energies

Article
Roadway Embedded Smart Illumination Charging System for
Electric Vehicles
Daniel Fernandez 1 , Ann Sebastian 1 , Patience Raby 2 , Moneeb Genedy 2 , Ethan C. Ahn 1 ,
Mahmoud M. Reda Taha 2 , Samer Dessouky 3 and Sara Ahmed 1, *

1 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, 1 UTSA Circle San
Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249, USA
2 Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, University of New Mexico,
Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA
3 School of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Construction Management, University of Texas at San
Antonio, 1 UTSA Circle San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249, USA
* Correspondence: sara.ahmed@utsa.edu

Abstract: Inspired by the fact that there is an immense amount of renewable energy sources available
on the roadways, such as mechanical pressure, this study presents the development and implemen-
tation of an innovative charging technique for electric vehicles (EVs) by fully utilizing the existing
roadways and state-of-the-art nanotechnology and power electronics. The developed Smart Illu-
minative Charging is a novel wireless charging system that uses LEDs powered by piezoelectric
materials as the energy transmitter source and thin film solar panels placed at the bottom of the EVs
as the receiver, which is then poised to deliver the harvested energy to the vehicle’s battery. The
piezoelectric materials were tested for their mechanical-to-electrical energy conversion capabilities
and the relatively large-area EH2N samples (2 cm × 2 cm) produced high output voltages of up to
52 mV upon mechanical pressure. Furthermore, a lab-scale prototype device was developed to testify
the proposed mechanism of illuminative charging (i.e., “light” coupled pavement and vehicle as a
Citation: Fernandez, D.; Sebastian, wireless energy transfer medium).
A.; Raby, P.; Genedy, M.; Ahn, E.C.;
Taha, M.M.R.; Dessouky, S.; Ahmed,
Keywords: wireless charging; electric vehicles; piezoelectric effect; LEDs; solar panels
S. Roadway Embedded Smart
Illumination Charging System for
Electric Vehicles. Energies 2023, 16,
835. https://doi.org/10.3390/
en16020835
1. Introduction
Roadways are an important part of transportation infrastructure, serving as a backbone
Academic Editors: Ayman
to enable better mobility for people and goods. Because the roadways greatly impact
S. Mosallam, Haohui Xin,
the economic growth and development of the communities, state-of-the-art research has
Brahim ELBHIRI, Shaohua He and
focused on planning, designing, and constructing roadways to reduce environmental
Shadi M. Saadeh
impact, increase sustainability, and improve the efficiency of transport flow [1,2]. However,
Received: 9 November 2022 due to increasingly large demands for reduced driver stress, independent mobility for
Revised: 22 December 2022 non-drivers, and increased safety, further research is called for on the development of novel
Accepted: 25 December 2022 roadways that can adapt for future vehicles (e.g., electric, or self-driving vehicles).
Published: 11 January 2023 Electric vehicles (EVs) are promoted as a key contributor to building this sustainable
mobility system [3]. They are generally much more energy efficient than gas-powered
vehicles. Increasing the use of EVs can result in considerably lower emissions of carbon
dioxide and other air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides and particulate matter (PM),
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
and therefore decrease the air quality problems and preserve the environment [4]. However,
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
the adoption of EVs could lead to overloading the grid and degrading the power quality
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
of the distribution system. It also demands an increase in the number of EV charging
conditions of the Creative Commons
stations. To meet the EV charging needs of 15 million EVs by the year 2030, with limited
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// charging stations [5,6], prediction of charging needs and reallocating charging resources
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ are emerging needs, especially due to the coincidence between utility peak power loading
4.0/). and EV charging [7]. Multiple studies proposed different optimization and stochastic

Energies 2023, 16, 835. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020835 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2023, 16, 835 2 of 21

planning models that utilize the limited network resources with the increase in uncertain
distribution generation, such as renewables and EVs [8,9]. In [10], the authors focused
on the impacts of EVs on the electricity generation, and in [11], the authors proposed
investment in operation models of Grid-to-Vehicle (G2V), Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G), and
Vehicle-to-Building (V2B) for the large-scale and long-term network expansion planning
problems under multi-dimensional uncertainty.
In addition, these EVs need to be equipped with a large-capacity battery pack as
an energy storage unit to operate for a satisfactory distance [12,13]. Lithium-ion batter-
ies, the most commonly used battery in today’s EVs, have an energy density of only
90–100 Wh/kg [14,15], which is very low when compared with that of gasoline (about
12,000 Wh/kg). Therefore, lithium-ion battery operated EVs can only operate for about a
300-mile range, and then they need to be recharged [16,17]. In addition to the low energy
density, contemporary battery technologies have thee shortcomings of long charging time,
large size and weight, limited lifetime, and high cost. To overcome these challenges, alter-
native charging strategies that utilize renewable energy sources and roadways need to be
developed. Currently, the stationary charging systems of EVs fall under three categories:
Level 1, 2, and 3 charging stations. Level 1 charging stations use a 120 VAC plug supplying
3–5 miles per hour using a standard outlet. Level 2 EV charging stations are used for
both residential and commercial charging stations. They use a 240 V (for residential) or
208 V (for commercial) plug, charging at a rate of 10–20 miles per hour. Level 3 charg-
ing stations, also known as DC fast chargers, use a 208 V (for commercial) plug or are
connected to a 480 V 3-Phase AC source, and can charge 80 percent of an EVs battery in
20–30 min [18]. Alternatives to stationary charging stations have also been introduced,
for example, wireless power transfer (WPT) charging [19], and photovoltaic (solar) vehi-
cles [20]. Wireless power transfer (WPT) for EVs has been introduced by using magnetic
resonance to create a field between a ground charging coil and a copper coil embedded in a
vehicle. A research team from MIT first demonstrated in 2007 that 60 watts of power can
be transferred at a 2 m distance according to the coupled magnetic resonance theory [21].
Many researchers followed this groundbreaking work on wireless power transfer (WPT)
mechanisms, suggesting innovative circuits and performing system-level analysis with
improved control [22–27]. The WPT system uses ferrite as a magnetic flux guide and alu-
minum plate as a shield to generate a resonance frequency of a maximum of 100 kHz [28].
Multiple other works on WPT systems for EV charging include the online electric vehicle
(OLEV), designed by the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST),
with its three generations of a light golf cart, a bus (60 kW power transfer with efficiency
of 70%), and an SUV (20 kW with efficiency of 83%) [29,30], and the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory (ORNL)’s wireless charging system prototype for an EV with efficiency of
nearly 90% for 3 kW power delivery [31]. Recent work by the University of Michigan,
Dearborn, also attracted much attention due to a 200 mm distance, 8 kW WPT system,
which achieved efficiency as high as 95.7% [32]. Despite the popularity and maturity of the
WPT technology for EV charging, its relatively high cost and limited distance for power
transmission (maximum of 3 ft) still remains a great challenge. Solar power is another
method for charging EVs wirelessly without entirely relying on batteries, as energy can
be harnessed from the sun and converted into electricity by placing solar panels on a
vehicle’s roof. For example, a solar vehicle company, Lightyear, recently emerged with the
promise of delivering practical solar-powered vehicles by 2030 [33], and a Chinese solar
panel manufacturer, Hanergy Holding group, formed a Solar Vehicle Business Division
with four PV prototypes for solar-powered vehicles [33]. However, this type of charging
solution is only feasible when sunlight is available (e.g., during the daytime); the vehicle
batteries should still be charged using power from the grid during nighttime. Moreover,
solar-powered EVs are still not mature enough to be economically available to customers,
largely due to multiple technical and manufacturing challenges in the contemporary PV cell
technology, such as the engineering tradeoff between cost and energy conversion efficiency.
Energies 2023, 16, 835 3 of 21

There are many applications of harvesting energy using the roadway, due to multiple
renewable energy sources available through roadways: optical (light), thermal (heat), and
mechanical (deformation or friction) energies. One form of energy harvesting is solar
pavement, a form of pavement that generates electricity by collecting solar power with
photovoltaic cells [34], and is installed in various roadway infrastructures. The solar
pavement panels consist of three (3) layers: (1) The road surface has PV cells which collect
the sunlight; (2) The electronic layer contains a mini microprocessor board that helps
control the heating element of the panels (e.g., this heating capability can help melt the
snow that lands on the panels); and finally, (3) The base plate layer collects the energy from
the sun and distributes the power [35]. Another form of energy harvesting is Asphalt Solar
Collectors (ASCs); ASCs use asphalt and tarmac to absorb the sun’s rays and heat water
for domestic use [36]. ASCs consist of pipes embedded in the pavement with a circulating
fluid inside. Due to the temperature gradient between the fluid circulating through pipes
and the pavement [37], a heat transfer occurs from the pavement to the fluid, which leads
to a temperature drop in pavement and a temperature increase in fluid, creating energy.
Recent research studies have considered the potential of functional (e.g., piezoelectric or
thermoelectric) nanomaterials to generate electricity from mechanical pressure or frictional
heat. The reasoning behind this nanomaterials-based energy harvesting system is that the
nanomaterial can be embedded inside the roadway pavement or the vehicle tire [38,39] such
that the mechanical or thermal excitation is induced in the nanomaterial by tire loading of
the vehicles, producing separation of electrical charges. Although the voltage and power
level generated from this nano-generator system may be relatively low, this approach has
great potential to advance the energy harvesting technology by miniaturizing the system
and facilitating its integration with other existing infrastructures.
The primary objective of this study is to introduce an innovative Smart Illuminative
Charging (SIC) method for EVs by using renewable energy sources available on roadways,
such as mechanical pressure and frictional heat. This study introduces a novel wireless
power system where (a) nanomaterials-powered light-emitting diodes (LEDs), as the energy
transmitter, are embedded under a transparent polymer modified nanocomposite (TPMN)
overlay and (b) thin-film photovoltaic (PV) solar panels, as the energy receiver, are placed
under each vehicle (See Figure 1). The energy harvested during vehicle motion by using
cutting-edge low-dimensional nanomaterials are transferred to the vehicle’s main power
supply, i.e., the battery. The study will also discuss a lab-scale proof-of-concept prototype
for a smart charging system for vehicles. The prototype represents the integration
Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 ofof
21
existing roadways, state-of-the-art nanomaterials, and power electronics technologies to
create a smart, sustainable transportation infrastructure.

Figure1.1.Schematic
Figure Schematicof
ofthe
thesmart
smartcharging
chargingsystem
systemproposed
proposedfor
forEVs
EVsand
androadway
roadwayinfrastructure.
infrastructure.

2. Methods
The SIC system developed in this study features the following three sequential path-
ways of energy conversion: (1) the mechanical energy available on the roadway is con-
verted into electrical energy through the use of energy-harvestable 2D nanomaterials
(EH2N) (See Figure 2a), (2) the harvested energy is used (instead of the conventional
 Figure 1. Schematic of the smart charging system proposed for EVs and roadway infrastructure.
Energies 2023, 16, 835 4 of 21

2. Methods
The SIC system developed in this study features the following three sequential path-
2. Methods
ways of energy conversion: (1) the mechanical energy available on the roadway is con-
Theinto
verted SICelectrical
system developed in this study
energy through features
the use the following three
of energy-harvestable 2Dsequential path-
nanomaterials
ways of energy conversion: (1) the mechanical energy available on the roadway
(EH2N) (See Figure 2a), (2) the harvested energy is used (instead of the conventional is converted
into
powerelectrical
grid) toenergy
powerthrough
the LEDstheembedded
use of energy-harvestable
in the roadway, 2D andnanomaterials (EH2N)
(3) the PV panels (See
attached
Figure 2a), (2) the harvested energy is used (instead of the conventional power
to the vehicle bottom finally convert the received light energy back to electricity. In the grid) to
power the LEDs embedded in the roadway, and (3) the PV panels attached to
following sections, the components of the system as shown in Figure 1 will be discussed the vehicle
bottom finally convert the received light energy back to electricity. In the following sections,
in detail.
the components of the system as shown in Figure 1 will be discussed in detail.

Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 21

(a) (b)

(c)
Figure 2. EH2N testing (a) EH2N grown by CVD (b) Raman characterization data of EH2N grown
Figure 2. EH2N testing (a) EH2N grown by CVD (b) Raman characterization data of EH2N grown
on a SiO2/Si substrate (c) PFM measurements of EH2N. The observed phase shift between the two
on a SiO2 /Si substrate (c) PFM measurements of EH2N. The observed phase shift between the two
different voltage polarities indicate that the EH2N thin film expands and contracts with the electric
different voltage polarities indicate that the EH2N thin film expands and contracts with the electric
field direction (i.e., piezoelectric).
field direction (i.e., piezoelectric).
2.1. Photovoltaic
2.1. Photovoltaic Solar
Solar System
System
There are
There are various
various solar
solar panels
panels based
based on
on semiconductor
semiconductor materials
materials and
and manufacturing
manufacturing
methods. The types of solar panels that can be
methods. The types of solar panels that can be found onfound on the market, based on the materials
market, based on materials
and manufactured process,
and process, are:
are:(1)
(1)monocrystalline
monocrystalline panels, (2)(2)
panels, polycrystalline
polycrystallinepanels, (3)
panels,
amorphous
(3) amorphous panels, andand
panels, (4) tandem
(4) tandempanels. Monocrystalline
panels. panelspanels
Monocrystalline are called first gener-
are called first
ation, and are
generation, andmade of sections
are made of a silicon
of sections bar inbar
of a silicon one
in piece, crystallized
one piece, perfectly.
crystallized The
perfectly.
efficiency
The of these
efficiency panels
of these does not
panels doesreach
not more
reachthan
more24.7%
thanin24.7%
laboratory and 16%and
in laboratory for com-
16%
mercial
for ones. The
commercial polycrystalline
ones. panels arepanels
The polycrystalline similarare
to the previous
similar to thetype, but, intype,
previous this case,
but,
thethis
in process of silicon
case, the processcrystallization is different.isPolycrystalline
of silicon crystallization panels are formed
different. Polycrystalline panels are by
pieces of a silicon bar that have been structured as disordered crystals. They are visually
very recognizable because they present a granulated surface. A lower efficiency than
mono crystalline (19.8% laboratory, and commercial modules, 14%) is provided by these
panel, and, consequently, the price is lower. Amorphous panels have a considerable thick-
Energies 2023, 16, 835 5 of 21

formed by pieces of a silicon bar that have been structured as disordered crystals. They are
visually very recognizable because they present a granulated surface. A lower efficiency
than mono crystalline (19.8% laboratory, and commercial modules, 14%) is provided by
these panel, and, consequently, the price is lower. Amorphous panels have a considerable
thickness. Using silicon with another structure or other semiconductor materials, thinner
and versatile panels can be obtained. Amorphous PV Solar Panels or thin-film PV modules,
the second-generation panels, are classified according to the material employed. Unlike the
previous generation, amorphous panels do not have a crystal structure. Panels of this type
are commonly used for small electronic devices (calculators, watches) and small portable
panels. Its peak performance in the laboratory is about 13%, and 8% in the commercial
modules. Other examples are cadmium telluride, with a performance in laboratory of
16% and 8% in commercial modules, and gallium arsenide, one of the most efficient
materials, with 20% efficiency on commercial panels [40,41]. These second-generation
cells are more flexible, cheaper, take up less physical space, and are less impacted by high
temperatures and shading, but they degrade faster and have lower efficiency than that of
the first generation. Finally, there are also tandem panels, which combine two different
types of semiconductor materials [42,43]. Each type of material absorbs only a part of the
electromagnetic spectrum of solar radiation, and, because of this, a combination of two
or three types of materials can be used to collect more than one of the electromagnetic
spectrums. This type of panel can be as efficient as 35%. There is also a third generation of
panels, that are “emerging photovoltaics”; most are still in the prototype phase and not
commercially available.
In Table 1, six solar panels from five companies were considered. The criteria used
to choose the solar panels were the power rating and the cost. The cost for the second
generation relative to the power generated made the first generation solar panels more
competitive. The big disadvantage of first generation in our application is the rigidness
of the solar panels. This was counteracted by the monocrystalline solar cells encased in
ethylene vinyl acetate, ethylene tetrafluoroethylene, and tedlar polyester tedlar, which is
the combination of using both the first generation solar cells and the second generation
solar cells flexibility. This results in the most efficient and flexible solar cell that facilitates
easier integration in our proposed charging system.

Table 1. Analysis of solar panels in the current market.

Manufactuerer Power Rating Vmp Iop Price Generation

EcoWorthy® 10 W 17.3 V 0.58 A $21.16 First
Renogy® 30 W 17.5 V 1.71 A $59.99 First
SunKingdom® 13 W 12.0 V 1.08 A $33.99 First + Second
Zerodis® 4.5 W 18.0 V 0.25 A $29.99 Second
EcoWorthy® 5.0 W 17.9 V 0.28 A $20.73 Second
Lensun® 20 W 18.0 V 1.11 A $79.00 First + Second

2.2. Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)

A light emitting diode (LED) is a semiconductor light source that emits light when
current flows through it. LEDs have many advantages over incandescent light sources, in-
cluding lower energy consumption, longer lifetime, improved physical robustness, smaller
size, and faster switching. The major criterion for choosing LEDs is their conversion mea-
sured as Lumens per Watt (lm/W) and flexibility. LEDs emit more lumens per watt than
incandescent light bulbs [44]. LEDs can have a relatively long useful life [45,46]. Several
Department of Energy (DOE) demonstrations [47] have shown that the reduced mainte-
nance cost from this extended lifetime, rather than energy savings, is the primary factor
in determining the payback period for an LED product. There are four types of LEDs:
Miniature LEDs, Red–Green–Blue (RGB) LEDs, LED strips, and LED tubes. Based on the
Energies 2023, 16, 835 6 of 21

current market availability, approximately 200 lm/W is the maximum expected output, so
we implemented Samsung Semiconductor Inc. LM561C LEDs [48].

2.3. Energy-Harvestable 2D Nanomaterials

Two-dimensional (2D) nanomaterials [49] are an emerging class of materials, with
properties making them highly attractive for both fundamental exploration of physical
phenomena and practical engineering applications across a variety of disciplines, including
energy harvesting. These 2D nanomaterials exhibit a unique, unmatched portfolio of
functionalities and capabilities beyond the conventional materials at the fundamental
scaling limit (thicknesses of a few nanometers), and favorable electronic, mechanical, and
optical properties. For the purpose of this study, their promising piezoelectric (energy
harvesting) properties with excellent flexibility and transparency are of particular interest.
Unlike most of the previous studies [50,51], which used 2D nanomaterial flakes, this study
features the chemical vapor deposition (CVD)-based large-area material preparation. The
area of otherwise “exfoliated” 2D nanomaterial flakes is limited to hundreds of micrometers
squared, thus limiting their adoption in large-area integration such as in the proposed
SIC system for EVs. The CVD process is more scalable, in that growth is only limited
by the CVD system itself. In this study, the high-quality, large-area (up to 2 cm × 2 cm)
EH2N was prepared and characterized for the novel purpose of using them as a scalable,
mechanically robust energy harvesting source that can be integrated in the existing roadway
infrastructure. The next subsection discusses the sample preparation and highlights its
main structure and piezoelectric characteristics.

2.3.1. Sample Preparation

Two-dimensional nanomaterials were prepared utilizing the CVD technique [52] in
“2 cm × 2 cm” square samples. The EH2N was successfully synthesized and deposited on
the SiO2 /Si substrate in the quartz tube CVD furnace at a large scale using the method
described in the literature [52]. The thickness of EH2N ranges from 1.5 to 2 nm, as con-
firmed in the cross-sectional transmission electron micrograph (TEM) image shown in
Figure 2a. It is highlighted that a commercially available substrate material (SiO2 /Si) was
used for nanomaterial synthesis, and the nanomaterial can be readily transferred to any
other substrate.

2.3.2. Structural Characterization

The prepared EH2N material was studied using the Raman Spectroscopy technique, a
well-established tool used to analyze a variety of low-dimensional nanomaterials, including
graphene, carbon nanotubes, and transition metal dichalcogenides [53]. Figure 2b shows the
measured Raman spectrum of as-grown EH2N layers on a SiO2 /Si substrate, indicating two
distinct peaks corresponding to the in-plane (E1 2g ) and out-of-plane (A1 g ) lattice vibration
modes. Combined with the other microscopic characterization techniques applied, this
set of structural characterizations confirms that the EH2N thin film was prepared with no
significant amount of crystalline defects and imperfections, which is critical to ensure its
piezoelectric (energy harvesting) behavior.

2.3.3. Piezoelectric Characterization

The EH2N’s piezoelectricity was experimentally characterized by adopting the piezo
response force microcopy (PFM) technique. The PFM is a well-established approach
for probing piezoelectric properties at the nanoscale. Based on the coupling between
polarization and mechanical displacement, a highly localized electric field is applied to the
material and then the resultant surface displacement is measured. The following equations
provide an elementary theory of the PFM measurement.

Vtip = Vdc + Vac cos ωt (1)

A = A0 + A1 ω cos(ωt + p) (2)
Energies 2023, 16, 835 7 of 21

where Vtip is the voltage applied to the conductive tip, Vdc is the DC voltage bias (switching
bias), Vac is the AC voltage bias (probing bias), and ω = the driving frequency of the
AC bias.
As the sample expands or contracts due to the inverse piezoelectric effect, the tip
deflection can be monitored using a lock-in amplifier because the tip oscillation (A) will have
the phase shift (p) between the driving voltage (Vac ) and the voltage-induced mechanical
deformation (A1ω ), as well as the static surface displacement (A0 ). When the polarization
and applied electric field were parallel (Figure 2c left subpanel, +10 V), the deformation
was positive (i.e., expansion) and the PFM signal was in phase with Vac . On the contrary,
when the opposite electric field (Figure 2c right subpanel, −10 V) was applied, this caused
the EH2N to contract with the consequent lowering of the PFM cantilever tip. This led
to the 180◦ phase shift, as seen in the right subpanel. Given that all materials that exhibit
this so-called inverse piezoelectric effect are essentially piezoelectric, this measurement
proves that the prepared nanomaterial (EH2N) is a strong piezoelectric material that can be
harnessed for the energy harvesting or mechanical-to-electrical energy conversion purpose.

2.4. Fabrication and Testing of Electrically Conductive Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymer
A new glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) composite overlay incorporating nano-
materials was developed with improved mechanical properties and electrical conductivity.
The new multi-function GFRP composite can be connected to electrical power generating
materials and conduct electricity to illuminate the LEDs. The new composite also has
self-sensing ability, and can detect mechanical damage under loading by observing changes
in its electrical conductivity.
To fabricate electrically conductive GFRP, epoxy-carbon nanofiber (CNFs) composite
was first fabricated. The CNFs were supplied by Nanostructured and Amorphous Materials
Inc. Their diameters vary from 80 to 200 nm and their lengths from 0.5 to 20 µm, and thus
the aspect ratio ranges between 6.3 and 100. The epoxy used in fabrication was EPOTUF®
37-127, supplied by U.S. Composites, Inc. (Riviera Beach, FL, USA) [54]. The epoxy resin is a
low viscosity, 100% reactive, diluted liquid based on Bisphenol-A containing glycidyl ether.
The hardener was Aliphatic Amine EPOTUF® 37-614 [55]. The resin to hardener mixing
ratio was 2:1. The bidirectional S-Glass fiber fabric was supplied by ACP Composites, Inc.
The epoxy hardener was added to the resin-CNFs mixture to fabricate the GFRP using
the vacuum assisted hand lay-up technique, following ASTM standard D5687. A stage
for fabrication of GFRP was then built. This stage includes a metal plate fixed in place
on the lay-up table. A non-porous release film was attached to isolate the GFRP panels
from the metal plate. Peel ply was added over the non-porous release film to facilitate
peeling of GFRP panels after epoxy curing. Afterwards, the glass fiber fabrics layers were
placed on the peel ply. Each layer was impregnated in the epoxy using a roller, consuming
approximately 45 gm of epoxy per layer. Another peel ply was applied over the GFRP
layers, and then a porous release film was added. To provide an air bath to facilitate
absorbing the excess epoxy, a breather ply layer was added over the porous release film.
Finally, a nylon bag with an opening for the vacuum port was attached to a sealant tape
over the metal plate to seal the entire system. Six layers of bidirectional plain weave glass
fiber textile fabrics were laid in 0◦ direction, and then vacuum pressure was applied. A
vacuum pump was connected to apply a vacuum pressure for 24 h to remove air bubbles
and excess epoxy. After 24 h, the vacuum pump, nylon bag, and release films were removed.
The GFRP composite plates were then cured for 2.5 days at 110 ◦ C to ensure complete
curing. The CNF content of 2.0 wt.%, used for producing the GFRP composites, was based
on the electrical percolation observations of epoxy-CNFs nanocomposites discussed below.
Figure 3 shows the vacuum hand lay-up technique used to fabricate the GFRP composites.
 applied. A vacuum pump was connected to apply a vacuum pressure for 24 h to remove
air bubbles and excess epoxy. After 24 h, the vacuum pump, nylon bag, and release films
were removed. The GFRP composite plates were then cured for 2.5 days at 110 °C to en-
sure complete curing. The CNF content of 2.0 wt.%, used for producing the GFRP compo-
Energies 2023, 16, 835
sites, was based on the electrical percolation observations of epoxy-CNFs nanocomposites
8 of 21
discussed below. Figure 3 shows the vacuum hand lay-up technique used to fabricate the
GFRP composites.

Figure3.3.GFRP
Figure GFRPfabrication
fabricationusing
usingvacuum
vacuumhand
handlay-up
lay-uptechnique.
technique.

Fibervolume
Fiber volumefraction
fractionof
ofGFRP
GFRPcomposites
compositesincorporating
incorporating2.0
2.0wt.%
wt.%CNFs
CNFswaswasfound
found
to be 55%, determined using ASTM D3171. A scanning Electron Microscope
to be 55%, determined using ASTM D3171. A scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) using (SEM) using
Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW Quanta250
Quanta 250was
wasused
usedtotoexamine
examinethe
the dispersion
dispersion of of CNFs
CNFs in in epoxy.
epoxy. SEMSEM images
images
9 ofof of CNFs
21CNFs in
in the
the epoxy
epoxy matrix
matrix are shown
are shown in Figure
in Figure 4. The4.images
The images demonstrate
demonstrate the efficient
the efficient disper-
dispersion of
sion of
CNFs inCNFs in thematrix
the epoxy epoxyprior
matrix prior to fabrication
to fabrication of GFRP.of GFRP.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 4.Figure
SEM images
4. SEMof CNFsof
images inCNFs
the epoxy
in thematrix; (a) 0.5 wt.%;
epoxy matrix; (a) 0.5(b) 2.0 wt.%;
wt.%; (b) 2.0and (c)and
wt.%; a close
(c) aview
close view of
of 2.0 wt.% CNFS shows the formation of conductive network inside epoxy.
2.0 wt.% CNFS shows the formation of conductive network inside epoxy.

Five GFRP Fivecomposite

GFRP compositecoupons of 19 mm
coupons of 19×mm150×mm 150were tested
mm were under
tested off-axis
under (i.e.,(i.e., load
off-axis
load was wasapplied
appliedat 45° ◦
at 45with respect
with respecttoto
the fiber
the fiberdirection)
direction)static
staticmonotonically
monotonicallyincreasing
increasing tension
tension stress.
stress. The
The static
static tension
tensiontests
testswere
wereperformed
performedusing usingMTSMTS ®®servo
servohydraulic
hydraulicmachine
ma- [56].
chine [56]. A displacement
A displacement control
control protocolwas
protocol wasused
usedininthe
the static
static tension tests
tests according
according to the
to the ASTM
ASTMstandards
standards methods
methods D3039/D3039M,
D3039/D3039M, withwith
a loading rate of
a loading 1.0of
rate mm/min. The
1.0 mm/min. The
electricalelectrical
resistance of the glass fiber composite specimens was measured during
resistance of the glass fiber composite specimens was measured during the the ten-
sion testtension
using atest
Keithley
using 2636B source
a Keithley meter.
2636B Conductive
source electrodes were
meter. Conductive applied
electrodes to the
were applied to
glass fiber
the composite coupon using
glass fiber composite silver
coupon paint
using at two
silver points
paint spaced
at two pointsbyspaced
50 mm byto50allow
mm to allow
electric electric
resistance measurements.
resistance A schematic
measurements. representation
A schematic of the electrical
representation resistance
of the electrical resistance
measurement
measurement during theduring themonotonically
static static monotonically increasing
increasing tensiontension test is shown
test is shown In Figure 5.
In Figure
5.
 electrical resistance of the glass fiber composite specimens was measured during the ten-
sion test using a Keithley 2636B source meter. Conductive electrodes were applied to the
glass fiber composite coupon using silver paint at two points spaced by 50 mm to allow
electric resistance measurements. A schematic representation of the electrical resistance
Energies 2023, 16, 835 measurement during the static monotonically increasing tension test is shown In Figure
9 of 21
5.

Figure
Figure5.5.Schematic
Schematicofofelectrical
electricalresistance
resistancemeasurement
measurementofofglass
glassfiber
fibercomposite
compositecoupons
couponsduring
during
tension
tensiontests.
tests.

Damageininglass
Damage glassfiber
fibercomposite
compositecoupons
couponswas
wasestimated
estimatedininterms
termsofofthe
thechange
changeofofthe
the
electricalconductivity
electrical conductivityduringduringloading.
loading.The
Theelectrical
electricalconductivity
conductivitywas wasmeasured,
measured,and andaa
metricofofdamage
metric damagebasedbasedon onelectrical
electricalconductivity
conductivitychange, denotedDDEE(t),
change,denoted (t),was
wascalculated
calculated
usingEquation
using Equation(3):(3):
σ( t )
DE (t) = 1 − σ(𝑡) % (3)
𝐷 (𝑡) = 1 − σ(t0 ) % (3)
σ(𝑡 )
where DE (t) = the electrical damage measured at time t, σ(t0 ) = the initial electrical con-
where DE(t)of= the
ductivity the electrical
composite damage measured
prior to at time t, σ(t
load application ) = the
at 0time t0 initial electrical
and σ(t) = the conduc-
electrical
tivity of the composite prior to load
conductivity of the composite at time t. application at time t 0 and σ(t) = the electrical conduc-

tivity Moreover,
of the composite
a metric at of
time t.
damage based on change of modulus of elasticity, representing
mechanical damage and denoted DM (t), was calculated using Equation (4):

E(t)
D M (t) = 1 − % (4)
E ( t0 )

where E(t0 ) is the initial tangent modulus of elasticity of the glass fiber composite coupon
at t0 and E(t) is the tangent modulus of elasticity of the glass fiber composite coupon at
time t. A minimum tangent modulus of zero was assumed to account for the descending
stress–strain.

2.5. Power Delivery Circuit Design

A power conditioning circuit that converts the received light energy in the PV panels
back to electricity and charges a battery representing the vehicle battery was designed. A
synchronous, switch-mode battery charge control was used to implement maximum power
point tracking (MPPT). The MPPT is an algorithm utilized in charge controllers to extract
the maximum power from a photo-voltaic (PV) module [57]. The voltage of a PV module at
the maximum power is called the peak power voltage. To implement this, the bq24650EVM
evaluation module [58] was used. The module takes a solar panel as the input, and the
output as two loads. The first load is the system denoted by Vsys , which represents what
will be powered (i.e., actuators, sensors, etc.), and the second load is the charger output
denoted by Vout, , which will be a 12-volt lead–acid battery. For the lab prototype, a resistive
load is used to calculate the power output from Vsys . Utilizing the bq24650EVM evaluation
module increases the efficiency of the PV array output, which is necessary to reduce all
power losses within the system.

3. Lab-Scale Proof-of-Concept Design of the Proposed Smart Charging System

Figure 6 shows the lab-scale proof-of-concept prototype of the smart charging system
designed and implemented in this study. The prototype consists of two 150 cm pieces
of track with five 60 cm divisions (Figure 6 shows only half of the track); the divisions
 totype, a resistive load is used to calculate the power output from Vsys. Utilizing the
bq24650EVM evaluation module increases the efficiency of the PV array output, which is
necessary to reduce all power losses within the system.

3. Lab-Scale Proof-Of-Concept Design of the Proposed Smart Charging System

Energies 2023, 16, 835 10 of 21
Figure 6 shows the lab-scale proof-of-concept prototype of the smart charging system
designed and implemented in this study. The prototype consists of two 150 cm pieces of
track with five 60 cm divisions (Figure 6 shows only half of the track); the divisions alter-
alternate
nate fromfrom wood
wood to plexiglass,
to plexiglass, starting
starting andand ending
ending withwood
with woodrepresenting
representingthe
theasphalt,
asphalt,
and the plexiglass divisions will represent compartments that will be embedded
and the plexiglass divisions will represent compartments that will be embedded in in the
the
wheel paths on the embedded roadway.
wheel paths on the embedded roadway.

Figure 6. Lab scale proof-of-concept design of the prototype.

Figure 6. Lab scale proof-of-concept design of the prototype.

The LEDs are

The LEDs are located
locatedunder
underthe
thetransparent
transparentplexiglass,
plexiglass,which
which simulates
simulates thethe portion
portion of
of roadway
roadway pavements
pavements with
with EH2Ns
EH2Ns embedded.
embedded. TheThe prototype
prototype usedused 16 LED
16 LED stripsstrips
underunder
each
each plexiglass
plexiglass division,
division, with ratings
with ratings of 21.9ofV21.9
andV450
andmA450per
mA per strip.
strip. The strips
The strips were con-
were connected
nected in parallel to have a constant voltage. The LEDs strips are partially powered
in parallel to have a constant voltage. The LEDs strips are partially powered by a DC source by a
DC source in the prototype. However, given that the voltage per area obtained
in the prototype. However, given that the voltage per area obtained from nanomaterials from na-
2
is 130 V/m , a continuous nanomaterial film of the full area of the LED compartment
(60 × 45 cm), will enable the lighting up of all LEDs using the 2D nanomaterial. Since the
proposed 2D nanomaterials are still under development and not commercially available,
fabricating a large continuous nanomaterial was beyond the scope of this study. On top
of the plexiglass, solar panels are placed in a frame with wheels riding along a track to
simulate the vehicle with the solar panel on its bottom. The prototype was used to test the
viability of the proposed smart illuminative charging system.

3.1. Solar Panel Configuration

For the smart charging system prototype, three solar panels frames are utilized with
power ratings ranging between 26 and 30 W, as shown in Figure 7. These three con-
figurations use three of the solar panels chosen in Table 1. Two configurations use the
standard first-generation mono-crystalline solar panels. The first solar configuration uses
three 10 W EcoWorthy® panels, with an efficiency greater than 17%, in parallel to obtain
30 W. The second configuration also uses the standard first-generation configuration, but
uses only one panel of the Renogy® 30 W monocrystalline solar panel, with a rated effi-
ciency of 21%. The third solar panel configuration tested combines characteristics of the
first and second-generation solar panels, thus being mono-crystalline and semi-flexible.
This hybrid solar panel configuration uses two panels rated at 13 W from SunKingdom® ,
with a 23.5% efficiency.
 ard first-generation mono-crystalline solar panels. The first solar configuration uses three
10 W EcoWorthy® panels, with an efficiency greater than 17%, in parallel to obtain 30 W.
The second configuration also uses the standard first-generation configuration, but uses
only one panel of the Renogy® 30 W monocrystalline solar panel, with a rated efficiency
of 21%. The third solar panel configuration tested combines characteristics of the first and
Energies 2023, 16, 835 second-generation solar panels, thus being mono-crystalline and semi-flexible. This 11 ofhy-
21
brid solar panel configuration uses two panels rated at 13 W from SunKingdom , with a
®

23.5% efficiency.

Figure7.7.Three
Figure Threesolar
solarpanel
panelframes
framesconstructed
constructedfor
forlab-scale
lab-scaleprototype:
prototype:Top
Toptotobottom:
bottom:Three
Three10
10W
W
EcoWorthy ®
®, 30 W Renogy®, 2–13 W SunKingdom®.
® ®
EcoWorthy , 30 W Renogy , 2–13 W SunKingdom .

3.2.MPPT
3.2. MPPTCircuit
Circuitfor
forSolar
SolarPanels
Panelsand
andCommunication
Communicationand
andSensing
SensingCircuit
Circuitfor
forLEDs
LEDs
Datalogging
Data loggingwas
wasaakey
keycomponent
componentin incollecting
collectingresults
resultswhile
whilethe
thesolar
solarpanels
panelswere
were
stationary
stationaryand
andin
inmotion.
motion.There
Therewas
wasaaneed
need for
for wireless
wireless data.
data. To
To transfer
transfer data
data wirelessly,
wirelessly,
Bluetooth
Bluetoothcommunication
communicationwas wasemployed.
employed.A Amaster
masterBluetooth
Bluetooth module
module (HC-05)
(HC-05) [59]
[59] gath-
gath-
ered
eredand
andtransmitted
transmitteddata
datafrom
fromaavoltage
voltagesensor
sensorconnected
connectedto tothe
thesolar
solarpanels,
panels,to
toaaslave
slave
Bluetooth module (HC-06) connected to a laptop through a serial port. Data was then
recorded in a terminal software program. Utilizing the data, the resulting waveforms are
plotted in MATLAB [60].
An ultrasonic sensor connected to an Arduino was used for sensing if the solar panel
configurations are passing over the plexiglass compartment. If the distance of the ping was
shorter than the threshold that was set, the relay on the batteries would activate. A relay is
an electrically operated switch, the JBtek 4 Channel DC 5 V Relay Module, consisting of
four single pole single throw switches. The module was used because there are four arrays
of eight LED strips within the prototype. This configuration allows for each LED array to
have a separate power supply.

4. Performance Analysis and Findings

4.1. Harvested Voltage from EH2N
To further emulate the practical situation where the nanomaterial (embedded in
roadways) is exposed to a significant amount of mechanical pressure, the EH2N sample’s
energy harvesting property was examined by bending it and directly measuring the induced
output voltage (i.e., piezoelectrically induced polarization charges). For this experiment,
the EH2N was transferred onto a flexible substrate (polyimide film) and the electrode
was deposited on the sides by the e-beam evaporation and shadow mask techniques. As
seen in Figure 8, the mechanically strained (by 0.5% to 1%) nanomaterial was able to
produce an output voltage of up to 52 mV, which is higher than the state-of-the-art reported
peak output of 15 mV and 20 pA [29]. Given that the voltage per area measured from
 energy harvesting property was examined by bending it and directly measuring the in-
duced output voltage (i.e., piezoelectrically induced polarization charges). For this exper-
iment, the EH2N was transferred onto a flexible substrate (polyimide film) and the elec-
trode was deposited on the sides by the e-beam evaporation and shadow mask tech-
niques. As seen in Figure 8, the mechanically strained (by 0.5% to 1%) nanomaterial was
Energies 2023, 16, 835 12 of 21
able to produce an output voltage of up to 52 mV, which is higher than the state-of-the-
art reported peak output of 15 mV and 20 pA [29]. Given that the voltage per area meas-
ured from nanomaterials is 130 V/m2, if we have a continuous nanomaterial film of the
nanomaterials
full area of theisLED V/m2 , if we have
130 compartment a continuous
in the prototype (2nanomaterial film
ft × 1.5 ft), we of then
will the full
be area
able ofto
the LED
light up compartment
all the LEDs in the prototype
using (2 ft × 1.5 ft),which
the 2D nanomaterial, we willshows
then be able to light
promising up allThis
results. the
LEDs
result using
provesthethe
2DEH2N’s
nanomaterial, which
potential shows promising
to become results.
an alternative This result
energy sourceproves
from the
the
EH2N’s potential to become an
ground when embedded in roadways. alternative energy source from the ground when embedded
in roadways.

Figure 8. Bending experiment and the produced

Figure 8. produced output
output voltage.
voltage.
4.2. Mechanical and Electrical Measurements of GFRP
4.2. Mechanical and Electrical Measurements of GFRP
The stress–strain curves of GFRP composite coupons with and without 2.0 wt.% CNFs
The stress–strain curves of GFRP composite coupons with and without 2.0 wt.%
under static tension showed nonlinear behavior. It can also be observed that incorporating
CNFs under static tension showed nonlinear behavior. It can also be observed that incor-
CNFs had no effect on the initial elastic modulus. The composite tension behavior is
porating CNFs
dominated hadmatrix
by the no effect on the
rather initial
than elasticdue
the fibers modulus. The composite
to the off-axis loading.tension behav-
Four distinct
zones can be identified in the stress–strain curves, and are marked on the curves showndis-
ior is dominated by the matrix rather than the fibers due to the off-axis loading. Four in
tinct zones
Figure 9a. can be identified in the stress–strain curves, and are marked on the curves
shown At in
lowFigure
stress9a.
(Zone 1), the contribution of glass fiber shall not be neglected. The relative
high stiffness of glass fiber counteracts the effect of the CNFs. When the applied stress
increases (Zone 2), the effect of CNFs on the composite behavior appears as interlaminar
debonding, which occurs due to reduced fiber-matrix bond due to reduced crosslinking.
This is reflected in Zone 2 and in the decreased stiffness of CNFs/GFRP coupons compared
with GFRP composite with neat epoxy. At high applied stress levels (Zone 3), another effect
of CNFs becomes apparent. Such softening in the polymer matrix limits its ability to restrain
lateral fiber movement under tension loads, thus an apparent necking-like behavior takes
place. This behavior is very pronounced with CNFs/GFRP coupons compared with GFRP
coupons with neat epoxy. Such necking results in reduced cross-section and premature
failure (Zone 4) at relatively lower elongation in CNFs/GFRP, compared with neat GFRP.
Figure 9b shows damage propagation in GFRP composite coupons incorporating 2.0 wt.%
CNFs under static tension.
A comparison between the damage metric observed using electrical conductivity
monitoring and that quantified from the mechanical test using Equation (4) was made. It
is apparent that incorporating CNFs at 2.0 wt.% loading enables a significant change in
the electrical conductivity of GFRP relative to the ability to observe damage initiation and
propagation with reasonable accuracy. Furthermore, both metrics increased gradually and
reached a relatively flat plateau, showing constant damage in GFRP at the peak stress. The
mechanical damage increase rate (damage propagation) is much faster compared with the
electrical damage (see Figure 9b). The difference between the mechanical and electrical
damage metrics can be explained by the difference in the significance of microcracks
initiation and propagation on elastic modulus and electrical conductivity. While the elastic
modulus is known to be significantly affected by cracking, the electrical conductivity might
Energies 2023, 16, 835 13 of 21

Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 21

not be influenced at the same rate if alternative electrically conductive paths can be found
in the matrix. This means that using CNFs will improve GFRP conductivity, which makes
it useful for electrical charge applications.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure9.9.GFRP
GFRPtesting
testing(a)
(a) Stress–strain
Stress–strain curves of GFRP
curves of GFRP and
and electrically
electricallyconductive
conductiveGFRP
GFRPincorporat-
incorpo-
rating 2.0% CNFs (b) stress-electrical damage (DE) and stress-mechanical damage (DM) for glass
ing 2.0% CNFs (b) stress-electrical damage (DE) and stress-mechanical damage (DM) for glass fiber
fiber composite incorporating CNFs under monotonically increasing static tension stress.
composite incorporating CNFs under monotonically increasing static tension stress.

4.3. At
Testlow stress
Results for(Zone 1), the contribution
the Lab-Scale Prototype of glass fiber shall not be neglected. The rel-
ative
4.3.1. Stationary Tests Comparison of Indoors the
high stiffness of glass fiber counteracts andeffect of the
Outdoors CNFs. When the applied
Settings
stress increases (Zone 2), the effect of CNFs on the composite behavior appears as inter-
The output power from the three solar panels used in this study (as described in
laminar debonding, which occurs due to reduced fiber-matrix bond due to reduced cross-
Section 3.1) is compared in indoor settings and artificial lights and outdoors with direct
linking.
sunlightThis is reflected
as shown in Zone
in Figure 2 and
10. Due to in
thethe decreased
indoor stiffness
settings and theofplexiglass,
CNFs/GFRP the coupons
output of
compared with GFRP composite with neat epoxy. At high applied
the solar panels is decreased by 25% from the maximum output that the panel can stress levels (Zone 3),
capture
another effect of CNFs becomes
outdoors with direct sunlight. apparent. Such softening in the polymer matrix limits its
ability to restrain lateral fiber movement under tension loads, thus an apparent necking-
like behavior takes place. This behavior is very pronounced with CNFs/GFRP coupons
compared with GFRP coupons with neat epoxy. Such necking results in reduced cross-
section and premature failure (Zone 4) at relatively lower elongation in CNFs/GFRP, com-
pared with neat GFRP. Figure 9b shows damage propagation in GFRP composite coupons
incorporating 2.0 wt.% CNFs under static tension.
A comparison between the damage metric observed using electrical conductivity
monitoring and that quantified from the mechanical test using Equation (4) was made. It
is apparent that incorporating CNFs at 2.0 wt.% loading enables a significant change in
the electrical conductivity of GFRP relative to the ability to observe damage initiation and
propagation with reasonable accuracy. Furthermore, both metrics increased gradually
and reached a relatively flat plateau, showing constant damage in GFRP at the peak stress.
The mechanical damage increase rate (damage propagation) is much faster compared
with the electrical damage (see Figure 9b). The difference between the mechanical and
 4.3.1. Stationary Tests Comparison of Indoors and Outdoors Settings
The output power from the three solar panels used in this study (as described in Sec-
tion 3.1) is compared in indoor settings and artificial lights and outdoors with direct sun-
light as shown in Figure 10. Due to the indoor settings and the plexiglass, the output of
Energies 2023, 16, 835 14 of 21
the solar panels is decreased by 25% from the maximum output that the panel can capture
outdoors with direct sunlight.

0.5 10 Watt EcoWorthy Panel

0.4

Current (A)
0.3
0.2
Outdoor Testing + Sunlight
0.1
Indoor Testing +LEDs
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Voltage (V)

2 30Watt Renorgy Solar Panel

1.5
Current (A)

0.5
Outdoor testing + Sunlight
Indoor testing + LEDs
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Voltage (V)

13 Watt SolarKINGDOM hybrid panel

1
0.8
Current (A)

0.6
0.4
Outdoor testing + Sunlight
0.2
Indoor testing +LEDs
0
0 5 10 15 20
Voltage (V)

Figure 10. Testing the power output of the three solar panels used; outdoor with sunlight versus
artificial light indoors.

4.3.2. Stationary Tests with Indoor Setting and Artificial LEDs

For the purpose of verifying the proposed concept of smart charging system, the LEDs
were first powered using a DC power supply. The output power of the three solar panels in
stationary without the plexiglass (163.6 lux output) and with plexiglass (120.1 lux output)
were measured, and the results for the three solar panels under test are shown in Figure 11.
The results show that the effect of the plexiglass is very minimal, which means that the
transparent GFRP will not affect light output from the LEDs embedded in the roadway.
However, it can be seen that the power output was about 62% of the rated power of the
panels, and that is due to the LEDs. Further testing will compare the power output if the
solar panels are tested outside and fed directly from the sun.
 panels in stationary without the plexiglass (163.6 lux output) and with plexiglass (120.1
lux output) were measured, and the results for the three solar panels under test are shown
in Figure 11. The results show that the effect of the plexiglass is very minimal, which
means that the transparent GFRP will not affect light output from the LEDs embedded in
the roadway. However, it can be seen that the power output was about 62% of the rated
Energies 2023, 16, 835 15 of 21
power of the panels, and that is due to the LEDs. Further testing will compare the power
output if the solar panels are tested outside and fed directly from the sun.

10W EcoWorthy Solar Panel

0.4

Current (A)
0.3
0.2
0.1 With Plexiglass
Without Plexi
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Voltage (V)

30W Renogy solar panel IV curve

1
Current (A)

0.5
With Plexiglass
Without Plexi
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Voltage (V)

Second generation 13W solar panel

1
0.8
Current (A)

0.6
0.4
With Plexi
0.2
Without Plexi
0
0 5 10 15 20
Voltage (V)

Figure 11. Testing the output power of the transparent plexiglass indoors with artificial light to
Figure 11. Testing the output power of the transparent plexiglass indoors with artificial light to
determine the effects for the three solar panels.
determine the effects for the three solar panels.
4.3.3. Test of the Lab-Scale Prototype under Motion with Indoor Settings and
Artificial
4.3.3. TestLEDs
of the Lab-Scale Prototype under Motion with Indoor Settings and Artificial
LEDsIn this test, the three solar panel configurations depicted in Figure 7 were moved
alongInthe
thistrack
test,with
the different velocities
three solar of 1.12 m/s, 2.24
panel configurations m/s, and
depicted 3 m/s to
in Figure simulate
7 were the
moved
vehicle with the solar panel on its bottom driven with different speeds, and with the
along the track with different velocities of 1.12 m/s, 2.24 m/s, and 3 m/s to simulate the load
corresponding to the maximum output. The MPPT was calculated by sweeping a variable
resistor and calculating the corresponding output power for each of the three solar panels
under test, as shown in Figure 12. During stationary testing, all solar panels need different
loads to achieve the MPPT point. The single 30 W panel, while being fully exposed to
artificial light, was optimally loaded at 40 Ω, while the two 13 W panels performed best at
15 Ω, and the three 10 W panels performed best at 35 Ω.
 under test, as shown in Figure 12. During stationary testing, all solar panels need different
vehicle with the solar panel on its bottom driven with different speeds, and with the load
loads to achieve
corresponding to the MPPT point.
the maximum The
output. single
The MPPT30 wasWcalculated
panel, while being fully
by sweeping exposed to
a variable
artificial
resistor and calculating the corresponding output power for each of the three solar panels best at
light, was optimally loaded at 40 Ω, while the two 13 W panels performed
15under
Ω, and the
test, as three
shown10 in W panels
Figure performed
12. During best at
stationary 35 Ω.all solar panels need different
testing,
Energies 2023, 16, 835 loads to achieve the MPPT point. The single 30 W panel, while being fully exposed to 16 of 21
artificial light, was optimally loaded at 40 Ω, while the two 13 W panels performed best at
Resistive Sweep for MPPT
15 Ω, and the three 10 W panels performed best at 35 Ω.
12
Resistive Sweep for MPPT
10
12

810

Power (W)
68
Power (W)
46

24

2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
0 5 10 15 20Resistive
25 Load30
(Ohm) 35 40 45 50
1 - 30 W Renorgy Panel 2 Resistive
- 13 W SunKingdom
Load (Ohm)Panels 3 10 W EcoWorthy Panels
1 - 30 W Renorgy Panel 2 - 13 W SunKingdom Panels 3 10 W EcoWorthy Panels
Figure 12. Sweeping resistive load to capture the maximum power output for one Renogy® 30 W
Figure 12. of
panel, Sweeping
the13 Wresistive load to®capture the maximum power output for one ®Renogy ® 30 W
Figuretwo
12. Sweeping Sunkingdom
resistive load topanel, and
capture three
the of the
maximum 10power
W EcoWorthy
output for panels.
one Renogy® 30 W
panel, two of the13 W Sunkingdom® panel, and three of the 10 W EcoWorthy® panels.
panel, two of the13 W Sunkingdom® panel, and three of the 10 W EcoWorthy® panels.
Figures 13–15 depicts the output voltage, current, and power measured while the
Figures 13–15 depicts the output voltage, current, and power measured while the ®
simulated vehicle
Figures 13–15 is depicts
in motion.the The
outputmaximum
voltage, output
current, powerand from
power themeasured
EcoWorthy while solar
the
simulated vehicle is in motion. The maximum output power from the EcoWorthy ® solar
panel was
simulated 3.8 W
vehicle from is one
in panel,
motion. with
The a load
maximum of 40 Ω
output tracking
power the
frommaximum
the power
EcoWorthy ®
point.
solar
panel was 3.8 W from one panel, with a load of 40 Ω tracking the maximum power point.
The
Theprototype
panel was 3.8 W
prototype has
hasfrom three
three onepanels toto
panel,
panels cover
with
cover all
thethe
a load
all LED
of 40
LED Ω area,
area, and, and,
tracking therefore,
the
therefore, maximum thepower
the maximum maximumpoint.
output
The
output power
power for
prototype hasthethree
the prototype
panels
prototype is is to11.43
11.43 W.W.
cover The
all
The thethree
three solarsolar
LED area,panels
panels and, were
weretherefore,
replaced replacedtheone
with with one
maximum
large
largesolar
output solar panel
powerpanel (30
for(30 theW Wprototype
Renogy
Renogy )isand
®)®and thethe
11.43 W.output
outputThe power
three
power solar
was was measured.
panels
measured. were Figure
Figurereplaced
13 shows 13with
shows
one
a maximum
large solar power
panel (30 output
W of
Renogyabout® ) 10.1
and W.the However,
output since
power the
wassize of the
measured. panel is
Figure now13 shows
a maximum power output of about 10.1 W. However, since the size of the panel is now
acovering
maximum
covering mostpower
most of the
of theLED output
LED compartment,
of about 10.1
compartment, thethesolar panel
W.solar
However,will will
panel not have
since nottheenough time
sizeenough
have of thetopanel
cap- to
time iscap-
now
ture the
covering
ture energy from
mostfrom
the energy of the the LEDs.
theLED
LEDs. Therefore,
compartment, it can
Therefore, it can be concluded
the besolar that
panel will
concluded it is better
thatnot to
it ishave use smaller
betterenough time to
to use smaller
solar panels
capture theinin parallel
energy thanthe
from oneLEDs.
large solar panel. During canthebespeed tests, it that
was concluded
solar panels parallel than one largeTherefore,
solar panel.itDuring concluded
the speed tests, ititwas
is better to use
concluded
that at different speeds the output waveforms are approximately equivalent.
smaller
that solar panels
at different speeds inthe
parallel
output than one largeare
waveforms solar panel. During
approximately the speed tests, it was
equivalent.
concluded that at different speeds the output waveforms are approximately equivalent.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 13. Output
(a) voltage, current, and power measured
(b) while simulated vehicle in motion (c) using
the 30 W Renogy® solar panel and under different speeds (1.12 m/s (a), 2.24 m/s (b) and 3 m/s (c),
from left
Figure
Figure 13.toOutput
13. right respectively).
Output voltage,
voltage, current, and
and power
powermeasured
measuredwhile
whilesimulated
simulated vehicle
vehicle in in motion
motion using
using the
the
30 W30 Renogy
W Renogy ® solar panel and under different speeds (1.12 m/s (a), 2.24 m/s (b) and 3 m/s (c),
® solar panel and under different speeds (1.12 m/s (a), 2.24 m/s (b) and 3 m/s (c), from
from left to right respectively).
left to right respectively).
Energies
Energies2023, 16, x FOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW 1717ofof2121
Energies2023,
2023,16,
16,x835 REVIEW 17 of 21

(a)
(a) (b)
(b) (c)
(c)
Figure
Figure
Figure 14. Output
14.
14. Output
Output voltage,
voltage, current,
voltage, current,
current, and
andpower
and power
power measured
measured
measured while
whilesimulated
while simulated
simulated vehicle
vehicle
vehicle ininin
motion
motionusing
motion using
using
the 2 of 13
the2 2ofof13W
13W SunKingdom
WSunKingdom ®
SunKingdom solar®®
solar panels
solarpanelsand
panelsandunder
andunderdifferent
underdifferentspeeds
differentspeeds(1.12
speeds (1.12m/s (a),
(1.12 m/s
m/s(a),2.24
(a),2.24 m/s
2.24m/s (b),
m/s(b), and
(b),and
and
the
33m/s
3m/s(c),
m/s (c),from
(c), left
from
from totoright,
left
left to respectively).
right,
right, respectively).
respectively).

(a)
(a) (b)
(b) (c)
(c)
Figure
Figure15.
15.Output
Outputvoltage,
voltage,current
currentand
andpower
powermeasured
measuredwhile
whilesimulated
simulatedvehicle
vehicleininmotion
motionusing
using
Figure 10
the 15. Output voltage, current andand
power measured while simulated vehicle inm/s
motion using
thethree
three 10W WEcoWorthy
EcoWorthy®solar panels under different speeds (1.12 m/s (a), 2.24 (b), and
®
solar panels and under different speeds (1.12 m/s (a), 2.24 m/s (b), and
® solar panels and under different speeds (1.12 m/s (a), 2.24 m/s (b), and
the
33m/s three
m/s(c), 10
(c),from W EcoWorthy
fromleft
lefttotoright,
right,respectively).
respectively).
3 m/s (c), from left to right, respectively).
For
ForthetheEcoWorthy
EcoWorthy®®configuration,
configuration,
® configuration,
the
themaximum
maximumpower powerthatthatcan
canbe
bedelivered
deliveredisis14.514.5
W For the EcoWorthy the maximum power that can be delivered is
W (peak points), while, in motion, the average power delivered over timeisisapproxi-
(peak points), while, in motion, the average power delivered over time approxi-
14.5 W (peak points), while, in motion, the average power delivered over time is approx-
mately
mately4.9 4.9W, W,meaning
meaningthat thatthetheininmotion
motionthe theefficiency
efficiencyisis43%.
43%.ForForthe
theSunKingdom
SunKingdom®®
imately 4.9 W, meaning that the in motion the efficiency is 43%. For the SunKingdom®
configuration,
configuration, the maximum power delivered was 15 W, while, in motion, the average
configuration,the themaximum
maximumpower powerdelivered
deliveredwas was1515W, W,while,
while,ininmotion,
motion,the theaverage
average
power
power delivered
delivered over
overtime
time was
was approximately
approximately 4.1
4.1W,W, meaning
meaning that
thatthe
theininmotion
motion the
theeffi-
effi-
power delivered over time was approximately 4.1 W, meaning that the in motion the
ciency
ciency was
was 45%.
45%. For
Forthe
theRenogy
Renogy ®®configuration the maximum power delivered was 14.8
configuration
® the maximum power delivered was 14.8
efficiency was 45%. For the Renogy configuration the maximum power delivered was
W,
W, while,
while, ininmotion,
motion, the
theaverage
average power
powerdelivered
delivered over
overtime
time was approximately one
onewatt,
14.8 W, while, in motion, the average power delivered overwas
time approximately
was approximately watt,
one
meaning
meaning that, in motion, the efficiency is 10%. The results of the average power over time
watt, meaning that, in motion, the efficiency is 10%. The results of the average powertime
that, in motion, the efficiency is 10%. The results of the average power over over
show
show that multiple smaller cells
cellsperform better
betterthan one single panel. This isisdue to others
time that
show multiple smallersmaller
that multiple perform
cells perform than
betterone single
than onepanel.
singleThis
panel. due
Thistoisothers
due to
effects,
effects,such
such asasshading.
shading.
others effects, such as shading.
5.5.5.
Discussion:
Discussion:
Discussion: Recommended
Recommended
Recommended Strategy
Strategy
Strategy
5.1. System
5.1. System Embedded
Embedded in Infrastructure
in
5.1. System Embedded in Infrastructure Infrastructure
AAAstandard
standard
standard lane
lane
lane isisseparated
isseparated
separated into
into five
into five
five distinct pieces,
distinct
distinct pieces,
pieces, the the
the left edge,
left
left edge,
edge, the left
the
the wheel
left
left wheel
wheel path,
path,
path,
the center
the center zone,
zone,the right
the right wheel
wheel path
path andand the right
the edge.
right edge. For For
the center zone, the right wheel path and the right edge. For this study, the right and left this study,
this study, the the right
rightand
and left
left
wheel
wheel paths
paths are the
are thefocal
focal points.
points. In each
In each respective
respective wheel
wheel path,
wheel paths are the focal points. In each respective wheel path, circuitry, materials, and path, circuitry,
circuitry, materials,
materials, andand
polymers
polymers
polymers will
will
will be
bebe placed.
placed.
placed. Sawtooth
Sawtooth
Sawtooth cuts
cuts
cuts will
will
will be be
be made
made
made ininin
the the
the wheelwheel
wheel path,
path,
path, with
with
with thethe
the minimum
minimum
minimum
width
width
width being
being
being 3030
30 cmcmcmand
andand thethe
the maximum
maximum
maximum being being
being 107107
107 cm.cm.
cm. The The
Theminimum
minimumminimum width
width width is relative
isisrelative
relative theto
totothe
the width
width
width of common
ofof common
common tire tire
tire sizes, sizes,
sizes, suchsuch
such as the
asas the
the 225/65r17
225/65r17
225/65r17 tiretire
tire thatthat
that isis 24is
2424cmcmcm wide wide
wide andand
and thethe
the
LT265/70R17
LT265/70R17 tiretire
at at
26 26
cm cm wide.
wide. TheThe common
common tire
tire widths
widths
LT265/70R17 tire at 26 cm wide. The common tire widths and ample additions to both and and ample
ample additions
additions to to both
both
sides
sides
sides areare
are thethe
the minimum
minimum
minimum width
width
width atatat
30
3030
cm;cm;
cm; thisthis
this will
will
will work
work
work onlyonly
only ifthe
ififthe theEV
EV EV ison
isison on apredetermined
predetermined
aapredetermined
path
path
pathand and precisely
andprecisely controlled.
preciselycontrolled. Realistically,
controlled.Realistically,
Realistically,this this will
thiswill
willnot not
notbe be
bethe the
thecase, case,
case,and and
andthe the
thecuts cuts
cuts cancan
can be
bebe
anywhere
anywhere
anywherebetween between
betweenthe the aforementioned
theaforementioned
aforementionedrange. range.
range.The The
Thecuts cuts
cutswill will
willbe be
bemade made
madefor for
forboth both
bothwheel wheel
wheelpaths paths
paths
(i.e.,
(i.e., left
left andand right).
right).
(i.e., left and right).
An ideal cut would have the width of 45 cm and the length of 20 cm. The length of
20 cm is due to the approximate length of a vehicle. The length should be a minimum
Energies 2023, 16, 835 18 of 21

of 182 cm due to the placement of the PV cells, which gives the full range of solar cells a
chance to produce power at the same time. Moreover, only powering the lights that are
directly under the solar cells is a key factor in increasing efficiency. An optimal way of
lighting the LEDs should be researched. If the vehicles are automated and can travel the
path at a predetermined speed, a simple lighting sequence can be implemented.
The recommended circuitry that will be embedded in the cuts are broken up into four
parts, the nanomaterial and the output voltage, a full-bridge rectifier, a fly-back converter,
and LED strips. The nanomaterial output voltage is a sinusoidal wave generated from the
scaled up MoS2 that generates electricity from mechanical pressure or heat. That waveform
will then be rectified going through the full bridge rectifier. The waveform is rectified so
that there is no negative current to control in the circuitry going forward. The rectified
waveform is used as the input to a fly-back converter and controlled though a constant
voltage controller to control the output to approximately 22 V, the operating voltage of the
LEDs. The reason a fly-back converter is being used is due to the expected large magnitude
of the rectified signal. From piezoelectric materials, one can expect high voltages with
extremely low current. This is where the fly-back converter can regulate the voltage and
give a usable current to power the final stage, the LEDs. The LEDs are the output on the
embedded roadway circuitry, and the input to the EV circuitry system, described in the
next section.
For the cuts that will be made, approximately 32, 1220 mm × 18 mm Samsung
Semiconductor Inc. (San Jose, CA, USA) LT-Qxx2A series LED module strips will be
embedded into each wheel path cut. This will allow for adequate room for the LED strips
along with room for the illumination to be taken advantage of.

5.2. System for EVs

A PV array will be placed on the underside of an EV to capture the illumination from
the LEDs embedded in the roadway, as discussed in the above section. The PV array will
exist between the wheel wells of each respective side (i.e., left and right). This means that
the PV array will run along the rocker panels of the vehicles, which are approximately
six feet in length. For these dimensions we can fit 24 solar cells, as PV cells come in a
standard size of 60 by 60 . The array will consist of 24 solar cells in parallel, placed in
2 × 12 cells. This means that the voltage will stay in the range of 0–24 V, and the current
will be cascaded. With the solar cells in this configuration, shading plays a less pivotal
role. These are approximate measures due to vehicles differing in dimensions. To capture
and deliver the power, the group is proposing the three stages: the PV cells in parallel as
discussed, a buck-boost converter, and then the battery of the proposed EV. The output of
the solar cells should be in parallel with a load capacitor to smooth the voltage that will
act as the input for a buck-boost converter. The proposed buck-boost converter is used to
regulate the voltage to 12 V to be fed into the final stage, the EVs battery. The power fed
into the battery will help add slow charging over time while the EV is in motion.

6. Conclusions and Future Work

This study presented an innovative smart illuminative charging system for EVs.
It is a novel (because it is induction coil-free) wireless charging mechanism that uses
nanomaterials-powered LEDs embedded within the road pavement and thin film solar
panels placed on the bottom of the EVs to charge the vehicle battery. Light mediates energy
transfer between LEDs and solar panels. To better protect the LEDs from the heavy vehicle
load whilst still harnessing their electric-to-optical energy conversion capability, certain
flexible polymer overlay materials were developed to be placed onto the pavement surface.
The study presented the initial, albeit promising, results on the great potential of the nano-
materials to harvest energy and provide electricity to light up the LEDs. However, one of
the challenges in implementation is to fabricate EH2N in a large scale to be used commer-
cially. For future work, the authors are also investigating other piezoelectric materials that
are commercially available to operate with the same concept. A GFRP was fabricated as an
Energies 2023, 16, 835 19 of 21

overlay for the nanomaterials for the roadway compartments and tested for mechanical
stress to ensure the performance of load testing of the vehicle and electrical conductivity.
A lab-scale proof-of-concept prototype was also demonstrated to verify the system-
level capability. Different solar panels were tested, and it was concluded that the solar
panel size should be smaller than the LED compartments embedded in the roadways for
best results. In addition, it was shown that the best results came from the solar panel that
combines the first- and second-generation panel characteristics, thus simultaneously mono-
crystalline and flexible. It was shown that the start-to-end energy efficiency was about
40%. A strategy for implementation was proposed for both the embedded roadway and the
circuits for the EV. Dimensions of the compartments and the contents of the compartments
were discussed, as well as the configuration of the solar panels and power stage to charge
the battery.
If this clean, wireless charging method for EVs is adapted, it will lead to a significant
decrease in CO2 emissions. Comparing with gas-powered vehicles, the CO2 emission is
decreased 50% in EVs, from 57 to 28 metric tons. This will help reduce the impact of climate
change on the reliability and capacity of transportation systems. In addition, with the
energy harvested from the pavement using these nanomaterials, the system can also be
used as a sensor for vehicle counts and traffic data collection. This sensing technology can
help improve safety and reduce congestion.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.A., E.C.A., M.M.R.T. and S.D.; methodology, D.F., A.S.,
P.R., and M.G.; software, D.F., A.S., P.R. and M.G.; formal analysis, D.F., A.S., P.R. and M.G. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by Transportation Consortium of South-Central States (Tran-SET)
University Transportation Center, grant number 18ITSTSA03.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author.
Acknowledgments: This work is part of a project funded by the Transportation Consortium of
South-Central States (Tran-SET) University Transportation Center (Project No. 18ITSTSA03).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Dept. of Transportation. Sustainability in Roadway Design and Construction Guidance Document; CDOT Environmental Programs
Branch: Denver, CO, USA, 2013.
2. Newman, P.; Hargroves, K.; Desha, C.; Whistler, L.; Farr, A.; Wilson, K.; Beauson, J.; Matan, A.; Surawski, L. Reducing the
Environmental Impact of Road Construction. 2012. Available online: https://sbenrc.com.au/app/uploads/2013/11/SBEnrc-
Project-1.3-Briefing-Report-Reducing-energy-intensity-of-road-construction.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2021).
3. Konstantinou, T.; Gkartzonikas, C.; Gkritza, K. Public acceptance of electric roadways: The case of Los Angeles, California. Int. J.
Sustain. Transp. 2021, 22, 1–25. [CrossRef]
4. US. Environmental Protection Agency. Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions; EPA: Washington, DC, USA, 2017.
5. Moon, H.; Youngjun Park, S.; Jeong, C.; Lee, J. Forecasting electricity demand of electric vehicles by analyzing consumers’
charging patterns. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2018, 62, 64–79, ISSN 1361–9209. [CrossRef]
6. Shepero, M. Modeling and Forecasting of Electric Vehicle Charging, Solar Power Production, and Residential Load: Perspectives
into the Future Urban and Rural Energy Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation, Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and
Technology, Technology, Department of Civil and Industrial Engineering, Civil Engineering and Built Environment, Uppsala,
Sweden, 2020. Available online: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-416754 (accessed on 3 January 2021).
7. Gerossier, A.; Girard, R.; Kariniotakis, G. Modeling and Forecasting Electric Vehicle Consumption Profiles. Energies 2019, 12, 1341.
[CrossRef]
8. Konstantelos, I.; Giannelos, S.; Strbac, G. Strategic Valuation of Smart Grid Technology Options in Distribution Networks. IEEE
Trans. Power Syst. 2017, 32, 1293–1303. [CrossRef]
9. van der Weijde, A.; Hobbs, B. Planning electricity transmission to accommodate renewables: Using two-stage programming to
evaluate flexibility and the cost of disregarding uncertainty. Energy Econ. 2012, 34, 2089–2101. [CrossRef]
10. Taljegard, M.; Göransson, L.; Odenberger, M.; Johnsson, F. Impacts of electric vehicles on the electricity generation portfolio–A
Scandinavian-German case study. Appl. Energy 2019, 235, 1637–1650. Available online: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S0306261918316970 (accessed on 4 January 2021). [CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 835 20 of 21

11. Borozan, S.; Giannelos, S.; Strbac, G. Strategic network expansion planning with electric vehicle smart charging concepts as
investment options. Adv. Appl. Energy 2022, 5, 100077, ISSN 2666-7924. [CrossRef]
12. Trieu, M.; Jadun, P.; Logan, J.; McMillan, C.; Muratori, M.; Steinberg, D.; Vimmerstedt, L.; Jones, R.; Haley, B.; Nelson,
B. Electrification Futures Study: Scenarios of Electric Technology Adoption and Power Consumption for the United States; National
Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2018; NREL/TP-6A20–71500. Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/
fy18osti/71500.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2021).
13. Yuksel, T.; Michalek, J.J. Effects of Regional Temperature on Electric Vehicle Efficiency, Range, and Emissions in the United States.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 3974–3980. [CrossRef]
14. Gerssen-Gondelach, S.; Faaij, A. Performance of batteries for electric vehicles on short and longer term. J. Power Sources 2012,
212, 111. [CrossRef]
15. Etacheri, V.; Marom, R.; Elazari Salitra, R.; Aurbach, D. Challenges in the development of advanced Li-ion batteries: A review.
Energy Environ. Sci. 2011, 4, 3243. [CrossRef]
16. Zhou, Y.; Gohlke, D.; Rush, L.; Kelly, J.; Dai, Q. Lithium-Ion Battery Supply Chain for E-Drive Vehicles in the United States: 2010–2020;
Argonne National Lab: Lemont, IL, USA, 2021.
17. Ahmed, S.; Bloom, I.; Jansen, A.N.; Tanim, T.; Dufek, E.J.; Pesaran, A.; Burnham, A.; Cason, R.B.; Dias, F.; Hardy, K.; et al. Enabling
fast charging–A battery technology gap assessment. J. Power Sources 2017, 367, 250–262, ISSN 0378–7753. [CrossRef]
18. Mastoi, M.S.; Zhuang, S.; Munir, H.M.; Haris, M.; Hassan, M.; Usman, M.; Bukhari, S.S.H.; Ro, J.-S. An in-depth analysis of
electric vehicle charging station infrastructure, policy implications, and future trends. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 11504–11529, ISSN
2352–4847. [CrossRef]
19. Li, S.; Mi, C.C. Wireless Power Transfer for Electric Vehicle Applications. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 2015, 3, 4–17.
[CrossRef]
20. Will Electric Cars soon Have Solar Roofs? Toyota and Tesla Say Yes, ThinkProgress.org. Available online: https://thinkprogress.org/
prius-solar-roof-breakthrough-2b929f467061/ (accessed on 9 March 2018).
21. André, K.; Aristeidis, K.; Robert, M.; Joannopoulos, J.D.; Peter, F.; Marin, S. Wireless Power Transfer via Strongly Coupled
Magnetic Resonances. J. Sci. P 2007, 317, 83–86. [CrossRef]
22. Sample, A.; Meyer, D.; Smith, J. Analysis, experimental results, and range adaptation of magnetically coupled resonators for
wireless power transfer. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2011, 58, 544–554. [CrossRef]
23. Cannon, B.; Hoburg, J.; Stancil, D.; Goldstein, S. Magnetic resonant coupling as a potential means for wireless power transfer to
multiple small receivers. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2009, 24, 1819–1825. [CrossRef]
24. Kurs, A.; Moffatt, R.; Soljacic, M. Simultaneous mid-range power transfer to multiple devices. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 96,
044102-1–044102-3. [CrossRef]
25. Cheon, S.; Kim, Y.-H.; Kang, S.-Y.; Lee, M.L.; Lee, J.-M.; Zyung, T. Circuit-Model-Based Analysis of a Wireless Energy-Transfer
System via Coupled Magnetic Resonances. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2011, 58, 2906–2914. [CrossRef]
26. Chen, K.; Zhao, Z. Analysis of the Double-Layer Printed Spiral Coil for Wireless Power Transfer. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power
Electron. 2013, 1, 114–121. [CrossRef]
27. Zhang, Y.; Zhao, Z.; Chen, K. Frequency Decrease Analysis of Resonant Wireless Power Transfer. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2014,
29, 1058–1063. [CrossRef]
28. Nagatsuka, Y.; Ehara, N.; Kaneko, Y.; Abe, S.; Yasuda, T. Compact contactless power transfer system for electric vehicles. In
Proceedings of the 2010 International Power Electronics Conference-ECCE ASIA, Sapporo, Japan, 21–24 June 2010; pp. 807–813.
[CrossRef]
29. Lee, S.; Huh, J.; Park, C.; Choi, N.S.; Cho, G.H.; Rim, C.T. On-Line Electric Vehicle using inductive power transfer system.
In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, Atlanta, GA, USA, 12–16 September 2010; pp.
1598–1601. [CrossRef]
30. Huh, J.; Lee, W.; Cho, G.H.; Lee, B.; Rim, C.T. Characterization of novel Inductive Power Transfer Systems for On-Line Electric
Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2011 Twenty-Sixth Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC),
Fort Worth, TX, USA, 6–11 March 2011; pp. 1975–1979. [CrossRef]
31. Ning, P.; Miller, J.M.; Onar, O.C.; White, C.P.; Marlino, L.D. A compact wireless charging system development. In Proceedings of
the 2013 Twenty-Eighth Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC), Long Beach, CA, USA,
17–21 March 2013; pp. 3045–3050. [CrossRef]
32. Nguyen, T.D.; Li, S.; Li, W.; Mi, C.C. Feasibility study on bipolar pads for efficient wireless power chargers. In Proceedings of
the 2014 IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition-APEC 2014, Fort Worth, TX, USA, 16–20 March 2014; pp.
1676–1682. [CrossRef]
33. Caughill, P. This High-Tech, Solar-Powered Car May be the Ruture of Travel. 2017. Available online: https://futurism.com/this-
futuristic-solar-powered-car-may-be-the-future-of-travel/ (accessed on 22 March 2018).
34. Lufčić, M.; Maras, M.; Vukelić, M. Energy saving design and materials in road transport. In Proceedings of the REACT Conference,
Beograd, Serbia, 3–4 May 2011. Available online: http://bib.irb.hr/prikazi-rad?rad=540022 (accessed on 20 March 2018).
35. Ranjan, R. Solar Power Roads: Revitalising Solar Highways, Electrical Power and Smart Grids. Int. J. Eng. Res. Gen. Sci. 2015, 3,
380–385.
Energies 2023, 16, 835 21 of 21

36. Bobes-Jesus, V.; Pascual-Munoz, P.; Castro-Fresno, D.; Rodriguez-Hernandez, J. Asphalt solar collectors: A literature review. Appl.
Energy 2013, 102, 962–970. [CrossRef]
37. Larsson, O.; Thelandersson, S. Estimating extreme values of thermal gradients in concrete structures. Mater. Struct. 2011, 44,
1491–1500. [CrossRef]
38. Navarro, G.; Rojas, C. Piezoelectric Power Generating Tire Apparatus. U.S. Patent US20170084817A1, 23 March 2017.
39. Kumar, A.; Sumathi, S. Renewable energy source piezo electric harvesters in car tyres. In Proceedings of the 2015 Online
International Conference on Green Engineering and Technologies, Coimbatore, India, 27 November 2015.
40. Allouhi, A.; Rehman, S.; Buker, M.S.; Said, Z. Up-to-date literature review on Solar PV systems: Technology progress, market
status and R&D. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 362, 132339. [CrossRef]
41. Benda, V.; Černá, L. PV cells and modules–State of the art, limits and trends. Heliyon 2020, 6, e05666. [CrossRef]
42. Babics, M.; De Bastiani, M.; Balawi, A.H.; Ugur, E.; Aydin, E.; Subbiah, A.S.; Liu, J.; Xu, L.; Azmi, R.; Allen, T.G.; et al. Unleashing
the Full Power of Perovskite/Silicon Tandem Modules with Solar Trackers. ACS Energy Lett. 2022, 7, 1604–1610. [CrossRef]
43. Lee, K.; Um, H.-D.; Choi, D.; Park, J.; Kim, N.; Kim, H.; Seo, K. The Development of Transparent Photovoltaics. Cell Rep. Phys. Sci.
2020, 1, 100143. [CrossRef]
44. Solid-State Lighting: Comparing LEDs to Traditional Light Sources. Available online: https://www.eere.energy.gov (accessed on
22 March 2018).
45. Lifetime of White LEDs; US Department of Energy: Washington, DC, USA, 2012.
46. Wang, F.-K.; Lu, Y.-C. Useful lifetime analysis for high-power white LEDs. Microelectron. Reliab. 2014, 54, 1307–1315. [CrossRef]
47. In Depth: Advantages of LED Lighting. Available online: https://www.energy.ltgovernors.com (accessed on 22 March 2018).
48. Available online: https://www.samsung.com/led/lighting/mid-power-leds/5630-leds/lm561c/# (accessed on 24
December 2022).
49. Anton, S.; Erturk, E.; Kong, N.; Ha, D.; Inman, D. Self-charging structures using piezoceramics and thin-film batteries. In
Proceedings of the ASME Conf. Smart Mater., Adaptive Struct. Intell. Syst., Oxnard, CA, USA, 21–23 September 2009; pp. 1–11.
50. Wu, W.; Wang, L.; Li, Y.; Zhang, F.; Lin, L.; Niu, S.; Chenet, D.; Zhang, X.; Hao, Y.; Heinz, T.F.; et al. Piezoelectricity of
single-atomic-layer MoS2 for energy conversion and piezotronics. Nature 2014, 514, 470. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
51. Zhu, H.; Wang, Y.; Xiao, J.; Liu, M.; Xiong, S.; Wong, Z.J.; Ye, Z.; Ye, Y.; Yin, X.; Zhang, X. Observation of piezoelectricity in
free-standing monolayer MoS2. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2015, 10, 151. [CrossRef]
52. Buscema, M.; Barkelid, M.; Zwiller, V.; van der Zant, H.S.J.; Steele, G.A.; Castellanos-Gomez, A. Large and Tunable Photothermo-
electric Effect in Single-Layer MoS2 . Nano Lett. 2013, 13, 358–363. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
53. Ferrari, A.C.; Meyer, J.C.; Scardaci, V.; Casiraghi, C.; Lazzeri, M.; Mauri, F.; Piscanec, S.; Jiang, D.; Novoselov, K.S.; Roth, S.; et al.
Raman Spectrum of Graphene and Graphene Layers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006, 97, 187401. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54. US Composites. Epoxy Resins. Available online: https://www.uscomposites.com/products.html (accessed on 14
December 2022).
55. ACP Composites. Available online: https://www.acpcomposites.com/ (accessed on 14 December 2022).
56. Large Scale Testing. MTS Machine. Available online: http://taha.unm.edu/research-2/large-scale-testing/ (accessed on 14
December 2022).
57. Sharma, C.; Jain, A. Maximum Power Point Tracking Techniques: A Review. Int. J. Recent Res. Electr. Electron. Eng. (IJRREEE)
2014, 1, 25–33.
58. Texas Instruments bq24800EVM Controller Evaluation Module (EVM). Available online: https://www.mouser.com/new/
texas-instruments/ti-bq24800evm-evaluation-module/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAqOucBhDrARIsAPCQL1azXxb4u4TLWfXbhWx6
ZCgRUkclK6akYwdhBbbbP9mFyQpdkneMLwoaApBCEALw_wcB (accessed on 14 December 2022).
59. HC-05 Bluetooth Module. Available online: https://www.electronicwings.com/sensors-modules/bluetooth-module-hc-05-
(accessed on 14 December 2022).
60. Matlab Mathworks. Available online: https://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab.html (accessed on 14 December 2022).

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.