Operation of electrothermal and electrostatic MUMPs microactuators underwater
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surface-micromachined actuators made in multi-user MEMS processes (MUMPs) have been operated underwater without modifying the manufacturing process. Such actuators have generally been either electro-thermally or electro-statically actuated and both actuator styles are tested here for suitability underwater. This is believed to be the first time that thermal and electrostatic actuators have been compared for deflection underwater relative to air performance. A high-frequency ac square wave is used to replicate a dc-driven actuator output without the associated problem of electrolysis in water. This method of ac activation, with frequencies far above the mechanical resonance frequencies of the MEMS actuators, has been termed root mean square (RMS) operation. Both thermal and electrostatic actuators have been tested and proved to work using RMS control. Underwater performance has been evaluated by using in-air operation of these actuators as a benchmark. When comparing deflection per volt applied, thermal actuators operate between 5 and 9% of in-air deflection and electrostatic actuators show an improvement in force per volt applied of upwards of 6000%. These results agree with predictions based on the physical properties of the surrounding medium.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".