Origami-Inspired Composite Springs with Bi-directional Translational-Rotational Functionalities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many of the patterns seen in Origami are currently being explored as a platform for building functional engineering systems with versatile characteristics that cater to niche applications in various technological fields. One such pattern is the Kresling pattern, which offers unconventional mechanical properties with rich coupled translation and rotational kinematics. In this paper, we design and manufacture a composite spring inspired by the Kresling Origami pattern, which is capable of simultaneously behaving as an axial and torsional restoring element with bi-directional functionalities. We study, numerically and experimentally, the restoring behavior of this spring, its equilibria, and their bifurcations for different combination of the design parameters. We show that the fabricated springs can have fixed, quasi-zero, or variable stiffness, and can be customized to exhibit single- or multi-stable states (symmetric and asymmetric) as needed. The proposed spring demonstrates how combining additive manufacturing with Origami principles can offer a new pathway towards the design of new structural and machine elements with versatile functionalities.
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".