal piezoelectric coefficient, which describes how much charge is generated when mechanical stress is applied along the same direction as the polarization of the material. d₃₁ on the other hand, is the transverse piezoelectric coefficient, which refers to the amount of charge generated when mechanical stress is applied perpendicular to the polarization direction. Optimizing these material properties alongside user factors like walking style and activity level is essential for maximizing the harvested energy and ensuring the technology’s applicability for various user demographics.

B. Energy Efficiency Across Various Models

Achieving optimal energy efficiency in footwear harvesting hinges on two critical aspects: the inherent properties of the chosen energy-harvesting materials and the overall design and structure of the shoe itself. Material selection plays a crucial role, as different materials exhibit varying degrees of efficiency in converting mechanical energy into usable electrical power.

One prominent example when the use of piezoelectric materials, specifically PZT (Lead Zirconate Titanate), for energy harvesting in footwear was explored³⁰. The research focused on integrating PZT-based inserts into shoe insoles. This design achieved a noteworthy power output of 8.4 mW during normal walking, highlighting the potential of piezoelectric materials for powering low-power wearable electronics.

However, maximizing energy output goes beyond simply choosing the right material. The effectiveness of energy conversion also depends on several design considerations:

Coupling Efficiency: A critical factor is the degree of “coupling” between the piezoelectric material and the insole. This refers to how effectively the mechanical stresses experienced by the insole are transferred to the piezoelectric element, ultimately influencing the amount of electrical charge generated. Optimization strategies like strategic placement and proper material interfaces can improve this coupling efficiency.
Footbed Coverage Area: The area of the footbed covered by the energy harvesting element also plays a role. A larger footprint generally translates to capturing more of the foot’s pressure distribution during gait, potentially leading to higher energy output. However, this needs to be balanced with user comfort and practical considerations regarding shoe design and aesthetics.
Foot Dynamics: Understanding the wearer’s individual foot dynamics is crucial. Factors such as walking style, stride length, and impact force all influence the amount of mechanical energy available for harvesting. Ideally, the shoe’s design should accommodate these differences and optimize energy capture based on the user’s specific gait patterns.

By carefully considering these factors – material properties, coupling efficiency, footbed coverage, and individual foot dynamics – researchers and designers can strive to create energy-efficient footwear harvesting solutions that are both practical and effective for real-world applications.

C. Wearer Comfort Basis Design Features

While cushioning plays a crucial role in footwear comfort, achieving comfort in energy-harvesting footwear requires careful consideration of how the harvesting technology interacts with the foot during movement. There exists an importance of integrating energy-harvesting mechanisms, such as multilayer polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) structures, in a way that minimizes disruption to the foot’s natural biomechanics³¹.

A comprehensive assessment of comfort in energy-harvesting footwear goes beyond subjective user reports. Researchers employ quantifiable measures to objectively evaluate user experience. These measures include pressure mapping and foot strain analysis³²^,³³. Pressure mapping techniques provide a detailed picture of the distribution of pressure across the foot during various activities. This information is crucial for ensuring that the energy-harvesting components are strategically placed to avoid creating pressure points that could lead to discomfort or fatigue. Foot strain analysis, which often involves gait evaluation, helps assess whether the harvesting technology alters a user’s natural gait pattern. Undesirable gait modifications can lead to increased energy expenditure, muscle fatigue, and potential musculoskeletal problems over time.

By incorporating these objective measures alongside subjective user feedback, researchers and designers can develop energy-harvesting footwear that is not only functional but also comfortable for extended wear. This integrated approach is essential for ensuring the long-term adoption and success of energy-harvesting footwear technologies.

D. Functionality Evaluations

Evaluating the functionality of energy-harvesting footwear requires testing its performance across a wider range of user activities than just typical walking speeds. While studies by Paradiso and Starner (2005) provide valuable insights into energy generation during normal walking, true functionality necessitates adaptability to various walking conditions and user behaviorswith the first beingdiverse walking surfaces. Footwear should function effectively on different terrains, from flat sidewalks to uneven paths or inclines¹. Energy harvesting mechanisms need to be robust enough to handle the varying impact forces encountered on different surfaces. Another factor includes varied walking speeds, when functionality extends beyond a single walking pace. The design should accommodate the fluctuations in power generation that occur during activities like slow walking, jogging, or even running³⁴. Lastly one must consider differences in user behaviour. Individual gait patterns and footfalls can influence energy harvesting efficiency¹⁶. The design must be adaptable to accommodate variations in heel strike patterns and toe-off force.

Material & Design	Harvested Power	Application Focus	Activity Level Functionality
PZT-based Insole	8.4 mW	Continuous Power for Wearables	Effective across various walking speeds
PVDF Film Inserts	1-10 mW	Self-Sustaining Wearable Electronics	Optimized for average daily activities
Multilayer PVDF Structures	2-20 mW	Intermittent Power Supply	Best for activities with pronounced heel-strikes

Table 3. Functionality Assessment

The energy-harvesting mechanism needs to be designed to effectively capture the high power surges experienced during these critical moments in the gait cycle without compromising its structural integrity or causing discomfort to the wearer³⁵^,³⁶^,³⁷.

Optimized Material Choice

The pursuit of self-powered wearable electronics hinges on a critical breakthrough: the development of energy-harvesting materials that are both efficient and exceptionally durable. While traditional materials like Polyvinylidene Fluoride (PVDF) and Lead Zirconate Titanate (PZT) serve as potential solutions, they fall short in crucial aspects. PVDF suffers from a significant decline in power output over time due to fatigue, while PZT’s inherent brittleness renders it unsuitable for applications requiring flexibility, like insoles in footwear³⁸ ^,³⁹. Recent advancements in flexible piezoelectric composites and nanocomposites have shown promise, but further innovation is necessary to achieve the ideal material for energy-harvesting footwear. Here, the investigation yields an innovative approach: biocompatible shape-memory polymer (SMP) nanocomposites infused with self-healing characteristics.

Limitations of Existing Materials

As for PVDF’s, studies by Sirohi and Chopra (2000) documented a significant decrease in its power output after a specific number of walking or running cycles (typically in the 10⁶ to 10⁷ range)⁴⁰. This vulnerability to fatigue necessitates the exploration of alternative materials with superior endurance. When comparing the same to PZT’s, although it boasts high piezoelectric coefficients, translating to a higher energy output per step, its inherent brittleness makes it unsuitable for applications requiring flexibility⁴¹. The dynamic stresses exceeding 30 MPa experienced in insoles during walking can cause cracking and premature failure in PZT⁴². Flexible Piezoelectric Composites, on the other demonstrated improved fatigue resistance in these composites (exceeding 10⁸ cycles), their energy conversion efficiency remains lower compared to PZT⁴³. This efficiency-fatigue resistance trade-off necessitates a material that can offer both superior fatigue resistance and competitive energy conversion efficiency. In the up and coming field of nanotechnology the exceptional fatigue resistance (>10⁹ cycles) and improved efficiency (up to 20 %) in nanocomposites was portrayed⁹. However, large-scale, cost-effective production methods for these materials are still under development, hindering their widespread adoption.

Self-Healing Shape- Memory Polymers (SMP’s)

We propose incorporating SMPs as the base material for the nanocomposite. SMPs possess the unique ability to return So a predetermined shape after deformation⁶. This inherent self-healing mechanism has the potential to revolutionize energy-harvesting footwear by mitigating micro-cracks that can accumulate during wear. These micro-cracks are a major contributor to fatigue failure in conventional materials, and the self-healing properties of SMPs can significantly enhance the material’s longevity and durability.

Piezoelectric Nanoparticles to Enhance Energy Conversion

To address the efficiency limitations and create a synergistic effect with the self-healing properties of SMPs, we propose embedding strategically chosen piezoelectric nanoparticles within the SMP matrix. This would create a biomimetic nanocomposite that leverages the flexibility and self-healing properties of SMPs while incorporating the energy harvesting capabilities of the nanoparticles. Promising results were demonstrated with piezoelectric nanocomposite materials, suggesting further exploration is warranted⁷. Optimizing the size, distribution, and type of nanoparticles will be crucial for maximizing energy conversion efficiency. Here, factors like nanoparticle morphology, interfacial interactions between the nanoparticles and the SMP matrix, and the overall electrical conductivity of the composite all play a critical role⁴⁴.

Scientific Considerations for Material Choice

Picking the right materials to construct the shoe with, is vital for the scope of the research, as aspects like self-healing processes, shape memory, and cross links could increase its efficacy and practicality. Thus the following substances have been considered for the sake of this study:

Biocompatible SMPs: Polyurethanes (PU) and polyureas (PUA) are promising candidates due to their biocompatibility, good mechanical properties, and shape-memory characteristics⁴⁵. Further research on incorporating self-healing functionalities using reversible cross-linking strategies is crucial. Here, stimuli-responsive cross-linking approaches using light, heat, or pH could be explored to enable on-demand or continuous self-healing³⁸:
Light-responsive cross-linking: Utilizing photo initiators sensitive to specific wavelengths of light would allow for spatial and temporal control over the self-healing process³⁹. This could be beneficial for targeted repair of damaged areas within the SMP matrix.
Heat-responsive cross-linking: Introducing reversible cross-links that respond to heat could enable self-healing at elevated temperatures, potentially during the manufacturing process or through body heat during wear⁴⁰.
pH-responsive cross-linking: Incorporating self-healing moieties that respond to changes in pH could allow the SMP to self-heal in response to sweat or other physiological fluids encountered during wear.
Piezoelectric Nanoparticles: Barium Titanate (BaTiO3) nanoparticles are strong contenders due to their high piezoelectric coefficients, biocompatibility, and commercial availability⁴¹.
Zinc Oxide (ZnO) nanoparticles: ZnO nanoparticles offer excellent piezoelectric properties and have shown potential for improved biocompatibility with surface modifications⁴². They could be explored as an alternative or complementary material to BaTiO3, potentially offering a balance between efficiency and biocompatibility.
Composite Nanoparticles: Investigating composite nanoparticles made from a combination of materials like BaTiO3 and PZT could be another avenue for exploration. This could allow for tailoring the piezoelectric properties, biocompatibility, and self-healing behavior of the nanocomposite⁴³.
SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS

The application of energy-harvesting technologies in footwear inherently supports the sustainability ethos by reducing dependency on conventional power sources and decreasing the ecological footprint of personal electronic devices. The integration of such technologies into the consumer market impacts various stakeholders including consumers, who gain a seamless energy supply for their wearables; manufacturers, tasked with integrating complex systems into comfortable and marketable products; and environmental advocates, who foresee a reduction in electronic waste and battery usage.

While the ability to reduce reliance on conventional power sources is a significant benefit, energy-harvesting footwear offers a multitude of sustainability advantages that extend far beyond individual users. Widespread adoption has the potential to significantly reduce environmental impact through a decrease in battery waste. Studies indicate that the average American discards approximately 4.4 pounds (2 kgs) of batteries annually, with the associated processing and disposal contributing to environmental hazards⁴⁶. Energy harvesting lessens dependence on resource-intensive battery production, mitigating concerns about resource depletion and environmental damage associated with mining lithium and cobalt, vital elements in many wearable device batteries⁶. Furthermore, battery production and disposal contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, with lithium-ion battery production alone a significant contributor⁷.

By harvesting energy from human movement, energy-harvesting footwear offers a cleaner alternative, reducing reliance on these environmentally taxing processes. The impact of energy-harvesting footwear extends beyond individual consumers. Integrating this technology positions manufacturers as leaders in sustainable innovation, potentially attracting environmentally conscious customers and fostering partnerships with eco-friendly organizations. Additionally, energy-harvesting footwear could promote increased physical activity, contributing to public health benefits. Research shows that walking or running more often improves overall health, which could lead to reduced healthcare costs and a healthier society⁴⁴.

In the context of smart cities, data collected from energy-harvesting footwear on pedestrian movement patterns could play a role in urban planning. This aligns with the concept of sustainable “smart cities”, which leverage technology to optimize resource use and improve quality of life⁴⁵. For instance, insights from pedestrian traffic flow data could help design more efficient walking and cycling paths, ultimately reducing the reliance on personal vehicles and their associated carbon emissions.

Despite these advantages, challenges remain. A crucial consideration is balancing energy output with material longevity, as discussed in previous sections. Additionally, combining functionality with aesthetics will be essential for consumer adoption. Seamlessly integrating energy-harvesting technology into stylish footwear designs is key to widespread acceptance. Finally, the initial costs of energy-harvesting footwear may be higher than those of traditional shoes. Government incentives or subsidies could promote affordability and encourage widespread use.

Conclusion

This research explored the potential of integrating energy-harvesting technology into footwear using piezoelectric materials and shape-memory polymer (SMP) nanocomposites. These materials show promise for converting mechanical energy from human movement into usable electrical power, which can contribute to reducing reliance on traditional batteries and supporting sustainability goals. However, several significant challenges and limitations need to be critically addressed for this technology to achieve widespread adoption. One of the primary challenges lies in the energy conversion efficiency of piezoelectric materials when used in wearable applications. While materials like PZT (lead zirconate titanate) and PVDF (polyvinylidene fluoride) are well known for their high piezoelectric coefficients, the energy harvested from walking is relatively low due to the intermittent nature of human motion. Furthermore, mechanical fatigue in piezoelectric materials can lead to reduced efficiency over time, especially in high-wear environments like footwear⁴⁷. While SMP nanocomposites offer self-healing capabilities, the efficiency of these materials during the healing process remains a concern. Frequent mechanical stresses, such as those experienced during walking, may temporarily reduce their energy conversion efficiency, which presents a trade-off between durability and consistent power output.

The cost of incorporating advanced materials such as nanocomposites and self-healing polymers into footwear is another significant challenge. The fabrication of these materials is complex and costly, largely due to the precision required in controlling their nanoscale structure. This complexity drives up production costs, making energy-harvesting footwear significantly more expensive to produce than conventional shoes. Although economies of scale could eventually lower these costs, the high initial production expenses may make the product too expensive for the mass market in the short term. Manufacturers will need to innovate cost-effective production methods or explore hybrid material designs that balance performance and affordability to make the product accessible to a wider audience.

Another critical challenge is the manufacturing feasibility of integrating piezoelectric materials and SMP nanocomposites into flexible, comfortable footwear. Materials like PZT, though efficient at converting mechanical stress into electrical energy, are brittle and prone to cracking under repetitive stress. Embedding such materials into flexible shoe soles without compromising their performance or structural integrity is a difficult task⁴⁷. Although SMP nanocomposites are more flexible, scaling their production for commercial use presents several hurdles. Additionally, integrating these energy-harvesting components into footwear without affecting the comfort or aesthetic appeal of the shoes remains a complex design challenge.

While energy-harvesting footwear has the potential to reduce battery waste by generating power for small wearable devices, such as fitness trackers, the sustainability benefits require further validation. Quantitative modeling is needed to assess the actual reduction in battery waste that could be achieved if millions of users adopted energy-harvesting footwear. At present, the claim that this technology could significantly reduce environmental impact is speculative without more robust data. Similarly, there is insufficient evidence to support the idea that these shoes would lead to measurable improvements in public health. Controlled trials and empirical studies are needed to validate whether users wearing these shoes increase their physical activity and experience related health benefits.

Despite these challenges, the potential of energy-harvesting footwear remains significant, especially as sustainability becomes a greater focus in consumer products. To move forward, research must focus on improving the energy efficiency and durability of piezoelectric and nanocomposite materials, reducing the cost of production, and refining scalable manufacturing techniques. In parallel, user-centric design approaches should prioritize comfort and practicality, ensuring that the technology does not negatively affect the user experience. In conclusion, while the concept of energy-harvesting footwear represents a promising step toward sustainable innovation, the challenges related to energy efficiency, manufacturing feasibility, and cost must be carefully addressed. By overcoming these limitations and conducting further research, this technology has the potential to reduce reliance on disposable batteries and contribute to a more sustainable future.

References

Mitcheson, Paul D., et al. “Energy harvesting from human and machine motion for wireless electronic devices.” Proceedings of the IEEE 96.9 (2008): 1457-1486 [↩] [↩] [↩]
Veved, Albert, Geh Wilson Ejuh, and Noël Djongyang. “Review of emerging materials for PVDF-based energy harvesting.” Energy Reports 8 (2022): 12853-12870 [↩] [↩]
Farris, Dominic James, and Gregory S. Sawicki. “The mechanics and energetics of human walking and running: a joint level perspective.” Journal of The Royal Society Interface 9.66 (2012): 110-118 [↩]
Wang, Yidi, et al. “Design and preliminary testing of a piezoelectric-based sole energy harvester.” 2022 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO). IEEE, 2022 [↩] [↩] [↩]
Wang, Zehuan, et al. “Perspective on Development of Piezoelectric Micro-Power Generators.” Nanoenergy Advances 3.2 (2023): 73-100 [↩] [↩]
Skiba, Richard. Battery Powered: The Social, Economical, and Environmental Impacts of the Lithium Ion Battery. After Midnight Publishing, 2024 [↩] [↩] [↩]
Xu, Chengjian, et al. “Future greenhouse gas emissions of automotive lithium-ion battery cell production.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling 187 (2022): 106606 [↩] [↩] [↩]
Khan, Karim, et al. “Recent developments in emerging two-dimensional materials and their applications.” Journal of Materials Chemistry C 8.2 (2020): 387-440 [↩] [↩]
Fishbein, B. “Waste in the wireless world.” Inform Inc (2002) [↩] [↩]
Shenck, Nathan S., and Joseph A. Paradiso. “Energy scavenging with shoe-mounted piezoelectrics.” IEEE micro 21.3 (2001): 30-42 [↩]
Wang, Yidi, et al. “Design and preliminary testing of a piezoelectric-based sole energy harvester.” 2022 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO). IEEE, 2022 [↩]
Shenck, Nathan S., and Joseph A. Paradiso. “Energy scavenging with shoe-mounted piezoelectrics.” IEEE micro 21.3 (2001): 30-42 [↩]
Skiba, Richard. Battery Powered: The Social, Economical, and Environmental Impacts of the Lithium Ion Battery. After Midnight Publishing, 2024 [↩]
Xu, Chengjian, et al. “Future greenhouse gas emissions of automotive lithium-ion battery cell production.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling 187 (2022): 106606 [↩]
Popovic, Zoran D., and E. Roland Menzel. “Electric field?induced fluorescence quenching in organic photoconductors.” The Journal of Chemical Physics 71.12 (1979): 5090-5096 [↩]
Liu, Mingyi, et al. “Biomechanical energy harvesting for wearable and mobile devices: State-of-the-art and future directions.” Applied Energy 321 (2022): 119379 [↩] [↩]
Kumar, MS Senthil, et al. “Effect of nanomaterials on tribological and mechanical properties of polymer nanocomposite materials.” Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 2022.1 (2022): 2165855 [↩]
Zhao, Z., et al. “Flexible nanogenerators for wearable electronic applications based on piezoelectric materials.” Materials Today Energy 20 (2021): 100690 [↩]
Mariani, Benoît. Assessment of foot signature using wearable sensors for clinical gait analysis and real-time activity recognition. No. 5434. EPFL, 2012 [↩]
Zhao, Bingqi, et al. “A review of piezoelectric footwear energy harvesters: Principles, methods, and applications.” Sensors 23.13 (2023): 5841 [↩]
Zhou, Honglei, et al. “Stretchable piezoelectric energy harvesters and self-powered sensors for wearable and implantable devices.” Biosensors and Bioelectronics 168 (2020): 112569 [↩]
Pfaffen, Samuel, et al. “Planipes: Mobile foot pressure analysis.” Proceedings of the First ACM Workshop on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services for Healthcare. 2011 [↩]
Jones, Alexander D., et al. “A cross-sectional pilot study utilising STrain Analysis and Mapping of the Plantar Surface (STAMPS) to measure plantar load characteristics within a healthy population.” Gait & Posture (2024) [↩]
Kymissis, John, et al. “Parasitic power harvesting in shoes.” Digest of papers. Second international symposium on wearable computers (Cat. No. 98EX215). IEEE, 1998 [↩]
Mitcheson, Paul D., et al. “Energy harvesting from human and machine motion for wireless electronic devices.” Proceedings of the IEEE 96.9 (2008): 1457-1486 [↩]
Edwar, Romero., Michael, R., Neuman., Robert, O., Warrington. (2011). 1. Rotational energy harvester for body motion. doi: 10.1109/MEMSYS.2011.5734678 [↩]
Donelan, et al. (2008). Biomechanical Energy Harvesting: Generating Electricity During Walking with Minimal User Effort. Science (New York, N.Y.). 319. 807-10. 10.1126/science.1149860 [↩]
Vidya, K., Nandikolla., Robin, Bochen., Steven, Meza., Allan, Garcia. (2017). Experimental Gait Analysis to Study Stress Distribution of the Human Foot.2017:3432074-3432074 [↩]
Peters, Travis Lee. Extrinsic Contributions in Lead Zirconate Titanate Films: From Defects to Devices. The Pennsylvania State University, 2023 [↩]
Wu, Yixin, et al. “Advances and prospects of PVDF based polymer electrolytes.” Journal of Energy Chemistry 64 (2022): 62-84 [↩]
Wang, S., and K. X. Liu. “Experimental research on dynamic mechanical properties of PZT ceramic under hydrostatic pressure.” Materials Science and Engineering: A 528.21 (2011): 6463-6468 [↩]
Fu, Jing, et al. “Highly durable piezoelectric energy harvester based on a PVDF flexible nanocomposite filled with oriented BaTi2O5 nanorods with high power density.” Nano Energy 52 (2018): 391-401 [↩]
Wan, Sijie, and Qunfeng Cheng. “Fatigue?Resistant Bioinspired Graphene?Based Nanocomposites.” Advanced Functional Materials 27.43 (2017): 1703459 [↩]
Hu, Jinlian, et al. “Recent advances in shape–memory polymers: Structure, mechanism, functionality, modeling and applications.” Progress in polymer science 37.12 (2012): 1720-1763 [↩]
Zhang, Qifeng, et al. “Nanomaterials for energy conversion and storage.” Chemical Society Reviews 42.7 (2013): 3127-3171 [↩]
Madbouly, Samy A., and Andreas Lendlein. “Shape-memory polymer composites.” Shape-memory polymers (2010): 41-95 [↩]
Nugroho, Wendy Triadji, et al. “Smart polyurethane composites for 3D or 4D printing: General-purpose use, sustainability and shape memory effect.” Composites Part B: Engineering 223 (2021): 109104 [↩]
Guo, Quanquan, Xiaoyan Qiu, and Xinxing Zhang. “Recent advances in electronic skins with multiple-stimuli-responsive and self-healing abilities.” Materials 15.5 (2022): 1661 [↩] [↩]
Amaral, Adérito JR, and George Pasparakis. “Stimuli responsive self-healing polymers: gels, elastomers and membranes.” Polymer Chemistry 8.42 (2017): 6464-6484 [↩] [↩]
Ekeocha, James, et al. “Challenges and opportunities of self?healing polymers and devices for extreme and hostile environments.” Advanced Materials 33.33 (2021): 2008052 [↩] [↩]
Okhay, Olena, and Alexander Tkach. “Current Achievements in Flexible Piezoelectric Nanogenerators Based on Barium Titanate.” Nanomaterials 13.6 (2023): 988 [↩] [↩]
Le, Anh Thi, Mohsen Ahmadipour, and Swee-Yong Pung. “A review on ZnO-based piezoelectric nanogenerators: Synthesis, characterization techniques, performance enhancement and applications.” Journal of Alloys and Compounds 844 (2020): 156172 [↩] [↩]
Chianella, Iva, Hamed Yazdani Nezhad, and Saurav Goel. “A Study of Control Mechanisms in Micro and Nano System-Enhanced Polymer Nanocomposites under Mechanical and Electrical Stimuli: An Experimental and Computational Investigation.” (2023) [↩] [↩]
Cicchella, Antonio. “Human Power Production and Energy Harvesting.” Encyclopedia 3.2 (2023): 698-704 [↩] [↩]
Blasi, S., A. Ganzaroli, and I. De Noni. “Smartening sustainable development in cities: Strengthening the theoretical linkage between smart cities and SDGs.” Sustainable Cities and Society 80 (2022): 103793 [↩] [↩]
Fishbein, B. “Waste in the wireless world.” Inform Inc (2002 [↩]
Jaffe, B., Cook, W. R., & Jaffe, H. (2012). Piezoelectric Ceramics. Academic Press [↩] [↩]

Optimizing Energy Conversion in Next-Generation Energy-Harvesting Footwear

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Fundamental Considerations

A. Material Science and Biomechanics Considerations

B. Optimizing Energy Harvesting Through Material Selection and Design

C. Energy Harvesting footwear as a step toward energy independence