252 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO.

2, MARCH 2010

Ultra-Low Power Control System for Maximal

Energy Harvesting From Short Duration Vibrations
Krishna Vijayaraghavan and Rajesh Rajamani

Abstract—With the advent of ultra-low power sensor packages, Width of the support beam (25 mm) also the
there is renewed interest in harvesting vibration energy to power width of the piezo.
them, thus creating a self sustaining battery-less sensor system. The
optimal algorithms previously developed in literature to harvest Strain produced per unit applied electric field
vibration energy are complex and hence require controllers that m V .
consume a significant amount of power. The relatively high power
requirement combined with the inherent complex design of these Open circuit electric field produced for an unit
algorithms would also limit them to only applications in which applied stress Vm N .
sustained vibration energy is available for harvesting. To address
these issues, this paper presents new control systems to optimize the 1 Piezo constant defined as the open circuit
amount of energy harvested from short duration vibrations. Only voltage developed per unit applied strain
algorithms that can be implemented using simple ultra-low power V.
analog electronic components are considered. The first algorithm
termed “fixed threshold switching”, has been adapted from liter- Thickness of the support beam (6.25 mm).
ature on harvesting energy from sustained vibration. The second
and third algorithms are new optimal control algorithms termed Load current through .
“maximum voltage switching” and “switched inductor”, respec- Current through the Piezo.
tively. The three algorithms are theoretically evaluated and com-
pared for a short duration vibration application. The final section Length scale associated with the mechanical
of this paper presents experimental results from the implementa- system.
tion of all the three algorithms on a new battery-less wireless traffic
sensor. Mass associated with the mechanical system.
Index Terms—Battery-less, energy harvesting, optimal vibration Displacement of the mechanical system.
energy harvesting, short duration vibrations, standalone sensors,
traffic sensor, ultra-low power control systems, wireless. Magnitude of displacement of the mechanical
system at the point where the force is applied.

NOMENCLATURE Capacitance of the Piezo.

Storage capacitor.
Electro-mechanical coupling value.
Modulus of elasticity of the piezo at
Thickness of piezo (0.191 mm). constant voltage (constant electric field)
Strain in the Piezo, from (3). .
Constant associated with the mechanical Elastic modulus of the main beam (200 GPa).
system equaling .
Elastic modulus of the support beam (200
Constant associated with the mechanical GPa).
system model arising due to electro-mechanical
Area moment of inertia main beam
coupling, , mm .
.
Area moment of inertia support beam
Open-circuit natural frequency of the mm .
mechanical system (38 Hz).
Value of inductance used in “Switched
Damping ratio associated with the vibrating Inductor” algorithm (Section III-B3) (10 mH).
mechanical system (0.7).
Effective length of the main beam (1.7125 m).
Effective length of the support beam (0.2 m).
Manuscript received May 17, 2008. Manuscript received in final form March
11, 2009. First published July 21, 2009; current version published February 24, Total resistance in the circuit due to switches
2010. Recommended by Associate Editor P. Meckl. This work was supported and other components (not including ) (327
in part by a research grant from the ITS Institute, University of Minnesota.
The authors are with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, University ohms).
of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA (e-mail: rajamani@me.umn.edu).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TCST.2009.2018135
Load resistance (1000 ohms).

1063-6536/$26.00 © 2009 IEEE

VIJAYARAGHAVAN AND RAJAMANI: ULTRA-LOW POWER CONTROL SYSTEM FOR MAXIMAL ENERGY HARVESTING
Diode resistance.
Load switch.
Piezo switch.
Voltage across the storage capacitor
Maximum voltage across the storage capacitor.
Voltage across the piezo capacitor
Forward voltage drop across each diode (1.1
V for the diode used).
On (high) threshold.
Off (low) threshold.
Voltage measured across the piezo.
Voltage open circuit voltage generated due to
the strain.
Maximum value of corresponding to the
maximum value of the strain.
Extremum value of corresponding to
the th extremum of displacement “ ”.
I. INTRODUCTION
S TANDALONE wireless sensor packages have been re-
placing wired sensors in many applications that require the
sensors to be either implanted in-vivo (as in the case of bio-sen-
sors) or embedded in host structures (such as bridges and road
structures). These wireless sensor packages have traditionally
been powered from electro-chemical batteries. Advances in
electronics have achieved ultra-low power integrated circuits
and micro-controllers as well as ultra-low power transmitters.
Researchers have taken advantage of these advancements
to successfully build new sensor packages [30], [31], [44].
Owing to the extremely low power requirement of these sensor
packages, there has been renewed interest in vibration energy
harvesting (VEH) technologies that would eliminate batteries
in wireless sensor, thus creating a self sustaining battery-less
sensor system. In addition to extending the useful life of the
sensors, VEH would eliminate chemicals from in-vivo environ-
ments like the human body.
There are several sources of sustained vibration that have
been identified as potential power sources for battery-less wire-
less sensors. Such sustained vibrations sources are found in me-
chanical structures [22], [33], [35], as well as in the animal and
human body [1], [37]. In addition to the sources of sustained vi-
bration that have been examined in literature, there is a whole
class of short duration vibration sources that is yet to be com-
pletely explored. In fact, there is tremendous potential for har-
vesting energy from such short duration vibrations. For instance,
a traffic sensor embedded in the road experiences short duration
vibration with the arrival of each automobile. VEH can be used
to power an embedded traffic sensor that would transmit the ar-
rival of every automobile by harvesting energy from these vi-
brations. Similarly, the short duration vibration in a sensor em-
1The constant “e” is not available for the piezo material, hence an equivalent
constant is used.
253
.
.
Fig. 1. Energy harvesting circuit.
bedded in an airport runway could be used to harvest sufficient
energy to power sensors that would measure friction coefficient
on the runway. Yet another application would involve embed-
ding sensors in artificial knee implants to harvest energy from
the vibration that would result during walking. This energy can
then be used to power a sensor that monitors the health of the
implant.
The paper by Sodano et al. [36] provides a good review of
VEH techniques. Some of the earlier work has also focused
on developing control algorithms to optimize the amount of
energy harvested [21], [28]. Ottoman et al. [28], [29] have
proposed an “Optimal Pulse Width Modulator Switching”
algorithm and Lefeuvre et al. [22] have proposed an algorithm
termed “Synchronized Charge Extraction.” Section II briefly
reviews these algorithms and finds them to be inadequate to
power a fully battery less sensor. Section III proposes two new
algorithms that can be used to optimally harvest energy from
short duration vibrations. The performances of the algorithms
are compared to the performance of an existing algorithm from
literature. Section IV presents a novel battery-less wireless
traffic sensor that utilizes the algorithms developed for energy
harvesting. In Section V, the developed algorithms are evalu-
ated experimentally using the new battery-less wireless traffic
sensor.
II. ENERGY HARVESTING ALGORITHMS
In order to replace the battery, the vibration energy needs to
be transduced to electrical energy using an electric circuit. One
such electric circuit is shown in Fig. 1. The energy harvesting
system consists of a piezo-electric substrate (“Piezo Crystal”)
that is used to generate an alternating electrical voltage from the
vibrations. By rectifying (using the diode bridge) and storing
this voltage in a storage capacitor , energy is harvested
to drive load circuits. Since the power available from vibra-
tions is rather low, all researchers have utilized switching al-
gorithms to intermittently drive the load by controlling a load
switch . In Fig. 1, all the components that are powered
by VEH, including the “actual load” and additional circuitry
such as step-down dc-dc convertors that might be needed, are
represented by an equivalent resistance . Sections II-A–II-D
review three different control algorithms that have been previ-
ously proposed in literature to harvest vibration energy.
A. Fixed Threshold Switching
In this algorithm, the voltage due to the vibration is rectified
and stored in the capacitor . The switch is closed when
254 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010
exceeds a fixed high threshold. is opened when
subsequently falls below a low threshold. Hence this algorithm
shall be termed “fixed threshold switching” (FTS). Kymissis et
al. [19] have implemented FTS using circuitry that is completely
powered from the energy that is harvested. Elvin et al. [9], have
proposed using a similar scheme to power sensors that could be
embedded in structures.
Ottoman et al. [28] have shown that for an ideal circuit (with
ideal diodes and no resistive losses in the circuit), maximum
power is extracted from the piezo when is maintained at
half the peak open circuit voltage of the piezo (i.e.,
) during switching. Hence although FTS has
been implemented using self-powered circuitry, it is suboptimal
in terms of the energy that is harvested. The thresholds would
have to change in real-time based on the magnitude of vibration
in order to maximize the energy harvested.
B. Optimal Pulse Width Modulator Switching
Ottoman et al. [28], [29] have proposed an optimal algorithm
to charge a 3-V battery from sustained mechanical vibrations. In
this algorithm, a pulse width modulator (PWM) circuit is used
to switch . In [28], Ottoman et al. have proposed an adap-
tation law to determine the duty cycle of the PWM required for
optimal power extraction. In [29], the researchers have proposed
an improvement to the circuit used in [28]. The new circuit con-
tains additional circuitry to integrate the dc-dc converter as well
as the controller. The overall power consumed by the control
circuitry has also been reduced.
From the analysis in the two papers, it is clear that the “Op-
timal Pulse Width Modulator Switching” algorithm can improve
the amount of energy harvested. However, the authors them-
selves have pointed out that a large amount of power is needed
by the control circuitry. Although this algorithm could be made
feasible and self-sustaining by using a large array of piezo har-
vesters, the overall efficiency is expected to be fairly low when
the number of piezo harvesters is small. Owing to the adaptive
nature of the algorithm, the optimization of the duty cycle can
only be achieved for a sustained and periodic vibration. Fur-
ther, the proposed algorithms cannot be implemented without
the use of a storage battery. Hence this algorithm cannot be di-
rectly used to power a battery-less wireless sensor. Due to the
power requirements and adaptive nature of this algorithm, this
algorithm cannot be used to optimally extract energy from short
duration vibrations.
C. Synchronous Charge Extraction
Lefeuvre et al. [22] have proposed an algorithm termed
“synchronized charge extraction”. In this algorithm, energy
is extracted from the piezo only when the displacement of
the mechanical system reaches an extremum. In other words,
the charge extraction is synchronized to the extremum of the
mechanical displacement. In their implementation of the circuit
shown inFig. 1, the researchers have eliminated the storage
capacitor. The output of the rectifier is directly connected
through the switch to the dc-dc converter. Under ideal
conditions (with ideal diodes and no dissipative losses in the
circuit), the “Synchronized Charge Extraction” algorithm has
been shown to theoretically harvest 400% more power than
the “Pulse Width Modulator Switching” algorithm. From the
analysis it is clear that this increase in power is a function of the
damping effect of the piezo on the mechanical vibrations. This
damping arises as a result of the electromechanical coupling. It
will be evident from the discussion in Section IV-D2 that the
electromechanical coupling is direct function of the size of the
piezo in relation to the size of the mechanical system. Hence,
the effectiveness of this algorithm would rely on the use of
piezos with large thickness.
Although the “Synchronized Charge Extraction” algorithm
would significantly increase the amount of power harvested, the
algorithm has several limitations. In order to determine the oc-
currence of the maximum, the displacement of the vibrating
structure is continuously monitored using an inductive pickup
or an equivalent sensor. This additional displacement sensor
that is needed could consume a significant amount of power.
Due to lack of information on the power requirements of the
controller, it can be assumed that the algorithm will be imple-
mented on an external controller, which would also consume
additional power. For persistent excitation, it might be possible
to harvest sufficient energy from an array of piezos to power
the control circuitry. However, the power consumption of the
controller would somewhat limit the overall efficiency of this
algorithm. When the vibrations are not sustained, it may not be
viable to continuously power the inductive pickup sensor. Thus,
in the case of short duration vibrations, even an array of piezo
elements may not suffice. Hence, this algorithm would not be
viable to harvest energy from short duration vibrations.
D. Motivation for New Algorithms
It is evident from the above brief literature review that past al-
gorithms have almost exclusively focused on harvesting energy
from sustained vibrations. VEH from short duration vibrations
has been largely ignored. Furthermore, these algorithms are ei-
ther suboptimal or have high power requirements. Hence these
controllers would be inefficient for most VEH applications. Due
to their relatively large power requirements, the optimal algo-
rithms cannot be implemented to harvest energy from short term
vibrations. Hence this paper develops ultra-low power control
systems to optimize the amount of energy harvested from short
duration vibrations. Only algorithms that can be implemented
using low power analog electronics are considered. The algo-
rithms that are developed can also be easily adapted to optimally
harvest energy from sustained vibrations.
III. PROPOSED CONTROLLERS
A. System Model
The dynamics of the VEH system will be modeled as con-
sisting of a mechanical sub-system and an electrical sub-system.
When the piezo is open (the terminals are unconnected), the me-
chanical sub-system will be modeled as a second order system
with
(1)
However, when the electrical system is active and the piezo
sources current, the voltage across the capacitor , in-
creases. Subsequently, the voltage across the piezo, , de-
VIJAYARAGHAVAN AND RAJAMANI: ULTRA-LOW POWER CONTROL SYSTEM FOR MAXIMAL ENERGY HARVESTING 255

creases by . This change in piezo voltage will induce a

force, , on the mechanical system. Hence, (1)
is modified to become

(2)

The strain can be represented as

(3)

From (2) and (3), the mechanical sub-system dynamics can

be rewritten in terms of strain as

(4) Fig. 2. Force Input used for simulation.

where is amount of static strain produced for a unit applied

force and is amount of static strain produced for a unit Algorithms
change in . Of the total energy generated in the Piezo, only the fraction
The most important component of the electrical sub-system transferred to the storage capacitor is available to drive the
is the piezo electric substrate that transduces this strain to an load. is a measure of this energy. The peak power at the
electrical voltage. At low frequencies, the piezo is modeled as load, given by , is also a function of . Hence,
a voltage source in series with a capacitance using (5)–(7) [7], in Sections III-B1–III-B8, the available voltage, , is deter-
[26]. A more sophisticated model can be found in Weinbert et mined for each of three different control algorithms.
al. [43] 1) Fixed Threshold Switching: This algorithm is an adapta-
tion of FTS used for harvesting energy from sustained oscilla-
(5)
tions. In this algorithm, the load is connected to , by setting
(6) the control input to logic high (1) when the crosses a pre-
determined high (on) threshold . The control is turned off
(7) (0), if falls below a low (off) threshold . The control
signal to , can be given by the control law state transition
In order to calculate the overall electrical dynamics, each diagram shown in Fig. 3.
diode making up the bridge is modeled by a piecewise linear Theorem 1 describes the maximum voltage generated and
model [34]. The piezo current can then be written as (8) and stored across the storage capacitor when this controller is used.
the dynamics of the capacitor voltage can be given by (9). See This will be compared later with the maximum voltage gener-
equation (8)–(9) at the bottom of the page. ated by the other two new controllers.
For the purpose of simulation, we consider the mechanical Theorem 1: If the displacement of the beam has a first local
system with parameters 38 Hz, and extremum value (with a corresponding ),
. and the switch is closed when , then see
(These parameters were chosen to match the experimental equation (10) at the bottom of the page.
setup. See Section IV-D for details on how the parameters were For a sufficiently large
identified from experimental data.)
The input load on the system is modeled as two short duration (11)
pulses as shown in Fig. 2 with a magnitude of 3937.5 N. (The proof of this Theorem is provided in the Appendix.)

if (8)
otherwise
if is closed

if is open (9)

if (10)
otherwise.
256 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010

Fig. 3. State transition diagram for “fixed threshold switching”.

Fig. 6. Instantaneous Power consumed by 1 K Load with “Fixed Threshold

Switching” algorithm.

Fig. 4. V for “fixed Threshold Switching” algorithm.

Fig. 7. State transition diagram for “max voltage switching”.

Fig. 5. Load current for 1 K load with “Fixed Threshold Switching” algorithm.
by the resistor. The peak power is 7.56 mW and the total energy
transferred to the load is 30 J.
2) Max Voltage Switching: In this algorithm, the load is con-
nected to the capacitor , when the voltage reaches a max-
imum value. The control is turned off, if falls below
the off-threshold . The control law can be given by the state
transition diagram shown in Fig. 7.
The occurrence of maximum can be determined using analog
electronics. For instance, the max-detector can be realized using
a high pass resistance–capacitance (RC) filter given by (12). A
maximum is declared when the output of this filter falls below
a threshold. The value of this threshold is small and determines
how close to zero the derivative must become for the voltage to
be recognized as maximum

(12)
The fixed threshold switching is the simplest algorithm, and
would serve as a baseline for evaluating the performance of the Theorem 2 describes the maximum voltage generated and
other control algorithms. Simulation results obtained using this stored across the storage capacitor when the max voltage con-
baseline control law are shown in Figs. 4–6. The voltage in the troller is used.
storage capacitor for 2.75 V and 1.5 V is seen in Theorem 2: If the displacement of the beam has the first local
Fig. 4. Fig. 5 shows the current through the 1 K (1 Kohm) load extremum value (with a corresponding ),
resistance and Fig. 6 shows the instantaneous power consumed then is given by (13a) and (13b) at the bottom of the page.

if (13a)
otherwise
if (13b)
otherwise
VIJAYARAGHAVAN AND RAJAMANI: ULTRA-LOW POWER CONTROL SYSTEM FOR MAXIMAL ENERGY HARVESTING
Fig. 8. V for “Max Voltage Switching” algorithm.
Fig. 9. V for modified “Max Voltage Switching” algorithm.
Thus, for a sufficiently large strain voltage, the difference be-
tween and is distributed between and
in the inverse ratio of their capacitance.
(The proof of this Theorem is provided in Appendix.)
It is seen from theorem 2 that when
(14)
For the current setup, is obtained to be 1 V for the first
pulse. This agrees with the simulation results shown in Fig. 8. It
should be noted that the first pulse charges the storage capacitor
to 1 V, but there is no discharge to the load because the voltage
is too low 1.5 V .
Since we have a priori knowledge about the nature of the
loading, it is possible to modify the to turn ON only at
the end of the second pulse. One way of achieving this would
involve checking for a maximum larger than a low threshold.
For the particular load acting on the sensor (consisting of two
pulses and hence four extremums in the vibration signal),
is approximately four times the value of obtained for the
first pulse. From Fig. 9, is 3.9 V. Fig. 10 shows the current
257
Fig. 10. Load current for 1 K load with modified “Max Voltage Switching”
algorithm.
Fig. 11. Instantaneous power consumed by 1 K Load with modified “Max
Voltage Switching” algorithm.
through the 1 K (1 Kohm) load resistance and Fig. 11 shows the
instantaneous power consumed by the resistor.
Since the storage capacitor is allowed to charge to a higher
voltage, this algorithm will deliver a larger peak power in
comparison to the “Fixed Threshold switching”. Hence, this
algorithm is always more efficient at harvesting vibration en-
ergy than the simple fixed threshold algorithm described in the
previous section. Indeed, the value of peak power (15.4 mW)
and the amount total energy transferred to the load (70 J) is
larger than those that were obtained for the “Fixed Threshold
Switching” algorithm.
3) Switched Inductor: This section proposes a third algo-
rithm that would further enhance . This algorithm uses a
circuit shown in Fig. 14. The new circuit uses an inductor
and a piezo switch in addition to the components shown
in Fig. 1. The voltage drop across is given by . is
turned on when reaches a maximum and is turned
on when reaches a maximum. The switches and
are turned off when the respective voltages and
drop below an off-threshold . As discussed in the pre-
vious section, the occurrence of maximum can be determined
using analog electronics. The control law for is given by
the state transition diagram shown in Fig. 12 and the control
258 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010

It is seen from theorem 3, that when

(16)

where

(17a)
Fig. 12. State transition diagram for SW (“Switched Inductor”).

(17b)

(17c)

By comparing (16) with (14), we notice that has in-

creased by a factor of at least , which equals the peak
overshoot of the LCR circuit. The “Switched Inductor” algo-
rithm yields a higher due to the presence of the inductor.
In the absence of the diode bridge rectifier, the second order dy-
Fig. 13. State transition diagram for SW (“Switched Inductor”). namics of the LCR circuit will exhibit an oscillatory behavior
for a small time period and the dynamics would eventually con-
verge to its steady-state value. The bridge rectifier in the circuit
would however clamp to the overshoot peak voltage, re-
sulting in higher available voltage.
Using (this is the estimated total resistance in
the circuit) in (15), we get and .
Now . Hence, the piezo would
drive the circuit in the reverse direction. and
. Hence, . The esti-
mated value for is seen to be in close agreement with the
simulation result from Fig. 15.
Fig. 14. Energy harvesting with Inductor. As mentioned in the earlier section, owing to the a priori
knowledge about the nature of the loading, it is possible to
modify the to turn ON only at the end of the second load
law for is given by the state transition diagram shown in pulse. For the particular load acting on the sensor (consisting
Fig. 13. of four extremums in vibration), is approximately four
Theorem 3 describes the maximum voltage generated and times the for first extremum (6.04 V). When compared
stored across the storage capacitor when the Switched Inductor to the modified “max voltage switch” controller, it is seen from
algorithm is used. Figs. 9 and 16 that the available voltage has increased by a
Theorem 3: If switch is closed at first local extremum factor of over 1.5. Subsequently from Fig. 18, the peak power
of the displacement of the beam, the voltages across capacitors is obtained to be 36.3 mW (an increase of 136%) and the total
and at the end of first half-LC oscillation ( and energy transferred to the load equals 188 J (an increase of
, respectively) are given by see equation (15a) and (15b) 169%).
at the bottom of the page. (The proof of this Theorem is provided An intuitive explanation of the performance of the switched
in the Appendix.) inductor system can be provided as follows. When the piezo
Note: The load switch is closed when the reaches a is charged to , and is completely discharged through a load
maximum. This will prevent from increasing much further. resistance, the total amount of energy passing through the load
However by using a low pass filter it is possible to filter out the can be calculated to be . When a storage capacitor
peaks occurring in due to LC oscillation. This will enable is connected to the piezo, the capacitor is charged to a voltage
us to collect energy from multiple LC oscillation. . If the storage

if (15a)
otherwise
if (15b)
otherwise
VIJAYARAGHAVAN AND RAJAMANI: ULTRA-LOW POWER CONTROL SYSTEM FOR MAXIMAL ENERGY HARVESTING 259

Fig. 18. Instantaneous Power consumed by 1 K Load with modified “Switched

Inductor”.

Fig. 15. V for “Switched Inductor” algorithm.

By adding an inductor in the circuit, some of this lost energy is
recovered. This happens because the inductor causes a transient
increase in current by creating a second-order under-damped
system instead of a first order system. The voltage transfer to
the storage capacitor is made at the transient peak of the voltage
by closing the switch at this peak. Thus, the inductor does not
replicate impedance matching that has been traditionally used
to optimize energy transfer.
4) Comparison of the Three Algorithms: It must be noted
that for the “Fixed Threshold Switching” algorithm to work re-
liably, cannot be arbitrarily large. must necessarily
be chosen a volt or two lower than the lowest that can
be expected corresponding to the set of all possible .
Hence, for “Fixed Threshold Switching” algorithm is
necessarily smaller than for the modified Max Voltage
Switching. From (17a) it is clear that . Thus,
for “Fixed Threshold Switching” for modified “Max
Fig. 16. V for modified “Switched Inductor” algorithm.
Voltage Switching” for modified “Switched Inductor”.
5) Fraction of Energy Harvested: For the system that has
been modeled, the deflection of the point of application of force
can be written as

(18)

The total energy supplied to the mechanical system can be

estimated using

Input Energy (19)

Using this calculation for the load shown in Fig. 2, the input
energy is found to be

Input Energy 17.037 J (20)

Fig. 17. Load current for 1 K load with modified “Switched Inductor”
algorithm. The fraction of available energy harvested is shown in Table I.
The fraction of energy harvested can be increased by using a
larger amount of active piezo material. It must however be noted
capacitor is discharged through a load, the amount of energy that the primary objective of this paper is to harvest sufficient
is . energy for powering the sensor electronics by using the minimal
Hence, the transfer from the piezo to the storage capacitor re- amount of piezo material. Hence the use of a larger amount of
sults in the loss of energy (through the resistance in the circuit). piezo material has not been explored.
260 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010
TABLE I
COMPARISON OF THE THREE ALGORITHMS
IV. TRAFFIC SENSOR
A. Introduction
Currently, traffic agencies all around the country use induc-
tive loop detectors (ILDs) to monitor traffic. The Minnesota De-
partment of Transportation (MnDOT) for example, monitors the
flow rates at over 6000 points in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metro
area using such ILDs. An ILD consists of a big loop of metallic
coil (usually a square of side 6 ft/1.8 m or larger) buried in the
lane. This loop is connected to a station which powers the loop
and processes the information obtained from the loop to deter-
mine if a vehicle passes over the sensor.
It is possible to develop a battery-less wireless traffic sensor
that can be embedded in the roadway. When a vehicle would
pass over that sensor, short duration oscillations would be in-
duced in the sensor. The proposed sensor would detect these vi-
brations and wirelessly transmit a pulse announcing the arrival
of the vehicle to a station. Such a sensor could be powered by
those same mechanical vibrations. By eliminating data cables
and power cables, the new smaller traffic sensor would greatly
improve the ease of installation and decrease maintenance re-
quirements as well as decrease the installation time and the as-
sociated traffic congestion.
B. Overview of New Sensor
The researchers in this paper have developed a novel bat-
tery-less wireless traffic sensor to measure the traffic flow at a
point on the highway. The sensor is completely autonomous and
can be embedded in the highway lane without the need for con-
trol/data cables. In the absence of any automobile, the sensor is
completely turned off, consuming no power. Thus, the sensor
has ZERO idle power loss and is extremely energy efficient.
When an automobile passes over the sensor, the sensor is turned
on by the vibrations and a RF pulse is transmitted wirelessly to
the station. The sensor requires no external power source as it is
powered by harvesting all its energy from vibrations that result
when a vehicle passes over it. Further this sensor has smaller
dimensions and can be installed with much lower traffic disrup-
tions. This is especially true because the sensor does not need a
power source and power lines do not need to be run to the sensor.
This new sensor, like the ILD, does not use complex image pro-
cessing or audio processing techniques and would hence pro-
vide the same level of high reliability. Owing to the battery-less
and wireless nature of the sensor, low maintenance can also be
Fig. 19. Sensor.
expected. Further it is likely that the sensor can measure the
number of axles and weight of passing vehicle in addition to
the flow rate. It is also possible to configure several sensors
to transmit to a single station by using different transmission
frequencies. In order to power the sensor, the three algorithms
proposed in Section III-B have been implemented using analog
electronic components. All the switches used in the algorithms
can be realized using MOSFET devices.
C. Hardware
The proposed sensor consists of a beam structure with a main
beam (6 or 1.8 m long) and two support beams ( long or 250
mm) at the ends as shown in Fig. 19. A total of eight Piezo ele-
ments (four piezos for each of the support beams) are bonded at
the locations shown in Fig. 19 and connected electrically in par-
allel. Ansys simulations revealed that the average of the strain
over the area of all the piezos depended only on the total load
acting on the main beam. This piezo configuration would en-
sure that the effective voltage generated by the piezo would not
depend on the location of the load along the beam. It should
be noted further that the speed of the passing vehicle can be
measured by measuring the time difference in the loading be-
tween two consecutive sensors placed a short longitudinal dis-
tance apart.
D. System Parameters
1) Mechanical Parameters: By considering only the first vi-
bration mode, the sensor dynamics can be represented using (4).
When a static force acts on the system (4), the re-
sulting static strain is given by
(21)
The same load , acting at the center of the main beam,
results in an average load of being transmitted to each
support beam. It can be inferred from Ketchum et al. [14] that
the resulting moment at the location of the piezo is given
by
(22)
For the support beam, 0.2 m, 0.01875 m,
0.025 m, 0.00625 m and 200 GPa. Hence,
mm and
(23)
Thus
(24)
VIJAYARAGHAVAN AND RAJAMANI: ULTRA-LOW POWER CONTROL SYSTEM FOR MAXIMAL ENERGY HARVESTING
Fig. 20. Bode magnitude plot of impulse response of the sensor.
The natural frequency was obtained by observing the im-
pulse response of the sensor. This impulse response was gener-
ated by striking the sensor with a hammer. Fig. 20 shows the re-
sulting bode plot. From the figure, rad s–38 Hz.
The impulse response could not be directly used to find the
damping ratio, since the tire passing over the sensor would damp
out the mechanical vibrations in the sensor. Instead a value of
was found to be appropriate.
A finite-element model of the sensor structure was con-
structed (using , , and for the main beam and ,
, and for the support beam) structure. From this model,
it was determined that when a unit static load is applied at the
mid point of the main beam, the mid point deflects by . Hence,
the transfer function for the deflection of the mid point of the
main beam can be written as
(25)
This relation can be used to determine the total energy sup-
plied to the beam structure.
2) Electro-mechanical Coupling Parameters: The VEH
system consists of piezo electric elements bonded to the sup-
port beams as shown in Fig. 19. The piezos are bonded to the
top and bottom surfaces of the support beam. When a vehicle
passes over the sensor, the piezo experiences a strain from the
loading and thus generates a voltage. When the piezo sources
current to the circuit, increases and decreases.
Since the piezo is bonded to the mechanical system, this de-
crease in piezo voltage translates to a static stress
(26)
261
The force developed by the piezo as a result of this stress is
given by
(27)
The pair of piezo that were considered, bonded to the top and
bottom of the support beam, are separated by the height of the
support beam . The moment developed by them is
(28)
This moment acting on the mechanical system would result
in a static strain
(29)
Noting that we get
(30)
From (4) we can deduce that for a static
(31)
Hence
(32)
Thus, the coupling coefficient
(33)
3) Electrical Parameters: The piezos are A4E sheets 0.191
mm thick and of side 37.5 mm 25 mm. (They were made by
cutting T107-A4E-602 sheets that were purchased from Piezo
Systems, Inc). The piezo will be subject to strain in the “1” di-
rection of the piezo. Hence, the “31” parameters of the piezo are
used in the calculation. For A4E piezo, the modulus of elasticity
at constant electric field is N m and thickness
m. Hence, open circuit voltage per unit strain is
V (34)
From the measurement of the capacitance of the sensor
system, the equivalent capacitance is found to be
F.
V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS WITH TRAFFIC SENSOR
The three algorithms presented in Section III-B were im-
plemented on a self-contained electronic circuit. The switches
and were implemented using MOSFETs. The ex-
tremely small amount of power required by the control system
was derived entirely from the charge energy stored in the capac-
itor. Sets of experiments were carried out with each of the three
circuits connected to the piezo. Each experiment consisted of
driving a compact car over the sensor at 20 Km/h as shown in
Fig. 21. This resulted in separate loading from the two axles,
first by the front tires and then by the rear tires.
262
Fig. 21. “Schematic of test setup” (figure not drawn to scale).
Fig. 22. “Fixed Threshold” algorithms with a threshold of 2.75 V.
Fig. 23. Modified “Max Switching” algorithm.
Fig. 22 show the results from the testing of the “Fixed
Threshold” algorithm. The on-threshold for the algorithm was
chosen at 2.75 V so that the sensor would detect light vehicle
such as motorcycles. The MOSFET used in the switching circuit
constrains the off-threshold voltage to 1.75 V. As a result,
turns on when the capacitor voltage reaches 2.75 V and
turns off when falls below 1.75 V.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010
Fig. 24. Modified “ Switched Inductor” algorithm.
TABLE II
FRACTION OF AVAILABLE VIBRATION ENERGY UTILIZED
TABLE III
THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MAXIMUM VOLTAGE
The electronic circuits were then modified so that turns
on when reaches a maximum. In order to detect a global
maximum, and to collect energy from both axles, was
modified to turn on when does not increase for a period of
100 ms. The off-threshold was once again chosen to be 1.75 V.
Fig. 23 show the results from modified “Max Switching” al-
gorithm. It is seen that the two axles would generate a com-
bined voltage of 3.95 V. This agrees well with the simulations
in Section III-B2.
Fig. 24 show the results from the modified “Switched In-
ductor” algorithm experiments and the capacitor voltage is
found to be 6 V. This agrees well with the simulations in
Section III-B3.
The theoretical and experimental capacitor voltages are sum-
marized in Tables II and III.
VIJAYARAGHAVAN AND RAJAMANI: ULTRA-LOW POWER CONTROL SYSTEM FOR MAXIMAL ENERGY HARVESTING 263

It is apparent that if is controlled as prescribed, the driving the current thought the resistive element in the
“switched inductor” offers significant improvement over both circuit is given by
the fixed threshold and the maximum voltage algorithms.

VI. CONCLUSION
Past research on VEH has almost exclusively focused on (35)
harvesting energy from sustained vibrations. When it comes
to short-duration vibrations, the optimal control algorithms In modeling overall dynamics, the first-order nonlinear
electrical dynamic (5)–(9) are dominated by the much
proposed in literature cannot be implemented due to the rela-
slower dynamics of the mechanical system. The system
tively large power requirements of associated microprocessors
exhibits a two time scale property and the faster electrical
or computers used to implement the controller. Hence, this
dynamics needs to be modeled by its quasi-steady state
paper develops ultra-low power control systems to optimize
value [15], [18] which corresponds to or
the amount of energy harvested from short duration vibrations.
It has been shown via both simulations and experiments that (36)
the modified “Max Voltage Switching”, the first algorithm that and are two capacitor connected in series. If
has been proposed in the paper, would outperform the base does not change signs
line FTS algorithm previously developed in literature. It has
further been shown that the modified “Switched Inductor”, the (37)
second algorithm that has been proposed in the paper, would
outperform both the modified “Max Voltage Switching” and Thus, see (38) at the bottom of the page.
the FTS algorithms. Case (ii): When is closed, once again the faster elec-
The developed control algorithms have also been used in the trical dynamics is modeled by its quasi-steady state value
paper to implement a new battery-less wireless traffic sensor. corresponding to and . Hence, in addition
The developed sensor can be embedded in a highway lane and to we have . Since the diodes
can measure traffic flow at that point. Due to battery-less wire- only conduct up to , when
less operation and its small size, the new sensor has significant is closed we have
advantages over existing inductive loop traffic sensors in terms (39)
of easy installation, low cost, low maintenance and zero power
consumption. Case (iii): When is initially open and is closed at time
, for an extremely small duration of time (cor-
APPENDIX responding to the time scale of the electrical system), the
electrical dynamics is dominant. Since is much smaller
PROOFS OF THEOREM 1, 2 AND 3:
than the time scale of the mechanical system, the mechan-
Proof of Theorem 1: The proof will proceed by deter-
ical system can be considered to be frozen [15], [18]. Since
mining for the following cases:
the electrical dynamics is a first order system, there is no
(i) when is open;
over shoot in any voltage value. Thus .
(ii) when is closed;
At the end of , the system approaches the quasi-steady
(iii) when transitions from open to closed when
state value and the equation is case (ii) can be used.
.
In summary, if , the diodes do not conduct
Case (i): When is open, it is clear that
and . If , is closed only
(refer Fig. 1). Thus, if
when . Hence, if
, the bridge circuit
rectifies the piezo current and charges the storage
capacitor. When , the
diodes block the flow of current thus preventing storage (40)
capacitor from discharging. If does not change signs If is sufficiently large, .
and , the effective voltage

if
otherwise
if (38)
otherwise
264 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010

APPENDIX: If , the diode bridge will begin to conduct

Lemma 1: (stated without proof) when is closed
If and , (10) is mod-
ified to (41) and (42) shown at the bottom of the page. (45)
(The proof would be a direct extension of the theorem above)
see the equation at bottom of page. When is unidirectional, the electrical dynamics can be
Proof of Theorem 2: Equation (38) derived in Case (i) of written in terms of and . Hence
theorem 1, holds as long as does not change signs. Since has
only one unique local extremum, cannot change signs and (38) (46)
is valid. If , then . If ,
it is evident that when . Hence, (47)
(13) follows.
Lemma 2: (stated without proof) Now . When and are ini-
If and , (13) is modified tially not charged
to (43a) and (43b), shown at the bottom of the page.
(The proof would be a direct extension of the theorem above.) (48)
Proof of Theorem 3: When is closed in the LCR
circuit shown in Section III-B3 Fig. 14, the effective voltage The piece-wise linear dynamics of the LCR system can be
driving the resistive and inductive components of the circuit is written as
given by

(49)

(44) Now and is unidirectional up to the first maximum

of at the end of the first half-oscillation. Since (49) is valid
In the absence of , the overall dynamics is dominated by when is unidirectional, it can be used to determine this first
the mechanical system and would be given by (13). There maximum . For this second-order system
would be no gain in . If is closed at some
, it would be result in a step input to the electrical circuit. (50)

if
(41)
otherwise

(42)

if
otherwise

if (43a)
otherwise

(43b)
if
otherwise
VIJAYARAGHAVAN AND RAJAMANI: ULTRA-LOW POWER CONTROL SYSTEM FOR MAXIMAL ENERGY HARVESTING
Hence, (51) and (52) shown at the top of the page.
Note: If piezo is charged sufficiently in the reverse direction
such that , the system would
continue to oscillate. When the piezo current flow in the reverse
direction, and at the end of the second half oscil-
lation ( and ) can be obtained by replacing
with and calculating the changes in
and . [16] S. W. Kim, Y. Eun, H. Kim, J. Ko, W. J. Jung, Y. Choi, Y. G. Cho,
Lemma 3: (stated without proof)
If and (15) gets modi-
fied to (53a) and (53b) shown at the top of the page.
(The proof would be a direct extension of the theorem above.)
REFERENCES
[1] R. Amirtharajah and A. P. Chandrakasan, “Self-powered signal pro-
cessing using vibration-based power generation,” IEEE J. Solid-State
Circuits, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 687–695, May 1998.
[2] A. Badel, D. Guyomar, E. Lefeuvre, and C. Richard, “Efficiency en-
hancement of a piezoelectric energy harvesting device in pulsed opera-
tion by synchronous charge inversion,” J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Structures,
vol. 16, pp. 889–901, 2005.
[3] C. Chen, J. Kwon, J. Rice, A. Skabardonis, and P. Varaiya, “Detecting
errors and imputing missing data for single-loop surveillance systems,”
Transp. Res. Rec., pp. 160–167, 2003.
[4] S. Chen, Z. Sun, and B. Bridge, “Traffic monitoring using digital
sound field mapping,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 50, no. 6, pp.
1582–1589, Nov. 2001.
[5] S. Chen, Z. P. Sun, and B. Bridge, “Automatic traffic monitoring by
intelligent sound detection,” in Proc. IEEE Intell. Transportation Syst.
Conf. (ITSC), 1997, pp. 171–176.
[6] B. Coifman, “Improved velocity estimation using single loop detec-
tors,” Transportation Res. Part A: Policy Practice, vol. 35, no. 10, pp.
863–880, 2001.
[7] C. W. De Silva, Mechatronics: An Integrated Approach. Boca Raton,
FL: CRC Press, 2004.
[8] N. G. Elvin, A. Elvin, and M. Spector, “A self-powered mechanical
strain energy sensor,” Smart Mater. Structures, vol. 10, no. 2, pp.
293–299, 2001.
[9] N. G. Elvin, A. Elvin, and D. H. Choi, “A self-powered damage detec-
tion sensor,” J. Strain Anal. for Eng. Des., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 115–124,
2003.
[10] N. Ferrier, S. Rowe, and A. Blake, “Real-time traffic monitoring,” in
Proc. 2nd IEEE Workshop Appl. Comput. Vision, 1994, pp. 81–88.
[11] W. E. L. Grimson, C. Stauffer, R. Romano, and L. Lee, “Using adap-
tive tracking to classify and monitor activities in a site,” in Proc. IEEE
Comput. Soc. Conf. Comput. Vision Pattern Recog. , 1998, pp. 22–29.
265
if (51)
otherwise
if (52)
otherwise
if (53a)
otherwise
(53b)
if
otherwise
[12] P. Horowitz and W. Hill, The Art of Electronics. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press, 1989.
[13] S. Kamijo, Y. Matsushita, K. Ikeuchi, and M. Sakauchi, “Traffic
monitoring and accident detection at intersections,” IEEE Trans. Intell.
Transportation Syst., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 108–118, 2000.
[14] M. S. Ketchum, Structural Engineers Handbook, 2nd ed. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1981.
[15] H. K. Khalil, Nonlinear Systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall, 2002.
and D. Cho, “Performance comparison of loop/piezo and ultrasonic
sensor-based traffic detection systems for collecting individual vehicle
information,” in Proc. 6th World Congr. ITS (CD-ROM), 1998.
[17] S. W. Kim, K. Kim, J. Lee, and D. D. Cho, “Appplication of fuzzy
logic to vehicle classification algorithm in loop/piezo-sensor fusion
systems,” Asian J. Control, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 64–68, 2001.
[18] P. V. Kokotovic, J. O’Reilly, and H. K. Khalil, Singular Perturbation
Methods in Control: Analysis and Design. Warrendale, PA: SIAM,
1986.
[19] J. Kymissis, C. Kendall, J. Paradiso, and N. Gershenfeld, “Parasitic
power harvesting in shoes,” in Dig. Papers 2nd Int. Symp. Wearable
Comput., Oct. 1998, pp. 132–139.
[20] C. Li, K. Ikeuchi, and M. Sakauchi, “Acquisition of traffic informa-
tion using video camera with 2D spatio-temporal image transformation
technique,” in Proc. IEEJ/JSAI Int. Conf. Intell. Transportation Syst.,
1999, pp. 634–638.
[21] E. Lefeuvre, A. Badel, C. Richard, and D. Guyomar, “Piezoelectric
energy harvesting device optimization by synchronous electric charge
extraction,” J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 865–876,
2005.
[22] E. Lefeuvre, A. Badel, A. Benayad, C. Richard, L. Petit, and D. Guy-
omar, “A comparison between several vibration-powered piezoelectric
generators for standalone systems,” Sensors Actuators A: Phys., vol.
126, no. 2, pp. 405–416, 2006.
[23] L. J. Mountain and J. B. Garner, “Application of photography to traffic
surveys,” J. Inst. Highway Eng., vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 12–19, Nov. 1980.
[24] P. T. Martin, Y. Feng, and X. Wang, “Detector technology evaluation,”
Mountain-Plains Consortium, 2003.
[25] P. G. Michalopoulos and C. A. Anderson, “Costs and benefits of vision-
based, wide-area detection in freeway applications,” Transp. Res. Rec.,
pp. 40–47, 1995.
[26] O. D. Nwokah, Mechanical Systems Design Handbook Modeling Mea-
surement and Control. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2001.
[27] S. Oh, S. G. Ritchie, and C. Oh, “Real time traffic measurement from
single loop inductive signatures,” in Proc. 81st TRB Annu. Meet., Jan.
2002, pp. 98–105.
[28] G. K. Ottman, H. F. Hofmann, A. C. Bhatt, and G. A. Lesieutre, “Adap-
tive piezoelectric energy harvesting circuit for wireless remote power
supply,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 669–676, Sep.
2002.
266 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 18, NO. 2, MARCH 2010
[29] G. K. Ottman, H. F. Hofmann, A. C. Bhatt, and G. A. Lesieutre, “Op-
timized piezoelectric energy harvesting circuit using step-down con-
verter in discontinuous conduction mode,” IEEE Trans. Power Elec-
tron., vol. 18, no. 2, Mar. 2003.
[30] G. B. Perez, M. Malinowski, and J. A. Paradiso, “An ultra-low power,
optically-interrogated smart tagging and identification system,” in
Proc. 4th IEEE Workshop Autom. Identification Adv. Technol., 2005,
pp. 187–192.
[31] S. Rhee, D. Seetharam, and S. Liu, “Techniques for minimizing power
consumption in low data-rate wireless sensor networks,” in Proc. IEEE
Wirel. Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC), 2004, vol. 3, pp. 1727–1731.
[32] J. C. Rojas and J. D. Crisman, “Vehicle detection in color images,”
in Proc. IEEE Intell. Transportation Syst. Conf. (ITSC), 1997, pp.
403–408.
[33] S. Roundy, “On the effectiveness of vibration-based energy har-
vesting,” J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Structures, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 809–823,
2005.
[34] K. Santiram, Basic Electronics: Devices, Circuits and IT Fundamen-
tals. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2004.
[35] H. A. Sodano, D. J. Inman, and G. Park, “Comparison of piezoelectric
energy harvesting devices for recharging batteries,” J. Intell. Mater.
Syst. Struct., vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 799–807, 2005.
[36] H. A. Sodano, D. J. Inman, and G. Park, “A review of power harvesting
from vibration using piezoelectric materials,” Shock Vibr. Dig., vol. 36,
no. 3, pp. 197–205, 2004.
[37] T. Starner, “Human-powered wearable computing,” IBM Syst. J., vol.
35, pp. 618–629, 1996.
[38] C. Sun, S. G. Ritchie, and S. Oh, “Inductive classifying artificial net-
work for vehicle type categorization,” Comput.-Aided Civil Infrastruc-
ture Eng., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 161–172, 2003.
[39] Urban ITS Center, Polytechnic University, “User’s manual for cost es-
timates of intelligent transportation technologies (CEIT),” 2007.
[40] N. Ushio and T. Shimizu, “Loop vs ultrasonic in Chicago: Ultrasonic
vehicle detector field test isolating diffused reflection and enduring
harsh environment,” in Proc. 5th World Congr. Intell. Transport Syst.,
1998.
[41] M. A. Vicencio, B. Qiu, and M. G. Hartley, “Algorithms and architec-
tures for the analysis of road-trafficmovements,” in Proc. 3rd Int. Conf.
Image Process. Its Appl. , 1989, pp. 182–186.
[42] K. Vijayaraghavan and R. Rajamani, “Active control based energy har-
vesting for battery-less wireless traffic sensors,” in Proc. Amer. Control
Conf., 2007, pp. 3106–3111.
[43] M. S. Weinberg, “Working equations for piezoelectric actuators and
sensors,” J. Microelectromechan. Syst., vol. 8, pp. 529–533, 1999.
[44] C. Zhu, Z. Gut, L. Shang, R. Dick, and R. Knobel, “Towards an ultra-
low-power architecture using single-electron tunneling transistors,” in
Proc. 44th Annu. Conf. Des. Autom., 2007, pp. 312–317.
Krishna Vijayaraghavan received the M.S. degree
from University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, in 2005
and the B.Tech. degree from the Indian Institute of
Technology, Madras, India, in 2003. He is currently
working towards the Ph.D. degree from the Univer-
sity of Minnesota.
His research interests include fault-tolerant con-
trol, battery-less wireless sensors, signal processing
and real-time software.
Mr. Vijayaraghavan was a recipient of many
awards, including the ITS MN Graduate Student
Award (2008) in recognition of outstanding research contributions to Intelligent
Transportation Systems (ITS) technology and the Sivasailam Merit Prize for
Best Individual B.Tech. Project in Mechanical Engineering in IIT Madras
(2003).
Rajesh Rajamani received the M.S. and Ph.D. de-
grees from the University of California at Berkeley,
in 1991 and 1993, respectively, and the B.Tech. de-
gree from the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras,
India, in 1989.
He is currently Professor of Mechanical Engi-
neering at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
His research interests include sensors and control
systems for automotive and biomedical applications.
He has authored over a 100 refereed publications
and received 4 patents. He is the author of Vehicle
Dynamics and Control (Springer Verlag, 2005).
Dr. Rajamani was a recipient of several honors, including the CAREER
Award from the National Science Foundation, the 2001 Outstanding Paper
Award from the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY,
and the 2007 O. Hugo Schuck Award from the American Automatic Control
Council. He has served as Chair of the IEEE Technical Committee on Auto-
motive Control and on the editorial boards of the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY and the IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON
MECHATRONICS.