IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 59, NO.
9, SEPTEMBER 2012 2125
A Power Link Study of Wireless
Non-Radiative Power Transfer Systems
Using Resonant Shielded Loops
Erin M. Thomas, Member, IEEE, Jason D. Heebl, Member, IEEE, Carl Pfeiffer, Student Member, IEEE, and
Anthony Grbic, Member, IEEE
Abstract—This paper discusses the use of magnetically coupled
resonators for midrange wireless non-radiative power transfer
(WNPT). A quasi-static (circuit) model is developed to establish
key measures of performance and to aid in design. The use of
directly fed, resonant shielded loops for WNPT is also proposed
for the first time. Two experimental WNPT systems employing
shielded loops are reported. A comprehensive experimental study
is performed, and the performance of the WNPT systems shows
close agreement with analytical predictions and developed circuit
models. With a single-turn system of loop radius 10.7 cm, power
transfer efficiency of 41.8% is achieved at a loop separation of
35 cm (3.3 loop radii). When the number of turns is increased
to ten, a power transfer efficiency of 36.5% is achieved at a loop
separation of 56 cm (5.3 loop radii). Measured magnetic field
levels in the vicinity of the WNPT systems are shown to closely
agree with analytical field values.
Index Terms—Mutual inductance, non-radiative power transfer,
resonant magnetic coupling, shielded loops, wireless power.
I. INTRODUCTION
M ID-RANGE wireless non-radiative power transfer
(WNPT) was introduced in 2007 with a theoretical
overview and an experimental demonstration [1]. WNPT relies
on coupling between two or more resonant objects through their
evanescent (non-radiating) fields. Therefore, it is necessary
for the resonators to be within each other’s reactive near field.
Although theoretical work suggests that any electromagnetic
resonators can be used for WNPT [2], the initial demonstration
utilized magnetic resonance. Magnetic resonators have the added
Manuscript received May 14, 2011; revised September 23, 2011; accepted
December 23, 2011. Date of publication February 07, 2012; date of current
version August 24, 2012. This work was supported by the U.S. Air Force
(FA8650-05-D-5807, FA8650-090-D-5037) through Universal Technology
Corporation and UES Inc. subcontract agreements. This paper was recom-
mended by Associate Editor E. Alarcon.
E. M. Thomas was with the Radiation Laboratory, Department of Electrical
Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
48109 USA. She is now with SRI International in the Communications, Radar
and Sensing Lab, Menlo Park, CA 84025 USA (e-mail: emenolly@umich.edu).
A. Grbic and C. Pfeiffer are with the Radiation Laboratory, Department of
Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, MI 48109 USA (e-mail: agrbic@umich.edu; carlpfei@umich.edu).
J. D. Heebl was with the Air Force Research Labs, Materials and Manufac-
turing Directorate, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH 45433 USA.
He is now with Space and Missiles Systems Center, Satellite Control Network,
Los Angeles Air Force Base, El Segundo, CA 90245 USA (e-mail: Jason.Heebl.
1@us.af.mil).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TCSI.2012.2185295
1549-8328/$31.00 © 2012 IEEE
benefit of only weakly interacting with surrounding non-reso-
nant objects, as most everyday materials are non-magnetic.
The transfer of RF power through magnetic coupling has been
studied for some time; a sampling of earlier work can be found
in [3]–[10]. However, these earlier works considered small sep-
aration distances (distances less than one loop radius), that is,
close range instead of midrange power transfer. Additionally,
this work utilizes the natural resonance of the coils along with
conjugate matching on both the source and receiver, whereas
earlier works increased efficiency by solely loading the loops
with a capacitor to achieve resonance.
WNPT has seen interest from research institutions [1], [2],
[11]–[13] and industry [14], [15]. Numerous applications of
WNPT have been proposed, such as charging electric vehi-
cles, personal electronics and providing power for robots in
a manufacturing environment. For each of these applications,
improving the efficiency, practicality and range of WNPT
systems are critical. The range can be defined as the maximum
distance at which a certain efficiency can be achieved, where
the target efficiency may vary with application. The efficiency
is most realistically quoted as the ratio of the power dissipated
in the load to the power available from the source
.
In this paper, a detailed explanation of magnetically coupled
resonators for midrange WNPT is presented from a circuit per-
spective. Using a coupled RLC representation of the system,
performance metrics and design equations are derived. A thor-
ough analysis of impedance matching is also reported. The pre-
sented circuit model is shown to accurately predict the perfor-
mance of two experimental WNPT systems over a wide range
of operating distances. Dramatic improvements in efficiency are
demonstrated with the use of matching networks that provide a
simultaneous conjugate match to both the source and load.
In addition, the use of open-circuited, shielded loops for
WNPT is proposed for the first time. Shielded loops have been
extensively studied and previously used for magnetic field
probes and imaging [16]–[22]. The open-circuit termination
of the loops creates a capacitance which allows the loops to
resonate. These shielded loops are simple to construct and offer
several advantages. They are balanced structures (baluns are
not required) which can be directly fed through coaxial RF
connectors. Baluns are undesirable because they add fabrica-
tion complexity and cost, and introduce losses which degrade
efficiency. Alternatively, a signal source with a balanced trans-
mission-line output such as twin-wire lines could be used.
2126 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 59, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

the next section, all the circuit parameters are found analytically
(in closed form).
From this circuit model, the input and output impedances of
the system can be calculated

Fig. 1. Equivalent circuit for two magnetically coupled resonant loops. Expres-
sions for and are given by (1) and (2). Optimal expressions for (1)
and are given by (5) and (6).

However, balanced transmission lines are problematic since

they are not shielded from the environment, thereby making (2)
them more susceptible to background noise and parasitic
coupling to nearby objects. Driver and load loops used in The loops resonate when or becomes purely real. If the
earlier WNPT systems [1], [11], [23], [24] are not needed in loops are identical
the proposed designs. Additionally, since shielded loops have
a predominantly magnetic response [18], they eliminate the (3)
electric dipole moment of earlier open-circuited helical struc-
tures used for WNPT [1]. Finally, the shielded loop systems are resonance occurs at . At resonance, the effi-
geometrically simple and can be characterized analytically. The ciency of the coupled loop system depicted in Fig. 1 is
elements of their circuit models can be derived in closed form.
Utilizing the theory and design methods outlined in this
paper, two WNPT systems were fabricated: one with single-turn
loops and the other with ten-turn coils. The single-turn system
had a lower profile, while the ten-turn system provided an
(4)
increased range. Both systems were designed to have a loop
radius of approximately 10 cm. A comprehensive experi- where is the reflection coeffi-
mental study of the fabricated WNPT systems is reported. The cient at the source.
single-turn system exhibited an efficiency of 41.8% at 3.3 times The efficiency, , has been defined as the ratio of power de-
the loop radius and the ten-turn system exhibited an efficiency livered to the load to power available from the source. The ef-
of 36.5% at 5.3 times the loop radius. It is shown that the ficiency can be maximized, or equivalently the power transfer
system performances were predicted accurately by their circuit maximized, if both input and output are simultaneously conju-
models. gately matched: and (see Fig. 1) [33].
Experimental WNPT systems have been demonstrated in the It should be noted that the WNPT systems reported to date [1],
past [23]–[28], and circuit models of such systems have been [2], [11], [23]–[28] have not been simultaneously conjugately
reported [29]–[31]. Though optimal load values have been de- matched. A conjugate match leads to the following expressions
rived [27], [29], optimal source values have not. In addition, for the optimal source, , and load, , impedances
previous experimental WNPT systems have not been rigorously
tested under these optimal conditions to demonstrate maximum
achievable efficiencies. In this paper, maximum power transfer (5)
efficiencies for a WNPT system under optimal conditions at var-
ious separation distances are demonstrated.
Additionally, the magnetic field strength surrounding the (6)
single-turn system was predicted using exact expressions for
the time-harmonic fields from a thin wire loop with uniform At resonance, the impedances given by (5) and (6) simplify to
current [32]. The experimental magnetic field was measured
using an electrically-small non-resonant circular probe and
agreed with theoretical predictions. (7)

II. CIRCUIT MODELING

A WNPT system consisting of two magnetically coupled, res-
onant loops can be modeled by the circuit shown in Fig. 1. The
capacitances and inductances model the resonant nature of the
loops, and the resistors model both the radiation (which is quite
small) and ohmic loss. The loops are coupled through their mu-
tual inductance . For the case of shielded loops described in
(8)
Equation (8) is simply the maximum efficiency condition given
in [1], which by itself neglects reflections at the source. Substi-
tuting both (7) and (8) into the efficiency expression yields the
maximum possible efficiency for a system of coupled magnetic
resonators. Therefore, to ensure maximum power transfer, not
THOMAS et al.: WIRELESS NON-RADIATIVE POWER TRANSFER SYSTEMS
Fig. 2. Cross sectional view of proposed shielded loop structure. The arrows
represent the current flow. The portion of the line from the input port to the slit
in the outer conductor acts as a feed line. The portion of the line from the slit
to the open circuit end is the open-circuited stub that generates the capacitance.
The entire outside of the outer conductor acts as an inductor.
only does (8) reported in [1] need to be satisfied, but so does (7)
in order to eliminate reflections at the source.
From (1), an expression for the resonant frequency splitting,
, predicted by coupled mode theory [1] can be derived. This
splitting can be obtained by setting the imaginary part of
equal to zero and solving for . Under the assumption that
, the frequency splitting for identical loops (3) be-
comes
(9)
This expression is in agreement with the frequency splitting
expression stated in [1]. From (9), different coupling regimes
can be defined. At critical coupling, there is only one resonance.
Hence, and therefore . This
is the threshold between strong and
weak coupling . In the strong coupling
regime, there are two resonant frequencies (separated by ) in
addition to . If , the coupling is weak
and there is one resonant frequency.
III. RESONANT SHIELDED LOOPS FOR WNPT
The model in Fig. 1 is for general magnetic resonators. One
realization of such a resonator is the open-circuited shielded
loop shown in Fig. 2, which offers a number of advantages for
WNPT. Shielded loops are balanced structures and can be easily
fed. Their simple geometry allows the elements of their circuit
model to be derived analytically. They also exhibit a predom-
inantly magnetic response [18], which eliminates the electric
dipole effect observed in the initial demonstration of WNPT [1].
The loops are open-circuited (see Fig. 2) in order to create a
capacitance that allows them to resonate even though they are
electrically small . The arrows in Fig. 2 show the cur-
rent flow on a shielded loop. The signal enters the input port of
the shielded loop and propagates down the interior of the coaxial
cable to the slit in the outer conductor. It then traverses the exte-
rior of the loop to the opposite side of the slit and finally enters
the open-circuited stub. Therefore, the loop and the open-cir-
cuited stub can be viewed as being in series.
The circuit in Fig. 1 correctly models the coupled shielded
loops when their feed lines are de-embedded. A more accurate
model is given in Fig. 3. This model accounts for the feed line
2127
Fig. 3. Circuit model of magnetically-coupled, resonant, shielded loops. This
is an extension of the general model in Fig. 1 that includes the feed line present
in shielded loops.
present in the shielded loop and predicts its behavior over a
wider range of frequencies. Each circuit component in Fig. 3 is
realized by a specific portion of the shielded loop. The outside
of the loop is responsible for the inductance. The capacitance is
generated by the open-circuited stub: the section of line from the
slit to the open circuit. The rest of the line can be denoted as the
feed line. This feed line introduces an impedance translation and
some additional loss. Since the capacitance is shielded by the
loop’s outer shell, there is no significant electric dipole moment
observed outside of the loop. To an outside observer, this loop
appears to be made of a solid wire. This allows the self and
mutual inductances to be approximated as those for solid loops.
The circuit parameters in Fig. 3 can be estimated using ana-
lytic expressions. The inductance is equivalent to the inductance
of a solid loop. For a single-turn loop, this can be approximated
as [34]
(10)
where is the loop radius and is the wire radius (in the case
of the shielded loop, this is the outer conductor’s radius). The
mutual inductance is that of two current loops, and can be found
using elliptic integrals [34]
(11)
where
(12)
and is the number of turns, and are the radii of the
loops, is the separation of the loops and and are
the complete elliptic integrals of the first and second kind. The
capacitance is generated by an open-circuited transmission line
of length . It is found using standard transmission-line theory
[33]
(13)
where is the characteristic admittance of the coaxial cable,
is the propagation constant within the coaxial cable, and is
the length of the open-circuited stub. The resistance can be split
into a radiation resistance and an ohmic resistance. The radiation
resistance is that of a magnetic dipole
(14)
2128 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 59, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012
Due to the skin effect, the ohmic resistance can also be separated
into two [19]: the resistance associated with the outside of the
outer coaxial conductor (pertaining to the inductor ) and the
resistance associated with the inside of the coaxial cable (per-
taining to the feed line and open-circuited stub). The resistance
associated with is given by
(15)
where is the outer radius of the outer conductor, is the
conductivity of the conductor, is the radial frequency, and
, with N being the number of turns. The per-unit-length
resistance of a coaxial cable is:
(16)
where is the radius of the inner conductor and is the radius
of the insulator (or equivalently the inner radius of the outer con-
ductor). The per-unit-length conductance is very large at MHz
frequencies, so it does not contribute significantly to the loss.
Therefore, the resistance associated with the open-circuited stub
(C) is and the loss associated with the
feed line is . In order to obtain the model in
Fig. 1, the effects of the feed line can be de-embedded. Once the
parameters are de-embedded, the true resonance point of each
loop can be identified. This is the frequency at which the si-
multaneous conjugate match is made in order to maximize effi-
ciency.
IV. SIMULATION AND EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Two systems utilizing shielded loops were investigated: a
single-turn loop system and a multi-turn coil system. Both
systems consisted of two magnetically-coupled, resonant,
shielded loops. The single-turn system has a lower profile,
while the multi-turn system has a larger working range. In
the experiments, scattering parameters (S-parameters) were
measured using a vector network analyzer (Hewlett Packard
3753D). Power measurements for the single-turn system were
performed using an analog signal generator (Agilent N5183A)
and a power meter (Agilent E4416A) with a power sensor
(Agilent N8485A). The field measurements were performed
using a power meter (Agilent E4416A) with a power sensor
(Agilent N8485A).
A. Single Turn System
A single-turn shielded loop was designed and simulated
using a commercial full-wave finite-element solver (Ansoft
HFSS). Two loops with the same dimensions were then built
and tested. The loop radius was 10.7 cm and constructed from
coaxial cable with a teflon dielectric. To test the system,
one loop was held up by a styrofoam structure above a table
top, while the other loop was attached to a movable arm using
styrofoam, as shown in Fig. 4.
A comparison between the analytic, simulated and exper-
imental loop resonant frequencies is shown in Table I. The
Fig. 4. Experimental setup for the single-turn WNPT system. Matching net-
works are shown connecting the cables to the loops. The cables run from the
matching networks to the source or load. The separation distance shown is
20 cm.
TABLE I
COMPARISON OF RESONANT FREQUENCIES FOR SINGLE-TURN SYSTEM
experimental resonant frequencies were determined from ex-
perimental S-parameters. They were found by de-embedding
the feed lines in both simulation and experiment. De-embed-
ding was not necessary for the analytic expressions, as they
neglect the presence of the feed line. The resonant frequencies
were all within 3% of each other. The measured resonant
frequencies of the two experimental loops were within 0.25%
of each other. The percentage difference between theory and
experiment could be decreased if the manufacturing of the
coils was optimized. The loops were not perfectly circular,
therefore the overall radius used to determine the theoretical
and simulated frequencies was approximate. The matching
circuits that will be used to conjugately match the loops to
source and load impedances can also be used to compensate
for slight differences in the resonant frequencies of the two
loops. To simplify the fabrication of the open-circuited shielded
loops presented here and tighten tolerances, one may also
use strip-line based, planar shielded loops compatible with
printed-circuit fabrication methods [35].
The values for the model in Fig. 3 were initially set to the
analytically derived values. The model S-parameters were then
compared against the experimental S-parameters. With minor
tuning of L, C, R and the length of the feed line, the indi-
vidual isolated loop parameters were determined (with
). The analytic values and tuned (experimental) model values
are stated in Table II. The model in Fig. 3 can be treated with
lossless or lossy lines. If the feed line is modeled as lossless, the
resistance, R, in the model should be the combined resistance of
the resonator and the feed. If the feed line is modeled as lossy,
then the resistance, R is simply the resonator resistance. The the-
oretical mutual inductance given by (11) was used in the model.
From the values in Tables I and II, a -factor can be computed
for each loop. If we consider , with R being the
THOMAS et al.: WIRELESS NON-RADIATIVE POWER TRANSFER SYSTEMS 2129

TABLE II
CIRCUIT MODEL PARAMETERS FOR SINGLE-TURN SYSTEM

Fig. 6. This Smith chart shows matching considerations for various distances
at 37.95 MHz. The values shown are (squares, ) and (triangles, )
from the model shown in Fig. 3, which accounts for the feed lines.

Fig. 5. This Smith chart shows the theoretical efficiency for different load
values, as predicted by (4), given the “Resonator R” values from Table II, a
separation distance of 20 cm and source impedance from (5).
sum of all losses (i.e., the feed line and the resonator losses)
then loop 1 has a -factor of approximately 280 and loop 2 has
a -factor of approximately 290. If only the resonator losses
are considered, then the Q-factors for loop 1 and loop 2 are
approximately 610 and 680, respectively.
The parameters in Table II and (4) can be used to determine
the efficiency of the system for different load values. Fig. 5
shows the results of load pull simulations for a 20 cm separa-
tion. The source impedance is held constant at the value given
by (5) and the load impedance is varied.
The model in Fig. 3, with circuit parameters stipulated in
Table II, was used to design matching networks at three sep-
arate distances (20 cm, 35 cm, 50 cm). The center distance (35
cm) was determined by finding the greatest distance at which a
efficiency of approximately 40% is achieved
using practical (lossy) matching networks. The other two dis-
tances were chosen with equal separation from this center value.
The input and output impedances at all three distances were such
that a purely capacitive L-section matching network achieved
a conjugate match to the 50 source and load, as shown in
Fig. 6. Using purely capacitive matching networks is advanta-
geous since the Q-factors of commercial capacitors are much
higher than those of commercial inductors.
Fig. 7 shows the L-section matching network used, and
Table III lists the component values for the three distances.
Since the loops were close to identical, the same matching
networks were used for both source and the load. The matching
Fig. 7. Schematic of the matching networks. The parallel capacitance, ,
is split into two equal-valued capacitors to balance the currents. The lines inter-
connecting the capacitors, source and loop are grounded co-planar waveguide
transmission lines with and length, width, and gap width given in
Table III.
TABLE III
MATCHING NETWORK PARAMETERS FOR AND THE
DESIRED . THE MUTUAL INDUCTANCE AT EACH DISTANCE IS ALSO
GIVEN. THE CO-PLANAR WAVEGUIDE DIMENSIONS FOR THE SINGLE-TURN
SYSTEM ARE: MM, MM, MM, MM
networks were implemented in grounded coplanar waveguide
technology (CPWG).
Fig. 8 shows the difference between experimental efficien-
cies for the system with and without optimized matching net-
works at a loop separation of 35 cm. The experimental curve
was found by placing the experimental scattering parameters of
the entire system (taken with and without matching networks for
the respective curves) into a circuit simulator and sweeping the
frequency to find the efficiency versus frequency. A dramatic
increase in transferred power is observed. All three matching
networks significantly increased the efficiency of the system.
Fig. 9 shows plots of efficiency versus distance for the WNPT
system with matching networks designed for 20 cm, 35 cm
2130 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 59, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012
Fig. 8. Efficiency of the single-turn system at 35 cm. The experimental peak
value with matching (using 50 source and load) is 40.58% at 37.83 MHz, the
model peak value with matching is 40.66% at 37.83 MHz and the experimental
peak value without matching is 0.1929% at 37.71 MHz. The difference in per-
formance between the system with matching networks and without matching
networks demonstrates the importance of impedance matching.
and 50 cm separations. The figure demonstrates that efficiencies
very close to the theoretical maximum efficiency (given by sub-
stituting (8) into (4)) can be achieved with impedance matching
networks. The experimental curves were found by powering the
source loop with a signal generator and measuring the power de-
livered to a power meter connected to the load loop. The load
loop was placed on a translation stage, as shown in Fig. 4. As can
be seen, the circuit model predicted the efficiency versus dis-
tance behavior accurately. The distances for which the matching
networks were designed are circled on the graph. The experi-
mental efficiencies at the design distances are: 76.9% at 20 cm
(1.87 loop radii), 41.8% at 35 cm (3.27 loop radii) and 12.9%
at 50 cm (4.67 loop radii). The 20 cm and 50 cm measurement
curves were taken at 37.94 MHz, while the 35 cm curve was
taken at 37.83 MHz. The slight frequency difference can be at-
tributed to fabrication and component tolerances. Additionally,
the efficiency of the WNPT system impedance matched for 35
cm measured at a separation distance of 35 cm is slightly higher
in Fig. 9 than it is in Fig. 8. This slight difference is due to the
impedance difference between the actual source and load used
to generate Fig. 9, and the ideal 50 source and load assumed
in Fig. 8.
Fig. 9 shows that the peak efficiency is not at the distance
that the matching network was designed for. The peak efficiency
denotes the distance at which critical coupling occurs.
The efficiencies quoted here are ratios of the power available
from the source to the power dissipated in the load. This is in
contrast to the efficiencies quoted in [1], which were defined as
the ratios of the currents in the self-resonant source (S) and de-
vice (D) coils. As a result, the efficiencies reported in [1] did
not take into account coupling to source and load. In addition,
the efficiencies quoted here are significantly higher than those
reported in [11], where an efficiency just above 50% was quoted
at a separation distance of 17 cm (1.12 loop radii). A full com-
parison of recently reported experimental data with results re-
ported in this study can be seen in Table IV. The WNPT system
Fig. 9. Efficiency of the single-turn system utilizing matching networks opti-
mized for different distances. The analytic maximum efficiency curve was ob-
tained by substituting (8) into (4). This gives an expression for the maximum
efficiency when and are conjugately matched to and . The cir-
cles indicate the efficiencies at the distances for which the matching networks
were designed.
TABLE IV
A COMPARISON OF RECENTLY REPORTED WNPT SYSTEMS AND THEIR
EFFICIENCIES. (*) A FREQUENCY TUNED SOURCE IS USED TO INCREASE
EFFICIENCY WITHIN THE STRONGLY COUPLED REGIME OF THE RESONATORS.
PLANAR COIL STRUCTURE ARE USED
described in [1] is not considered in this summary for the reason
cited above.
The scattering parameter at fixed distances is shown in
Fig. 10. Again, the circuit model accurately predicts the system
behavior. The loops strongly couple at their resonance (and di-
rectly around it due to the finite Q-factor). The maximum effi-
ciency is achieved at the resonant frequency.
In Fig. 10, a wider bandwidth is seen at smaller separation
distances. This bandwidth can be attributed to increased fre-
quency splitting. Frequency splitting is defined as the differ-
ence between the two points where the imaginary part of the
input impedance goes to zero. This splitting is predicted by (9).
To verify this equation, de-embedded experimental S-parame-
ters of the system were used, given that (9) was based on the
basic model without feed lines. The experimental S-parameters
of the coupled loops (with no matching networks) at a separa-
tion of 13.5 cm were de-embedded and placed in a circuit sim-
ulator. One port was terminated in a short circuit and the input
impedance at the other end was observed. The imaginary part
of the input impedance is shown in Fig. 11.
From Fig. 11, the experimentally determined frequency split-
ting is 2.37 MHz. To determine the analytic splitting, (9) was
THOMAS et al.: WIRELESS NON-RADIATIVE POWER TRANSFER SYSTEMS
Fig. 10. S-parameter of the single-turn system utilizing matching networks
optimized for different distances. The experimental peak values are:
at 37.84 MHz for a separation of 20 cm, dB at 37.83 MHz for a separation
of 35 cm, and dB at 37.97 MHz for a separation of 50 cm. The model
peak values are: dB at 37.84 MHz for a separation of 20 cm,
dB at 37.85 MHz for a separation of 35 cm, and dB at 37.97 MHz for
a separation of 50 cm.
Fig. 11. Imaginary part of the input impedance computed using the experi-
mental de-embedded S-parameters with a short circuit load. The splitting fre-
quency shown is predicted well by (9).
used. Since (9) assumes identical loops, the parameters of only
one loop should be used for comparison. Using the model pa-
rameters for loop 1 (from Table II), the splitting was predicted
to be 2.311 MHz. If instead the model parameters for loop 2 are
used, the predicted splitting is 2.368 MHz. The percent differ-
ence between the experimentally determined splitting and the
analytic splitting is 2.5% and 0.08% when the values of loop 1
and loop 2 are used, respectively. The higher resonant frequency
represents the odd mode, while the lower frequency represents
the even mode.
B. WNPT in Practice
To demonstrate the practicality of the single-turn WNPT
system, the loops were used to wirelessly power a 7.5 W
light bulb. The experiment was performed using compo-
2131
Fig. 12. Single-turn system wirelessly powering a 7.5 W light bulb at a distance
of 35 cm. Matching networks connect the load loop to the light bulb, and the
source loop to the cable attached to the power source. The loops are separated
from the table by foam cone platforms.
dB
nents from Mini-Circuits [36]: a voltage controlled oscillator
(ZOS- ), an amplifier (ZHL-ED12128A/1) and an attenu-
ator (ZX73- ) to limit the oscillator input power to the
amplifier. The input power to the source loop was approxi-
mately 42.8 dBm (19 W) at approximately 37.8 MHz. Fig. 12
shows the setup. A special matching network (as in Fig. 7) was
designed for the light bulb. The light bulb had an impedance
of , which resulted in values of pF
and pF for the load matching network. The matching
network designed earlier for a 35 cm separation was used as
the source matching network.
The focus of this work has been on the power transfer effi-
ciency of the matched resonant link. Therefore, losses within
the power stage were not considered up to this point. The am-
plifier (ZHL-ED12128A/1) used in the light bulb experiment
was a class A amplifier, which is inherently inefficient. A prac-
tical WNPT system would use a switched-mode, high efficiency
amplifier such as a class E amplifier. A class E amplifier oper-
ates efficiently by driving an active switch such that the cur-
rent-voltage product across it remains close to zero, thereby
minimizing power dissipation. In this section, we design a class
E amplifier for use with the shielded loop WNPT system. The
basic configuration of a class E amplifier is shown in Fig. 13
[37], [38].
The component values for the designed amplifier were com-
puted using expressions from [38] for a and a sepa-
ration distance of cm. At this separation distance, the
input impedance of the coupled loops is (see
Table III), resulting in an amplifier load resistance of
. The component values were then fine-tuned
using the methods described in [38] to minimize power dissipa-
tion. The final component values for the class E amplifier were:
pF, pF, H, and H.
Using a supply voltage of V, the simulated amplifier
delivered 7.63 W to the load with a power added effi-
ciency (PAE) of 95.9%. The amplifier was then connected to the
equivalent circuit for the shielded loop WNPT system and sim-
ulated for distances ranging from cm to cm. The
2132 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 59, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012
Fig. 13. Basic configuration of a class E amplifier. is an active switch (tran-
sistor). is a RF choke. The components , and define the of the
amplifier. is the impedance of the amplifier load: the input impedance of
the shielded loops.
Fig. 14. Simulated efficiency of the single turn shielded loop system driven by
the class E amplifier. The circles denote the PAE of the amplifier and the solid
line plots the efficiency of the shielded loop system matched for a 20 cm loop
separation. The dash dot line shows the total efficiency: the product of these two
efficiencies. The dashed line denotes the analytical maximum efficiency.
PAE and the efficiency of the coupled loops was recorded. The
product of these two values is the total efficiency of the system.
The simulated efficiency results are shown in Fig. 14. The ide-
alized class E amplifier presented here demonstrates that power
can be efficiently delivered to a shielded loop WNPT system.
The simulation results are qualitatively similar to those in [39],
which explored the use of class E amplifiers in WNPT systems.
C. Magnetic Field Measurements
The single-turn shielded loops have a circumference of . Fig. 16 and closely agrees with analytical predictions.
Since they are electrically small, the current can be approxi-
mated as constant. Additionally, to an outside observer they ap-
pear as thin wire loops. The theoretical magnetic fields of a thin
loop with constant current can be calculated exactly using the
expressions given in [32]. Fig. 15 shows the theoretical mag-
netic field versus distance transverse to the loop axis. It is shown
for two loops separated by 35 cm, with an input power of 17
dBm (0.05 W). The magnetic field is shown at three separate
distances from the source loop: at the source (0 cm axial dis-
tance), midpoint between the two loops (17.5 cm axial distance)
and at the load loop (35 cm axial distance). The currents on the
loops were determined using the circuit model and circuit pa-
rameters given in Table II. At the source and load, the field is
strongest at the wire. At the midpoint between the two loops,
the field is strongest in the center.
Fig. 15. Theoretical magnetic field for two loops carrying constant currents
separated by 35 cm. The field is measured transverse to the loop axis. The input
source power was assumed to be 17 dBm (0.05 W). The power into the second
loop was assumed to be 42% of the source input power.
To measure the strength of the magnetic field between the
experimental loops, a small loop antenna with a 27 mm diam-
eter was used. This loop antenna was constructed as a short-cir-
cuited, shielded loop. Unlike the open-circuited, shielded loops
used for WNPT, this loop does not resonate. To find the mag-
netic field, Faraday’s law was used. For a small loop, the field is
nearly constant, so the magnetic field intensity can be found as
(17)
with S being the area of the loop: . However, the quan-
tity measured was power using a power sensor and power meter.
The probe, sensor and power meter can be modeled as a series
circuit. Then the found in (17) is given by
(18)
where R is the 50 sensor input resistance, P is the measured
power in Watts, and and are the measured induc-
tance and resistance of the isolated probe.
The magnetic field along the axis of the loops is shown in
D. Enhanced Performance With the Ten-Turn Coil System
One way to increase the useable range of the shielded loop
system is to introduce multiple turns. As shown by (11), the
mutual inductance increases quadratically with N, the number
of turns. However, the losses also increase with conductor
length: . This added loss prevents dramatic increases in
the working range.
Two ten-turn coils were designed, built and tested. The av-
erage loop radius was 10.5 cm and each loop was constructed
from coaxial cable with teflon as the dielectric. The av-
erage distance between turns was 1.285 cm. The slit was placed
on the last turn, so that the open-circuited transmission line was
again of length . To test the system, each loop was hung in
the air from a rod using plastic string, as shown in Fig. 17. This
THOMAS et al.: WIRELESS NON-RADIATIVE POWER TRANSFER SYSTEMS
Fig. 16. Theoretical and experimental magnetic field strength between the
single-turn shielded loops along their axis. The theoretical curve was generated
using (1a) in [32] and the experimental field was calculated from power
measurements using (17) and (18). The input power was 17 dBm (0.05 W) and
the received power was approximately 13 dBm (0.02 W).
Fig. 17. Experimental setup for the ten-turn coil WNPT system. The separa-
tion between the coils is 56 cm, measured from the closest points. Each turn is
separated by strips of ROHACELL foam to prevent electrical contact between
turns. The loops are connected to cables through matching networks. The cables
attach to source or load. The loops are suspended from a plastic rod to ensure
they are on axis.
allowed the two loops to be on axis with one another as the sep-
aration distance was changed. The turns of each loop were sep-
arated using strips of Rohacell foam. This ensured there was no
electrical contact between turns.
The analytic values for the capacitance, losses and mutual in-
ductance are computed as in the case of the single-turn loops,
and are given by (11)–(16). The self-inductance can be calcu-
lated as a special case of the mutual inductance [34]. Utilizing
(11), the self-inductance is found to be
(19)
where
(20)
2133
TABLE V
COMPARISON OF RESONANT FREQUENCIES FOR TEN-TURN SYSTEM
TABLE VI
MATCHING NETWORK VALUES FOR TEN-TURN SYSTEM AT A SEPARATION OF
56 CM WITH AND MATCHING TO OR . THE
CO-PLANAR WAVEGUIDE DIMENSIONS FOR THE TEN-TURN SYSTEM ARE:
MM, MM, MM, MM
and N is the number of turns, r is the radius of the loop, a is
the wire radius and K(k) and E(k) are the complete elliptic inte-
grals of the first and second kind. The analytic and experimental
resonant frequencies are listed in Table V. As in the single-turn
system, the experimental resonant frequencies were found by
de-embedding the experimental S-parameters. The measured
resonant frequencies of the two experimental loops were within
3.3% of each other. The analytic and experimental frequencies
differed by 4.3%.
Using the analytic expressions, the maximum distance at
which 40% efficiency could be achieved was determined. Ex-
perimental S-parameters were then recorded for distances close
to this maximum distance. The separation was measured as the
distance between the closest points on each coil. From these
S-parameters, conjugate matching networks were designed.
Since the resonant frequencies were farther apart than those for
the single-turn case, the matching networks were different for
the source and load. The input impedance around resonance
for the ten-turn coils changes rapidly, so operating slightly off
resonance can cause dramatic changes in the input impedance.
This caused the matching networks to be notably different, even
though the loops themselves were very similar. The desired
impedances for the source and load, and , are given in
Table VI. The schematic in Fig. 7 was used for the matching
network, and the circuit parameters are stated in Table VI.
The matching networks significantly increased power
transfer. With matching networks, an efficiency of 36.5% was
reached at a 56 cm (5.33 loop radii) separation. Fig. 18 shows
the experimental results with and without matching. Again,
the experimental curve was found by placing the experimental
scattering parameters of the entire system (taken with and
without matching networks for the respective curves) into
a circuit simulator and sweeping the frequency to find the
efficiency versus frequency.
The model in Fig. 3 can also be used for this ten-turn system.
The values of the model parameters were initially set to the
values obtained analytically. The model was then compared to
the experimental S-parameters of the system and the values of
each isolated loop were tuned to obtain closer agree-
ment. The analytic and tuned model parameter values can be
found in Table VII. The resistance quoted is the total resistance
(including feed line and resonator loss). Again, the theoretical
mutual inductance given by (19) ( H at 56 cm)
2134 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 59, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012
Fig. 18. Efficiency of the ten-turn system at a separation of 56 cm. The dif-
ference in efficiencies with and without matching demonstrates the importance
of impedance matching. The experimental peak efficiency with matching was
36.59% at 5.256 MHz, the model peak efficiency with matching was 35.49% at
5.255 MHz, and the experimental peak efficiency without matching was 1.813%
at 5.247 MHz. The efficiency without matching is better than it was for the
single-turn system shown in Fig. 8. This is due to an increase in mutual induc-
tance.
TABLE VII
CIRCUIT MODEL PARAMETERS FOR TEN-TURN SYSTEM
was used in the model, and verified by comparing S of the
model to S of the experimental data.
As with the single turn system, the circuit model of the ten-
turn system can be used to predict the efficiency for various
matching distances. Fig. 19 shows the simulated efficiency of
the ten-turn system with matching networks designed for 20 cm,
35 cm, 56 cm, and 80 cm separations. The experimental result
at 56 cm is also plotted on the graph. As expected, Fig. 19 is
similar to Fig. 9 except for the higher efficiencies due to the
increased mutual inductance.
Although the S-parameters were used to design the matching
networks for the ten-turn system, it is still useful to compare
the performance of the circuit model to the experimental per-
formance. Fig. 20 shows the experimental data (with matching)
versus the circuit model (with matching) at a separation of 56
cm. The agreement indicates that the performance of the system
can be predicted at multiple distances without taking measure-
ments at each distance. Hence, the model could be used to de-
sign matching networks for systems with multiple turns as it was
used for the single-turn system.
V. CONCLUSION
To summarize, a quasi-static circuit model for wireless
non-radiative power transfer (WNPT) was described. The
model consisted of two series RLC circuits coupled through
Fig. 19. Efficiency of the ten-turn system utilizing matching networks opti-
mized for different distances. The results are based on the circuit model in Fig. 3.
The circles indicate the efficiencies at the distances for which the matching net-
works were designed.
Fig. 20. S-parameter S of the circuit model and experimental ten-turn system
with loop separation of 56 cm. The peak experimental value is dB at
5.256 MHz and the peak model value is dB at 5.255 MHz.
a mutual inductance. From this model, expressions for the
input impedance, resonant frequency, frequency splitting and
efficiency of the system were determined. Additionally, con-
ditions for maximum efficiency/power transfer were derived.
It was shown that a simultaneous conjugate match results in
maximum efficiency for a given set of loop parameters. From
this analysis, expressions for the source and load impedances
needed to achieve this conjugate match were found.
Next, a WNPT system employing resonant shielded loops
was considered for the first time. A refined circuit model for
this specific realization of WNPT was determined. The model
consisted of the basic coupled RLC circuit model with the ad-
dition of transmission lines that accounted for the length of the
physical feed lines. The simple geometry of the shielded loops
allowed the circuit parameters to be determined analytically.
Two WNPT systems were built and tested: one single-turn
loop system and one ten-turn coil system. They were character-
ized analytically and experimentally. This allowed the exper-
imental systems to be conjugately matched at both input and
THOMAS et al.: WIRELESS NON-RADIATIVE POWER TRANSFER SYSTEMS
output, in contrast to earlier WNPT systems which were not si-
multaneously matched to load and source. The resonant shielded
loops on the source and load side were designed to have the
same parameters, although due to fabrication tolerances they
were not identical. The loops in the single-turn system each
had a radius of approximately 10.7 cm. One of the coils for the
ten-turn system had an average radius of approximately 10.4 cm
and the other had an average radius of approximately 10.6 cm.
The experimental WNPT systems demonstrated close agree-
ment with analytic expressions and their circuit models. Effi-
ciencies of approximately 41.8% and 36.5% were achieved at
distances of 35 cm (3.33 loop radii) and 56 cm (5.33 loop radii)
respectively for the single-turn and ten-turn systems. Addition-
ally, the magnetic field surrounding the single-turn system was
measured, and agreed with analytical calculations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to acknowledge discussions with Dr.
V. V. Liepa. They would also like to thank Y.-F. Chen for as-
sistance with measurements and refinement of the circuit model
for the single-turn WNPT system.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Kurs, A. Karalis, R. Moffatt, J. D. Joannopoulos, P. Fisher, and
M. Soljačić, “Wireless power transfer via strongly coupled magnetic
resonances,” Science, vol. 317, pp. 83–86, Jul. 2007.
[2] A. Karalis, J. D. Joannopoulos, and M. Soljačić, “Efficient wireless
non-radiative midrange energy transfer,” Annals Phys., vol. 323, no. 1,
pp. 34–48, Jan. 2008.
[3] D. C. Galbraith, M. Soma, and R. L. White, “A wideband efficient
inductive transdermal power and data link with coupling insensitive
gain,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. BME-34, no. 4, pp. 265–275,
Apr. 1987.
[4] C. Fernandez, O. Garcia, R. Prieto, J. A. Cobos, and J. Uceda,
“Overview of different alternatives for the contact-less transmission
of energy,” in Proc. 28th Annual Conf. IEEE Industrial Electron. Soc.
IECON, 2002, vol. 2, pp. 1318–1323.
[5] G. B. Joung and B. H. Cho, “An energy transmission system for an ar-
tificial heart using leakage inductance compensation of transcutaneous
transformer,” in Proc. 27th Annual IEEE Power Electron. Specialists
Conf. PESC, 1996, vol. 1, pp. 898–904.
[6] C. Kim, D. Seo, J. You, J. Park, and B. Cho, “Design of a contactless
battery charger for cellular phone,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 48,
no. 6, pp. 1238–1247, Dec. 2001.
[7] N. de N. Donaldson, “Comments on efficient transdermal links with
coupling-insensitive gain,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. 35, no. 4,
Apr. 1988.
[8] N. de N. Donaldson and T. A. Perkins, “Analysis of resonant coupled
coils in the design of radio frequency transcutaneous links,” Med. Biol.
Eng. Comput., vol. 21, no. 21, pp. 612–627, Jul. 1983.
[9] M. Soma, D. C. Galbraith, and R. L. White, “Radio-frequency coils
in implantable devices: Misalignment analysis and design procedure,”
IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. BME-34, no. 4, pp. 276–282, Jul. 1987.
[10] J. C. Schuder, J. H. Gold, and H. E. Stephenson, Jr., “An inductively
coupled RF system for the transmission of 1 KW or power through the
skin,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. BME-18, no. 4, pp. 265–273,
Jul. 1971.
[11] B. L. Cannon, J. F. Hoburg, D. D. Stancil, and S. C. Goldstein, “Mag-
netic resonant coupling as a potential means for wireless power transfer
to multiple small receivers,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 24, no.
7, pp. 1819–1825, Jul. 2009.
[12] A. Kurs, R. Moffatt, and M. Soljačić, “Simultaneous midrange power
transfer to multiple devices,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 96, no. 4, p.
044102, 2010.
[13] F. Segura-Quijano, J. García-Cantón, J. Sacristán, T. Osés, and A.
Baldi, “Wireless powering of single-chip systems with integrated coil
and external wire-loop resonator,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 92, no. 7, p.
074102, 2008.
2135
[14] Fulton Innovation, eCoupled Wireless Power Technology [Online].
Available: http://www.ecoupled.com
[15] WirelessPowerConsortium [Online]. Available: http://www.wire-
lesspowerconsortium.com
[16] H. Whiteside and R. King, “The loop antenna as a probe,” IEEE Trans.
Antennas Propag., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 291–297, 1964.
[17] F. J. Zucker, R. W. P. King, and R. E. Colin, Antenna Theory. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1969, ch. 11, pt. 1.
[18] M. D. Harpen, “The theory of shielded loop resonators,” Magn. Reso-
nance Med., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 785–788, 1994.
[19] A. Stensgaard, “Optimized design of the shielded-loop resonator,” J.
Magn. Reson., ser. A, vol. 122, no. 2, pp. 120–125, 1996.
[20] A. Stensgaard, “Planar quadrature coil design using shielded-loop res-
onators,” J. Magn. Reson., vol. 125, no. 1, pp. 84–91, 1997.
[21] C. F. M. Carobbi, L. M. Millanta, and L. Chiosi, “The high-frequency
behavior of the shield in the magnetic-field probes,” in Proc. IEEE Int.
Symp. Electromagn. Compat., 2000, vol. 1, pp. 35–40.
[22] S. Hetzer, T. Mildner, W. Driesel, M. Weder, and H. E. Möller,
“Shielded dual-loop resonator for arterial spin labeling at the neck,” J.
Magn. Reson. Imag., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 1414–1424, 2009.
[23] F. Z. Shen, W. Z. Cui, W. Ma, J. T. Huangfu, and L. X. Ran, “Circuit
analysis of wireless power transfer by coupled magnetic resonance,” in
Proc. IET Int. Commun. Conf. Wireless Mobile Computing (CCWMC
2009), Dec. 2009, pp. 602–605.
[24] A. P. Sample, D. A. Meyer, and J. R. Smith, “Analysis, experimental
results, and range adaptation of magnetically coupled resonators for
wireless power transfer,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 2, pp.
544–554, Feb. 2011.
[25] T. Imura, H. Okabe, and Y. Hori, “Basic experimental study on he-
lical antennas of wireless power transfer for electric vehicles by using
magnetic resonant couplings,” in Proc. IEEE Vehicle Power Propul-
sion Conf. 2009 , Sep. 2009, pp. 936–940.
[26] Z. Yan, Q. Yang, H. Chen, C. Zhang, and G. Xu, “Modeling and exper-
imental analysis of helical resonator for wireless power transmission
system,” in Proc. 2010 Int. Conf. Electrical Control Eng. (ICECE),
Jun. 2010, pp. 3886–3889.
[27] T. Linlin, H. Xueliang, L. Hui, and H. Hui, “Study of wireless power
transfer system through strongly coupled resonances,” in Proc. 2010
Int. Conf. Electrical Control Eng. (ICECE), Jun. 2010, pp. 4275–4278.
[28] T. Imura, H. Okabe, T. Uchida, and Y. Hori, “Study on open and short
end helical antennas with capacitor in series of wireless power transfer
using magnetic resonant couplings,” in Proc. 35th Ann. Conf. IEEE
Ind. Electron. 2009, Nov. 2009, pp. 3848–3853.
[29] C.-J. Chen, T.-H. Chu, C.-L. Lin, and Z.-C. Jou, “A study of loosely
coupled coils for wireless power transfer,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst.
II, Exp. Briefs, vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 536–540, Jul. 2010.
[30] I. Awai, “Design theory of wireless power transfer system based on
magnetically coupled resonators,” in Proc. 2010 IEEE Int. Conf. Wire-
less Inf. Technol. Syst. (ICWITS), Sep. 2010, pp. 1–4.
[31] H. Hirayama, Y. Okuyama, N. Kikuma, and K. Sakakibara, “An con-
sideration on equivalent circuit of wireless power transmission,” in
Proc. 2010 14th ANTEM-AMEREM, Jul. 2010, pp. 1–4.
[32] M. R. Abdul-Gaffoor, H. K. Smith, A. A. Kishk, A. W. Glison, L. W.
Li, M. S. Leong, P. S. Kooi, and T. S. Yeo, “Comments on “Exact
solutions of electromagnetic fields in both near and far zones radiated
by thin circular loop antennas: A general representation” [and reply],”
IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 49, pp. 845–847, May 2001.
[33] D. M. Pozar, Microwave Engineering, 3rd ed. Hoboken, New Jersey:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2005.
[34] V. V. Liepa and D. L. Sengupta, Applied Electromagnetics and Elec-
tromagnetic Compatibility. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2006.
[35] M. Yamaguchi, S. Yabukami, H. Yurugi, K. Nakada, K. I. Arai, A.
Itagaki, K. Itagaki, N. Saito, K. Fuda, M. Watanabe, H. Takahashi, T.
Tamogami, and Y. Sakurada, “Two dimensional electromagnetic noise
imaging system using planar shielded-loop coil array,” in Proc. IEEE
Int. Symp. Electromagn. Compat., 1999, pp. 51–54.
[36] Mini-Circuits. New York [Online]. Available: http://www.minicir-
cuits.com
[37] F. H. Raab, “Idealized operation of the class e tuned power amplifier,”
IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst., vol. CAS-24, no. 12, pp. 725–735, Dec.
1977.
[38] N. O. Sokal, “Class-e RF power amplifiers,” QEX, pp. 9–20, Feb. 2001.
[39] J. J. Casanova, Z. N. Low, and J. Lin, “Design and optimization of a
class-e amplifier for a loosely coupled planar wireless power system,”
IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II, Exp. Briefs, vol. 56, no. 11, pp. 830–834,
Nov. 2009.
2136 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 59, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012
Erin M. Thomas (S’09–M’10) received the B.S.E. and M.S.E. degrees in elec-
trical engineering from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, in 2008 and
2010, respectively.
Currently, she is a Research Engineer at SRI International in the Engineering
R&D Division within the Engineering and Systems Group. Her research inter-
ests include wireless power transfer, RF circuits and antenna design and analyt-
ical electromagnetics.
Jason D. Heebl (S’04–M’10) received the B.S. degree from the University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, in 2007, and the M.S. degree from the University of
Dayton, Dayton, OH, in 2011 both in electrical engineering.
Currently, he is a Systems Engineer working in the Air Force Satellite Con-
trol Network program office, Space and Missiles Command, Los Angeles Air
Force Base, El Segundo, CA. His research interests include wireless power
transfer, metamaterial theory and design, novel antenna design, and optimiza-
tion methods.
Carl Pfeiffer (S’08) received the B.S.E. and M.S.E. degrees in electrical engi-
neering from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, in 2009 and 2011, respec-
tively, where he is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree.
His research interests include electrically small antennas, printed antennas,
metamaterials, metasurfaces, and transformation optics.
Mr. Pfeiffer received the IEEE MTT-S Undergraduate/Pre-Graduate Schol-
arship, and the Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need Fellowship in
2009.
Anthony Grbic (S’00–M’06) received the B.A.Sc., M.A.Sc., and Ph.D. degrees
in electrical engineering from the University of Toronto, ON, Canada, in 1998,
2000, and 2005, respectively.
In January 2006, he joined the Department of Electrical Engineering and
Computer Science, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, where he is currently
an Associate Professor. His research interests include engineered electromag-
netic structures (metamaterials, electromagnetic bandgap materials, frequency
selective surfaces), printed antennas, microwave circuits, wireless power trans-
mission systems and analytical electromagnetics.
Dr. Grbic received the Best Student Paper Award at the 2000 Antenna Tech-
nology and Applied Electromagnetics Symposium and an IEEE Microwave
Theory and Techniques Society Graduate Fellowship in 2001. In 2008, he was
the recipient of an AFOSR Young Investigator Award as well as an NSF Faculty
Early Career Development Award. In January 2010, he was awarded a Presi-
dential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers. In 2011, he was the
recipient of an Outstanding Young Engineer Award from the IEEE Microwave
Theory and Techniques Society, a Henry Russel Award from the University of
Michigan, and a Booker Fellowship from the United States National Committee
of the International Union of Radio Science (USNC/URSI).