Abstract
A pseudothreelayer electrostatic repulsive outofplane actuator is proposed. It combines the advantages of twolayer and threelayer repulsive actuators, i.e., fabrication requirements and fill factor. A theoretical model for the proposed actuator is developed and solved through the numerical calculation of SchwarzChristoffel mapping. Theoretical and simulated results show that the pseudothreelayer actuator offers higher performance than the twolayer and threelayer actuators with regard to the two most important characteristics of actuators, namely, driving force and theoretical stroke. Given that the pseudothreelayer actuator structure is compatible with both the parallelplate actuators and these two types of repulsive actuators, a 19element twolayer repulsive actuated deformable mirror is operated in pseudothreelayer electrical connection mode. Theoretical and experimental results demonstrate that the pseudothreelayer mode produces a larger displacement of 0–4.5 μm for a dc driving voltage of 0–100 V, when compared with that in twolayer mode.
Introduction
Micro outofplane electrostatic actuators are among the most important microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) devices, and have been widely applied in radio frequency (RF) MEMS^{1,2,3,4} and optical MEMS^{5,6,7}. Compared with thermal and piezoelectric actuators, electrostatic actuators have the advantages of fast response, low power consumption, and hysteresisfree characteristics^{8,9}.
In general, electrostatic actuators have fixed and movable electrodes at different voltages. Most current outofplane electrostatic actuators, including parallelplate and vertical combdrive actuators, are based on the electrostatic attractive force that exists among electrodes with different voltages. The stroke of this type of actuator, i.e., maximum achievable displacement, is severely limited by the gaps between electrodes. This displacement is then determined entirely through fabrication processes. As a result, the outofplane surfacemicromachined electrostatic actuators that were presented in prior studies have a micronscale or even submicronscale stroke because of the small gaps between the electrode layers. These layers are accumulated one by one on substrate surfaces with thicknesses that are limited by the nature of deposition processes. Numerous techniques have been developed to increase the stroke of outofplane surfacemicromachined electrostatic actuators, including nonlinear flexures^{10,11}, leveraged bending^{12,13}, and prestress selfassembly^{14,15}. However, these techniques are still based on the implementation of an attractive force. Moreover, their strokes cannot exceed the gap size, and the resulting actuators suffer from several problems, such as pullin instability, stiction, and mechanical breakdown. These problems are associated with conventional attractive actuators when the strokes approach the gap size.
In contrast to these electrostatic attractiveforce actuators, electrostatic repulsiveforce actuators drive the movable electrodes away from the fixed electrodes. Their strokes can exceed the gap size, and these devices have been applied in translation and rotation micromirrors^{16,17}. To the authors’ knowledge, the outofplane repulsive phenomenon in inplane combdrive actuators was first observed in 1990^{18,19}, where it is called “levitation”. Figure 1a illustrates that the levitation phenomenon of the movable finger occurs because the potential of the substrate is the same as that of the movable finger. After a decade, Lee et al. introduced the term “repulsiveforce actuators” for an inplane repulsiveforce actuator^{20}. In 2003, He et al. proposed an outofplane repulsiveforce actuator based on another electrode configuration^{21,22}. Figure 1b,c show these two types of electrostatic repulsive actuators and it is easy to see that all three devices are based on asymmetric electric field distributions and realize similar functions. Firstly they have fixed electrodes and movable electrodes with electrical potential difference applied between them. In this paper, we name these electrodes the attracting electrode (AT) and actuated electrode (AC). Each side of AC is attracted by AT, and the attractive forces are denoted by f_{L}, f_{R}, f_{U}, and f_{D} in Fig. 1. The direction and the size of the solid line arrows indicate the direction and magnitude of the attractive forces involved. Among these forces, f_{L} and f_{R} cancel each other out (Fig. 1a,c) or are counteracted by an external force (Fig. 1b). Thus, the movable electrode can only move in the directions of f_{U} or f_{D}. Second, one side of AC is presented to a fixed electrode with the same potential, thereby changing the field distribution and suppressing the applied attractive force to the aforementioned side of AC, f_{D}. This electrode is called the suppressing electrode (SU). Finally, the attractive force on the opposite side of AC, f_{U}, moves AC away from SU, thereby offering the impression that AC is repulsed by SU. AC is not actually driven if only SU and AC are present. According to the perspective of the three electrode types, electrostatic attractive actuators only have ATs and ACs.
These repulsive actuators are suitable for surface micromachining processes and require two structural layers. Rezadad et al. recently proposed a threelayer repulsive actuator, as shown in Fig. 1d ^{23,24}. In essence, the threelayer structure is space efficient in the lateral direction, but requires thick sizes in the vertical direction. It therefore allows high fill factors and is beneficial for specific applications.
Various electrostatic repulsive actuators have been presented. However, most of these actuators lack theoretical models, which are critical for guidance in design and optimization. In this study, a novel pseudothreelayer repulsive actuator is proposed and analyzed through a physical model developed here. Based on this model, the effect of varying structural parameters on the electrostatic force of the actuator and the comparison of three repulsive actuators is summarized. At last the proposed actuator is validated with experimental measurements based on a 19element deformable mirror (DM) that was developed through commercially available multiuser MEMS processes (MUMPs)^{25}.
Results
Pseudothreelayer repulsive actuator
Figure 1d shows the basic structure of the threelayer repulsive actuator, which consists of three parallel electrodes with the same or similar width, length, and thickness. When appropriate voltages are applied, the movable upper electrode is driven to move vertically upward.
Although the threelayer actuator has a large fill factor, it requires three structural layers, which increase the difficulty of device fabrication. In most surface micromachining processes, the substrate is a doped semiconductor. Thus, it can be connected to the ground to serve as the lower electrode. The middle and upper electrodes can be deposited with two structural layers. This novel threelayer repulsive actuator, as shown in Fig. 2a, is called the pseudothreelayer repulsive actuator in this paper.
The pseudothreelayer repulsive actuator has the advantages of both the twolayer and the threelayer repulsive actuators. Its fabrication process is the same as that of the twolayer actuator, whereas its fill factor is the same as that of the threelayer actuator. In addition to these advantages, the most important characteristics of MEMS actuators are the force generated and their stroke. We therefore compare these three actuators, which are all exactly the same size, i.e., the widths of their electrodes and the gaps between them are identical, with regard to the driving force and the stroke.
Modeling of the pseudothreelayer actuator
First a theoretical model of the pseudothreelayer actuator is constructed. In general, the electrode thickness is considerably small compared to the electrode length and width. Therefore, the thicknesses of all electrodes are neglected. Furthermore, the substrate is a conductor and its upper surface is an equipotential surface. When compared with the middle and upper electrodes, the length and width of the substrate can also be regarded as infinite. Given these two reasons, the electric field is limited above the upper surface of the substrate. Figure 2b shows the cross section of the pseudothreelayer actuator, where the solid lines represent the equipotential surfaces and the dashed lines represent the electric field lines. The gap between the substrate and the middle electrodes, G, and the gap between the middle and upper electrodes, H, are two of the important actuator parameters. The value of G is fixed, and the value of H varies when the actuator is driven. Given the symmetry, the dashed line in Fig. 2b is the axis of symmetry.
The relationship between the electrostatic force and the variable H is derived. A technique that is similar to the method proposed by He et al. is used^{26}. The electrostatic force is written as
where V is the electric potential difference between AT and AC, and C is the capacitance between AT and the other two electrodes. In a practical actuator, L is considerably larger than W, G, and H. Therefore, the capacitance C can be obtained by multiplying electrode length L by the capacitance per unit length C_{unit}:
C_{unit} is the capacitance of the cross section shown in Fig. 2b. The field line in Fig. 2b divides the structure into two symmetrical parts, and each part has an identical capacitance C_{half}. Therefore,
The dimensions of the structure are normalized with the width of the fixed middle electrode W_{F}:
where w_{F}, w_{M}, g, and h are the normalized dimensions of W_{F}, W_{M}, G, and H. With expressions (1), (2), (3), and (4), the electrostatic force can be expressed as
The computation of C_{half} is a 2D electrostatic field problem and is suitable for solution by conformal mapping. Figure 2c shows the left half of the pseudothreelayer actuator. The closed curve composed of dashed lines and solid lines represents the region where the solution is sought. The middle and upper electrodes have no thicknesses. However, their upper and lower surfaces are drawn separately to indicate that the electrodes are excluded from the region in question.
Figure 2c illustrates a generalized polygon, and its vertices are denoted by A, B, …, H. A complex plane, Zplane, is constructed such that vertex B is the origin and the vertical dashed line is the imaginary axis. Thus, the coordinates of all vertices can be derived in Zplane based on the structural parameters. Through an inverse Schwarz–Christoffel (SC) transformation, Fig. 2c can be mapped to the upper halfplane of another complex plane, namely, Wplane, as shown in Fig. 2d. The coordinates of any three vertices in Wplane can be chosen arbitrarily, e.g., −1 (vertex B), 1 (vertex H), and infinity (vertex A). The following is the transformation function from Wplane to Zplane^{27}:
where w_{C}, w_{D}, w_{E}, w_{F}, and w_{G} are the complex coordinates of the corresponding vertices in Wplane. M is a complex constant. The complex coordinates of points C, D, E, F, G, H, and A in Zplane, namely, z_{C}, z_{D}, z_{E}, z_{F}, z_{G}, z_{H}, and z_{A}, respectively, are known, which are also the definite integrals of function (6) when their upper limits are w_{C}, w_{D}, w_{E}, w_{F}, w_{G}, w_{H}, and w_{A}, respectively. These upper limits and M are then determined based on these relationships. No analytical solution exists for these coordinates. Therefore, in this paper, the complex coordinates of all vertices in Wplane are solved with an SC toolbox for MATLAB created by T. A. Driscoll^{28,29}.
From vertex E to vertex F along the dashed line EF in Fig. 2c, the voltage first decreases and then increases. Therefore, a point E’ exists at which the minimum voltage occurs in line EF. Based on a forward SC transformation, the upper halfplane of Wplane can then be transformed into a folded rectangle in another complex plane, namely, Qplane, as shown in Fig. 2e ^{30}. The dashed lines EE’ and E’F overlap, although they are drawn separately to show that the structure is closed. This rectangle is a perfect (fringe effectfree) parallelplate capacitor. The transformation function is
w_{E’} must be solved before the capacitance is computed. The fixed middle electrode, CE, has the same voltage as the movable upper electrode, FH. Thus, the length of EE’ should be equal to the length of E’F, and an equation can be written as
So w_{E’} can be expressed as
After solving for w_{E’}, q_{A}, q_{B}, q_{C}, and q_{H} can be calculated easily with function (7). Finally, given the invariance of the capacitance under a conformal transformation, the capacitance C_{half} can be expressed as
The complex constant N obviously cancels out. To compute the electrostatic force, the derivative in Equation (5) is approximated as
The interval of h is selected to be as small as 0.001. Then, electrostatic force F can be calculated based on Equations (10) and (11).
Comparison with threelayer and twolayer actuators
Figure 2f shows the cross section of the threelayer actuator, which is modeled in Fig. 2h. The electrostatic force can also be calculated with the same method.
For the twolayer actuator, the definitions of all electrodes and sizes are shown in Fig. 2g. The dashed line in Fig. 2g is the axis of symmetry. The electric field line from the midpoint of the upper surface of the movable electrode (point H in Fig. 2g) to the grounded unaligned fixed electrode goes through an infinite distance. The field line from the midpoint of the lower surface of the aligned fixed electrode (point E in Fig. 2g) to the grounded unaligned fixed electrode also goes through an infinite distance. Therefore, the end of the field line reaching the grounded unaligned fixed electrode can be approximated symmetrically. The structure can then be modeled, as shown in Fig. 2i. According to the theoretical analysis of He et al.^{26}, the field line between points C and D can be approximated as a straight line, as shown in Fig. 2i. In addition, the capacitance of the shaded region can be ignored. The final model is the generalized polygon ABCDEFGH.
Based on the above analysis, the electrostatic forces of the three actuators which have exactly the same sizes, i.e., G = W_{u} = W_{m} = W_{l} = W_{M} = W_{F} = W_{U} = W_{A} = W_{e} = W_{g} = 1, are calculated and plotted in Fig. 3a. A numerical simulation is performed with the commercial software Maxwell SV^{31} to verify the theoretical results. All electrode thicknesses are set as 1% of its width to satisfy the presumption that electrode thicknesses are negligible. The simulation results are also shown in Fig. 3a.
As Fig. 3a shows, the pseudothreelayer actuator has the highest electrostatic force among the normalized h ranges from 0.1 to 8. Its electrostatic force decreases to 0 until h is approximately 7.6. By contrast, the electrostatic forces of the twolayer and threelayer actuators reach 0 at h values of approximately 2 and 3.1 respectively. With the term of theoretical stroke introduced in ref. 26, the theoretical strokes for the pseudothreelayer, twolayer, and threelayer actuators are obtained at 7.6, 2, and 3.1, respectively. Therefore, the pseudothreelayer actuator has advantages not only in terms of fabrication requirements and fill factor, but also in terms of electrostatic force and theoretical stroke.
The preceding conclusion is only suitable for the case in which all the structural parameters of the three actuators are the same. However, in real devices, parameter G of the pseudothreelayer and threelayer actuators is different from other parameters. It is mainly determined through fabrication process and cannot be tuned in design. In most surface micromachining processes, G is considerably smaller than the other parameters, which limits the vertical displacement range of the actuators. For the twolayer actuator, all structural parameters are determined with design and can be increased to achieve a large displacement. Therefore, on the basis of the preceding analysis, we also calculate the force in pseudothreelayer actuator with different G values, as shown in Fig. 3b. The results show that as G decreases, the electrostatic force increases, while the position where the repulsive force decreases to 0 decreases. Further calculations indicate that when G = 0.03 W_{M} = 0.03 W_{F}, the repulsive force reaches 0 at h value of approximately 2, which equals the turning point of h for the twolayer actuator. On the basis of these results, we can compare quantitatively the theoretical stroke of the pseudothreelayer actuator with that of the twolayer actuator. For instance, in MUMPs process, where G equals 600 nm, when the width of all electrodes is smaller than 20 μm, the theoretical stroke of the pseudothreelayer actuator is larger than that of the twolayer actuator. On the contrary, when the width is larger than 20 μm, the theoretical stroke of the twolayer actuator is greater than that of the pseudothreelayer actuator.
In summary, the pseudothreelayer repulsive actuator proposed in this paper has three main advantages:

1
It combines both advantages of threelayer actuator and twolayer actuator. In other words, it has a high fill factor similar to that of the threelayer actuator, and a low fabrication demand similar to that of the twolayer actuator.

2
It has the highest electrostatic force and theoretical stroke of the three actuators when they are of the same size.

3
Its structure is compatible with both the parallelplate actuators and the twolayer and threelayer repulsive actuators. If the substrate meets the conductivity demand, these several types of actuators can then be connected to form pseudothreelayer repulsive actuators. Take twolayer actuator as an example, the movable and aligned fixed electrodes and the substrate are treated as the three electrodes, and the unaligned fixed electrodes are left floating. Figure 4a,b show the two driving modes of the twolayer actuator. A device with this structure and its theoretical and experimental analysis is discussed in the next subsection.
19element DM based on pseudothreelayer repulsive actuator
Our previously reported 19element segmented DM^{32,33} based on twolayer repulsive actuator is utilized to verify the discussions in previous subsection. The DM was fabricated by MUMPs. One of the elements is shown in Fig. 5a.
The mirror segment is supported by four fixedguided beams. At the same time, the beam forms the movable electrode of a twolayer repulsive actuator. One end of the beam is anchored to the substrate, and the other end is connected to the mirror segment. When the twolayer actuator is driven, the guided end of the four beams is actuated upward, and the mirror segment is moved upward in a translational manner. The structural parameters of the DM are listed in Table 1.
In MUMPs, the surface of the substrate, which is an ntype silicon wafer with a resistivity of 1–2 Ωcm, is doped with phosphorus oxychloride (POCl_{3}) in the first step of the process. After POCl_{3} doping, the substrate surface resistance is 9–10 Ω/square, which can be regarded as conductive. Then, the four twolayer repulsive actuators of DM element can be connected as a pseudothreelayer repulsive actuator, as shown in Fig. 4b.
When the actuator is connected as a twolayer structure or a pseudothreelayer structure, the movable electrode is deformed in both cases as a fixedguided beam, as shown in Fig. 5b. The distance between this electrode and the aligned fixed electrode is then varied along the longitudinal direction, which results in a change of the electrostatic force along the beam.
Given the advantages of repulsive actuators, the deflection is comparable with the thickness of the 2 μm movable electrode. Therefore, large deflection theory must be included here. As a result, the deflection should satisfy^{34}
where E, I, w, and u represent the Young’s modulus, moment of inertia, deflection in the zdirection of the movable electrode, and deflection in the xdirection of the movable electrode, respectively. N represents the axis force induced by the large deflection. Additionally, the following six boundary conditions exist:
These boundary conditions represent 1) the fixed end of the beam having no deflection in the zdirection and no slope and no deflection in the xdirection, and 2) the guided end of the beam having no slope, no concentrated force, and no deflection in the xdirection.
The first term on the right side of the first equation of Equation (12), i.e., the electrostatic force 1/W_{A}·ΔC_{half}/Δh, can be solved using the proposed model. The values of the two driving modes are calculated based on the structural parameters and are plotted in Fig. 4c.
To express the first equation of Equation (12) analytically, the least squares method is used to fit the calculated values with a polynomial expression. The polynomial approximation is
The coefficients a_{0}, …, a_{9} have units of N/m/V^{2} and are listed in Table 2.
The relationship between the deflection in the zdirection, w, and the normalized height, h, is given as
The relationship between w and V can be determined by substituting expressions (14) and (15) into (12) and by solving Equations (12) and (13) simultaneously with MATLAB. These theoretical results are drawn in Fig. 6c.
Figure 6a,b show a micrograph and the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of the repulsive DM. The four electrodes can be clearly seen in Fig. 6b.
The voltagedeflection performance of the DM is measured with a 3D optical profiler, namely, Zygo NewView 7300 (Zygo, Middlefield, CT, USA). First, one of the elements is connected in the twolayer mode and dc voltages of 0–100 V are applied with increments of 5 V. The measured deflections are shown in Fig. 6c (The values are averaged over 5 independent measurements). Then, the same element is connected in the pseudothreelayer mode, and the same voltages are applied again. The new voltagedeflection relationship is also shown in Fig. 6c.
From the experimental results, it is easy to see that in the pseudothreelayer mode, the deflection is larger, and a maximum deflection of 4.5 μm is achieved. Several other elements are also measured and, deflections in the range of 4.1–4.5 μm are achieved under a driving voltage of 100 V.
Overall, the theoretical results are consistent with the experimental results. The discrepancies are mainly attributed to two reasons: 1) The potential of the mirror segment is the same as that of the movable electrode, which alters the electric field distribution and slightly reduces the repulsive force. 2) The initial bending deformation of the large mirror segment exists because of liquid surface tension effects when the structure is released in the HF solution, thereby modifying the initial height of the movable electrode.
Discussions
In summary, a pseudothreelayer repulsive actuator that integrates the advantages of the twolayer and the threelayer repulsive actuators is proposed. A theoretical analysis that combines physical modeling with SC numerical calculations is performed. The pseudothreelayer actuator has the largest electrostatic force and theoretical stroke when compared with the other two actuators. Its structure is compatible with the parallelplate actuators and the repulsive actuators, and existing devices based on these actuators can be altered to easily accommodate the pseudothreelayer actuator. A previous 19element DM based on a twolayer actuator is converted into the pseudothreelayer mode, and the resulting device is analyzed theoretically and experimentally. The results show a larger displacement than that in the twolayer mode under the same applied voltage and a maximum displacement of 4.5 μm is achieved.
Methods
Sample fabrication
The DM was fabricated by MUMPs, which has the general features of a standard surface micromachining process. Three polysilicon layers (Poly 0–2) are used as the structural material, two deposited oxide (PSG) layers are applied as the sacrificial material, and silicon nitride is used as electrical isolation between the polysilicon and the substrate, and a metal layer for electronic connection and optical reflection.
Additional Information
How to cite this article: Wang, W. et al. Electrostatic repulsive outofplane actuator using conductive substrate. Sci. Rep. 6, 35118; doi: 10.1038/srep35118 (2016).
References
Kim, C.H. Kim Mechanically coupled lowvoltage electrostatic resistive RF multithrow switch. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 59, 1114–1122 (2012).
Majumder, S. et al. Study of contacts in an electrostatically actuated microswitch. Sensors Actuators A 93, 19–26 (2001).
Shavezipur, M., Nieva, P., Khajepour, A. & Hashemi, S. M. Development of parallelplatebased MEMS tunable capacitors with linearized capacitance–voltage response and extended tuning range. J. Micromech. Microeng. 20, 025009 (2010).
Sattler, R., Plotz, F., Fattinger, G. & Wachutka, G. Modeling of an electrostatic torsional actuator: Demonstrated with an RF MEMS switch. Sensors Actuators A 9798, 337–346 (2002).
Hah, D., Patterson, P. R., Nguyen, H. D., Toshiyoshi, H. & Wu, M. C. Theory and experiments of angular vertical combdrive actuators for scanning micromirrors. IEEE J. Sel. Topics Quantum Electron. 10, 505–513 (2004).
Wang, W. et al. A 45element continuous facesheet surface micromachined deformable mirror for optical aberration correction. AIP Advances 4, 031317 (2014).
Yu, Y.T., Yuan, W.Z., Li, T.P. & Yan, B. Development of a micromechanical pitchtunable grating with reflective/transmissive dual working modes. J. Micromech. Microeng. 20, 065002 (2010).
Chen, D.S. et al. An electrothermal actuator with two degrees of freedom serving as the arm of a MEMS gripper. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 61, 5465–5471 (2014).
Choi, J.Y., Ruan, J., Coccetti, F. & Lucyszyn, S. Threedimensional RF MEMS switch for power applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 56, 1031–1039 (2009).
Burns, D. M. & Bright, V. M. Nonlinear flexures for stable deflection of an electrostatically actuated micromirror. Proc. SPIE 3226, 125–136 (1997).
Shavezipur, M., Nieva, P., Hashemi, S. M. & Khajepour, A. Linearization and tunability improvement of MEMS capacitors using flexible electrodes and nonlinear structural stiffness. J. Micromech. Microeng. 22, 025022 (2012).
Dagel, D. J. et al. Largestroke MEMS deformable mirrors for adaptive optics. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 15, 572–583 (2006).
Ren, H. Tao, F., Wang, W. & Yao, J. An outofplane electrostatic actuator based on the lever principle. J. Micromech. Microeng. 21, 045019 (2011).
Chiou, J.C., Kou, C.F. & Lin, Y.J. A micromirror with large static rotation and vertical actuation. IEEE J. Sel. Topics Quantum Electron. 13, 297–303 (2007).
Manzanera, S., Helmbrecht, M. A., Kempf, C. J. & Roorda, A. MEMS segmentedbased adaptive optics scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Biomed. Opt. Express 2, 1204–1217 (2011).
He, S., Ben Mrad, R. & Chong, J. Repulsiveforce outofplane large stroke translation micro electrostatic actuator. J. Micromech. Microeng. 21, 075002 (2011).
He, S., Ben Mrad, R. & Chong, J. Development of a highperformance microelectrostatic repulsiveforce rotation actuator. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 19, 561–569 (2010).
Tang, W. C., Lim, M. G. & Howe, R. T. Electrostatically balanced comb drive for controlled levitation. SolidState Sensor and Actuator Workshop 23–27 (IEEE, 1990).
Tang, W. C., Lim, M. G. & Howe, R. T. Electrostatic comb drive levitation and control method. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 1, 170–178 (1992).
Lee, K. B. & Cho, Y.H. Laterally driven electrostatic repulsiveforce microactuators using asymmetric field distribution J. Microelectromech. Syst. 10, 128–136 (2001).
He, S. & Ben Mrad, R. Development of a novel translation micromirror for adaptive optics. Proc. SPIE 5264, 154–161 (2003).
He, S. & Ben Mrad, R. Largestroke microelectrostatic actuators for vertical translation of micromirrors used in adaptive optics. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 52, 974–983 (2005).
Rezadad, I., Azad, J. B., Smith, E. M., Alhasan, A. & Peale, R. E. Vertical electrostatic force in MEMS cantilever IR sensor. Proc. SPIE 9070, 90701U (2014).
Rezadad, I., Boroumand, J., Smith, E. M. & Peale, R. E. Micro electro mechanical cantilever with electrostatically controlled tip contact. Appl. Phys. Lett. 105, 033514 (2014).
Cowen, A., Hardy, B., Mahadevan, R. & Wilcenski, S. Polymumps design handbook. Available at: http://www.memscap.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/1729/PolyMUMPsDR130.pdf (Accessed: 14th June 2016) (2011).
He, S. & Ben Mrad, R. Design, modeling, and demonstration of a MEMS repulsiveforce outofplane electrostatic micro actuator. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 17, 532–547 (2008).
Brown, J. W. & Churchill, R. V. Complex Variables and Applications 8th edn (McGrawHill, New York, 2008).
Driscoll, T. A. Algorithm 756: A MATLAB toolbox for SchwarzChristoffel mapping. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 22, 168–186 (1996).
Driscoll, T. A. Algorithm 843: Improvements to the Schwarz–Christoffel toolbox for MATLAB. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 31, 239–251 (2005).
Wang, W., Ma, W., Wang, Q. & Ren, H. Conformal mapping for multiple terminals. arXiv preprint arXiv :1511.02639 (2015).
Maxwell: An electromagnetic field simulation package. Pittsburgh, PA: Ansoft Corp (2002).
Hu, F., Yao, J., Qiu, C. & Ren, H. A MEMS micromirror driven by electrostatic force. J. Electrostat. 68, 237–242 (2010).
Wang, W. et al. A 19 element segmented MEMS deformable mirror based on electrostatic repulsiveforce actuator. Proc. SPIE 8617, 861702 (2013).
Timoshenko, S. & WoinowskyKrieger, S. Theory of Plates and Shells 2nd edn (McGrawHill, New York, 1959).
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to extend special thanks to Fenggang Tao for drawing the device layout and would also like to thank Heng Shi for producing the SEM photographs. We acknowledge support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos 11403029 and 61071027 and the Youth Innovation Promotion Association CAS under Grant No. 2014346.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
W.W. and W.M. wrote the manuscript. Q.W. and H.R. contributed to the numerical calculation. C.Q. and Z.C. carried out the experiment. W.W. conceived the original idea. B.F. supervised the project. All the authors have discussed the results.
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, W., Wang, Q., Ren, H. et al. Electrostatic repulsive outofplane actuator using conductive substrate. Sci Rep 6, 35118 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep35118
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep35118
This article is cited by
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.