MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041688369 · doi:10.1117/12.704605

Development of a model for predicting dry stiction in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS)

2007· article· en· W2041688369 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Hariri, Jean W. Zu, R. Ben Mrad

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStictionAsperity (geotechnical engineering)Microelectromechanical systemsMaterials sciencevan der Waals forceWork (physics)AdhesionMechanicsContact areaComposite materialNanotechnologyMechanical engineeringEngineeringChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adhesion between micro parts, also referred to as stiction, is a major failure mode in MEMS. Undesirable stiction, which results from contact between surfaces, can severely compromise the reliability of MEMS. In this paper, a model is developed to predict the dry stiction between uncharged micro parts in MEMS. In dry stiction, the interacting surfaces are assumed to be either hydrophobic or placed in dry environment. In this condition, the van der Waals (vdW) and asperity deformation forces are dominant. Here, a model is developed for the vdW force between rough micro surfaces and the new model is combined with a newly developed multiple asperity point model for the elastic/plastic deformation of rough surfaces in contact to solve for the equilibrium condition of the forces. This, in turn, will yield the equilibrium distance between micro surfaces, using which the apparent work of adhesion can be found. The result of the theory is compared with the available experimental data from literature. The developed model can be easily used for design purpose. If the topographic data and material constants are known, the adhesion parameters can be quickly calculated using the model.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface InteractionsFrench-language works237,207