Journal of Mechanical Design.

Received July 28, 2016;

Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

A Comprehensive Survey on
Microgrippers Design: Mechanical Structure

Matteo Verotti ∗ Alden Dochshanov

Department of Mechanical and Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering Aerospace Engineering
Sapienza University of Rome Sapienza University of Rome
Rome, Italy, 00184 Rome, Italy, 00184
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Nicola P. Belfiore
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering
Sapienza University of Rome
Rome, Italy, 00184
Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

An Atlas of 98 microgrippers that recently appeared in Literature is herein presented by using four different

forms: a) a restyled layout of the original mechanical structure, b) its corresponding pseudo-rigid body model
(PRBM), c) its kinematic chain and, finally, d) its related graph. Homogeneity in functional sketching (a) is as-
sumed to be greatly helpful to understand how these grippers work and what are the most significant differences

between them. Therefore, a unified and systematic set of aesthetics and proportionality criteria have been adopted.

Analogously, unified criteria for obtaining pseudo-rigid (b), kinematic (c), and graph (d) representations have been

also used, which made the Atlas easy to be read and inspected. The distinction among lumped and distributed
compliance has been also accepted to develop the structure of the Atlas. A companion paper has been prepared to
present a survey on the variety of operational strategies that are used in these microgrippers.

1 Introduction

High precision manipulation of micro and nano objects is a critical issue for a large class of applications, such as MEMS

development, optical fiber alignment, electronic packaging of micro-components and biomedical engineering [1–3]. In

particular, micromanipulation devices are becoming fundamental tools in the microbiology and in the microassembly fields.

In microbiology, new technological advances at the microscale allow scientists to characterize microorganisms from a

new perspective [4]. Furthermore, the manipulation of a single cell represents an essential tasks to understand individual

cell behaviors and interactions, since heterogeneity in cell populations has been ascertained [5]. Related activities in cellular

∗
Corresponding author.
Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 1

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

microsurgery allow researchers also to modify the cell structure and to understand cell mechanics. These techniques played

an important role in the development of assisted reproductive technology, expanding the repertoire of clinical methodology

and options [6]. As well, new operations, such as intracellular injections, can be performed when conventional methods, such

as concentration gradients or electroporation, are not applicable or fail [7–9]. Finally, it was found that cells are sensible to
mechanical stimulation and give a response through cytoskeletal re-organization and force generation [10, 11]. In fact, the

study of cell mechanical behaviors has been related to morphological changes and diseases [12].

Micro devices assembly (MDA) becomes necessary when a microsystem can not be constructed by means of MEMS-

based technologies, because of its geometry, required materials, or, more in general, limitations due to its technological
process. Many investigations were focused on the development of tools for handling micro-objects [13–16], and on the

microassembly of 3D structures [17, 18]. Generally, MDA operations, such as manipulation, insertion, and fixturing are
difficult, costly, time-consuming and require systems that are able to perform gripping, releasing, precise positioning and

joining. For these reasons, computer-based automated micro devices assembly (AMDA) could increase efficiency, reliabil-

ity, and reduce costs [19, 20]. However, both accurate positioning of micro-objects and automated microassembly remain

challenging tasks [21].

A considerable amount of work has been devoted to satisfy the increasing demand of high-efficiency, high-precision
and reliable microgrippers and some state-of-the-art surveys have been already completed to analyze micromanipulation
systems under different points of view. Cecil et al. considered gripping and manipulation techniques for microassembly

applications [19, 20], whereas Fantona and Porta focused on the releasing strategies [22]. Manipulation of micro and nano
objects in electron microscopes was investigated by Denisyuk et al. [23]. Wei and Xu analyzed working principles, detec-
tion accuracies, advantages and disadvantages of microforce sensing methods [24], whereas an overview on gripping force

measurement (using two-fingered microrobotic systems) was presented by Boudaoud and Regnier [25]. A review of concep-
tual designs of nanoscale manipulators was presented by Mekid et al. [26], who described the characteristics of forty recent

patents. Several MEMS microgripper actuators and sensors were compared by Jia and Xu, who suggested some guidelines

for different scenarios [27]. Nikoobin and Niaki compared several types of microgrippers and then they were able to de-

rive effective design and performance parameters, such as displacement amplification factor, gripping range and stroke, jaw

motion characteristic, ideal shape of tips, number of degree of freedom and microactuator specifications [28].

The present contribution is exclusively dedicated to the electro mechanical microgrippers because these structures are

widely used in research and applications and also because their large number makes it interesting to compare them with one

another. Therefore, some peculiar classes of tweezers, such as ultrasonic, molecular, fluorescence resonance energy transfer,

optical, laser, acoustic, dielectrophoretic or freezer tweezers, were not investigated. A selection and analysis process was

necessary to build the group of structures, and a new Atlas was created by gathering the different elements in three classes.

These categories were established on the basis of classical mechanical characteristics. Compliance played a fundamental

role in classification because the mechanical component of any MEMS consists conceptually in a compliant mechanism.

The first two classes are composed of micromechanisms which embody either lumped (Class I) or distributed (Class II)

compliance, whereas those microgrippers which do not obey to the two previous criteria have been gathered into the third

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 2

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

class, as special structures (Class III).

An effort has been made in order to extract not only the functional representation of the microgrippers, but also their

most popular corresponding simplified representations, namely, the Pseudo-Rigid Body Models (PRBMs) [29–34]. Such

model is obtained by reducing the original compliant mechanism to an ordinary one (i.e. composed of only rigid bodies
and kinematic pairs). Both the functional and the PRBM representations can not be uniquely defined. However, while the

functional sketch is quite simple and straightforward, a more complex procedure must be used to obtain the PRBM.

Once the PRBM has been defined, the resulting ordinary mechanism gives rise to its corresponding kinematic chain and

graph, which can be allocated to a family and a group, according to a classic method of mechanisms categorization [35]. As

a consequence, the Atlas becomes an effective and systematic tool which is well integrated to Number and Type Synthesis,
and which allows designers to appreciate the microgrippers topological characteristics .

The mechanical structure of a microgripper is strictly related to the adopted actuation strategy, because the value of the

actuating force or torque depends on the mechanical constraints which characterize the corresponding kinematic chain. Both

the elastic joints configuration and the mechanism posture have a great effect on actuation. For this reason, a comparative

analysis of the possible actuation strategies has been developed and proposed in a companion paper [36]. This analysis,
which includes force feedback, sensing and releasing strategy, represents a complementary part of the present paper. A
wide range of different actuator types, specially designed for microgrippers, is therein explored and some survey tables are

introduced. At the same time, a comparison of the basic performance characteristics of three major actuator types, namely,
electrostatic, thermal and piezoelectric, is proposed.

2 A Note on Topological Classification

Since decades, the systematic development of Mechanisms Atlases (see for example Refs. [37–40]) has been supported

by Type and Number Synthesis. Graph Theory played an important role in separating the concepts of structure and function,
as recently remarked [41], and therefore it has been widely adopted as the main and preferred resource in generating Atlases

of kinematic structures of mechanisms. Provided that a systematic approach is adopted for enumeration (for example,

algorithms based on Graph Theory), the Atlases are, generally, both exhaustive (i.e. all the structures with the selected
characteristics are considered) and not redundant (i. e. there are no idle copies of the same structure in the group). Graph-

based algorithms perform best during the generation of large classes of kinematic structures with specified topological

characteristics (i.e. up to a given number l links, with specified F degrees of freedom, LIND loops, and so on). Taking l = 4,

F = 1 and LIND = 1, an Atlas of grippers (at the macro scale) has been presented in 1997 [40]. This contribution offered a

full Atlas of grippers obtained by combining two elementary four bar linkages in symmetric and asymmetric arrangements,

by attaching the jaws to the couplers. This Atlas has been used as a source for generating new microgrippers. For example,

in 2005, Tsai et al. [42] applied the operation of kinematic joint transformation to the grippers reported in Atlas [40] and

generated 28 compliant microgrippers. The compliant mechanisms and their corresponding pseudo-rigid body models have

been related by means of equivalent joint transformations.

In the present investigation, an inverse process, namely, from the compliant mechanism to a corresponding PRBM,

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 3

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

has been used to generate the PRBMs that appear in the new Atlas. In fact, the adopted inclusion criterion consisted in

considering only those mechanisms which have been really fabricated or, at least, simulated and, then, presented in Literature.

Although the topological approach has not been adopted for enumeration purposes, it has been used as a fundamental tool for

classifying the structures. Another interesting difference between the review approach adopted in this paper and the typical
enumeration algorithms consists in the contents of the Atlas itself. In fact, whereas enumeration is tailored for generating

classes of kinematic structures with a great number of links (i.e. l ≥ 8), the actual microgrippers used in applications have
rarely more than 8 links.

3 Classification

In this Atlas, micromechanisms are classified considering three levels. The first level focuses on the compliant structures,

and defines a class of mechanisms. The second level assesses a classification of compliant structures according to the
topological nature of the corresponding PRBMs, whereas the third one considers the family and the group.

3.1 Functional Classification

A compliant mechanism modifies its neutral configuration either through the elastic deformations of its flexible parts

(flexures) or through a distributed deformation along the whole mechanism.

The advantages of flexure-based mechanisms (e.g. high accuracy, no backlash, no need of lubrication) provide great
opportunities for high-precision microgrippers establishment [43]. For example, beams with uniform cross-section in straight

configuration can serve as flexures in leaf-spring guidance systems [44] or as amplification beams in MEMS devices [45,
46]. Constant-curvature beams, with uniform cross-section, have also been considered as primitive flexures for compliant
mechanism [47, 48], or employed to realize complex flexures [49] and micromechanisms [50–53].

Beams with variable cross-section have also been considered as flexures. Notch hinges, for example, are characterized by

the geometric configuration (circular, corner-filleted, parabolic, hyperbolic, elliptical, inverse parabolic, and secant designs)

[54–57] and by axial symmetry [58, 59]. Figure 1 shows a circular, an elliptical and a corner-filleted notch hinge.

Whereas notch hinges are peculiar elements of the compliant mechanisms that are characterized by lumped compliance,
uniform cross-section beams, in straight or curved configuration, may introduce both lumped and distributed compliance,

depending on the mechanism configuration.

To improve the performance of compliant mechanisms in terms of stress concentration, off-axis-to-axial stiffness ratio,

range of motion and precision of rotation [60], complex flexures have been developed combining more flexible elements or

involving contact systems [49, 61–63]. Large deflections, within the elastic range, and precision of motion are among the

most important features of microgrippers, and such characteristics are often in contrast to each other.

The goal of recent investigations [64,65] has been the realization of advanced flexures, with capability of achieving wide

range of motion and high accuracy in rotations.

Some microgrippers embed both long beams and notch hinges within their compliant structure. In fact, these structures

combine both lumped and distributed compliance to guarantee motion. All these mechanisms have been grouped in the above

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 4

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

mentioned third group, namely, the Special Structures Group. The mechanical structure has an effect on its compliance

response to externally applied load. The importance of such response has been recently pointed out by Rabenorosoa et

al. [21], and compliance optimization, well-established in rigid-body mechanics (for example, by means of active stiffness

regulation [66–69]) has been recently considered in the design of a microgripper [70].

3.2 Topological classification

A kinematic chain is characterized by its degrees of freedom (F), number of links (ℓ), number of joints (m), and number
of independent loops (LIND ). These parameters are related by Grübler’s and Euler’s equations,

F = 3(ℓ − 1) − 2m ,
(1)
LIND = m − ℓ + 1 ,

and so only two of these parameters are independent. The pair F-ℓ defines a family of kinematic chains. The kinematic

chains of the same family have the same number of links ℓ, but, generally, different numbers of binary, ternary and j−nary
links (ℓ j ). Then, within the same family, it is possible to define groups of linkages having the same numbers of binary,
ternary, j−nary links.

In Sections 5, 6 and 7, microgrippers presentation has been ordered according to the following criteria:

1. special topological cases as first, including those mechanisms which are not classifiable as members of a family (e.g.
open chain with LIND = 0);
2. increasing degrees of freedom;

3. increasing family number;

4. increasing group, starting from the minimum number of the lowest j-nary links l j .

4 The adopted representation methods for the gripper layout and the PRBM

Anyone who wish to achieve a complete picture of the actual State of the Art of microgripper design, encounters many

difficulties because each contribution is depicted through an individual sketching style. The variety of applications leads

to a rather inhomogeneous set, where the representations are neither standard, nor uniform. As a consequence, comparing

different microgrippers can be a time consuming and inaccurate task. For example, two different layouts may seem rather

similar, while two similar structures may be treated as very different microgrippers. The quality of the present Atlas,

according to the Authors experience [37–40,71], depends strongly on how much systematic is the representation method and

on the efficacy of the adopted aesthetics. The representation method is based on four main features:

• an appropriate and effective way of representing the geometrical and structural characteristics of the microsystems,

• a systematic way of representing the functional characteristics of the microstructures (PRBM),

• a standard way of representing the kinematic chain and

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 5

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

• a uniform style for displaying the corresponding graph.

Furthermore, the following general criteria to represent mechanism geometry, PRBM, kinematic chains and graphs have
been adopted:

• drawings have been positioned inside widows which have all an equal size and rectangular shape;

• pin joints have been all represented by circles with equal size, whereas a generic prismatic pair has been represented as

the usual box sliding inside a slot;

• sensible points, such as the centers of the revolute joints or the polygons vertices, have been positioned on a base grid;

• graph nodes has been represented by characterizing the nature of their corresponding link: actuator, frame or output

vertices have been represented by black, double or checkered circles, respectively.

Moreover, the following general criteria have been adopted to represent mechanisms geometry:

• geometrical re-mapping of the original design (in order to locate the jaws always on the right hand side);

• horizontal orientation of the symmetry (when applicable) or gripping axis;

• symmetry (when applicable);
• introduction of modular and standard graphical elements to represent the jaws or the fixed revolute joints;

• introduction of a minimum size for the compliant parts of the compliant mechanism;
• introduction of a maximum size for the pseudo-rigid parts of the compliant mechanism;
• introduction of a maximum-to-minimum size ratio for the parts of the compliant mechanism.

• simplification of truss structures and possible substitution of truss regions with T labeled block.

Finally, the following actions have been applied to determine the PRBM corresponding to the analyzed structures:

• notch hinges have been replaced by revolute (pin) joints located in correspondence of the minimum cross-sectional area

of the flexure;
• flexible beams have been also replaced by revolute joints, placing the pin joint in the center of the beam elastic weights;

• revolute joints which are incident to the frame link have been represented with the same shape and size in all the

drawings;

• multiple revolute joints have been represented by two concentric circles;

• actuator producing a linear displacement (such as piezoelectric or chevron) have been replaced by a prismatic joint;

• sensing hinges have been replaced by torsional springs;

• actuation forces or torques, or their effects on specific parts of the structures, have been schematically represented with

bold black arrows;

• sensing elements, or their effects on specific parts of the structures, have been schematically represented with white-

colored black-bordered arrows.

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 6

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

5 Class I: lumped compliance

The class of microgrippers based on lumped compliance shows a large variety of structures. In this investigation this
group counts 35 different mechanisms, which have been illustrated in Figs. 2-7.

The common feature consists in the presence of some zones, with restricted width, which operates as flexures. The

conceptual stage of design, which most includes designer’s creativity, can be based on the invention of a PRBM which can
be easily transformed into a compliant mechanism. There are not canonical transformation rules, although the Authors of

the paper think that the criterion based on the selection of the center of elastic weights can be adopted with great accuracy

to detect the center of relative rotations between two rigid parts. In fact, as demonstrated in Ref. [47] in case of uniform
flexures, the position of the center of rotation can be found analytically. The center lies on the axis of symmetry of the flexure

and tends to its center of mass for loads approaching zero.

In the devices belonging to Class I, motion relies on the deflections of flexures that are considerably smaller than the rest

of the structure. These regions are exposed to stress levels that could compromise the device, if not adequately considered in
the design steps. This condition could be worsened by possible imperfections due to the fabrication processes, that give rise
to stress concentrations.

Usually, Class I is characterized by a fair correspondence between the original compliant mechanism and its correspond-
ing PRBM, because it is quite easy to identify, with a good approximation, the relative rotation center between two adjacent

pseudo-rigid links within a restricted region around the flexure. This allows designers to adopt more easily the classical
algorithms from kinematic synthesis. However, an accurate detection of the above mentioned center is still quite challenging
because its position actually depends on the loads applied on the pseudo-rigid links.

Table 1 reports the microgrippers with lumped compliance classified in terms of families and groups.

6 Class II: distributed compliance

The class of microgrippers that are based on distributed compliance shows also a similarly large variety of structures.
This group counts 32 different mechanisms, which have been illustrated in Figs. 8-13.

Embedded in these mechanisms there may be also some thin beams with higher flexibility. However, in such case,

these regions are as large as the pseudo-rigid ones and therefore it is not easy to predict where the centers of relative

rotations between the two adjacent pseudo-rigid parts are, for a given static load on the structure. As a consequence, the

conceptual stage of design relies on the designer’s mastery of Statics, which must include the capability of deciphering the

compliance behavior of the whole complex structure, rather than of its simplified PRBM. It is still possible to find a PRBM

corresponding to a given microgripper with distributed compliance. However, for the class of distributed compliance, the

equivalence among the original compliant mechanism and its corresponding PRBM will be rather weaker than for the class

of lumped compliance.

With respect to lumped compliance structures, the devices belonging to Class II are characterized by flexible elements

whose dimensions are comparable to the dimensions of the whole structure. Stress is then distributed along extended regions

and not concentrated to small parts of the device. For this reason, distributed compliance structures could be less vulnerable

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 7

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

to low-yield fabrication processes and stress concentrations.

The PRBM reported in Figures 8, 9 and 10 have been still developed by using the criterion based on the selection
of elastic weights center of the most flexible parts of the structures. However, the variation of the position of the relative

rotation center could imply a loss of significance for the PRBM, determining also a loss of precision in case designers apply

kinematic synthesis to the above mentioned PRBM.

Table 2 reports the microgrippers with distributed compliance classified in terms of family and group.

7 Class III: special cases

As in any human activity, creativity is something which can be hardly classified. In fact, together with structures for

which a lumped or distributed compliance is self evident, some other structures did not showed neither the former nor the

latter as clearly as for the first two groups.

This particular class of microgrippers counts 31 very different mechanisms, which have been illustrated in Figs. 14-19
and consist of

• structures with one or more parallel substructures embedded in the mechanical structure (see, for example, Fig. 17a);

• structures for which motion and operation are due to a particular symmetry (as in Fig. 18b) ;
• structures for which sliding is allowed (as in Fig. 16f);

• elementary structures (as in Fig. 16d);

• complex structures (as in Fig. 18e);
• truss structures, as, for example, Figs. 14d, 17a, 17c, 17e and 18b);

• distributed wedge simple mechanisms (Fig. 16f),

• ratchet structures (Fig. 15b),

• distributed compliance simple cantilever structures (Figs. 14b, 14c, 15c to 15f, 16a, 16d, 16e, 17b and 17d),

• out-of-plane simple cantilever structures with two (Fig. 15f), four (Fig. 14c) or six (Fig. 15e) fingers,
• distributed compliance parallel cantilevers structures (Figs. 17f, 18a, 18c to 18e and 19a).

As for the case of distributed compliance, it is not easy to predict where the relative rotations centers (between any two

adjacent pseudo-rigid parts) are, and therefore the conceptual stage of design relies only on designer’s individual skills in

understanding and interpreting the compliance of the whole structure due to its peculiar geometrical characteristics. Fur-

thermore, similarly to the case of distributed compliance, the equivalence among the original compliant mechanism and its

corresponding PRBM will be rather weak. However, the specification of a PRBM is still of great importance in order to

understand how the original system operates.

The PRBM reported in Figures 14, 15 and 16 have been developed by using the criterion based on the selection of

the rotation centers as coincident to the center of elastic weights of the most flexible parts of the structures. Furthermore,

prismatic joints also appear, as floating dyads, to represent relative translations.

Table 3 lists the microgrippers with distributed compliance classified in terms of families and groups.

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 8

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

8 Discussion

Structures representations have been built to convey to the reader some reasonable interpretations of the topological
characteristics of the microgrippers. Of course, it will be the readers tolerance and understanding that the actual mechanical

features of any discussed microgripper are those described in the original paper (always referenced in Figures captions). In

fact, while the Atlas has been built by taking into account aesthetics, the original layouts have been developed for the sake

of functionality.

Actuation, sensing and operation will be discussed systematically in the above mentioned companion paper. However,
before addressing the reader to that work [36], it is worth noting that the morphology has some direct implication on some

characteristics, such as the mechanical advantage and output motion.

For example, the jaws motion, usually rather limited in amplitude, can be enhanced involving different kinds of dis-
placement amplification, such as Scott-Russel mechanism [72] (see Fig. 7b), leverage mechanism [73] (see Fig.5f), the

combination of flexure hinge and flexure beam [43] (see Fig.5e), the integration of lever and parallelogram mechanisms [74]

(see Fig.7a), differential mechanism [75] (see Fig.7e).

Furthermore, most of the existing microgrippers are designed with parallelogram flexures [76–78] (see Figures 6a, 4d,
11b) to generate a pure translational motion of gripper tips [79] (see Fig.12e), that makes the architecture of the gripper

mechanism rather complex. Another side-effect of the displacement amplification is the reduction of the actuation force [80]
(see Fig. 11a). The last, in turn, may require high input voltage [43, 76, 81] (see Figures 5e, 6a and 4d). Sometime,
piezoelectric bimorph [82–84] or linear actuators employing a lever mechanism [85] can be conveniently used. The designs

adopted in this kind of microgrippers are mainly asymmetric [75] (see Fig. 7e) and improves gripping accuracy as well [74]
(see Fig. 7a). Moreover, grasping can be performed asymmetrically: the left jaw accomplishes grasping, while the right one
provides rotations [75].

Finally, other interesting morphology–to–function relations appear, for example, in multi-finger grasping and rotating
operations [86] (see Fig.5d), piezoelectric stack actuator (PSA) driven mechanisms [79] (see Fig. 12e), and Roberts mecha-

nisms combined in parallel to provide both grasping and rotating capability [86].

9 Conclusions

Optimal criteria and graphical aesthetics have been used to generate an Atlas of microgrippers composed of a large

selection of structures from the recent Literature. Each mechanism has been represented by means of a functional form,

which is quite similar to the original layout, a pseudo-rigid body equivalent mechanism, together with the corresponding

kinematic chain and graph. The collected structures have not been obtained by means of Type or Number Synthesis because

the purpose of the present investigation consists in offering a survey of those microgrippers that have been actually fabricated

or, at least simulated. All the sketches that have been included in the Atlas appear homogeneous, easy to inspect and quite

useful to understand the basic ideas standing behind the reviewed microgrippers. This feature does not appear in any other

review dedicated to micro-gripping. The strategies employed to operate all the collected devices have been also reviewed,

but, for the sake of brevity, such additional survey has been presented in another contribution, namely, the second part of the

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 9

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

present paper. The Authors hope that their new catalog could help designers to develop their own new microgrippers.

References

[1] Castillo, J., Dimaki, M., and Svendsen, W. E., 2009. “Manipulation of biological samples using micro and nano

techniques”. Integr. Biol., 1, pp. 30–42.

[2] Bargiel, S., Rabenorosoa, K., Clevy, C., Gorecki, C., and Lutz, P., 2010. “Towards micro-assembly of hybrid moems

components on a reconfigurable silicon free-space micro-optical bench”. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengi-
neering, 20(4), p. 045012.

[3] Bargiel, S., Rabenorosoa, K., Mascaro, J.-P., Clévy, C., Gorecki, C., and Lutz, P., 2010. “Technology platform for
hybrid integration of moems on reconfigurable silicon micro-optical table”. Procedia Engineering, 5, pp. 428–431.

[4] Brehm-Stecher, B. F., and Johnson, E. A., 2004. “Single-cell microbiology: tools, technologies, and applications”.
Microbiology and molecular biology reviews, 68(3), pp. 538–559.

[5] Altschuler, S. J., and Wu, L. F., 2010. “Cellular heterogeneity: do differences make a difference?”. Cell, 141(4),

pp. 559–563.
[6] Malter, H., 2016. “Micromanipulation in assisted reproductive technology”. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 32(4),
pp. 339–347.

[7] McAllister, D. V., Allen, M. G., and Prausnitz, M. R., 2000. “Microfabricated microneedles for gene and drug
delivery”. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering, 2(1), pp. 289–313.

[8] Kimura, Y., and Yanagimachi, R., 1995. “Intracytoplasmic sperm injection in the mouse.”. Biology of reproduction,
52(4), pp. 709–720.
[9] Garcés-Schröder, M., Leester-Schädel, M., Schulz, M., Böl, M., and Dietzel, A., 2015. “Micro-gripper: A new

concept for a monolithic single-cell manipulation device”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 236, pp. 130–139.

[10] Ingber, D. E., 2006. “Cellular mechanotransduction: putting all the pieces together again”. The FASEB journal, 20(7),
pp. 811–827.

[11] Moeendarbary, E., and Harris, A. R., 2014. “Cell mechanics: principles, practices, and prospects”. Wiley Interdisci-

plinary Reviews: Systems Biology and Medicine, 6(5), pp. 371–388.

[12] Park, Y., Best, C. A., Badizadegan, K., Dasari, R. R., Feld, M. S., Kuriabova, T., Henle, M. L., Levine, A. J., and

Popescu, G., 2010. “Measurement of red blood cell mechanics during morphological changes”. Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences, 107(15), pp. 6731–6736.

[13] Arai, F., Andou, D., Nonoda, Y., Fukuda, T., Iwata, H., and Itoigawa, K., 1998. “Integrated microendeffector for

micromanipulation”. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 3(1), pp. 17–23.

[14] Carrozza, M. C., Eisinberg, A., Menciassi, A., Campolo, D., Micera, S., and Dario, P., 2000. “Towards a force-

controlled microgripper for assembling biomedical microdevices”. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering,

10(2), p. 271.

[15] Pérez, R., Agnus, J., Clévy, C., Hubert, A., and Chaillet, N., 2005. “Modeling, fabrication, and validation of a

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 10

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

high-performance 2-DoF piezoactuator for micromanipulation”. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 10(2),

pp. 161–171.

[16] Zhou, L., Kahn, J., and Pister, K., 2003. “Corner-cube retroreflectors based on structure-assisted assembly for free-

space optical communication”. Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems, 12(3), pp. 233–242.

[17] Dechev, N., Cleghorn, W., and Mills, J., 2004. “Microassembly of 3-D microstructures using a compliant, passive

microgripper”. Microelectromechanical Systems, Journal of, 13(2), Apr., pp. 176–189.

[18] Das, A. N., Sin, J., Popa, D. O., and Stephanou, H. E., 2008. “On the precision alignment and hybrid assembly

aspects in manufacturing of a microspectrometer”. In 2008 IEEE International Conference on Automation Science

and Engineering, pp. 959–966.

[19] Cecil, J., Vasquez, D., and Powell, D., 2005. “A review of gripping and manipulation techniques for micro-assembly

applications”. International Journal of Production Research, 43(4), pp. 819–828.

[20] Cecil, J., Powell, D., and Vasquez, D., 2007. “Assembly and manipulation of micro devices – a state of the art survey”.
Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 23(5), pp. 580–588.

[21] Rabenorosoa, K., Clevy, C., Chen, Q., and Lutz, P., 2012. “Study of forces during microassembly tasks using two-
sensing-fingers grippers”. Mechatronics, IEEE/ASME Transactions on, 17(5), Oct., pp. 811–821.

[22] Fantoni, G., and Porta, M., 2008. “A critical review of releasing strategies in microparts handling”. In Micro-Assembly
Technologies and Applications, S. Ratchev and S. Koelemeijer, eds., Vol. 260 of IFIP – International Federation for
Information Processing. Springer US, pp. 223–234.

[23] Denisyuk, A., Krasavin, A., Komissarenko, F., and Mukhin, I., 2014. “Mechanical, electrostatic, and electromag-
netic mechanical, electrostatic, and electromagnetic manipulation of microobjects and nanoobjects in electron micro-
scopes”. Advances in Imaging and Electron Physics, 186, pp. 101–140.

[24] Wei, Y., and Xu, Q., 2015. “An overview of micro-force sensing techniques”. Sensors and Actuators, A: Physical,
234, pp. 359–374.
[25] Boudaoud, M., and Regnier, S., 2014. “An overview on gripping force measurement at the micro and nano-scales

using two-fingered microrobotic systems”. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 11(1), pp. 1–15.

[26] Mekid, S., Bashmal, S., and Ouakad, H. M., 2016. “Nanoscale manipulators: Review of conceptual designs through

recent patents”. Recent Patents on Nanotechnology, 10(1), pp. 44–58.

[27] Jia, Y., and Xu, Q., 2013. “MEMS microgripper actuators and sensors: The state-of-the-art survey”. Recent Patents

on Mechanical Engineering, 6(2), pp. 132–142.

[28] Nikoobin, A., and Niaki, M. H., 2012. “Deriving and analyzing the effective parameters in microgrippers perfor-

mance”. Scientia Iranica, 19(6), pp. 1554–1563.

[29] Howell, L., and Midha, A., 1995. “Parametric deflection approximations for end-loaded, large-deflection beams in

compliant mechanisms”. Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, 117(1), pp. 156–165.

[30] Lyon, S., Erickson, P., Evans, M., and Howell, L., 1999. “Prediction of the first modal frequency of compliant

mechanisms using the pseudo-rigid-body model”. Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, 121(2),

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 11

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

pp. 309–313.

[31] Edwards, B., Jensen, B., and Howell, L., 2001. “A pseudo-rigid-body model for initially-curved pinned-pinned

segments used in compliant mechanisms”. Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, 123(3), pp. 464–

468.
[32] Jensen, B., and Howell, L., 2003. “Identification of compliant pseudo-rigid-body four-link mechanism configurations

resulting in bistable behavior”. Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, 125(4), pp. 701–708.
[33] Howell, L., Dibiasio, C., Cullinan, M., Panas, R., and Culpepper, M., 2010. “A pseudo-rigid-body model for large

deflections of fixed-clamped carbon nanotubes”. Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics, 2(3).

[34] Halverson, P., Bowden, A., and Howell, L., 2011. “A pseudo-rigid-body model of the human spine to predict implant-

induced changes on motion”. Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics, 3(4).

[35] Grübler, M. F., 1917. Getriebelehre: eine Theorie des Zwanglaufes und der ebenen Mechanismen... Springer.

[36] Dochshanov, A., Verotti, M., and Belfiore, N. P., 2016. “A comprehensive survey on microgrippers design: Opera-
tional strategy”. Submitted to ASME Journal of Mechanical Design.

[37] Belfiore, N. P., 2000. “Distributed databases for the development of mechanisms topology”. Mechanism and Machine
Theory, 35(12), pp. 1727–1744.

[38] Belfiore, N. P., 2000. “Brief note on the concept of planarity for kinematic chains”. Mechanism and Machine Theory,
35(12), pp. 1745–1750.
[39] Belfiore, N. P., 1993. “Atlas of remote actuated bevel gear wrist mechanisms of up to nine links”. International

Journal of Robotics Research, 12(5), pp. 448–459.

[40] Belfiore, N. P., and Pennestrı̀, E., 1997. “An atlas of linkage-type robotic grippers”. Mechanism and Machine Theory,
32(7), pp. 811–833.

[41] Pennestrı́, E., and Belfiore, N., 2015. “On crossley’s contribution to the development of graph based algorithms for
the analysis of mechanisms and gear trains”. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 89, pp. 92–106.
[42] Tsai, Y.-C., Lei, S. H., and Sudin, H., 2005. “Design and analysis of planar compliant microgripper based on kinematic

approach”. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 15(1), p. 143.

[43] Sun, X., Chen, W., Fatikow, S., Tian, Y., Zhou, R., Zhang, J., and Mikczinski, M., 2015. “A novel piezo-driven

microgripper with a large jaw displacement”. Microsystem Technologies, 21(4), pp. 931–942.

[44] Bellouard, Y., 2010. Microrobotics: methods and applications. CRC Press.

[45] Bazaz, S. A., Khan, F., and Shakoor, R. I., 2011. “Design, simulation and testing of electrostatic SOI MUMPs based

microgripper integrated with capacitive contact sensor”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 167(1), pp. 44–53.

[46] Beyeler, F., Neild, A., Oberti, S., Bell, D. J., Sun, Y., Dual, J., and Nelson, B. J., 2007. “Monolithically fabricated

microgripper with integrated force sensor for manipulating microobjects and biological cells aligned in an ultrasonic

field”. Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems, 16(1), pp. 7–15.

[47] Verotti, M., 2016. “Analysis of the center of rotation in primitive flexures: Uniform cantilever beams with constant

curvature”. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 97, pp. 29–50.

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 12

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

[48] Belfiore, N., and Simeone, P., 2013. “Inverse kinetostatic analysis of compliant four-bar linkages”. Mechanism and

Machine Theory, 69, pp. 350–372.

[49] Verotti, M., Crescenzi, R., Balucani, M., and Belfiore, N., 2015. “MEMS-based conjugate surfaces flexure hinge”.

Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, 137(1), pp. 012301–1–012301–10.

[50] Balucani, M., Belfiore, N. P., Crescenzi, R., and Verotti, M., 2011. “The development of a MEMS/NEMS-based 3

D.O.F. compliant micro robot”. International Journal of Mechanics and Control, 12(1), pp. 3–10.
[51] Belfiore, N. P., Verotti, M., Crescenzi, R., and Balucani, M., 2013. “Design, optimization and construction of MEMS-

based micro grippers for cell manipulation”. In ICSSE 2013 - IEEE International Conference on System Science and
Engineering, Proceedings, pp. 105–110.

[52] Belfiore, N. P., Broggiato, G. B., Verotti, M., Balucani, M., Crescenzi, R., Bagolini, A., Bellutti, P., and Boscardin,

M., 2015. “Simulation and construction of a MEMS CSFH based microgripper”. International Journal of Mechanics

and Control, 16(1), pp. 21–30.

[53] Cecchi, R., Verotti, M., Capata, R., Dochshanov, A., Broggiato, G., Crescenzi, R., Balucani, M., Natali, S., Razzano,

G., Lucchese, F., Bagolini, A., Bellutti, P., Sciubba, E., and Belfiore, N. P., 2015. “Development of micro-grippers for
tissue and cell manipulation with direct morphological comparison”. Micromachines, 6(11), pp. 1710–1728.

[54] Yong, Y. K., Lu, T.-F., and Handley, D. C., 2008. “Review of circular flexure hinge design equations and derivation
of empirical formulations”. Precision engineering, 32(2), pp. 63–70.
[55] Lobontiu, N., Garcia, E., Goldfarb, M., and Paine, J. S., 2001. “Corner-filleted flexure hinges”. Journal of Mechanical

Design, 123(3), pp. 346–352.

[56] Lobontiu, N., Paine, J. S., O’Malley, E., and Samuelson, M., 2002. “Parabolic and hyperbolic flexure hinges: flexibil-
ity, motion precision and stress characterization based on compliance closed-form equations”. Precision Engineering,

26(2), pp. 183–192.

[57] Smith, S. T., Badami, V. G., Dale, J. S., and Xu, Y., 1997. “Elliptical flexure hinges”. Review of Scientific Instruments,
68(3), pp. 1474–1483.

[58] Chen, G.-M., Jia, J.-y., and Li, Z.-W., 2005. “On hybrid flexure hinges”. In Networking, Sensing and Control.

Proceedings, IEEE, pp. 700 – 704.

[59] Lee, V., Gibert, J., and Ziegert, J., 2013. “Hybrid bi-directional flexure joint”. Precision Engineering, 38(2), pp. 270–

278.

[60] Trease, B. T., Moon, Y., and Kota, S., 2004. “Design of large-displacement compliant joints”. Journal of Mechanical

Design, Transactions of the ASME, 127(4), pp. 788–798.

[61] Cannon, J. R., and Howell, L. L., 2005. “A compliant contact-aided revolute joint”. Mechanism and Machine Theory,

40(11), pp. 1273–1293.

[62] Moon, Y.-M., 2007. “Bio-mimetic design of finger mechanism with contact aided compliant mechanism”. Mechanism

and Machine Theory, 42(5), pp. 600–611.

[63] Pei, X., Yu, J., Zong, G., Bi, S., and Su, H., 2009. “The modeling of cartwheel flexural hinges”. Mechanism and

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 13

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

Machine Theory, 44(10), pp. 1900–1909.

[64] Henein, S., Spanoudakis, P., Droz, S., Myklebust, L., and Onillon, E., 2003. “Flexure pivot for aerospace mecha-

nisms”. In Proceedings of the 10th European Space Mechanisms and Tribology Symposium, E. SP-524, ed., pp. 285–

288.
[65] Pei, X., and Yu, J., 2011. “Adlif: a new large-displacement beam-based flexure joint”. Mechanical Sciences, 2(2),

pp. 183–188.
[66] Belfiore, N., Verotti, M., Di Giamberardino, P., and Rudas, I., 2012. “Active joint stiffness regulation to achieve

isotropic compliance in the Euclidean Space”. ASME Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics, 4(4), p. 041010.
[67] Verotti, M., and Belfiore, N. P., 2015. “Isotropic compliance in E(3): Feasibility and workspace mapping”. Journal

of Mechanisms and Robotics, pp. 1–37.

[68] Verotti, M., Masarati, P., Morandini, M., and Belfiore, N., 2016. “Isotropic compliance in the Special Euclidean Group

SE(3)”. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 98, pp. 263–281.

[69] Belfiore, N., Di Giamberardino, P., Rudas, I., and Verotti, M., 2011. “Isotropy in any RR planar dyad under active

joint stiffness regulation”. International Journal of Mechanics and Control, 12(1), pp. 75–81.
[70] Verotti, M., Dochshanov, A., and Belfiore, N., 2016. “Compliance synthesis of CSFH MEMS-based microgrippers”.

Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, 139(2), pp. 022301–022301–10.

[71] Belfiore, N. P., and Pennestrı̀, E., 1994. “Automatic sketching of planar kinematic chains”. Mechanism and Machine
Theory, 29(1), pp. 177–193.

[72] Ai, W., and Xu, Q., 2014. “New structural design of a compliant gripper based on the scott-russell mechanism”. Int J
Adv Robot Syst, 11:192, pp. 1–10.
[73] Sun, X., Chen, W., Tian, Y., Fatikow, S., Zhou, R., Zhang, J., and Mikczinski, M., 2013. “A novel flexure-based

microgripper with double amplification mechanisms for micro/nano manipulation”. Review of Scientific Instruments,
84(8), pp. 085002–1–085002–10.
[74] Zhang, D., Zhang, Z., Gao, Q., Xu, D., and Liu, S., 2015. “Development of a monolithic compliant spca-driven

micro-gripper”. Mechatronics, 25, pp. 37–43.

[75] Lu, K., Zhang, J., Chen, W., Jiang, J., and Chen, W., 2014. “A monolithic microgripper with high efficiency and high

accuracy for optical fiber assembly”. In Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), 2014 IEEE 9th Conference

on, pp. 1942–1947.

[76] Wang, D., Yang, Q., and Dong, H., 2013. “A monolithic compliant piezoelectric-driven microgripper: Design, mod-

eling, and testing”. Mechatronics, IEEE/ASME Transactions on, 18(1), Feb., pp. 138–147.

[77] Zubir, M. N. M., Shirinzadeh, B., and Tian, Y., 2009. “A new design of piezoelectric driven compliant-based micro-

gripper for micromanipulation”. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 44(12), pp. 2248–2264.

[78] Xu, Q., 2012. “Mechanism design and analysis of a novel 2-DOF compliant modular microgripper”. In Industrial

Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), 2012 7th IEEE Conference on, pp. 1966–1971.

[79] Xu, Q., 2013. “A new compliant microgripper with integrated position and force sensing”. In Advanced Intelligent

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 14

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

Mechatronics (AIM), 2013 IEEE/ASME International Conference on, pp. 591–596.

[80] Kim, D.-H., Lee, M. G., Kim, B., and Sun, Y., 2005. “A superelastic alloy microgripper with embedded electromag-

netic actuators and piezoelectric force sensors: a numerical and experimental study”. Smart Materials and Structures,

14(6), p. 1265.
[81] Zubir, M. N. M., and Shirinzadeh, B., 2009. “Development of a high precision flexure-based microgripper”. Precision

Engineering, 33(4), pp. 362–370.

[82] Cho, Y. S., Pak, Y., Han, C. S., and Ha, S. K., 2000. “Five-port equivalent electric circuit of piezoelectric bimorph

beam”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 84(1-2), pp. 140–148.

[83] Takagi, K., Li, J.-F., Yokoyama, S., Watanabe, R., Almajid, A., and Taya, M., 2002. “Design and fabrication of

functionally graded pzt/pt piezoelectric bimorph actuator”. Science and Technology of Advanced Materials, 3(2),

pp. 217–224.

[84] Taya, M., Almajid, A. A., Dunn, M., and Takahashi, H., 2003. “Design of bimorph piezo-composite actuators with
functionally graded microstructure”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 107(3), pp. 248–260.

[85] Duan, Z., and Wang, Q., 2005. “Development of a novel high precision piezoelectric linear stepper actuator”. Sensors
and Actuators A: Physical, 118(2), pp. 285–291.

[86] Shi, X., Chen, W., Zhang, J., and Chen, W., 2013. “Design, modeling, and simulation of a 2-DOF microgripper for
grasping and rotating of optical fibers”. In Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM), 2013 IEEE/ASME International
Conference on, pp. 1597–1602.

[87] Cao, Q., Lu, Q., Xi, J., Yan, J., and Chu, C., 2011. “Modeling and performance analysis of giant magnetostrictive
microgripper with flexure hinge”. In Computer and Computing Technologies in Agriculture IV, D. Li, Y. Liu, and
Y. Chen, eds., Vol. 347 of IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg,

pp. 237–245.
[88] Kyung, J., Ko, B., Ha, Y., and Chung, G., 2008. “Design of a microgripper for micromanipulation of microcomponents
using SMA wires and flexible hinges”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 141(1), pp. 144–150.

[89] Ballandras, S., Basrour, S., Robert, L., Megtert, S., Blind, P., Rouillay, M., Bernéde, P., and Daniau, W., 1997.

“Microgrippers fabricated by the LIGA technique”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 58(3), pp. 265–272.

[90] Chronis, N., and Lee, L., 2004. “Polymer MEMS-based microgripper for single cell manipulation”. In Micro Electro

Mechanical Systems, 2004. 17th IEEE International Conference on. (MEMS), pp. 17–20.

[91] Chronis, N., and Lee, L. P., 2005. “Electrothermally activated su-8 microgripper for single cell manipulation in

solution”. Microelectromechanical Systems, Journal of, 14(4), Aug., pp. 857–863.

[92] Jayaram, K., and Joshi, S. S., 2010. “Development of a flexure-based, force-sensing microgripper for micro-object

manipulation”. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 20(1), p. 015001.

[93] Chang, R., and Chen, C., 2007. “Using microgripper for adhesive bonding in automatic microassembly system”. In

Mechatronics and Automation, 2007. ICMA 2007. International Conference on, pp. 440–445.

[94] Chang, R.-J., and Cheng, C.-Y., 2009. “Vision-based compliant-joint polymer force sensor integrated with microgrip-

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 15

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

per for measuring gripping force”. In Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, 2009. AIM 2009. IEEE/ASME International

Conference on, pp. 18–23.

[95] Alogla, A., Scanlan, P., Shu, W., and Reuben, R., 2012. “A scalable syringe-actuated microgripper for biological

manipulation”. Procedia Engineering, 47, pp. 882–885.

[96] Menciassi, A., Eisinberg, A., Mazzoni, M., and Dario, P., 2002. “A sensorized mu;electro discharge machined supere-

lastic alloy microgripper for micromanipulation: simulation and characterization”. In Intelligent Robots and Systems,
2002. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on, Vol. 2, pp. 1591–1595.

[97] Nah, S., and Zhong, Z., 2007. “A microgripper using piezoelectric actuation for micro-object manipulation”. Sensors
and Actuators A: Physical, 133(1), pp. 218–224.

[98] Millet, O., Bernardoni, P., Régnier, S., Bidaud, P., Tsitsiris, E., Collard, D., and Buchaillot, L., 2004. “Electrostatic

actuated micro gripper using an amplification mechanism”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 114(2-3), pp. 371–

378.
[99] Keller, C. G., and Howe, R. T., 1997. “Hexsil tweezers for teleoperated micro-assembly”. In Micro Electro Mechanical

Systems, 1997. MEMS ’97, Proceedings, IEEE., Tenth Annual International Workshop on, pp. 72–77.
[100] Hoxhold, B., and Büttgenbach, S., 2008. “Batch fabrication of micro grippers with integrated actuators”. Microsystem

Technologies, 14(12), pp. 1917–1924.

[101] Xu, Q., 2015. “Design and development of a novel compliant gripper with integrated position and grasping/interaction
force sensing”. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, PP(99), pp. 1–14.

[102] Xu, Q., 2015. “Design, fabrication, and testing of an mems microgripper with dual-axis force sensor”. IEEE Sensors
Journal, 15(10), pp. 6017–6026.
[103] Chu, J., Zhang, R., and Chen, Z., 2011. “A novel su-8 electrothermal microgripper based on the type synthesis of the

kinematic chain method and the stiffness matrix method”. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 21(5),
pp. 1–15.
[104] Zhang, R., Chu, J., Wang, H., and Chen, Z., 2013. “A multipurpose electrothermal microgripper for biological micro-

manipulation”. Microsystem Technologies, 19(1), pp. 89–97.

[105] Bharanidaran, R., and Ramesh, T., 2014. “Numerical simulation and experimental investigation of a topologically

optimized compliant microgripper”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 205, pp. 156–163.

[106] Stavrov, V., Tomerov, E., Hardalov, C., Danchev, D., Kostadinov, K., Stavreva, G., Apostolov, E., Shulev, A., An-

donova, A., and Al-Wahab, M., 2010. “Low voltage thermo-mechanically driven monolithic microgripper with

piezoresistive feedback”. In Precision Assembly Technologies and Systems, S. Ratchev, ed., Vol. 315 of IFIP Ad-

vances in Information and Communication Technology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 207–214.

[107] Ai, W., and Xu, Q., 2014. “New structure design of a flexure-based compliant microgripper”. In Robotics and

Biomimetics (ROBIO), 2014 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 2588–2593.

[108] Blideran, M. M., Bertsche, G., Henschel, W., and Kern, D. P., 2006. “A mechanically actuated silicon microgripper

for handling micro- and nanoparticles”. Microelectronic Engineering, 83(4-9), pp. 1382–1385.

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 16

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

[109] Blideran, M. M., Fleischer, M., Grauvogel, F., Löffler, K., Langer, M. G., and Kern, D. P., 2008. “Real-time gripping

detection for a mechanically actuated microgripper”. Microelectronic Engineering, 85(5-6), pp. 1022–1026.

[110] Zeman, M. J. F., Bordatchev, E. V., and Knopf, G. K., 2006. “Design, kinematic modeling and performance testing

of an electro-thermally driven microgripper for micromanipulation applications”. Journal of Micromechanics and

Microengineering, 16(8), p. 1540.

[111] Greminger, M. A., Sezen, A. S., and Nelson, B. J., 2005. “A four degree of freedom MEMS microgripper with novel
bi-directional thermal actuators”. In Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2005. (IROS 2005). 2005 IEEE/RSJ International

Conference on, pp. 2814–2819.

[112] Ren-Jung Chang, C.-C. S., and Cheng, C.-Y., 2013. “Self-biased-sma drive pu microgripper with force sensing in

visual servo”. Int J Adv Robot Syst, 10:280, pp. 1–12.

[113] Fraser, J., Hubbard, T., and Kujath, M., 2006. “Theoretical and experimental analysis of an off-chip microgripper”.

Electrical and Computer Engineering, Canadian Journal of, 31(2), Spring, pp. 77–84.
[114] Wu, Z., and Li, Y., 2014. “Optimal design and comparative analysis of a novel microgripper based on matrix method”.

In Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM), 2014 IEEE/ASME International Conference on, pp. 955–960.
[115] Wu, Z., and Li, Y., 2014. “Design, modeling, and analysis of a novel microgripper based on flexure hinges”. Advances

in Mechanical Engineering, 6, pp. 1–11.

[116] Iamoni, S., and Somà, A., 2014. “Design of an electro-thermally actuated cell microgripper”. Microsystem Technolo-
gies, 20(4-5), pp. 869–877.

[117] Boudaoud, M., Haddab, Y., and Le Gorrec, Y., 2010. “Modelling of a MEMS-based microgripper: Application to
dexterous micromanipulation”. In Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference
on, pp. 5634–5639.

[118] Ivanova, K., Ivanov, T., Badar, A., Volland, B. E., Rangelow, I. W., Andrijasevic, D., Sümecz, F., Fischer, S., Spitzbart,
M., Brenner, W., and Kostic, I., 2006. “Thermally driven microgripper as a tool for micro assembly”. Microelectronic
Engineering, 83(4-9), pp. 1393–1395.

[119] Nguyen, N.-T., Ho, S.-S., and Low, C. L.-N., 2004. “A polymeric microgripper with integrated thermal actuators”.

Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 14(7), p. 969.

[120] Solano, B., and Wood, D., 2007. “Design and testing of a polymeric microgripper for cell manipulation”. Microelec-

tronic Engineering, 84(5-8), pp. 1219–1222.

[121] Vijayasai, A. P., Sivakumar, G., Mulsow, M., Lacouture, S., Holness, A., and Dallas, T. E., 2012. “Haptic controlled

three degree-of-freedom microgripper system for assembly of detachable surface-micromachined MEMS”. Sensors

and Actuators A: Physical, 179(0), pp. 328–336.

[122] Duc, T. C., Lau, G. K., Creemer, J. F., and Sarro, P. M., 2008. “Electrothermal microgripper with large jaw displace-

ment and integrated force sensors”. In Micro Electro Mechanical Systems, 2008. MEMS 2008. IEEE 21st International

Conference on, pp. 519–522.

[123] Shivhare, P., Uma, G., and Umapathy, M., 2015. “Design enhancement of a chevron electrothermally actuated micro-

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 17

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

gripper for improved gripping performance”. Microsystem Technologies, pp. 1–9.

[124] Jia, Y., and Xu, Q., 2013. “Design of a monolithic dual-axis electrostatic actuation MEMS microgripper with capaci-

tive position/force sensors”. In Nanotechnology (IEEE-NANO), 2013 13th IEEE Conference on, pp. 817–820.

[125] Amjad, K., Bazaz, S., and Lai, Y., 2008. “Design of an electrostatic MEMS microgripper system integrated with force
sensor”. In Microelectronics, 2008. ICM 2008. International Conference on, pp. 236–239.

[126] Carlson, K., Andersen, K. N., Eichhorn, V., Petersen, D. H., Mølhave, K., Bu, I. Y. Y., Teo, K. B. K., Milne, W. I.,
Fatikow, S., and Bøggild, P., 2007. “A carbon nanofibre scanning probe assembled using an electrothermal microgrip-

per”. Nanotechnology, 18(34), p. 345501.

[127] Chen, T., Sun, L., Chen, L., Rong, W., and Li, X., 2010. “A hybrid-type electrostatically driven microgripper with an

integrated vacuum tool”. Sensors and Actuators, A: Physical, 158(2), pp. 320–327.

[128] Khan, F., Bazaz, S., and Sohail, M., 2010. “Design, implementation and testing of electrostatic SOI MUMPs based

microgripper”. Microsystem Technologies, 16(11), pp. 1957–1965.

[129] Krishnan, S., and Saggere, L., 2012. “Design and development of a novel micro-clasp gripper for micromanipulation

of complex-shaped objects”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 176, pp. 110–123.

[130] Harouche, I. P. F., and Shafai, C., 2005. “Simulation of shaped comb drive as a stepped actuator for microtweezers

application”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 123-124, pp. 540–546.

[131] Ali, N., Shakoor, R., and Hassan, M., 2011. “Design, modeling and simulation of electrothermally actuated micro-
gripper with integrated capacitive contact sensor”. In Multitopic Conference (INMIC), 2011 IEEE 14th International,

pp. 201–206.
[132] Elbuken, C., Gui, L., Ren, C. L., Yavuz, M., and Khamesee, M. B., 2008. “Design and analysis of a polymeric
photo-thermal microactuator”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 147(1), pp. 292–299.

[133] Kohl, M., Just, E., Pfleging, W., and Miyazaki, S., 2000. “SMA microgripper with integrated antagonism”. Sensors
and Actuators A: Physical, 83(1-3), pp. 208–213.
[134] Kohl, M., Krevet, B., and Just, E., 2002. “SMA microgripper system”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 97-98,

pp. 646–652.

[135] Chen, T., Chen, L., Sun, L., Wang, J., and Li, X., 2008. “A sidewall piezoresistive force sensor used in a MEMS

gripper”. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture

Notes in Bioinformatics), 5315 LNAI(PART 2), pp. 207–216.

[136] Chen, T., Chen, L., and Sun, L., 2009. “Piezoelectrically driven silicon microgrippers integrated with sidewall piezore-

sistive sensor”. In Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 2989–2994.

[137] Chen, T., Chen, L., Sun, L., and Li, X., 2009. “Design and fabrication of a four-arm-structure MEMS gripper”.

Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, 56(4), Apr., pp. 996–1004.

[138] Chen, T., Chen, L., Sun, L., Rong, W., and Yang, Q., 2010. “Micro manipulation based on adhesion control with

compound vibration”. In IEEE/RSJ 2010 International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, IROS 2010 -

Conference Proceedings, pp. 6137–6142.

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 18

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

[139] Kim, D.-H., Kim, B., and Kang, H., 2004. “Development of a piezoelectric polymer-based sensorized microgripper

for microassembly and micromanipulation”. Microsystem Technologies, 10(4), pp. 275–280.

[140] Kim, D.-H., Lee, M.-G., Kim, B., and Shim, J.-H., 2004. “A superelastic alloy microgripper with embedded elec-

tromagnetic actuators and piezoelectric sensors”. In Optics East, International Society for Optics and Photonics,
pp. 230–237.

[141] Park, J., Kim, S., Kim, D.-H., Kim, B., Kwon, S. J., Park, J.-O., and Lee, K.-I., 2005. “Identification and control of a
sensorized microgripper for micromanipulation”. Mechatronics, IEEE/ASME Transactions on, 10(5), Oct., pp. 601–

606.
[142] Kim, K., Liu, X., Zhang, Y., and Sun, Y., 2008. “Nanonewton force-controlled manipulation of biological cells using

a monolithic MEMS microgripper with two-axis force feedback”. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering,

18(5), p. 055013.

[143] Choi, H.-S., Lee, D.-C., Kim, S.-S., and Han, C.-S., 2005. “The development of a microgripper with a perturbation-
based configuration design method”. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 15(6), p. 1327.

[144] Choi, H., Shin, D., Ryuh, Y., and Han, C., 2011. “Development of a micro manipulator using a microgripper and pzt
actuator for microscopic operations”. In Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), 2011 IEEE International Conference

on, pp. 744–749.

[145] Panepucci, R. R., and Martinez, J. A., 2008. “Novel su-8 optical waveguide microgripper for simultaneous microma-
nipulation and optical detection”. Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology B, 26(6), pp. 2624–2627.

[146] Volland, B., Heerlein, H., and Rangelow, I., 2002. “Electrostatically driven microgripper”. Microelectronic Engineer-
ing, 61-62, pp. 1015–1023.
[147] Houston, K., Eder, C., Sieber, A., Menciassi, A., Carrozza, M., and Dario, P., 2007. “Polymer sensorised microgrip-

pers using sma actuation”. In Robotics and Automation, 2007 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 820–825.
[148] Yamahata, C., Collard, D., Legrand, B., Takekawa, T., Kumemura, M., Hashiguchi, G., and Fujita, H., 2008. “Silicon
nanotweezers with subnanometer resolution for the micromanipulation of biomolecules”. Journal of Microelectrome-

chanical Systems, 17(3), pp. 623–631.

[149] Tarhan, M. C., Lafitte, N., Tauran, Y., Jalabert, L., Kumemura, M., Perret, G., Kim, B., Coleman, A. W., Fujita, H.,

and Collard, D., 2016. “A rapid and practical technique for real-time monitoring of biomolecular interactions using

mechanical responses of macromolecules”. Scientific Reports, 6, pp. 1–10.

[150] Lafitte, N., Haddab, Y., Le Gorrec, Y., Guillou, H., Kumemura, M., Jalabert, L., Collard, D., and Fujita, H., 2015.

“Improvement of silicon nanotweezers sensitivity for mechanical characterization of biomolecules using closed-loop

control”. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 20(3), pp. 1418–1427.

[151] Kim, B.-S., Park, J.-S., Kang, B. H., and Moon, C., 2012. “Fabrication and property analysis of a MEMS micro-

gripper for robotic micro-manipulation”. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 28(1), pp. 50–56.

[152] Dow, A. B. A., Jazizadeh, B., Kherani, N. P., and Rangelow, I., 2011. “Development and modeling of an electrother-

mally MEMS microactuator with an integrated microgripper”. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering,

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 19

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

21(12), p. 125026.

[153] Mackay, R., Le, H., and Keatch, R., 2011. “Design optimisation and fabrication of su-8 based electro-thermal micro-

grippers”. Journal of Micro-Nano Mechatronics, 6(1), pp. 13–22.

[154] Imai, S., Ishikawa, T., Sato, M., Sato, H., and Tamura, K., 2010. “Handling characteristics of MEMS-tweezers with
contact surface fabricated by DRIE”. Journal of Advanced Mechanical Design, Systems, and Manufacturing, 4(1),

pp. 150–157.
[155] Giouroudi, I., Hötzendorfer, H., Kosel, J., Andrijasevic, D., and Brenner, W., 2008. “Development of a microgripping

system for handling of microcomponents”. Precision Engineering, 32(2), pp. 148–152.

[156] Zheng, X., Kim, J.-K., and Lee, D.-W., 2011. “Design and fabrication of a novel microgripper with four-point contact

fingers”. Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology A, 29(1), p. 011007.

[157] Grossard, M., Boukallel, M., Chaillet, N., and Rotinat-Libersa, C., 2011. “Modeling and robust control strategy for

a control-optimized piezoelectric microgripper”. Mechatronics, IEEE/ASME Transactions on, 16(4), Aug., pp. 674–
683.

[158] Chang, H., Zhao, H., Ye, F., Yuan, G., Xie, J., Kraft, M., and Yuan, W., 2014. “A rotary comb-actuated microgripper
with a large displacement range”. Microsystem Technologies, 20(1), pp. 119–126.

[159] Piriyanont, B., and Moheimani, S., 2014. “MEMS rotary microgripper with integrated electrothermal force sensor”.
Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems, 23(6), pp. 1249–1251.
[160] Piriyanont, B., Fowler, A., and Moheimani, S., 2015. “Force-controlled MEMS rotary microgripper”. Microelec-

tromechanical Systems, Journal of, PP(99), pp. 1164 – 1172.

[161] Chen, B., and Sun, Y., 2011. “A MEMS microgripper with changeable gripping tips”. In Solid-State Sensors,
Actuators and Microsystems Conference (TRANSDUCERS), 2011 16th International, pp. 498–501.

[162] Komati, B., Rabenorosoa, K., Clevy, C., and Lutz, P., 2013. “Automated guiding task of a flexible micropart using a
two-sensing-finger microgripper”. Automation Science and Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 10(3), July, pp. 515–
524.

[163] Hazra, S. S., Beuth, J. L., Myers, G. A., DelRio, F. W., and de Boer, M. P., 2015. “Design and test of reliable high

strength ingressive polycrystalline silicon microgripper arrays”. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering,

25(1), p. 015009.

[164] Kalaiarasi, A., and Thilagar, S., 2012. “Design and modeling of electrostatically actuated microgripper”. In Mecha-

tronics and Embedded Systems and Applications (MESA), 2012 IEEE/ASME International Conference on, pp. 7–11.

[165] Kim, C.-J., Pisano, A., and Muller, R., 1992. “Silicon-processed overhanging microgripper”. Microelectromechanical

Systems, Journal of, 1(1), Mar., pp. 31–36.

[166] Yoshida, K., Tsukamoto, N., wan Kim, J., and Yokota, S., 2014. “A study on a soft microgripper using MEMS-based

divided electrode type flexible electro-rheological valves”. Mechatronics, 29, pp. 103–109.

[167] Luo, J., Huang, R., He, J., Fu, Y., Flewitt, A., Spearing, S., Fleck, N., and Milne, W., 2006. “Modelling and fabrication

of low operation temperature microcages with a polymer/metal/dlc trilayer structure”. Sensors and Actuators A:

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 20

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

Physical, 132(1), pp. 346–353.

[168] Jeon, C.-S., Park, J.-S., Lee, S.-Y., and Moon, C.-W., 2007. “Fabrication and characteristics of out-of-plane piezo-

electric micro grippers using MEMS processes”. Thin Solid Films, 515(12), pp. 4901–4904.

[169] Jain, R. K., Majumder, S., Ghosh, B., and Saha, S., 2015. “Design and manufacturing of mobile micro manipulation
system with a compliant piezoelectric actuator based micro gripper”. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 35, pp. 76 –

91.
[170] Alogla, A., Amalou, F., Balmer, C., Scanlan, P., Shu, W., and Reuben, R., 2015. “Micro-tweezers: Design, fabrication,

simulation and testing of a pneumatically actuated micro-gripper for micromanipulation and microtactile sensing”.
Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 236, pp. 394 – 404.

[171] Kurita, Y., Sugihara, F., Ueda, J., and Ogasawara, T., 2012. “Piezoelectric tweezer-type end effector with force-and

displacement-sensing capability”. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 17(6), pp. 1039–1048.

[172] Rakotondrabe, M., and Ivan, I., 2011. “Development and force/position control of a new hybrid thermo-piezoelectric
microgripper dedicated to micromanipulation tasks”. Automation Science and Engineering, IEEE Transactions on,

8(4), Oct., pp. 824–834.

[173] Kuo, J.-C., Huang, H.-W., Tung, S.-W., and Yang, Y.-J., 2014. “A hydrogel-based intravascular microgripper manip-

ulated using magnetic fields”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 211, pp. 121–130.
[174] Wester, B. A., Rajaraman, S., Ross, J. D., LaPlaca, M. C., and Allen, M. G., 2011. “Development and characterization
of a packaged mechanically actuated microtweezer system”. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 167(2), pp. 502–511.

[175] Sardan, O., Petersen, D. H., Molhave, K., Sigmund, O., and Boggild, P., 2008. “Topology optimized electrothermal
polysilicon microgrippers”. Microelectronic Engineering, 85(5-6), pp. 1096–1099.
[176] Voicu, R., Muller, R., and Eftime, L., 2008. “Design optimization for an electro-thermally actuated polymeric micro-

gripper”. In Design, Test, Integration and Packaging of MEMS/MOEMS, 2008. MEMS/MOEMS 2008. Symposium
on, pp. 182–186.
[177] Daunton, R., Gallant, A., Wood, D., and Kataky, R., 2011. “A thermally actuated microgripper as an electrochemical

sensor with the ability to manipulate single cells”. Chem. Commun., 47, pp. 6446–6448.

[178] Shih, C. J., and Lin, C. F., 2006. “A two-stage topological optimum design for monolithic compliant microgripper

integrated with flexure hinges”. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 34(1), p. 840.

[179] Dodd, L. E., Ward, S. C., Cooke, M. D., and Wood, D., 2015. “The static and dynamic response of su-8 electrothermal

microgrippers of varying thickness”. Microelectronic Engineering, 145, pp. 82–85.

[180] Huang, S.-C., LEE, C.-M., Chiu, C.-C., and Chen, W.-L., 2006. “Topology optimal compliant microgripper”. JSME

International Journal Series A Solid Mechanics and Material Engineering, 49(4), pp. 589–596.

[181] Piriyanont, B., Moheimani, S., and Bazaei, A., 2013. “Design and control of a MEMS micro-gripper with integrated

electro-thermal force sensor”. In Control Conference, 2013 3rd Australian, pp. 479–484.

[182] Wierzbicki, R., Houston, K., Heerlein, H., Barth, W., Debski, T., Eisinberg, A., Menciassi, A., Carrozza, M., and

Dario, P., 2006. “Design and fabrication of an electrostatically driven microgripper for blood vessel manipulation”.

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 21

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

Microelectronic Engineering, 83(4-9), pp. 1651–1654.

[183] Huang, S.-C., and Chen, W.-L., 2008. “Design of topologically optimal microgripper”. In Systems, Man and Cyber-

netics, 2008. SMC 2008. IEEE International Conference on, pp. 1694–1698.

[184] Wierzbicki, R., Adda, C., and Hotzendorfer, H., 2007. “Electrostatic silicon microgripper with low voltage of actua-
tion”. In Micro-NanoMechatronics and Human Science, 2007. MHS ’07. International Symposium on, pp. 344–349.

[185] Chen, B., Zhang, Y., and Sun, Y., 2009. “Active release of microobjects using a MEMS microgripper to overcome
adhesion forces”. Microelectromechanical Systems, Journal of, 18(3), June, pp. 652–659.

[186] Hamedi, M., Salimi, P., and Vismeh, M., 2012. “Simulation and experimental investigation of a novel electrostatic
microgripper system”. Microelectronic Engineering, 98, pp. 467–471.

[187] Demaghsi, H., Mirzajani, H., and Ghavifekr, H., 2014. “A novel electrostatic based microgripper (cellgripper) inte-

grated with contact sensor and equipped with vibrating system to release particles actively”. Microsystem Technolo-

gies, 20(12), pp. 2191–2202.

[188] Demaghsi, H., Mirzajani, H., and Ghavifekr, H., 2014. “Design and simulation of a novel metallic microgripper using

vibration to release nano objects actively”. Microsystem Technologies, 20(1), pp. 65–72.

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 22

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

List of Tables

1 Classification of Class I structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

2 Classification of Class II structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

3 Classification of Class III structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 23

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

Table 1. Classification of Class I structures

Refs. Figs. F ℓ m Fam. ℓ2 ℓ3 ℓ4 ℓ5 ℓ6 ℓ7 ℓ8
[53](1) 2a 2 3 2 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(1)
[87] 2b 1 2 1 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
[88](2) 2c 4 5 4 - 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
[89](c) 2d 3 1 0 0 0 0 0
4 4 I
[90–92] 2e, 2f 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
[93–99] 3a-3e 6 7 II 4 2 0 0 0 0 0
[9, 81, 100–102] 3f-4b 8 10 III 5 2 1 0 0 0 0
[103] 4c 4 0 0 0 6 0 0
[77, 104, 105] 4d -4f 10 13 IV 6 3 0 1 0 0 0
1
[106] 5a 8 0 0 2 0 0 0
[107] 5b 7 4 0 1 0 0 0
[108, 109] 5c 12 16 V 8 2 0 1 0 1 0
[86] 5d 8 3 0 0 0 1 0
[43, 73, 76] 5e-6a 14 19 VI 8 5 0 0 0 1 0
[110] 6b 18 25 VIII 12 4 0 0 0 2 0
[89](b) 6c 4 1 0 0 0 0 0
5 5 I
[111] 6d 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
[89, 112](a) 6f, 6e 4 3 0 0 0 0 0
7 8 II
[74] 7a 5 1 1 0 0 0 0
2
[72] 7b 9 11 III 6 2 1 0 0 0 0
[113] 7c 13 17 V 10 0 2 0 1 0 0
[114, 115] 7d 15 20 VI 8 6 0 0 1 0 0
[75] 7e 17 23 VII 10 6 0 0 0 0 1
(1): 1R open chain (one-joint-one-link arm)
(2): RR open chain (two-joint-two-link arm)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 24

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

Table 2. Classification of Class II structures

Refs. Figs. F ℓ m Fam. ℓ2 ℓ3 ℓ4 ℓ5 ℓ6 ℓ7 ℓ8
[46, 116–127] 8a-9c 4 4 I 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
[45, 80, 128–140] 9d-11a 6 7 II 4 2 0 0 0 0 0
[78] 11b 8 10 III 5 2 1 0 0 0 0
[141] 11c 2 8 0 0 0 0 0
1 10 13 IV
[142–146] 11d-12a 6 3 0 1 0 0 0
[147] 12b 8 1 2 1 0 0 0
12 16 V
[148] 12c 8 2 0 2 0 0 0
[149, 150] 12d 14 19 VI 12 0 0 0 0 2 0
[79] 12e 2 17 23 VII 13 0 0 4 0 0 0
[14, 151] 12f 4 0 4 0 0 0 0
3 8 9 II
[152, 153] 13a, 13b 6 2 0 0 0 0 0

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 25

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

Table 3. Classification of Class III structures

Refs. Figs. F ℓ m Fam. ℓ2 ℓ3 ℓ4 ℓ5 ℓ6 ℓ7 ℓ8
[154](1) 14a 1 2 1 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
[155–173](1) 14b-16e 1 2 1 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(2)
[174] 16f 1 3 2 - 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
[175–177] 17a, 16e 4 4 I 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
[178–180] 17c-17e 6 7 II 4 2 0 0 0 0 0
[181, 182] 17f, 18a 8 10 5 2 1 0 0 0 0
III
[183] 18b 1 8 10 6 0 2 0 0 0 0
[184] 18c 10 13 IV 6 3 0 1 0 0 0
[185] 18d 16 22 VII 9 6 0 0 0 0 1
[186] 18e 20 28 IX 10 8 1 0 0 0 1
[17] 18f 6 6 I 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
3
[187, 188] 19a 14 18 V 12 0 0 0 2 0 0
(1): 1R open chain (one-joint-one-link arm)
(2): one higher pair, cam-follower

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 26

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

List of Figures

1 Circular (a), elliptical (b), and corner-filleted (c) notch hinge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

2 Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (1-6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

3 Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (7-12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

4 Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (13-18) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

5 Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (19-24) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

6 Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (25-30) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

7 Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (31-35) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

8 Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (1-6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

9 Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (7-12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

10 Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (13-18) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

11 Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (19-24) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

12 Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (25-30) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

13 Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (31-32) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

14 Geometry of Class III: special structures (1-6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

15 Geometry of Class III: special structures (7-12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

16 Geometry of Class III: special structures (13-18) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
17 Geometry of Class III: special structures (19-24) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

18 Geometry of Class III: special structures (25-30) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

19 Geometry of Class III: special structures (31) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 27

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

a) b) c)

Fig. 1. Circular (a), elliptical (b), and corner-filleted (c) notch hinge

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 28

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [53]

(b) See Ref. [87]

(c) See Ref. [88]

(d) See Ref. [89]

(e) See Refs. [90, 91]

(f) See Ref. [92]

Fig. 2. Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (1-6)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 29

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Refs. [93–95]

(b) See Ref. [96]

(c) See Ref. [97]

(d) See Ref. [98]

(e) See Ref. [99]

(f) See Ref. [81]

Fig. 3. Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (7-12)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 30

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Refs. [9, 100]

(b) See Refs. [101, 102]

(c) See Ref. [103]

(d) See Ref. [77]

(e) See Ref. [104]

(f) See Ref. [105]

Fig. 4. Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (13-18)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 31

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [106]

(b) See Ref. [107]

(c) See Refs. [108, 109]

(d) See Ref. [86]

(e) See Ref. [43]

(f) See Ref. [73]

Fig. 5. Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (19-24)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 32

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [76]

(b) See Ref. [110]

(c) See Ref. [89]

(d) See Ref. [111]

(e) See Ref. [112]

(f) See Ref. [89]

Fig. 6. Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (25-30)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 33

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [74]

(b) See Ref. [72]

(c) See Ref. [113]

(d) See Refs. [114, 115]

(e) See Ref. [75]

Fig. 7. Geometry of Class I: structures with lumped compliance (31-35)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 34

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [116]

(b) See Ref. [118]

(c) See Ref. [119]

(d) See Refs. [120, 121]

(e) See Ref. [122]

(f) See Ref. [123]

Fig. 8. Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (1-6)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 35

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Refs. [46, 124, 125]

(b) See Ref. [126]

(c) See Ref. [127]

(d) See Ref. [128]

(e) See Ref. [129]

(f) See Ref. [130]

Fig. 9. Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (7-12)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 36

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [45]

(b) See Ref. [131]

(c) See Ref. [132]

(d) See Refs. [133, 134]

(e) See Refs. [135–137]

(f) See Ref. [138]

Fig. 10. Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (13-18)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 37

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Refs. [80, 139, 140]

(b) See Ref. [78]

(c) See Ref. [141]

(d) See Ref. [142]

(e) See Refs. [143, 144]

(f) See Ref. [145]

Fig. 11. Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (19-24)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 38

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [146]

(b) See Ref. [147]

(c) See Ref. [148]

(d) See Refs. [149, 150]

(e) See Ref. [79]

(f) See Refs. [14, 151]

Fig. 12. Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (25-30)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 39

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [152]

(b) See Ref. [153]

Fig. 13. Geometry of Class II: systems with distributed compliance (31-32)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 40

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [154]

(b) See Ref. [155]

(c) See Ref. [156]

(d) See Ref. [157]

(e) See Refs. [158–160]

(f) See Ref. [161]

Fig. 14. Geometry of Class III: special structures (1-6)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 41

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [162]

(b) See Ref. [163]

(c) See Refs. [164, 165]

(d) See Ref. [166]

(e) See Ref. [167]

(f) See Ref. [168]

Fig. 15. Geometry of Class III: special structures (7-12)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 42

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [169])

(b) See Ref. [170]

(c) See Ref. [171]

(d) See Ref. [172]

(e) See Ref. [173]

(f) See Ref. [174]

Fig. 16. Geometry of Class III: special structures (13-18)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 43

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [175]

(b) See Refs. [176, 177]

(c) See Ref. [178]

(d) See Ref. [179]

(e) See Ref. [180]

(f) See Ref. [181]

Fig. 17. Geometry of Class III: special structures (19-24)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 44

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [182]

(b) See Ref. [183]

(c) See Ref. [184]

(d) See Ref. [185]

(e) See Ref. [186]

(f) See Ref. [17]

Fig. 18. Geometry of Class III: special structures (25-30)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 45

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/

Journal of Mechanical Design. Received July 28, 2016;
Accepted manuscript posted March 28, 2017. doi:10.1115/1.4036351
Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME

(a) See Ref. [187, 188]

Fig. 19. Geometry of Class III: special structures (31)

Matteo Verotti Paper MD-16-1535 46

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jmdedb/0/ on 04/04/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/