0
Research Papers

Voltage–Amplitude Response of Superharmonic Resonance of Second Order of Electrostatically Actuated MEMS Cantilever Resonators

[+] Author and Article Information
Dumitru I. Caruntu

Mechanical Engineering Department,
University of Texas Rio Grande Valley,
Edinburg, TX 78539
e-mails: dumitru.caruntu@utrgv.edu;
caruntud2@asme.org;
dcaruntu@yahoo.com

Martin A. Botello, Christian A. Reyes, Julio S. Beatriz

Mechanical Engineering Department,
University of Texas Rio Grande Valley,
Edinburg, TX 78539

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL AND NONLINEAR DYNAMICS. Manuscript received March 23, 2018; final manuscript received November 10, 2018; published online January 18, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Eihab Abdel-Rahman.

J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam 14(3), 031005 (Jan 18, 2019) (8 pages) Paper No: CND-18-1119; doi: 10.1115/1.4042017 History: Received March 23, 2018; Revised November 10, 2018

This paper investigates the voltage–amplitude response of superharmonic resonance of second order (order two) of alternating current (AC) electrostatically actuated microelectromechanical system (MEMS) cantilever resonators. The resonators consist of a cantilever parallel to a ground plate and under voltage that produces hard excitations. AC frequency is near one-fourth of the natural frequency of the cantilever. The electrostatic force includes fringe effect. Two kinds of models, namely reduced-order models (ROMs), and boundary value problem (BVP) model, are developed. Methods used to solve these models are (1) method of multiple scales (MMS) for ROM using one mode of vibration, (2) continuation and bifurcation analysis for ROMs with several modes of vibration, (3) numerical integration for ROM with several modes of vibration, and (4) numerical integration for BVP model. The voltage–amplitude response shows a softening effect and three saddle-node bifurcation points. The first two bifurcation points occur at low voltage and amplitudes of 0.2 and 0.56 of the gap. The third bifurcation point occurs at higher voltage, called pull-in voltage, and amplitude of 0.44 of the gap. Pull-in occurs, (1) for voltage larger than the pull-in voltage regardless of the initial amplitude and (2) for voltage values lower than the pull-in voltage and large initial amplitudes. Pull-in does not occur at relatively small voltages and small initial amplitudes. First two bifurcation points vanish as damping increases. All bifurcation points are shifted to lower voltages as fringe increases. Pull-in voltage is not affected by the damping or detuning frequency.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Zhang, W.-M. , Yan, H. , Peng, Z. K. , and Meng, G. , 2014, “ Electrostatic Pull-in Instability in MEMS/NEMS: A Review,” Sens. Actuators A: Phys., 214, pp. 187–218. [CrossRef]
Caruntu, D. I. , Martinez, I. , and Knecht, M. W. , 2016, “ Parametric Resonance Voltage Response of Electrostatically Actuated Micro-Electro-Mechanical System Cantilever Resonators,” J. Sound Vib., 362, pp. 203–213. [CrossRef]
Ghayesh, M. H. , Farokhi, H. , and Amabili, M. , 2013, “ Nonlinear Behaviour of Electrically Actuated MEMS Resonators,” Int. J. Eng. Sci., 71, pp. 137–155. [CrossRef]
LaRose , R. P., III. , and Murphy, K. D. , 2010, “ Impact Dynamics of MEMS Switches,” Nonlinear Dyn., 60(3), pp. 327–339. [CrossRef]
Persano, A. , Quaranta, F. , Martucci, M. C. , Siciliano, P. , and Cola, A. , 2015, “ On the Electrostatic Actuation of Capacitive RF MEMS Switches on GaAs Substrate,” Sens. Actuators A, 232, pp. 202–207. [CrossRef]
Bogue, R. , 2013, “ Recent Developments in MEMS Sensors: A Review of Applications, Markets and Technologies,” Sensor Rev., 33/4, pp. 300–304. [CrossRef]
Nawi, M. N. M. , Manaf, A. A. , Arshad, M. R. , and Sidek, O. , 2011, “ Review of MEMS Flow Sensors Based on Artificial Hair Cell Sensor,” Microsyst. Technol., 17, pp. 1417–1426. [CrossRef]
Batra, R. C. , Porfiri, M. , and Spinello, D. , 2006, “ Electromechanical Model of Electrically Actuated Narrow Microbeams,” J. Microelectromech. Syst., 15(5), pp. 1175–1189. [CrossRef]
Caruntu, D. I. , and Knecht, M. W. , 2015, “ Microelectromechanical Systems Cantilever Resonators Under Soft Alternating Current Voltage of Frequency Near Natural Frequency,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control, 137(4), p. 041016. [CrossRef]
Zhang, W. , and Meng, G. , 2005, “ Nonlinear Dynamical System of Micro-Cantilever Under Combined Parametric and Forcing Excitations in MEMS,” Sens. Actuators A: Phys., 119(2), pp. 291–299. [CrossRef]
Chen, X. , and Wu, Z. , 2017, “ Review on Macromodels of MEMS Sensors and Actuators,” Microsyst. Technol., 23(10), pp. 4319–4332. [CrossRef]
Yin, T. , Wang, B. , Zhou, S. , and Zhao, M. , 2016, “ A Size-Dependent Model for Beam-like MEMS Driven by Electrostatic and Piezoelectric Forces: A Variational Approach,” Phys. E: Low-Dimensional Syst. Nanostruct., 84, pp. 46–54. [CrossRef]
Nayfeh, A. H. , Younis, M. I. , and Abel-Rahman, E. M. , 2005, “ Reduced-Order Models for MEMS Applications,” Nonlinear Dyn., 41(1–3), pp. 211–236. [CrossRef]
Caruntu, D. I. , Martinez, I. , and Knecht, M. W. , 2013, “ Reduced Order Model Analysis of Frequency Response of Alternating Current Near Half Natural Frequency Electrostatically Actuated MEMS Cantilevers,” ASME J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn., 8(3), p. 031011. [CrossRef]
Najar, F. , Nayfeh, A. H. , Abdel-Rahman, E. M. , Choura, S. , and El-Borgi, S. , 2010, “ Nonlinear Analysis of MEMS Electrostatic Microactuators: Primary and Secondary Resonances of the First Mode,” J. Vib. Control, 16(9), pp. 1321–1349. [CrossRef]
Abel-Rahman, E. M. , and Nayfeh, A. H. , 2003, “ Secondary Resonances of Electrically Actuated Resonant Microsensors,” J. Micromech. Microeng., 13, pp. 491–501. [CrossRef]
Nayfeh, A. H. , and Younis, M. I. , 2005, “ Dynamics of MEMS Resonators Under Superharmonic and Subharmonic Excitations,” J. Micromech. Microeng., 15(10), pp. 1840–1847. [CrossRef]
Al-Ghamdi, M. S. , Alneamy, A. M. , Park, S. , Li, B. , Khater, M. E. , Abdel-Rahman, E. M. , Heppler, G. R. , and Yavuz, M. , 2017, “ Nonlinear Parameter Identification of a Resonant Electrostatic MEMS Actuator,” Sensors, 17(5), p. 1121. [CrossRef]
Alsaleem, F. A. , Younis, M. I. , and Ouakad, H. M. , 2009, “ On the Nonlinear Resonances and Dynamic Pull-in of Electrostatically Actuated Resonators,” J. Micromech. Microeng., 19(4), p. 045013. [CrossRef]
Dwivedy, S. K. , and Kar, R. C. , 1999, “ Nonlinear Response of a Parametrically Excited System Using Higher-Order Method of Multiple Scales,” Nonlinear Dyn., 20(2), pp. 115–130. [CrossRef]
Nayfeh, A. H. , and Mook, D. T. , 1979, Nonlinear Oscillations, Wiley, New York.
Caruntu, D. I. , Martinez, I. , and Taylor, K. N. , 2013, “ Voltage-Amplitude Response of Alternating Current Near Half Natural Frequency Electrostatically Actuated MEMS Resonators,” Mech. Res. Commun., 52, pp. 25–31. [CrossRef]
Younis, M. I. , Abdel-Rahman, E. M. , and Nayfeh, A. , 2003, “ A Reduced-Order Model for Electrically Actuated Microbeam-Based MEMS,” J. Microelectromech. Syst., 12(5), pp. 672–680. [CrossRef]
Caruntu, D. I. , and Martinez, I. , 2014, “ Reduced Order Model of Parametric Resonance of Electrostatically Actuated MEMS Cantilever Resonators,” Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 66, pp. 28–32. [CrossRef]
Bao, M. , and Yang, H. , 2007, “ Squeeze Film Air Damping in MEMS,” Sens. Actuators A, 136(1), pp. 3–27. [CrossRef]
Caruntu, D. I. , and Taylor, K. N. , 2014, “ Bifurcation Type Change of AC Electrostatically Actuated MEMS Resonators Due to DC Bias,” Shock Vib., 2014, p. 542023.
Lakrad, F. , and Belhaq, M. , 2010, “ Suppression of Pull-in Instability in MEMS Using a High-Frequency Actuation,” Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 15(11), pp. 3640–3646. [CrossRef]
Doedel, E. J. , and Oldeman, B. E. , 2012, AUTO-07P: Continuation and Bifurcation Software for Ordinary Differential Equations, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Shampine, L. F. , and Reichelt, M. W. , 1997, “ The MATLAB ODE Suite,” SIAM: J. Sci. Comput., 18, pp. 1–22. [CrossRef]
Shampine, L. F. , Reichelt, M. W. , and Kierzenka, J. A. , 1999, “ Solving Index-1 DAEs in MATLAB and Simulink,” SIAM Rev., 41(3), pp. 538–552. [CrossRef]
Kierzenka, J. A. , and Shampine, L. F. , 2001, “ A BVP Solver Based on Residual Control and the MATLAB PSE,” ACM Trans. Math. Software, 27(3), pp. 299–316. [CrossRef]
Labuschagne, A. , van Renburg, N. F. J. , and van der Merwe, A. J. , 2009, “ Comparison of Linear Beam Theories,” Math. Comput. Modell., 49(1–2), pp. 20–30. [CrossRef]
Caruntu, D. I. , 2007, “ Classical Jacobi Polynomials, Closed-Form Solutions for Transverse Vibrations,” J. Sound Vib., 306(3–5), pp. 467–494. [CrossRef]
Caruntu, D. I. , 2009, “ Dynamic Modal Characteristics of Transverse Vibrations of Cantilevers of Parabolic Thickness,” Mech. Res. Commun., 33(3), pp. 391–404. [CrossRef]
Caruntu, D. I. , 2013, “ Factorization of Self-Adjoint Ordinary Differential Equations,” Appl. Math. Comput., 219(14), pp. 7622–7631.
Nguyen, C. C. , and Li, W. L. , 2017, “ Effect of Gas on the Quality Factors of Micro-Beam Resonators,” Microsyst. Technol., 23(8), pp. 3185–3199. [CrossRef]
Guo, X. , and Alexeenko, A. , 2009, “ Compact Model on Rarefied Flow Simulations,” J. Micromech. Microeng., 19(4), p. 045026. [CrossRef]
Lee, J. W. , Tung, R. , Raman, A. , Sumali, H. , and Sullivan, J. P. , 2009, “ Squeeze-Film Damping of Flexible Microcantilevers at Low Ambient Pressures: Theory and Experiments,” J. Micromech. Microeng., 19(10), p. 105029. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Uniform cantilever MEMS resonator of constant thickness t and constant width W, and under electrostatic actuation due to AC voltage V0cosΩt

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Voltage–amplitude response using MMS, 5T AUTO, and 5T TR; b*=0.01, f=0.26, σ=−0.025

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Time responses using five term ROM (5T TR); σ=−0.025, U0=0, b*=0.01, f=0.26, (a) δ = 0.4, (b) δ = 0.5, (c) δ = 0.8, and (d) δ = 1.2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Time responses using five term ROM (5T TR); σ=−0.025, U0=0.4, b*=0.01, f=0.26, (a) δ = 0.4, (b) δ = 0.5, (c) δ = 1.0, and (d) δ = 1.6

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Time responses using five term ROM (5T TR); σ=−0.025, U0=0.7, b*=0.01, f=0.26, (a) δ = 0.3, (b) δ = 0.4, (c) δ = 1.0, and (d) δ = 1.2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Time responses using five term ROM (5T TR); σ=−0.025, U0=0.95, b*=0.01, f=0.26, (a) δ = 0.2, (b) δ = 0.3, (c) δ = 0.8, and (d) δ = 1.6

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Time responses using BVP4C with timestep = 0.0005; δ=1.0b*=0.01, f=0.26, σ=−0.025, (a) U0=0, (b) U0=0.4, (c) U0=0.6, and (d) U0=0.8

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Convergence of voltage–amplitude response using two, three, four, and five term ROM; MMS is included; b*=0.01, f=0.26, σ=−0.025

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Effect of damping parameter b* on the voltage–amplitude response using MMS and 5T AUTO; f=0.26, σ=−0.025

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Effect of fringe parameter f on the voltage–amplitude response using MMS and 5T AUTO; b*=0.01, σ=−0.025

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Effect of detuning frequency σ on the voltage–amplitude response using MMS and 5T AUTO; b*=0.01, f=0.26

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In