Dynamics of Variable-Geometry Electrostatic Microactuators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the dynamic behavior of a microbeam-based electrostatic microactuator. The cross-section of the microbeam under consideration varies along its length. A mathematical model, accounting for the system nonlinearities due to mid-plane stretching and electrostatic forcing, is adopted and used to examine the microbeam dynamics. The Differential Quadrature Method (DQM) and Finite Difference Method (FDM) are used to discretize the partial-differential-integral equation representing the microbeam dynamics. The resulting nonlinear algebraic system is solved for the limit cycles of various microstructure geometries under combined DC-AC loads and the stability of these limit cycles is examined using Floquet theory. Results are presented to show the effect of variations in the geometry on the frequency-response curves of the microactuator. We examine the effect of varying the gap size and the microbeam thickness and width on the frequency-response curves for hardening-type and softening-type behaviors. We found that it is possible to tune the geometry of the microactuator to eliminate dynamic pull-in.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".