DESIGN OF A COMPLIANT CRIMPING MECHANISM

A mini project report

Submitted as partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the completion of course of

THEORY OF MECHANISMS (ME6611D)

As part of the course of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
in
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
by
ULLAS U [ Roll No.: M190197ME]

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT

JUNE 2020
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In this project, a compliant mechanism was designed, which can be used as a wire crimper. Wire
crimpers are used to attach connectors to the end of the cable. The connector has a ductile end,
which is pressed over the wire. The crimper deforms one or both these pieces, forming a secure
joint, which is conductive, as an alternate to soldering. For deforming metal, the crimper needs a
great amount of force at the end, for a meager input force. The design should hence ensure a
greater mechanical advantage.

The design, in this context, involves the conventional rigid body synthesis of the mechanism that
is needed. It is then suitably converted to a compliant version. In the past, lot of research has
been focused in design of compliant mechanisms. There are different approaches for
synthesizing a compliant mechanism. The usage of such mechanisms is popular in recent years,
and hence no single, perfect method can be pointed out. Most of the methods utilized, to some
degree, involve a iterative approach. The designer’s intuition is put to test here. The synthesized
mechanism can be simulated with analysis packages such as Ansys or Abaqus, before
prototyping.

Once the design is finalized, prototypes can be made. The prototype may be primitive, like a
cardboard cutout, or can be more complex like being laser cut, or 3D printed. The mono body
design of these mechanisms makes it possible to have such a large variety of methods for
prototyping and manufacturing. The prototypes can serve as a tool, or as a final step in
understanding the mechanism, and making further design modifications if such a need arises. It
also, as discussed earlier, is suitable for mass production, where it can be precision cut from
sheets of materials such as polypropylene, or can be injection molded. The compliant
mechanisms are further discussed in detail in the following sections.

Fig.1.0.1 Conventional Wire Crimper

2
2.0 COMPLIANT MECHANISMS
Compliant mechanisms are those mechanisms that accomplish their function due to the
deformation of one or more slender segments of their members. The mechanisms, being
monolithic, unlike conventional rigid body mechanisms, have the advantage of not having
relative motion between members, so that there is no wear, noise, vibration, need for lubrication,
and backlash. There is no overlapping between members, hence making them compact and easy
to assemble. There are, however, drawbacks, like limitation in what can be fabricated. Cranks
cannot be included due to absence of overlapping members. The input output relation is not
straight forward, due to storage of potential energy in members. The synthesis of compliant
mechanisms is a major challenge.

They find use in places where precision is of importance, due to obvious advantages in this
regard. They can be used in places where compactness and less maintenance is of importance.
Some examples are in MEMS devices, in mechanisms of beard trimmer, common Nail clipper,
camera mechanisms, etc.

2.1 COMPLIANT MECHANISMS – ADVANTAGES

1. The compliant mechanisms may contain fewer parts, or can be manufactured / molded as
one-piece resulting in cost reduction due to reduced assembly time, simplified
manufacturing processes, and general integration of form and function.
2. With less number of parts, the compliant mechanisms are relatively lighter as compared
with rigid-body mechanisms.
3. The compliant mechanisms have fewer movable joints.
a. This results in reduced wear and reduced need for lubrication, hence any
maintenance.
b. Lacking lash, it reduces the noise and vibration
4. Less number of joints also helps increase the mechanical precision, making them useful
in high-precision instruments.
5. As the compliant mechanisms achieve some of their mobility from the deflection of their
flexible members, the stored strain energy may be transferred, transformed or released at
a later time in a different manner. They can be used to design mechanisms having
specific force-deflection properties, e.g. compliant constant-force mechanism, which
generates a nearly constant output force in response to, say, a linear input displacement.
6. The compliant mechanisms can be easily miniaturized and so they may result in space
savings and find useful applications in MEMS devices.

3
2.2 COMPLIANT MECHANISMS – DRAWBACKS
1. Due to the large deflections of flexible links, the design and analysis of compliant
mechanisms is more difficult than that of rigid-body mechanisms.
2. Fatigue analysis is important in the design of compliant mechanisms, and the choice of
material is critical to attain a required fatigue life. The large deflection of a flexible
member is limited by its geometric and material properties.
3. The compliant segments cannot produce continuous rotational motion, as does a rigid
body crank.
4. Flexible segments under stress for long periods of time, or at high temperatures, may
experience stress relaxation or creep and may be rendered ineffective in their function.

2.3 COMPLIANT MECHANISMS – EXAMPLES

Compliant mechanisms are used wherever accuracy is an important concern. In spite of
the above disadvantages, compliant mechanisms are continuing to find important applications in
the engineering world and society at large, such as micro-sensors and actuators in micro-electro-
mechanical (MEMS) devices, crashworthiness applications in automobiles due to the energy
storage characteristics, precision machines, robotics, biomedical devices and prosthetics, surgical
tools, adaptive structures, etc. Compliant mechanisms are also widely used in items such as
grippers, Compliers, bicycle brakes, binder clips, staple removers, etc.

2.4 PHOTOGRAPHS OF SOME OF THE COMPLIANT MECHANISMS IN

APPLICATION ARE INCLUDED BELOW.

Fig. 2.4.1 Compliant mechanism in a Fig. 2.4.2 Bi-stable switch

disassembled beard trimmer blade

4
Fig. 2.4.3 Mechanical Watch Fig. 2.4.4 A Wyrd mechanism in the shape of an
mechanism using compliant elephant. Note that the hole on trunk stays at same
mechanism position when the rest of the mechanism moves.

Fig. 2.4.5 Minimal Invasive Fig.2.4.6 Compliant gripper.

surgery gripper.

Fig. 2.4.7 Compliant gripper. Fig. 2.4.8 Compliant mechanism

in MEMS application.

5
3.0 SYNTHESIS OF COMPLIANT MECHANISMS

Fig. 3.0.1 Types of Compliant Mechanism synthesis.

4.0 RIGID BODY REPLACEMENT

In this method, a conventional rigid body mechanism is synthesized for the problem at hand. The
rigid body model is converted into a compliant mechanism, by replacing the joints using Pseudo-
Rigid- Body (PRB) model or beam deflection models, or by simply replacing the conventional
joints with flexural joints. Flexural joints are regions in the body which undergo larger deflection
compared to their stiffer neighbors. There are broadly two types of compliance: Lumped
compliance and Distributed compliance

Fig.4.0.1 Lumped Compliance Fig.4.0.2 Distributed Compliance

6
4.1. LUMPED COMPLIANCE
Lumped compliance is a mechanism with rigid links, but having joints of thinner cross sections,
where deformation takes place. These joints are called flexure joints. Lumped compliance makes
the synthesis of compliant mechanisms relatively easy, as in many cases, a traditional rigid body
mechanism can have its joints replaced by proper flexure joints, and be made as a compliant
mechanism. As an example, if a four bar parallelogram linkage is considered, flexure joints may
be used to replace the revolute joints, and can work effectively as a compliant mechanism. Such
a mechanism is used in the bear trimmer blade, picture of which was included previously.
Another example is that of a bi-stable compliant switch. This switch has two stable positions,
much like a toggle switch. Here, again, we see that the joints consist of flexure joints.

Fig. 4.1.1 Bi-stable Compliant Fig.4.1.2 Compliant Four bar

switch linkage

4.2. DISTRIBUTED COMPLIANCE

In these types of mechanisms, the deflection of members occurs along a broader part of the
constitutive elements. This is in contrast to the Lumped compliance, where deformation takes
place in concentrated parts (or flexure joints) of the constitutive elements. In the former, the
majority of the members themselves deform to attain the requisite motion. A mechanism may
have a combination of both Lumped and Distributed compliance. A good example of a
Distributed compliant mechanism is the conventional household nail clipper. We can observe
that the force applied bends one of the metal strips, producing enough force at the tip to cut the
nail. There is no joint with smaller cross section here, like in previous case. The other example

7
is of an overrunning clutch, like the one used on a bicycle. Here, beam like elements act as
ratchets and springs, letting the clutch function as required.

Fig.4.2.1 Conventional Nail Fig.4.2.2 Overrunning clutch

Clipper

4.3. FLEXURE JOINTS

A flexure joint is a region which can undergo large deflections relative to stiffer adjacent regions
in the same element. Normally these stiffness differences are attained through the geometrical
characteristics of the deflection regions. Depending on these characteristics, the flexure joint can
show single or multiple deflection axes which can be rotational or translational axes. Flexure
joints can be categorized as primitive and complex flexures. Flexural joints with rotational axes
are also known as flexure hinges or flexure pivots.

Fig.4.3.1 Flexure joints for Fig.4.3.2 Flexure joints for

lumped compliance distributed compliance

8
4.4. PSEUDO RIGID BODY MODEL (PRB)
The PRB model is an approach that allows in finding a rigid body mechanism that emulates the
behavior of a compliant member that undergoes large, nonlinear deflections. The deflection path
is given by the kinematics of the rigid-body mechanism whilst the force deflection relation is
approximated by springs that represent the member’s stiffness. During the design of a compliant
mechanism, the PRB model has its main role in the conceptual design stage in the transition from
the type synthesis to the dimensional synthesis. Analyses based on kinematics are simpler, so the
use of PRB model provides with a quick way to test concepts and therefore reduces efforts to
obtain final concepts, just before to proceed with the detailed design. The PRB models vary
depending on the boundary conditions applied at both ends of the beam, which determined how the
loads are applied. When two compliant members interact it is important to determine which condition
better suits this interaction.

(EI)𝑙
K=
𝑙

Fig. 4.4.1 PRB Model for Lumped Compliance

𝛾𝐾𝜃 (EI)
K=
𝑙

Fig.4.4.2 PRB Model for Distributed Compliance

9
5.0 MECHANISM
The mechanism needs to provide a greater output force for an input force from the human hand.
A conventional Rigid Body model can be first developed with rigid links for the required
mechanism, its kinematic simulation is carried out. The mechanism can be optimized, finalizing
its dimensions. It is desirable in such mechanisms to have a greater Mechanical advantage. It
would not be possible to crimp with normal force that is produced by human hand. Grippers and
pliers, use the principle of leverage, to convert the applied pressure to a greater force, over the
area of contact between the object and the tool. The pressure applied by human hand is not a
known constant. For this reason, studies are referred, which discuss the pressure by human hand
for different applications. This can be altered to our requirements, and with trial and error, a
proper value can be arrived at. The input force may be varied and the output results can be
obtained using Ansys. The mechanism should nearly meet the requirements specified at the
output. It is preferable to simulate the mechanism using FEM, so that, an optimized design can
be prototyped. Further, the requirements selected for the mechanism are discussed. No force
output or mechanical advantage is specified, as a SS metal sleeve will be included in analysis
and checked for deformation.

SELECTED REQUIREMENTS
Clearance at relaxed position = 6mm.
Clearance when fully pressed = 3mm.
Required displacement of output = 6-3 = 3mm.
Input arm length = 85mm.
Width of mechanism = 50mm.
Output link width = 10mm.

Fig.5.0.1 Requirement: Conventional wire crimper to a

compliant wire crimper

10
6.0 SYNTHESIS OF THE MECHANISM FOR THE SELCTED
REQUIREMENTS

6.1. TYPE SYNTHESIS

The mechanism that can accomplish the discussed task may be represented as shown here. Link
6 (as in Image (2)) has a pure sliding motion, like the slider (as in Image (1)). It is important to
synthesize the type of mechanism that can be used to accomplish the defined task, before
dimensional synthesis. Many different mechanisms may be used to accomplish the defined task,
and it is up to the designer to choose the mechanism that is most suitable in all aspects. This
mechanism chosen here, is similar to an offset slider crank mechanism. In Image (1), Link 2
forms the crank, and link 4, the connecting rod. Link 6 is the slider, which is constrained to move
in the vertical direction only. Replacing the slider with a horizontal link (Image (2)), for equal
inputs on links 2 and 3, we have a similar output motion at link 6, like that of a slider. This is
preferred over the mechanism with slider, for its simplicity, and ease of construction.

Due to symmetry in mechanism, only one side can be considered for modeling. This holds true,
for equal inputs on the input links, which is the case here. The centerline is assumed to split the
mechanism into two, and one half is represented here. This half is used for further kinematic
synthesis.

11
6.2. DIMENSIONAL SYNTHESIS
The dimensional synthesis was carried out in SolidWorks sketching module. Pure sliding is
considered at the joint between link 4 and link 6 in second diagram of mechanism. This is
achieved by constraining the point of contact of link 4 and 6 as a point on a fixed vertical
reference line. This vertical line, is drawn at 5mm left of the actual center line of the mechanism,
as the horizontal link 6 is of 10mm length, exactly at the center of mechanism. This causes the
overall width of the mechanism to reduce from 25 mm (50mm/2) to 20mm. An infinite
horizontal line is drawn as a reference, and two more parallel references are drawn below it, at
distances representing the positions of the output link when the mechanism is relaxed, and when
pressed. Length of link 3 and its deflection between the two operating positions are obtained
from this diagram.

Fig. 6.2.1 Dimensional Synthesis of the mechanism

7.0 SIMULATING THE MECHANISM IN SOLIDWORKS

The mechanism is fully modeled in the form of line drawings in SolidWorks. Constraining the
sketches, at places where it is constrained in the actual mechanism, and leaving the links that are
expected to move unconstrained, we can have a kinematic simulation of the motion. It is also
possible to carry out the same by making ‘Blocks’ of sketches in SolidWorks, but the former
method proved easier, and gave the required results. The input link is given the deflection
obtained prior, and the output motion is noted, and checked if it is equal to the requirements.

12
 Fig.7.0.1 Mechanism simulation in Solidworks

8.0 COMPLIANT MODEL

The Rigid Body model is now converted to a compliant mechanism, by eliminating joints,
replacing them with rigid junctions. In this model, distributed compliance is utilized. A PRB
model can be used for design validation, as discussed earlier. The PRB model simply, has all its
revolute joints replaced by springs, whose characteristic stiffness and position can be calculated
as discussed earlier. Here, though, Ansys was used to validate the design. The compliant model
thus obtained has its revolute joints replaced with rigid ones, giving rise to sharp junctions. The
Sharp corners are replaced with curves (fillets), to avoid problems of stress concentration. Two
additional members are added to the compliant model, for structural integrity, as the long length
of link in the middle makes it susceptible for buckling, or failure. Theoretically, here, an in-plane
motion is desired. The design is modeled in SolidWorks, with a thickness of 4mm.

Fig. 8.0.1 Compliant model from Rigid body model. 13

9.0 SIMULATING THE COMPLIANT MODEL IN ANSYS
The CAD model of the mechanism is imported to Ansys. The material chosen is Polystyrene,
a common plastic, from the Material library of the software. Other materials may be chosen,
knowing their characteristics, and checked if they are suitable for fabrication. The model is
meshed (Auto-mesh: Relevance = +100). Higher relevance results in a finer mesh, and hence
the error generally reduces. Manually creating a proper Hexmesh and carrying out
convergent studies may result in greater accuracy, which may be desired in applications such
as in MEMS. Dedicated software, such as Hypermesh may also be employed. In this model,
the top link is constrained as a fixed support. This is equivalent to holding that link, or fixing
it to a support. The input links are applied with equal pressure, and the displacement of the
output link is measured. The pressure initially considered, taken from a study of pressure
from human hands on tools such as pliers, resulted in extreme deformation, which was
undesired. Greatly reducing the values to the ones discussed in the next section, gave much
desirable results. The pressure is then replaced with a concentrated force, on the bottom
edges of the input link, and the procedure is repeated.

Fig.9.0.1 Meshed Model

9.1 CALCULATION OF PRESSURES AND FORCES

 By trial and error, an input force of about 9.8N was found to cause a deflection without
any intersection between members. It can be applied as a pressure over the input link
face, as
P= F/A=9.8/(70x4)=0.O35MPa

14
 The output force for this pressure was found to be,
F = 32.037 x (14 x 4) = 1.794KN

 We can estimate the Mechanical Advantage (MA) as,

MA = (1.794 x 1O) / (9.8 x 2) 90.

 The Force applied instead of pressure, was reduced to 5.5N to avoid intersection of
members. The output force was 1.744KN, nearly same as before.

 The displacement results are: 2.2215 mm and 2.4472 mm for respective cases, quite near
to the chosen 3 mm.

Fig.9.1.1 Pressure Load Applied

Fig.9.1.2 Point Load applied

15
9.2 RESULTS FROM ANSYS
9.2.1 PRESSURE LOAD

Stress on Output link face Stress distribution in model

Total deformation of the model

Fig.9.2.1.1 Analysis of the model under Pressure Load

9.2.2 POINT LOAD

Stress on Output link face Stress distribution in model

Total deformation of the model

Fig. 9.2.2.1 Analysis of the model under Point Load

16
10.0 PROTOTYPING
For prototyping, 3D printed models may be used, printed from the CAD model file. The
flexibility of the Rapid Prototyping systems makes it suitable for this application. In mass
production, they can be precision cut from sheets of materials such as polypropylene, or can be
injection molded. Laser cutters can provide precision cut mechanisms. As there is no assembly
involved, the prototype can be directly used, or can be used as a part of another mechanism. It is
important to have prototypes before any kind of production, as it can pin point the issues that
may have been overlooked in CAD models and analysis. It also serves as a proof of
functionality. In one-off applications, such methods may be used to create the product itself.

To test the model, here, a scaled up printout of the drawing of the CAD model was used as a
template, and the shape was cut from a mount board. The fixed end was glued to another piece of
same board, used as a base. Mount board, even though stiffer than other cardboards, is still made
in a layered form, which causes the board to fail or buckle under high loading. This makes it
difficult for the mechanism to move in a plane. A pin was used on the output link to constraint
the mechanism to have an in-plane motion. This kind of a method is applicable when prototyping
methods discussed earlier is either expensive, or inaccessible, like in the present COVID
scenario. The model gives a physical demonstration of the working of the mechanism, though it
may not be practical due to the choice of material and accuracy of the cut.

Normal position Pressed

Fig. 10.0.1 Cardboard Prototype - Working

17
11.0 CONCLUSION

The proposed mechanism was first modeled as a rigid body mechanism. The rigid body model
was converted to a compliant model, by replacing the revolute joints with fixed junctions. The
mechanism was simulated in Ansys with proper loads and constraints. A cardboard model was
made to understanding its working. The basics of Compliant mechanisms, synthesis methods and
their types were discussed, including the usage of PRB models. Their advantages such as having
minimal maintenance, and limitations such as not being able to operate as a crank were
discussed. The work was not to the best standards due to the present constraints, but attempt was
made to synthesize a mechanism to the defined specifications. The mechanism here uses
distributed compliance.

It is possible to use other approaches to design a mechanism to have the same results. The same
design may be converted to employ Lumped compliance. Approaches such as building block
approaches, may also be used, and the design optimized. The possibilities are immense,
considering that the branch being new, and has a lot to explore. The same reason, is also a
drawback, due to the lack of time tested methods, and resources. Further research in the field
may make Compliant mechanisms the norm in future mechanical devices, due to their obvious
advantages.

12.0 FUTURE SCOPE

The project was carried out with the constraints of the present situation, which created the earlier
specified limitations. There is a large scope for improvement of the model, by more work.
Further synthesis may lead to design simplification. More necessary requirements for the
crimper, such as being able to work on different sizes of wire, may be implemented. Proper
distributed compliance PRB modeling may lead to better dimensional synthesis, reducing the
losses in energy transmission due to energy stored during deformation. Other synthesis
approaches may be employed to obtain different mechanisms fulfilling the same purpose, and
can be compared, to select the most optimal mechanism. A different rigid body mechanism itself
may be selected initially, which may lead to a completely different model.

Further analysis can be carried out on the same mechanism using Ansys. The same model may
be tested for different materials, which gives results which can be compared, to select the most
optimal material. Fixing different links, the output can be checked, and that may result in a
different mechanism with entirely different application. The same model may be made with
Lumped compliance approach, and tested to compare between the two approaches. Failure
stresses may be evaluated, and failure regions can be identified. This can result in further design
optimization. Fatigue testing may also be carried out, as fatigue failure is one of the important

18
modes of failures for such a mechanism. The model file used here for analysis can be 3D printed,
and be used as a prototype. Proper analysis of the prototype can lead to further design changes
and optimization of the design.

13.0 REFERENCES

[1]. Juan A. Gallego, Just Herder, Synthesis methods in Compliant mechanisms: An

overview", Proceedings of the ASME 2009 International Design Engineering
Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference,
IDETC/CIE 2009, San Diego, California, USA.

[2]. M. I. Frecker, G. K. Ananthasuresh, et al. "Topological Synthesis of Compliant

Mechanisms Using Multi-Criteria Optimization", Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol.
119, June 1997, Pg-238 to Pg-245.

[3]. V. Kumar et al. "On a Compliant Mechanism Design Methodology Using the
Synthesis with Compliance Approach for Coupled and Uncoupled Systems" (Eds.):
Adv. In Mech., Rob. & Des. Educ. & Res., MMS 14, pp. 95–116.

[4]. Sridhar Kota, et al. "Design of Compliant Mechanisms: Applications to MEMS",

Analog Integrated Circuits and Signal Processing, 29, Pg.7–15, 2001.

[5]. Koli, Ashish B., "A generalized approach for compliant mechanism design using the
synthesis with compliance method, with experimental validation" (2013). Masters
Theses. 7099.

19