Understanding coupled factors that affect the modelling accuracy of typical planar compliant mechanisms

doi:10.1007/s11465-016-0392-z

Front. Mech. Eng.

2016, Vol. 11

Issue (2) : 129-134 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11465-016-0392-z

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Understanding coupled factors that affect the modelling accuracy of typical planar compliant mechanisms

Guangbo HAO^1,^*(

),Haiyang LI¹,Suzen KEMALCAN²,Guimin CHEN³,Jingjun YU⁴

¹. School of Engineering, University College Cork, Cork T12 YN60, Ireland
². School of Engineering, University College Cork, Cork T12 YN60, Ireland; Department of Mechanical Engineering, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey
³. School of Mechatronics, Xidian University, Xi’an 710071, China
⁴. School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China

Download: PDF(744 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

In order to accurately model compliant mechanism utilizing plate flexures, qualitative planar stress (Young’s modulus) and planar strain (plate modulus) assumptions are not feasible. This paper investigates a quantitative equivalent modulus using nonlinear finite element analysis (FEA) to reflect coupled factors in affecting the modelling accuracy of two typical distributed-compliance mechanisms. It has been shown that all parameters have influences on the equivalent modulus with different degrees; that the presence of large load-stiffening effect makes the equivalent modulus significantly deviate from the planar assumptions in two ideal scenarios; and that a plate modulus assumption is more reasonable for a very large out-of-plane thickness if the beam length is large.

Keywords coupling factors modelling accuracy compliant mechanisms equivalent modulus

Corresponding Author(s): Guangbo HAO

Online First Date: 27 May 2016 Issue Date: 29 June 2016

Cite this article:

Guangbo HAO,Haiyang LI,Suzen KEMALCAN, et al. Understanding coupled factors that affect the modelling accuracy of typical planar compliant mechanisms[J]. Front. Mech. Eng., 2016, 11(2): 129-134.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fme/EN/10.1007/s11465-016-0392-z
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fme/EN/Y2016/V11/I2/129

Fig.1 Two types of commonly-used translational compliant mechanisms

Fig.2 CBPM force ratio results for fixed beam length

Fig.3 CDPM force ratio results under fixed beam length

Fig.4 Average force ratio for CBPM

Fig.5 Average force ratio for CDPM

Fig.1 Fig.A1Normal stresses of an infinitesimal element along three orthogonal directions

1	Howell L L. Compliant Mechanisms. New York: Wiley, 2001
2	Lobontiu N. Compliant Mechanisms: Design of Flexure Hinges. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2002
3	Howell L L, Magleby S P, Olsen, B M. Handbook of Compliant Mechanisms. New York: Wiley, 2013
4	Smith S T. Flexures: Elements of Elastic Mechanisms. London: Taylor and Francis, 2003
5	Awtar S. Analysis and synthesis of planar kinematic XY mechanisms. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2004
6	Awtar S, Slocum A H, Sevincer E. Characteristics of beam-based flexure modules. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2007, 129(6): 625–639 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2717231
7	Timoshenko S. On the correction for shear of the differential equation for transverse vibrations of prismatic bars. Philosophical Magazine Series 6, 1921, 41(245): 744–746 https://doi.org/10.1080/14786442108636264
8	Venkiteswaran V K, Su H J. A parameter optimization framework for determining the pseudo-rigid-body model of cantilever-beams. Precision Engineering, 2015, 40: 46–54 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.precisioneng.2014.10.002
9	Chen G, Ma F. Kinetostatic modeling of fully compliant bistable mechanisms using Timoshenko beam constraint model. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2015, 137(2): 022301 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4029024
10	Zettl B, Szyszkowski W, Zhang W J. On systematic errors of two-dimensional finite element modeling of right circular planar flexure hinges. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2005, 127(4): 782–787 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1898341
11	Zettl B, Szyszkowski W, Zhang W J. Accurate low DOF modeling of a planar complaint mechanism with flexure hinges: The equivalent beam methodology. Precision Engineering, 2005, 29(2): 237–245 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.precisioneng.2004.09.001
12	Hao G, Li H. Extended static modelling and analysis of compliant compound parallelogram mechanisms considering the initial internal axial force. Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics, 2016, 8(4): 041008 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4032592
13	Hao G, Kong X. A novel large-range XY compliant parallel manipulator with enhanced out-of-plane stiffness. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2012, 134(6): 061009 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4006653
14	Hao G, Kong X. A normalization-based approach to the mobility analysis of spatial compliant multi-beam modules. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 2013, 59(1): 1–19 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2012.08.013

[1]	Junjie ZHAN, Yangjun LUO. Robust topology optimization of hinge-free compliant mechanisms with material uncertainties based on a non-probabilistic field model[J]. Front. Mech. Eng., 2019, 14(2): 201-212.
[2]	Guangbo HAO,Jingjun YU,Haiyang LI. A brief review on nonlinear modeling methods and applications of compliant mechanisms[J]. Front. Mech. Eng., 2016, 11(2): 119-128.
[3]	Guangbo HAO,Haiyang LI,Xiuyun HE,Xianwen KONG. Conceptual design of compliant translational joints for high-precision applications[J]. Front. Mech. Eng., 2014, 9(4): 331-343.
[4]	Michael Yu WANG. Mechanical and geometric advantages in compliant mechanism optimization[J]. Front Mech Eng Chin, 2009, 4(3): 229-241.
[5]	WANG Wenjing, YU Yueqing. Analysis of frequency characteristics of compliant mechanisms[J]. Front. Mech. Eng., 2007, 2(3): 267-271.
[6]	Shi-kui CHEN, Michael Yu WANG. Conceptual design of compliant mechanisms using level set method[J]. Front. Mech. Eng., 2006, 1(2): 131-145.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed