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

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

References

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2016 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg