Integrated Design of Compliant Mechanisms and Embedded Rotary Actuators and Bending Actuators for Motion Generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an integrated design approach, a new topology optimization technique, to simultaneously synthesizing the optimal structural topologies of compliant mechanisms (CMs) and actuator placement — bending actuators and rotary actuators — for motion generation. The approach has the following salient features: (1) the use of bending actuators and rotary actuators as the actuation of CMs, (2) the simultaneous optimization of the CM and the location and orientation of the actuator that is embedded in the CM, (3) the guiding of a flexible link from an initial configuration to a series of desired configurations (including precision positions, orientations, and shapes), and (4) a new connectivity checking scheme to check whether the regions of interest in a design candidate are well connected. A program was employed for the geometrically nonlinear finite element analysis of large-displacement CMs driven by either bending actuators or rotary actuators. Two design examples were presented to demonstrate the proposed approach. The design results were 3D printed, and they all achieved desired shape changes when actuated.
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 | 0.001 | 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".