0
Research Papers: Design of Mechanisms and Robotic Systems

Compliance Synthesis of CSFH MEMS-Based Microgrippers

[+] Author and Article Information
Matteo Verotti

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
Sapienza University of Rome,
Rome 00184, Italy
e-mail: matteo.verotti@uniroma1.it

Alden Dochshanov

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
Sapienza University of Rome,
Rome 00184, Italy
e-mail: alden.dochshanov@uniroma1.it

Nicola P. Belfiore

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
Sapienza University of Rome,
Rome 00184, Italy
e-mail: belfiore@dima.uniroma1.it

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Mechanisms and Robotics Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received April 27, 2016; final manuscript received October 10, 2016; published online November 14, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Massimo Callegari.

J. Mech. Des 139(2), 022301 (Nov 14, 2016) (10 pages) Paper No: MD-16-1313; doi: 10.1115/1.4035053 History: Received April 27, 2016; Revised October 10, 2016

In the last decades, grippers have been employed extensively at the microscale, for example, in microbiology and in microassembly. In these fields, specifically, it is essential to improve the performance of these systems in terms of precision, actuation, and sensing of the gripping force. Recent investigations drew attention on the tip–environment interaction force, which gave rise to further studies on the tip compliance behavior. This paper reveals a new method for designing MEMS technology-based compliant microgrippers with prescribed specifications for the jaw tip compliance. This approach relies on the equivalence between a compliant mechanism and its corresponding pseudorigid-body model (PRBM), the former embedding conjugate surfaces flexure hinges (CSFHs) as flexures. Such correspondence has been assessed by means of finite element analysis (FEA) simulations and theoretical models.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Compliance selectivity at the jaws. The interaction forces cause the transition from the neutral configuration (gray color) to the deformed one (dashed line). The mechanism compliance determines the tip displacements a and b along y and x, respectively. Selective compliance along y implies a > b.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

CSFH and geometrical parameter of the constant-curvature beam

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic layout: reference frames, gripper orientation with respect to the wafer primary flat, compliance ellipsoids (Cl, Cr), and specified frame–object distances (dl, dr)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

RR dyads configurations resulting from the anisotropic scaling condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Replacement of the revolute joint by the CSFH

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Compliant microgripper and corresponding PRBM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Compliant microgripper embedding rotary comb-drive actuators

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Right arm: simulation setup, mesh detail, and deformed configuration corresponding to a force magnitude equal to 10 μN, directed at an angle of 200 deg with respect to the x-axis

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Left arm: simulation setup, flexures details, and maximum principal stress distribution corresponding to a force magnitude equal to 10 μN, directed at an angle of 150 deg with respect to the x-axis

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Left arm: tip displacements in the x–y plane evaluated by theoretical model and by FEA (isotropic and anisotropic formulations)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Right arm: tip displacements in the x–y plane evaluated by theoretical model and by FEA (isotropic and anisotropic formulations)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Left arm: differences between the x-component (top) and y-component (bottom) displacements between the theoretical and the FEA anisotropic formulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Right arm: differences between the x-component (top) and y-component (bottom) displacements between the theoretical and the FEA anisotropic formulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Anisotropic factors for the left and right arms: comparison between theoretical and the FEA anisotropic formulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Left arm: highest values of the maximum principal stress varying the force direction and the force magnitude

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Right arm: highest values of the maximum principal stress varying the force direction and the force magnitude

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In