4.8 Article

Soft Tunable Lenses Based on Zipping Electroactive Polymer Actuators

期刊

ADVANCED SCIENCE
卷 8, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/advs.202003104

关键词

actuators; artificial muscles; electrostatic zipping; soft robotics; tunable lens

资金

  1. ERC Starting Grant GEL-SYS [757931]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soft focus-tunable lenses offer practical voltage operation, a wide range of adjustable focal lengths, and millisecond response times by inflating a liquid-filled elastomeric lens membrane with electroactive polymers. Performance equivalent to human eyes is demonstrated with focal length changes between 22 and 550 mm in 260 ms at voltages below 500 V. The presented model, design rules, and fabrication methods address key challenges in soft electrostatic actuators and optical systems, paving the way for autonomous bio-inspired robots and machines.
Compact and entirely soft optics with tunable and adaptive properties drive the development of life-like soft robotic systems. Yet, existing approaches are either slow, require rigid components, or use high operating voltages of several kilovolts. Here, soft focus-tunable lenses are introduced, which operate at practical voltages, cover a high range of adjustable focal lengths, and feature response times in the milliseconds range. The nature-inspired design comprises a liquid-filled elastomeric lens membrane, which is inflated by zipping electroactive polymers to tune the focal length. An analytic description of the tunable lens supports optimized designs and accurate prediction of the lens characteristics. Focal length changes between 22 and 550 mm (numerical aperture 0.14-0.005) within 260 ms, equal in performance to human eyes, are demonstrated for a lens with 3 mm aperture radius, while applying voltages below 500 V. The presented model, design rules, and fabrication methods address central challenges of soft electrostatic actuators and optical systems, and pave the way toward autonomous bio-inspired robots and machines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据