Advertisement

Size-dependent pull-in instability analysis of electrically actuated packaged FG micro-cantilevers under the effect of mechanical shock

  • M. A. Mokhtari Amir Majdi
  • M. TahaniEmail author
  • Amir R. Askari
Technical Paper
  • 27 Downloads

Abstract

This paper focuses on analyzing the unstable behavior of an electrically actuated functionally graded micro-cantilever under the effect of mechanical shock based on the modified couple stress theory. Since the micro-devices are usually mounted on some packages, the effect of packaging on the behavior of the system is also investigated. To this end, Hamilton’s principle is employed to derive the governing equation of motion base on the Euler–Bernoulli beam theory. Afterward, Galerkin’s method is used to convert the governing partial differential equation of motion to a single initial value problem. The accuracy of the presented results is also validated by comparison with available findings in the literature. Furthermore, a detailed parametric study is conducted to investigate the effect of mechanical shock on the behavior of the micro-cantilever. MEMS devices are usually actuated with electrostatic force, so the combined effect of electrostatic and mechanical shock is presented afterward. The packaging effect is also modeled with a micro-beam mounted on a single-degree-of-freedom mass and spring system. It is shown that not considering the MEMS packaging will lead to false results.

Keywords

Electrically actuated micro-cantilevers Mechanical shock Effect of tip mass Effect of packaging Functionally graded materials Reduced-order model 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Nayfeh AH, Younis MI, Abdel-Rahman EM (2007) Dynamic pull-in phenomenon in MEMS resonators. Nonlinear Dyn 48(1–2):153–163zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rottenberg X, De Wolf I, Nauwelaers BK, De Raedt W, Tilmans HA (2007) Analytical model of the DC actuation of electrostatic MEMS devices with distributed dielectric charging and nonplanar electrodes. J Microelectromech Syst 16(5):1243–1253Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Younis MI (2011) MEMS linear and nonlinear statics and dynamics, vol 20. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Senturia SD (2007) Microsystem design. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nakamura S (2005) MEMS inertial sensor toward higher accuracy and multi-axis sensing. In: IEEE sensors. IEEE, p 4Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wang H, Lenz H, Szabo A, Bamberger J, Hanebeck UD (2007) WLAN-based pedestrian tracking using particle filters and low-cost MEMS sensors. In: 2007 4th workshop on positioning, navigation and communication, pp 1–7Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hsu W-T, Best WS, De Los Santos HJ (2004) Design and fabrication procedure for high Q RF MEMS resonators. Microw J 47(2):60–75Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Czarnecki P, Rottenberg X, Soussan P, Ekkels P, Muller P, Nolmans P, De Raedt W, Tilmans H, Puers R, Marchand L (2008) Influence of the substrate on the lifetime of capacitive RF MEMS switches. In: MEMS 2008. IEEE 21st international conference on micro electro mechanical systems, 2008. IEEE, pp 172–175Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Xu YP, Yu R, Hsu W-T, Brown AR (2006) A silicon micromechanical resonator based CMOS bandpass sigma-delta modulator. In: Solid-state circuits conference, 2006. ASSCC 2006. IEEE Asian, 2006. IEEE, pp 143–146Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oskouie MF, Ansari R, Sadeghi FJ (2017) Nonlinear vibration analysis of fractional viscoelastic Euler–Bernoulli nanobeams based on the surface stress theory. Acta Mech Sol Sin 30(4):416–424Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jiang J, Wang LJ (2017) Analytical solutions for thermal vibration of nanobeams with elastic boundary conditions. Acta Mech Sol Sin 30(5):474–483MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sun X-P, Hong Y-Z, Dai H-L, Wang LJ (2017) Nonlinear frequency analysis of buckled nanobeams in the presence of longitudinal magnetic field. Acta Mech Sol Sin 30(5):465–473Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ebrahimi F, Haghi PJ (2017) Wave propagation analysis of rotating thermoelastically-actuated nanobeams based on nonlocal strain gradient theory. Acta Mech Sol Sin 30(6):647–657Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghayesh MH, Farokhi H (2015) Chaotic motion of a parametrically excited microbeam. Int J Eng Sci 96:34–45MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ghayesh MH, Farokhi H, Alici G (2016) Size-dependent performance of microgyroscopes. Int J Eng Sci 100:99–111MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ghayesh MH, Farokhi H, Amabili M (2014) In-plane and out-of-plane motion characteristics of microbeams with modal interactions. Compos Part B Eng 60:423–439Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Farokhi H, Ghayesh MH (2015) Thermo-mechanical dynamics of perfect and imperfect Timoshenko microbeams. Int J Eng Sci 91:12–33MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ghayesh MH, Farokhi H (2015) Nonlinear dynamics of microplates. Int J Eng Sci 86:60–73MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Farokhi H, Ghayesh MH (2015) Nonlinear dynamical behaviour of geometrically imperfect microplates based on modified couple stress theory. Int J Mech Sci 90:133–144Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Soroush R, Koochi A, Kazemi A, Noghrehabadi A, Haddadpour H, Abadyan M (2010) Investigating the effect of Casimir and van der Waals attractions on the electrostatic pull-in instability of nano-actuators. Phys Scr 82(4):045801zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Batra RC, Porfiri M, Spinello D (2008) Effects of van der Waals force and thermal stresses on pull-in instability of clamped rectangular microplates. Sensors 8(2):1048–1069Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tavakolian F, Farrokhabadi A, Mirzaei M (2017) Pull-in instability of double clamped microbeams under dispersion forces in the presence of thermal and residual stress effects using nonlocal elasticity theory. Microsyst Technol 23(4):839–848Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lotfi M, Zand MM, Hosseini II, Baghani M, Dargazany RJMT (2017) Transient behavior and dynamic pull-in instability of electrostatically-actuated fluid-conveying microbeams. Microsyst Technol 23(12):6015–6023Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Krylov S, Ilic BR, Schreiber D, Seretensky S, Craighead H (2008) The pull-in behavior of electrostatically actuated bistable microstructures. J Micromech Microeng 18(5):055026Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ramezani A, Alasty A, Akbari J (2007) Closed-form solutions of the pull-in instability in nano-cantilevers under electrostatic and intermolecular surface forces. Int J Solids Struct 44(14):4925–4941zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhang Y, Y-p Zhao (2006) Numerical and analytical study on the pull-in instability of micro-structure under electrostatic loading. Sens Actuators A 127(2):366–380Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taylor G (1968) The coalescence of closely spaced drops when they are at different electric potentials. Proc R Soc Lond A Math Phys Eng Sci 1487:423–434Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pamidighantam S, Puers R, Baert K, Tilmans HA (2002) Pull-in voltage analysis of electrostatically actuated beam structures with fixed–fixed and fixed–free end conditions. J Micromech Microeng 12(4):458Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Krylov S (2008) Parametric excitation and stabilization of electrostatically actuated microstructures. Int J Multisc Comput Eng 6(6):563–584Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chong AC, Lam DC (1999) Strain gradient plasticity effect in indentation hardness of polymers. J Mater Res 14(10):4103–4110Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Guo X, Fang D, Li X (2005) Measurement of deformation of pure Ni foils by speckle pattern interferometry. Mech Eng 27(2):21–25Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    McFarland AW, Colton JS (2005) Role of material microstructure in plate stiffness with relevance to microcantilever sensors. J Micromech Microeng 15(5):1060Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Toupin RA (1962) Elastic materials with couple-stresses. Arch Ration Mech Anal 11(1):385–414MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Koiter W (1964) Couple stresses in the theory of elasticity, I & II. Philos Trans R Soc B 67:17–44MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fleck N, Muller G, Ashby M, Hutchinson J (1994) Strain gradient plasticity: theory and experiment. Acta Metall Mater 42(2):475–487Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yang F, Chong A, Lam DCC, Tong P (2002) Couple stress based strain gradient theory for elasticity. Int J Solids Struct 39(10):2731–2743zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Attia M, Mahmoud F (2016) Modeling and analysis of nanobeams based on nonlocal-couple stress elasticity and surface energy theories. Int J Mech Sci 105:126–134Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Attia MA, Emam SA (2018) Electrostatic nonlinear bending, buckling and free vibrations of viscoelastic microbeams based on the modified couple stress theory. Acta Mech 229:1–21MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gholipour A, Farokhi H, Ghayesh MHJ (2015) In-plane and out-of-plane nonlinear size-dependent dynamics of microplates. Nonlinear Dyn 79(3):1771–1785Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ghayesh MH, Farokhi H, Amabili M (2013) Nonlinear dynamics of a microscale beam based on the modified couple stress theory. Compos Part B Eng 50:318–324zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ghayesh MH, Amabili M, Farokhi H (2013) Nonlinear forced vibrations of a microbeam based on the strain gradient elasticity theory. Int J Eng Sci 63:52–60MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Farokhi H, Ghayesh MH, Amabili M (2013) Nonlinear dynamics of a geometrically imperfect microbeam based on the modified couple stress theory. Int J Eng Sci 68:11–23MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mindlin R, Eshel N (1968) On first strain-gradient theories in linear elasticity. Int J Solids Struct 4(1):109–124zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fleck N, Hutchinson J (1993) A phenomenological theory for strain gradient effects in plasticity. J Mech Phys Solids 41(12):1825–1857MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lam DCC, Yang F, Chong A, Wang J, Tong P (2003) Experiments and theory in strain gradient elasticity. J Mech Phys Solids 51(8):1477–1508zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Kahrobaiyan M, Asghari M, Ahmadian M (2013) Strain gradient beam element. Finite Elem Anal Des 68:63–75MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Asghari M, Kahrobaiyan M, Ahmadian M (2010) A nonlinear Timoshenko beam formulation based on the modified couple stress theory. Int J Eng Sci 48(12):1749–1761MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Park S, Gao X (2006) Bernoulli–Euler beam model based on a modified couple stress theory. J Micromech Microeng 16(11):2355Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Attia MA (2017) Investigation of size-dependent quasistatic response of electrically actuated nonlinear viscoelastic microcantilevers and microbridges. Meccanica 52(10):2391–2420MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ghayesh MH, Amabili M, Farokhi H (2013) Three-dimensional nonlinear size-dependent behaviour of Timoshenko microbeams. Int J Eng Sci 71:1–14MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ghayesh MH, Farokhi H, Amabili M (2013) Nonlinear behaviour of electrically actuated MEMS resonators. Int J Eng Sci 71:137–155zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Petersen KE (1982) Silicon as a mechanical material. Proc IEEE 70(5):420–457Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wood RJ, Avadhanula S, Menon M, Fearing RS (2003) Microrobotics using composite materials: the micromechanical flying insect thorax. In: ICRA’03. IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, 2003. Proceedings, 2003. IEEE, pp 1842–1849Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Şimşek M, Yurtcu H (2013) Analytical solutions for bending and buckling of functionally graded nanobeams based on the nonlocal Timoshenko beam theory. Compos Struct 97:378–386Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Eltaher M, Emam SA, Mahmoud F (2012) Free vibration analysis of functionally graded size-dependent nanobeams. Appl Math Comput 218(14):7406–7420MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ansari R, Gholami R, Sahmani S (2012) Study of small scale effects on the nonlinear vibration response of functionally graded Timoshenko microbeams based on the strain gradient theory. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 7(3):031009Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Mohammadi M, Eghtesad M, Mohammadi HJ (2018) Stochastic analysis of pull-in instability of geometrically nonlinear size-dependent FGM micro beams with random material properties. Compos Struct 200:466–479Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Shanab R, Attia M, Mohamed S (2017) Nonlinear analysis of functionally graded nanoscale beams incorporating the surface energy and microstructure effects. Int J Mech Sci 131:908–923Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sedighi HM, Daneshmand F, Abadyan MJ (2015) Modified model for instability analysis of symmetric FGM double-sided nano-bridge: corrections due to surface layer, finite conductivity and size effect. Compos Struct 132:545–557Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ghayesh MH (2018) Functionally graded microbeams: simultaneous presence of imperfection and viscoelasticity. Int J Mech Sci 140:339–350Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ghayesh MH (2018) Nonlinear vibration analysis of axially functionally graded shear-deformable tapered beams. Appl Math Model 59:583–596MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ghayesh MH (2018) Dynamics of functionally graded viscoelastic microbeams. Int J Eng Sci 124:115–131MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Şimşek M, Reddy J (2013) Bending and vibration of functionally graded microbeams using a new higher order beam theory and the modified couple stress theory. Int J Eng Sci 64:37–53MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Zamanzadeh M, Rezazadeh G, Jafarsadeghi-Poornaki I, Shabani R (2013) Static and dynamic stability modeling of a capacitive FGM micro-beam in presence of temperature changes. Appl Math Model 37(10):6964–6978MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Sedighi HM, Keivani M, Abadyan M (2015) Modified continuum model for stability analysis of asymmetric FGM double-sided NEMS: corrections due to finite conductivity, surface energy and nonlocal effect. Compos Part B Eng 83:117–133Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Attia MA (2017) On the mechanics of functionally graded nanobeams with the account of surface elasticity. Int J Eng Sci 115:73–101MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Driesen W, Rida A, Breguet J-M, Clavel R (2007) Friction based locomotion module for mobile MEMS robots. In: 2007 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, 2007. IEEE, pp 3815–3820Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Tas N, Sonnenberg T, Jansen H, Legtenberg R, Elwenspoek M (1996) Stiction in surface micromachining. J Micromech Microeng 6(4):385Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Tanner DM, Walraven JA, Helgesen K, Irwin LW, Brown F, Smith NF, Masters N (2000) MEMS reliability in shock environments. In: Reliability physics symposium, 2000. Proceedings. 38th annual 2000 IEEE international, 2000. IEEE, pp 129–138Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Meirovitch L, Parker R (2001) Fundamentals of vibrations. Appl Mech Rev 54:100Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Younis MI, Alsaleem F, Jordy D (2007) The response of clamped–clamped microbeams under mechanical shock. Int J Non-Linear Mech 42(4):643–657Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Ramesham R, Ghaffarian R (2000) Challenges in interconnection and packaging of microelectromechanical systems (MEMS). In: Electronic components and technology conference, 2000. 2000 Proceedings. 50th, 2000. IEEE, pp 666–675Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Mehregany M, Zorman CA (1999) SiC MEMS: opportunities and challenges for applications in harsh environments. Thin Solid Films 355:518–524Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Alsaleem F, Younis MI, Miles R (2008) An investigation into the effect of the PCB motion on the dynamic response of MEMS devices under mechanical shock loads. J Electron Packag 130(3):031002Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Fan MS, Shaw HC (2001) Dynamic response assessment for the MEMS accelerometer under severe shock loadsGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Ramini AH, Younis MI, Miles R (2011) Modeling the effects of the PCB motion on the response of microstructures under mechanical shock. J Vib Acoust 133(6):061019Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Abbasnejad B, Rezazadeh G, Mi Design (2012) Mechanical behavior of a FGM micro-beam subjected to a nonlinear electrostatic pressure. Int J Mech Mater Des 8(4):381–392Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Moeenfard H, Awtar S (2014) Modeling geometric nonlinearities in the free vibration of a planar beam flexure with a tip mass. J Mech Des 136(4):044502Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Noghrehabadi A, Ghalambaz M, Ghanbarzadeh A (2012) A new approach to the electrostatic pull-in instability of nanocantilever actuators using the ADM–Padé technique. Comput Math Appl 64(9):2806–2815MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Association JSST (2001) JESD22-B110: subassembly mechanical shock. Arlington, VAGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Yeh C-L, Lai Y-S (2006) Support excitation scheme for transient analysis of JEDEC board-level drop test. Microelectron Reliab 46(2):626–636Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Reddy JN (2002) Energy principles and variational methods in applied mechanics. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Fu Y, Zhang J, Wan L (2011) Application of the energy balance method to a nonlinear oscillator arising in the microelectromechanical system (MEMS). Curr Appl Phys 11(3):482–485Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Qian Y, Ren D, Lai S, Chen S (2012) Analytical approximations to nonlinear vibration of an electrostatically actuated microbeam. Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul 17(4):1947–1955MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Askari AR, Tahani M (2014) An alternative reduced order model for electrically actuated micro-beams under mechanical shock. Mech Res Commun 57:34–39Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Rao SS (2007) Vibration of continuous systems. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Moghimi Zand M, Ahmadian M (2010) Dynamic pull-in instability of electrostatically actuated beams incorporating Casimir and van der Waals forces. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng Sci 224(9):2037–2047Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Osterberg PM, Senturia SD (1997) M-TEST: a test chip for MEMS material property measurement using electrostatically actuated test structures. J Microelectromech Syst 6(2):107–118Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Rahaeifard M, Ahmadian MT, Firoozbakhsh K (2014) Size-dependent dynamic behavior of microcantilevers under suddenly applied DC voltage. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng Sci 228(5):896–906Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. A. Mokhtari Amir Majdi
    • 1
  • M. Tahani
    • 1
    Email author
  • Amir R. Askari
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringFerdowsi University of MashhadMashhadIran
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringHakim Sabzevari UniversitySabzevarIran

Personalised recommendations