Fuse-tethers in MEMS: theory and operation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Micro-electro-mechanical-systems (MEMS) have designs which incorporate freestanding structures. These freestanding structures must be attached to the substrate during fabrication, and released when they are to be utilized. Tethers are long thin beams that mechanically anchor the freestanding structure to the substrate. In our study, we focused on the fuse-tether design and its associated Joule heating breaking technique. We investigated the breaking characteristics of two fuse-tether designs based on different current pulses. For each design, the current pulse which produced the most desirable break was chosen for more rigorous testing on 20 tethers. The reliability tests resulted in at least 80% success rate. In addition to empirical testing, we utilized ANSYS/spl trade/ to simulate the Joule heating process. The ANSYS/spl trade/ model produced results that closely matched the break characteristics observed in the empirical tests. This research demonstrated that a fuse-tether can be severed reliably with the Joule heating technique, and the outcome can be predicted with proper modeling before fabrication.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".