Synthesizing Constant Torque Constant torque mechanisms are also known as CT springs.

Springs are mechanical components that are made of elastic mate-

Compliant Mechanisms Using rials [5,6]. They are used to generate desired linear or nonlinear
force-deformation or torque-rotation relationships [7,8]. If spring
Precompressed Beams deformation or rotation is taken as the input motion while spring
force or torque is considered as the generated output, springs can
then be regarded as function generation mechanisms [9]. Springs
Ishit Gandhi usually have jointless structures and carry the merits of CMs.
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Constant torque springs conventionally come from constant
Texas A&M University-Kingsville, force (CF) springs. CF springs are commonly made up of pre-
Kingsville, TX 78363 stressed spring strip. The prestressed strip is wound around a stor-
e-mail: [email protected] age reel. A nearly constant resisting force is generated when the
prestressed strip is pulled from the storage reel. The resisting force
Hong Zhou is close to being constant because the change of the radius of cur-
vature of the spring strip is almost constant, which is from the
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
spring coil radius to infinity [10,11]. The thickness of the spring
Texas A&M University-Kingsville, strip is much smaller than that of the spring coil radius, so the
Kingsville, TX 78363 radius of curvature of the spring strip on the reel is almost con-
e-mail: [email protected] stant. When the pulling end of a CF spring is wound around
another spring reel (output reel), a nearly constant output or resist-
ing torque can be produced from the output reel. In a conventional
CT spring, its storage reel and output reel are separated each
A constant torque compliant mechanism (CM) generates an output
other, and have two different parallel rotation axes. It takes space
torque that keeps invariant in a large range of input rotation.
to install two separated parallel rotation axes, which makes con-
Because of the constant torque feature and the merits of CMs,
ventional CT springs or CTCMs unsuitable for compact applica-
they are used in automobile, aerospace, medical, healthcare, tim-
tions. The CTCMs studied in this paper have only one shaft and
ing, gardening, and other devices. A common problem in the cur-
are compact in space. Both input rotation and output torque are
rent constant torque CMs is their preloading range that is a
through the single shaft.
certain starting range of the input rotation. In the preloading
Constant torque compliant mechanisms with single rotation
range, the output torque of a constant torque CM does not have
axis (integrated input rotation and output torque axis) have been
the desired constant torque. It increases from zero to a value. The
synthesized [4,12]. Same as CF CMs (CFCMs), CTCMs belong to
preloading range usually accounts for one-third of the entire input
CMs with nonlinear stiffness [13]. Unlike CFCMs [14–18],
rotation range, which severally weakens the performance of con-
CTCMs have not been extensively studied yet. A common prob-
stant torque CMs. In this paper, the preloading problem is eradi-
lem among the currently available CTCMs is that they need pre-
cated by using precompressed beams as building blocks for
loading range for a CTCM to reach its desired CT. The preloading
constant torque CMs. It is challenging to synthesize constant tor-
range usually accounts for one-third of the entire input rotation,
que CMs composed of precompressed beams because of the inte-
which severally weakens the performance of CTCMs. The moti-
grated force, torque, and deflection characteristics. The synthesis
vation of this research is to eradicate the preloading range, so
of constant torque CMs is systemized as parameter optimization
CTCMs can have the desired CT in the entire input rotation range.
of the composed precompressed beams. The presented synthesis
The research objective is to establish a systematic synthesis
method is demonstrated by synthesizing constant torque CMs with
method for preloading-free CTCMs.
different numbers of precompressed beams and validated by
Compliant mechanisms take advantage of elastic deformation
experimental results. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4041330]
to fulfill mechanism function. When a flexible member has no
Keywords: compliant mechanism, constant torque, precompressed deformation, it does not generate any resisting force or torque.
beam, beam buckling, mechanism synthesis When the input rotation in a current CTCM is zero, the output or
resisting torque is also zero since no flexible member in the
CTCM has any deformation, which is the intrinsic reason for the
1 Introduction CTCM to need a preloading range in order to produce a desired
Elastic deformations of flexible members instead of relative resisting or output CT. In this paper, precompressed beams are
motions of kinematic joints of rigid links are utilized in compliant used as building blocks in CTCMs to eradicate the preloading
mechanisms (CMs) to generate the desired output motion, force problem. Precompressed beams have been employed in symmetri-
(or torque), or energy [1]. The complete or partial elimination of cally arranged double compliant parallelogram mechanism to
kinematic joints of rigid links results in the merits of CMs that adjust its translational stiffness [19]. Flexible beams have initially
include the ease of manufacturing, assembly, and miniaturization; straight undeformed shape. They are precompressed to curved
the reduction of vibration and noise; and the preclusion of back- deformed shapes and employed in a CTCM, so the flexible beams
lash, friction, wear, and lubrication [1,2]. already have elastic deformation before any input rotation is pro-
Constant torque (CT) CMs (CTCMs) form a special type of vided to the CTCM. The CTCM is synthesized through optimiz-
CMs in which the output or resisting torque keeps invariant in a ing the parameters of the precompressed beams for the CTCM to
large range of input rotation. This unique feature leads CTCMs to generate the desired CT in the entire input rotation range.
many different applications. They are used as fishing line or meas- In the remaining sections, precompressed beams are introduced
uring tape reels, power sources in aerospace appendages, seat belt in Sec. 2. Section 3 discusses the synthesis procedure. Examples
winding apparatus, and timing devices [3]. CTCMs are also used on synthesizing CTCMs are presented in Sec. 4. The experimental
as counterbalance in robot manipulators, knee or ankle assisting results of the synthesized CTCMs are included in Sec. 5. The con-
devices, and automotive hoods [4]. clusions are finally drawn in Sec. 6.

2 Precompressed Beams
Contributed by the Mechanisms and Robotics Committee of ASME for
publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received March 13,
Precompressed beams are employed as building blocks for
2018; final manuscript received August 15, 2018; published online October 8, 2018. CTCMs in this paper. All precompressed beams of a CTCM are
Assoc. Editor: Dar-Zen Chen. located within an annular design domain in which an inner shaft is

Journal of Mechanical Design Copyright V

C 2019 by ASME JANUARY 2019, Vol. 141 / 014501-1

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 10/07/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 1 The undeformed beam

Fig. 4 The deformed shape of the pined–pined beam and its

stress distribution

Fig. 2 The deformed beam

Fig. 5 The deformed shape of the fixed–fixed beam and its

stress distribution

Fig. 3 The solid model of a straight undeformed beam

used as the integrated input rotation and output torque shaft while
the outer ring is fixed [4,12]. Precompressed beams in this Fig. 6 The deformed shape of the 10–20 deg beam and its
research have initially straight undeformed shape. stress distribution
An initially straight flexible beam is shown in Fig. 1. The length
of the undeformed beam is L0. The vertical or transverse deflec-
tion of the beam is constrained at both ends. The axial compres- is a pined–pined buckled beam. The deformed shape of the beam
sion of the beam is DL. The length of the deformed beam is L that is shown in Fig. 4 together with the stress distribution.
meets the equation of L ¼ L0  DL. Figure 2 shows a precom- If the two ends of the beam are fixed, the precompressed beam
pressed beam that is from the straight undeformed beam shown in becomes a fixed–fixed buckled beam. The deformed shape of the
Fig. 1. The precompressed beam has its buckled shape. There are beam in this case is shown in Fig. 5 together with the stress
three input parameters (DL, hL, and hR) that lead the straight unde- distribution.
formed beam to the buckled shape of the precompressed beam. hL The pinned or fixed end condition of a compressed beam is
and hR are the rotation angles at the left and right ends of the common in studying buckled beams. In either of these two cases,
beam, respectively. For the analysis convenience of the precom- the end rotation angle is not an independent input parameter and
pressed beam, the left end of the beam is assumed to have no axial cannot be changed by a designer. In this research, both end rota-
displacement. So, the axial compression (DL) of the beam is all tion angles are input parameters. They can be changed or opti-
from the right end. mized by a designer. When the two ends of the above compressed
Precompressed beams will have further deformation to generate beam are rotated through 10 deg and 20 deg counter-clockwise,
the desired output or resisting CT. In this research work, finite ele- respectively, the deformed shape of the beam in this case is shown
ment software ANSYS WORKBENCH is employed for analyzing pre- in Fig. 6 together with the stress distribution.
compressed beams, their further deformations, resisting torques, As shown in Figs. 4–6, the deformed shape and stress distribu-
and stresses [20–22]. tion of a same beam under the same axial compression are differ-
Figure 3 shows the solid model of a straight undeformed beam. ent when its two end rotations are not the same. The number of
The beam has its length of L0 ¼ 50 mm with cross section dimen- deflection points in the deformed beam also depends on the two
sions of thickness t ¼ 0:0762 mm (0.003 in) and width b ¼ 5 mm. end rotations plus its axial compression. However, each deformed
The material of the beam is AISI 1095 blue tempered spring steel shape in Figs. 4–6 is a stable buckled shape that is obtained from
with Young’s modulus of 207 GPa, Poisson’s ratio of 0.3, and ANSYS WORKBENCH.
yield strength of 950 MPa. In this research, precompressed beams are designed through
The axial compression of the beam is given as 5 mm. When the their end rotations and axial compressions to generate the desired
two ends of the beam are free to rotate, the precompressed beam output torque without preloading stage.

014501-2 / Vol. 141, JANUARY 2019 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 10/07/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 3 Synthesis Procedure
Precompressed beams are used as building blocks for CTCMs
in this paper to eradicate the preloading problem. All precom-
pressed beams of a CTCM are located within an annular design
domain that is formed by an inner rotation shaft and an outer fixed
ring. Two arrangements of precompressed beams are considered
for CTCMs in this paper, three-beam or two-beam arrangement.
Figure 7 shows an annular design domain for a three-beam
arrangement. The two ends of each precompressed beam are rig-
idly mounted on the rotation shaft and the fixed ring, respectively.
An annular design domain for a two-beam arrangement is shown
in Fig. 8.
Constant torque compliant mechanisms are synthesized in this
paper to generate the desired CT in the entire input rotation range.
As shown in Fig. 9, the input rotation angle is from h0 to hm. The
desired CT is Td. The curve in Fig. 9 represents the actually gener- Fig. 9 The T–h relationship curve
ated output torque from a synthesized CTCM.
The actual output torque of a CTCM is usually not exactly con-
stant, which might have some deviation from its desired CT value. n  
1X   
Ta hj  Td 
The deviation is minimized or mitigated through the synthesis of ET ¼   (1)
a CTCM. The objective function of synthesizing a CTCM can be n j¼1
formulated as follows:
In Eq. (1), Td is the desired CT to be generated by the synthe-
sized CTCM. ET is the average error of the output torque. Ta(hj) is
the actually generated torque by the CTCM at input rotation angle
hj. All n angles of hj (j ¼ 1, 2,   , n) are in the range of h0 to hm in
Fig. 9.
In the synthesis process, the maximum stress in the beams is
constrained to be below its allowable value. Any beam is not
allowed to interfere with the rotation shaft or the fixed ring.
Mutual interference between any two beams is also not allowed.
The undeformed shape of a precompressed beam is uniformly
straight with rectangular cross section, which has three-
dimensional parameters, L0 (length), t (thickness), and b (width).
To transform a straight undeformed beam to its corresponding
precompressed beam, there are three input parameters, DL (axial
compression), hL (left end rotation), and hR (right end rotation).
The synthesis of a CTCM in this paper is to optimize the parame-
ters of its precompressed beams for the CTCM to generate the
desired CT without preloading state. The parameter optimization
of the precompressed beams for a CTCM is conducted in ANSYS
WORKBENCH.
To synthesize a CTCM, its undeformed beams and rotation
shaft are first modeled in ANSYS Design Modeler [23]. The unde-
formed beams are then transformed to precompressed beams in
Fig. 7 An annular design domain for a three-beam CTCM ANSYS Mechanical [24]. The shaft together with the precom-
pressed beams is rotated through the desired angle hm as shown in
Fig. 9. The resisting torque from the shaft, the maximum stress
within the deformed beams, and the deformed beam shape at the n
specified shaft rotation angles of hj (j ¼ 1, 2,   , n) can be
obtained from ANSYS Mechanical. The objective and constraint
functions are calculated based on the analysis results from
ANSYS Mechanical. The parameters of precompressed beams are
optimized in ANSYS Design Exploration [25] through the Direct
Optimization Toolbox by using the analysis results from ANSYS
Mechanical.

4 Synthesis Examples
A CTCM is synthesized to generate an output torque of 8.4 N
mm. The input rotation range is from 0 deg of 60 deg, so hm in
Fig. 9 is 60 deg, and h0 is 0 deg. The material of the beam is AISI
1095 blue tempered spring steel with Young’s modulus of
207 GPa, Poisson’s ratio of 0.3, and yield strength of 950 MPa.
All beams are located within an annular design domain that has
inner and outer diameters of 20 mm and 80 mm, respectively. The
cross section of the beams has rectangular shape. The thickness (t)
of the beams is set at 0.0762 mm (0.003 in). The width (b) of the
beams is a design parameter to be optimized in the synthesis
Fig. 8 An annular design domain for a two-beam CTCM process.

Journal of Mechanical Design JANUARY 2019, Vol. 141 / 014501-3

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 10/07/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 11 The meshed model of the three-beam CTCM
Fig. 10 The solid model of the three-beam CTCM

Figure 10 shows the solid model of the three-beam CTCM. The

undeformed beam is not in the radial direction. It is inclined with
respect to the radial direction. The inclination angle is a design
parameter that is to be optimized in the synthesis process to have
the best output torque. The inner rotation shaft is not circular in
Fig. 10, which is to avoid the potential interference between the
shaft and the beams. The outer fixed ring is not modeled in
Fig. 10. That is because it is not needed to simulate the perform-
ance of the synthesized CTCM in ANSYS. The outer end of each
beam is directly fixed after the precompression. The axial com-
pression of the beams is applied at their outer ends. In addition to
axial compression, each outer end has a rotation. Both axial com-
pression and rotation angle are design parameters to be decided in
the synthesis process.
Figure 11 shows the meshed model of the three-beam CTCM.
Line body is used for the beams while solid body is for the rota-
tion shaft. Although there are three beams in the synthesized
CTCM, only one beam is independent. All beams in a CTCM
have the same shape. They are evenly distributed in the annular
design domain. There are four design parameters to be selected in
the synthesis process, which are width (b), inclination angle (b),
rotation angle (c), and axial compression (d).
For the synthesized three-beam CTCM, the optimal design Fig. 12 The synthesized three-beam CTCM with input rotation
parameters are found to be b ¼ 5.9 mm, b ¼ 46.3 deg, c ¼ 7.0 deg, angle of 0 deg
d ¼ 4.5 mm. In the synthesis process, n in Eq. (1) is taken as 7,
and hj (j ¼ 1, 2,   , 7) are 0 deg, 10 deg, 20 deg, 30 deg, 40 deg,
50 deg, and 60 deg. The corresponding output torque values Tj (d). For the synthesized two-beam CTCM, the optimal design
(j ¼ 1, 2,   , 7) are 9.03, 8.43, 8.15, 8.05, 8.01, 8.05, and 8.21. parameters are found to be b ¼ 9.1 mm, b ¼ 46.3 deg, c ¼ 7.0 deg,
The average deviation of the output torque is 0.31 N mm. The and d ¼ 4.5 mm. In the synthesis process, n is also taken as 7. The
synthesized three-beam CTCM with precompressed beams is corresponding output torque values Tj (j ¼ 1, 2,   , 7) are 9.08,
shown in Fig. 12 in which the input rotation angle is 0 deg. When 8.60, 8.25, 8.07, 7.96, 7.93, and 8.03. The average deviation of the
the shaft has input rotation angle of 60 deg, the three-beam CTCM output torque is 0.37 N mm. The synthesized two-beam CTCM
has the deformed shape as shown in Fig. 13. with precompressed beams is shown in Fig. 15 in which the input
The maximum stress of the synthesized three-beam CTCM is rotation angle is 0 deg. When the shaft has input rotation angle of
879.81 MPa, which happens when the shaft has input rotation 60 deg, the two-beam CTCM has the deformed shape as shown in
angle of 60 deg. There is no interference between any beam and Fig. 16.
the rotation shaft or between two beams. The maximum stress of the synthesized two-beam CTCM is
The desired CT of 8.4 N mm can also be generated by a two- 874.81 MPa, which also happens when the shaft has input rotation
beam CTCM. The solid model of the two-beam CTCM is shown angle of 60 deg. There is no interference between any beam and
in Fig. 14. Similar to the three-beam case, there are four design the rotation shaft or between two beams.
parameters to be selected in the synthesis process, which are width The main difference between the three-beam design and the
(b), inclination angle (b), rotation angle (c), and axial compression two-beam design is the beam width and the rotation shaft shape.

014501-4 / Vol. 141, JANUARY 2019 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 10/07/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 17 The prototype of the synthesized three-beam CTCM
Fig. 13 The synthesized three-beam CTCM with input rotation
angle of 60 deg
5 Experimental Validation
The synthesized three-beam and two-beam CTCMs are proto-
typed. The output torque values Tj (j ¼ 1, 2,   , 7) of each CTCM
are measured at the input rotation angles hj (j ¼ 1, 2,   , 7) that
are 0 deg, 10 deg, 20 deg, 30 deg, 40 deg, 50 deg, and 60 deg.
Figure 17 shows the prototype of the three-beam CTCM. The
inner rotation shaft has three prongs for mounting the 3 beams.
The surface of the prong has the inclination angle (b). The shaft
can only rotate with respect to the base plate. The outer fixed ring
Fig. 14 The solid model of the two-beam CTCM
has 3 slots for the 3 beams. The slot orientation is based on the
synthesized inclination angle and rotation angle (c).
The beams have their precompressed shape in Fig. 17. One end
of a beam is rigidly mounted on the prong of the shaft. The other
end is fixed on the slot surface after it has its synthesized axial
compression (d) and rotation angle (c).
The output or resisting torque from the rotation shaft is meas-
ured by a digital torque screwdriver of GLK060E [26]. The rota-
tion shaft has a hex head that fits the hex hole of the digital torque
Fig. 15 The synthesized two-beam CTCM with input rotation
angle of 0 deg
screwdriver.
The output torque measurement of the three-beam CTCM is
shown in Fig. 18. With the input rotation angles of 0 deg, 10 deg,
20 deg, 30 deg, 40 deg, 50 deg, and 60 deg, the measured output
torques are 9.5, 9.0, 8.5, 8.0, 8.5, 9.0, and 9.0 N mm, respectively.

Fig. 16 The synthesized two-beam CTCM with input rotation

angle of 60 deg

The three-beam design has a little bit lower average output torque
error than the two-beam design. But its potential interference
between the precompressed beams and the rotation shaft is higher
than the two-beam design. Besides, the two-beam design is sim-
pler than the three-beam design. Both designs are feasible. One
can be chosen based on the practical application.
In both three-beam and two-beam designs, the maximum stress
in deformed beams is close to 880 MPa because of their large
deformations. Although the maximum stress is lower than its
allowable value of 950 MPa, it is still high. Regular structural
steel cannot sustain the maximum stress of 880 MPa. To meet the
high stress requirements, the material used for the precompressed Fig. 18 The output torque measurement of the synthesized
beams in this research is blue tempered spring steel. three-beam CTCM

Journal of Mechanical Design JANUARY 2019, Vol. 141 / 014501-5

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 10/07/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 19 The measured and analyzed output torque values of Fig. 22 The measured and analyzed output torque values of
the three-beam CTCM the two-beam CTCM

The measured output torques at the seven rotation angles are

marked by hollow circles and connected by a polyline in Fig. 19.
The desired CT of 8.4 N mm is represented by a horizontal line.
The analyzed output torques at the seven rotation angles are
marked by crosses and connected by a dotted polyline in Fig. 19.
The two polylines are close. The fabrication of the precompressed
beams and manual operation of the rotation shaft might cause
some errors of the output torque.
The prototype of the two-beam CTCM is shown in Fig. 20. The
measurement of the output torque of the two-beam CTCM is
shown in Fig. 21. Corresponding to the input rotation angles of
0 deg, 10 deg, 20 deg, 30 deg, 40 deg, 50 deg, and 60 deg, the
measured output torques are 9.5, 9.0, 8.0, 8.5, 8.5, 8.0, and 8.0 N
mm, respectively. Figure 22 shows the measured and analyzed
output torque polylines and the desired CT line. Similar to the
three-beam CTCM case, the measured and analyzed output torque
polylines match each other.

6 Conclusions
Constant torque compliant mechanisms have a feature that the
output torque does not change in a large range of input rotation.
Because of this unique feature, they have many applications.
Fig. 20 The prototype of the synthesized two-beam CTCM However, there is a drawback in the current CTCMs, which is the
preloading range. The output torque increases from zero to a value
in the preloading range. The performance of CTCMs is severely
weakened by the preloading range since it usually accounts for
one-third of the entire input rotation range. In this research work,
the preloading problem is eradicated by using precompressed
beams for CTCMs.
Precompressed beams are used as building blocks for CTCMs
in this paper. A flexible beam has an initially straight undeformed
shape. The deformed shape of a flexible beam depends on its axial
compression and two end rotations. The CTCMs in this research
work are located within an annular design domain. A single axis
is used for both input rotation and output torque. Two designs
(three-beam and two-beam) are proposed and presented in this
paper. Each design has precompressed beams evenly distributed
within the annular design domain. A CTCM is synthesized by
optimizing its design variables to minimize the deviation between
the actually generated output torque and the desired one. The syn-
thesized three-beam and two-beam CTCMs are fabricated and
tested. The test results match the analysis and simulation results.
Because of the large deformation of the beams, the maximum
stress of the deformed beams in both three-beam and two-beam
designs is close to 880 MPa, which is high and difficult for regular
structural steel to sustain. To meet the high stress requirements,
Fig. 21 The output torque measurement of the synthesized the material used for the precompressed beams in this research is
two-beam CTCM blue tempered spring steel. It is an important future research topic

014501-6 / Vol. 141, JANUARY 2019 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 10/07/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 for CTCMs to be synthesized with no preloading range and low [13] Hao, G., 2018, “A Framework of Designing Compliant Mechanisms With Non-
maximum stress. linear Stiffness Characteristics,” Microsyst. Technol., 24(4), pp. 1795–1802.
[14] Boyle, C., Howell, L. L., Magleby, S. P., and Evans, M. S., 2003, “Dynamic
Modeling of Compliant Constant-Force Compression Mechanisms,” Mech.
References Mach. Theory, 38(12), pp. 1469–1487.
[15] Pedersen, C. B. W., Fleck, N. A., and Ananthasuresh, G. K., 2006, “Design of a
[1] Howell, L. L., 2001, Compliant Mechanisms, Wiley, New York. Compliant Mechanism to Modify an Actuator Characteristic to Deliver a Con-
[2] Howell, L. L., Magleby, S. P., and Olsen, B. M., 2013, Handbook of Compliant stant Output Force,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 128(5), pp. 1101–1112.
Mechanisms, Wiley, New York. [16] Chen, Y. H., and Lan, C. C., 2012, “An Adjustable Constant-Force Mechanism
[3] McGuire, J. R., 1994, “Analysis and Design of Constant-Torque Springs Used for Adaptive End-Effector Operations,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 134(3),
in Aerospace Applications,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas in Austin, p. 031005.
Austin, TX. [17] Rahman, U. M., and Zhou, H., 2014, “Design of Constant Force Compliant
[4] Hou, C. W., and Lan, C. C., 2013, “Functional Joint Mechanisms With Mechanisms,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., 3(7), pp. 14–19.
Constant-Torque Outputs,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 62, pp. 161–181. [18] Wang, J. Y., and Lan, C. C., 2014, “A Constant-Force Compliant Gripper for
[5] Norton, R. L., 2013, Machine Design, 5th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle Handling Objects of Various Sizes,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 136(7), p. 071008.
River, NJ. [19] Hao, G., and Li, H., 2016, “Extended Static Modeling and Analysis of Compli-
[6] Schmid, S. R., Hamrock, B. J., and Jacobson, B. O., 2014, Fundamentals of ant Compound Parallelogram Mechanisms Considering the Initial Internal
Machine Elements, 3rd ed., CRC Press, New York. Axial Force,” ASME J. Mech. Rob., 8(4), pp. 1–11.
[7] Jutte, C. V., and Kota, S., 2008, “Design of Nonlinear Springs for Prescribed [20] Dill, E. H., 2012, The Finite Element Method for Mechanics of Solids With
Load-Displacement Functions,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 130(8), pp. 1–10. ANSYS Applications, CRC Press, New York.
[8] Ahmed, A., and Zhou, H., 2014, “Synthesis of Nonlinear Spiral Torsion [21] Moaveni, S., 2015, Finite Element Analysis Theory and Application With
Springs,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., 3(6), pp. 4–9. ANSYS, 4th ed., Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
[9] Norton, R. L., 2012, An Introduction to the Synthesis and Analysis of Mecha- [22] Lee, H. H., 2016, “Finite Element Simulations With ANSYS Workbench 17,”
nisms and Machines, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York. SDC Publications, Mission, KS.
[10] Associated Spring Corporation, 1981, Engineering Guide to Spring Design, [23] ANSYS, 2016, “Design Modeler User’s Guide,” ANSYS, Canonsburg, PA.
Associated Spring Corporation, Bristol, CT. [24] ANSYS, 2016, “ANSYS Mechanical User’s Guide,” ANSYS, Canonsburg, PA.
[11] Brown, A. A., 1981, Mechanical Springs, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. [25] ANSYS, 2016, “Design Exploration User’s Guide,” ANSYS, Canonsburg, PA.
[12] Prakashah, H. N., and Zhou, H., 2016, “Synthesis of Constant Torque Compli- [26] IMADA Incorporated, 2017, “KTC Digital Torque Screwdriver Instruction
ant Mechanisms,” ASME J. Mech. Rob., 8(6), pp. 1–8. Manual,” IMADA Incorporated, Northbrook, IL.

Journal of Mechanical Design JANUARY 2019, Vol. 141 / 014501-7

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 10/07/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use