Analysis of Fundamental Differences between Capacitive and Inductive Impedance Matching for Inductive Wireless Power Transfer

Inductive and capacitive impedance matching are two different techniques optimizing power transfer in magnetic resonance inductive wireless power transfer. Under ideal conditions, i.e., unrestricted parameter ranges and no loss, both approaches can provide the perfect match. Comparing these two tech...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Electronics (Basel) 2020-03, Vol.9 (3), p.476
Hauptverfasser: Zhaksylyk, Yelzhas, Halvorsen, Einar, Hanke, Ulrik, Azadmehr, Mehdi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Inductive and capacitive impedance matching are two different techniques optimizing power transfer in magnetic resonance inductive wireless power transfer. Under ideal conditions, i.e., unrestricted parameter ranges and no loss, both approaches can provide the perfect match. Comparing these two techniques under non-ideal conditions, to explore fundamental differences in their performance, is a challenging task as the two techniques are fundamentally different in operation. In this paper, we accomplish such a comparison by determining matchable impedances achievable by these networks and visualizing them as regions of a Smith chart. The analysis is performed over realistic constraints on parameters of three different application cases both with and without loss accounted for. While the analysis confirms that it is possible to achieve unit power transfer efficiency with both approaches in the lossless case, we find that the impedance regions where this is possible, as visualized in the Smith chart, differ between the two approaches and between the applications. Furthermore, an analysis of the lossy case shows that the degradation of the power transfer efficiencies upon introduction of parasitic losses is similar for the two methods.
ISSN:2079-9292
2079-9292
DOI:10.3390/electronics9030476