4.7 Article

Monolithic binary stiffness building blocks for mechanical digital machines

期刊

EXTREME MECHANICS LETTERS
卷 42, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eml.2020.101120

关键词

Digital mechanism; Zero stiffness; Static balancing; Mechanical logic; Metamaterials

资金

  1. TAG Heuer Institute, Switzerland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper introduces two essential building blocks with binary stiffness for mechanical digital machines. By using static balancing to create extreme stiffness states and a mechanical bistable switch for toggling stiffness states, the controllability of stiffness is improved.
We introduce two essential building blocks with binary stiffness for mechanical digital machines. The large scale fully compliant mechanisms have rectilinear and rotational kinematics and use a new V-shaped negative stiffness structure to create two extreme states of stiffness by static balancing. The use of a mechanical bistable switch allows us to toggle between near-zero-stiffness and high-stiffness states, effectively turning off and on stiffness. A stiffness reduction of 98.8% and 99.9% is achieved for linear and rotary motion over a range of 13.3% (20 mm) and 0.4 rad (23 degrees) respectively. Stiffness states can be reversibly changed by toggling the mechanical switch, or irreversibly by actuating the main stage. These binary stiffness mechanisms could set the stage for a new type of mechanical logic, adaptive and programmable metamaterials and other types of digital mechanical devices. Practical mechanical digital machines and materials require miniaturized and easily micro-manufactured components. We have therefore carefully considered scalability by integrating all required structures into a planar and monolithic architecture. This allows miniaturization and fabrication with conventional surface-micro machining and additive manufacturing such as photolithography, two-photon lithography and fused deposition modeling. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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