See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/225401642

Dynamic pull-in phenomenon in MEMS resonators

Article  in  Nonlinear Dynamics · April 2007

DOI: 10.1007/s11071-006-9079-z

CITATIONS READS

272 558

3 authors:

Ali H. Nayfeh Mohammad Ibrahim Younis

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
798 PUBLICATIONS   26,562 CITATIONS    230 PUBLICATIONS   4,172 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Eihab M. Abdel-Rahman
University of Waterloo
184 PUBLICATIONS   3,400 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

MEMS Bifurcation Gas Sensors View project

Metal-Organic Frameworks coated resonators for chemical detection View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammad Ibrahim Younis on 06 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163
DOI 10.1007/s11071-006-9079-z
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Dynamic pull-in phenomenon in MEMS resonators
Ali H. Nayfeh · Mohammad I. Younis ·
Eihab M. Abdel-Rahman
Received: 29 April 2005 / Accepted: 18 April 2006 / Published online: 29 September 2006

C Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2006
Abstract We study the pull-in instability in microelec-
tromechanical (MEMS) resonators and find that char-
acteristics of the pull-in phenomenon in the presence
of AC loads differ from those under purely DC loads.
We analyze this phenomenon, dubbed dynamic pull-in,
and formulate safety criteria for the design of MEMS
resonant sensors and filters excited near one of their
natural frequencies. We also utilize this phenomenon
to design a low-voltage MEMS RF switch actuated with
a combined DC and AC loading. The new switch uses
a voltage much lower than the traditionally used DC
voltage. Either the frequency or the amplitude of the
AC loading can be adjusted to reduce the driving volt-
age and switching time. The new actuation method has
the potential of solving the problem of high driving
voltages of RF MEMS switches.
Keywords MEMS . Microbeams . Resonators .
Pull-in . Primary resonance . Electric actuation
A. H. Nayfeh ()
Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, MC
0219, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA
e-mail: anayfeh@vt.edu
M. I. Younis
Department of Mechanical Engineering, State University of
New York at Binghamton, Binghamton, NY 13902, USA
E. M. Abdel-Rahman
Department of Systems Design Engineering, University of
Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
1 Introduction
Advances in microfabrication technology have enabled
the design and fabrication of RF microelectromechani-
cal (MEMS) devices, which promise breakthrough de-
velopments in telecommunications, radar systems, and
personal mobiles. In this paper, we study the dynamics
of two important MEMS RF components: resonators
and switches.
Resonant microbeams (resonators) have been
widely used as transducers in mechanical microsensors
since the mid-1980s [1]. As interest grew dramatically
in MEMS devices for wireless communications appli-
cations and the demand for high-frequency and quality
factor resonators increased rapidly, MEMS resonators
were proposed in the mid-1990s [2, 3] as a feasible
alternative to conventional large-size resonators.
There are a number of actuation methods for MEMS
devices. Electrostatic actuation is the most well estab-
lished of these actuation method because of its sim-
plicity and high efficiency [3]. In a microbeam-based
resonator, the beam is deflected by a DC bias and then
driven to vibrate around its natural frequency by an
AC harmonic load [2]. A key issue in the design of
such a device is to tune the electric load away from the
pull-in instability [4, 5], which leads to collapse of the
microbeam and hence the failure of the device.
Many studies have [4–6] addressed the pull-in phe-
nomenon and presented tools to predict its location to
enable designers to avoid it. However, these studies
investigate the stability of the static deflection of the
Springer
154
microbeam rather than the stability of motions around
this deflected position. Hence, they do not account for
motions due to the AC loading or the transients due to
the DC loading. This is particularly important in light
of the fact that the behavior of these devices is non-
linear [4, 5, 7–9]. Therefore, there is a possibility for a
dynamic instability to trigger pull-in [10] (i.e., dynamic
pull-in) below the statically predicted instability limit.
The dynamic pull-in phenomenon was reported
and analyzed for switches actuated by a step voltage
[11, 12] and various ramping rates [11]. Both studies
[11, 12] indicate that the dynamic pull-in voltage can
be as low as 91% of the static pull-in voltage. In the
presence of squeeze-film damping, the dynamic pull-in
voltage is shown to approach the static pull-in voltage
[12]. Seeger and Boser [13] also showed numerically
the presence of dynamic pull-in in the behavior of a gy-
roscope mass driven by a harmonic parallel-plate elec-
tric load.
Another MEMS device that has gained a great
deal of attention in wireless communications is the
MEMS switch. MEMS switches overcome the limi-
tations of conventional electromechanical and solid-
state switches; they have many attractive features like
low-power consumption and high isolation. The ma-
jor drawbacks of these devices are their requirement
of high driving voltages and low reliability [3, 14]. It
is highly desirable to bring the actuation voltage to a
level compatible or close to those of IC circuits and to
increase their reliability.
In [4, 5], we presented a model that predicts the static
pull-in phenomenon. In [7], we utilized perturbation
methods [15] to generate analytical expressions for the
dynamic behavior of resonators undergoing small mo-
tions around their equilibria. In [16, 17], we developed a
reduced-order model to simulate the static and dynamic
behaviors of resonators and switches undergoing small
and large motions. We utilized the model to simulate
the transient behavior of a MEMS switch and calculate
its pull-in time. In this work, we study the dynamics
of MEMS resonators around their natural frequencies
and track their motions up to the pull-in instability. We
analyze the dynamic pull-in phenomenon and present
criteria for the design of MEMS resonators. We also use
this phenomenon to design a novel RF MEMS switch
actuated by a voltage much less than the static pull-in
voltage. The switch is actuated using a combined dc
and AC loading, similar to the actuation method used
in MEMS resonators. The AC loading can be tuned by
Springer
Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163
altering either its amplitude or its frequency to mini-
mize the driving voltage and pull-in time.
We use the reduced-order model in [16, 17] to simu-
late the dynamic behavior of MEMS resonators and
switches excited near their fundamental natural fre-
quencies. We apply a shooting technique [10] and long-
time integration of the equations of motion to generate
periodic motions. This approach is valid for small and
large motions and can be applied to a wide range of
loadings and initial conditions, and hence it can be used
to study the global dynamics of switches. We validate
the numerical scheme using the analytical solution in
[7]. Then we use the global approach to simulate the
response of the low-voltage switch.
2 Problem formulation
We consider a clamped-clamped microbeam, Fig. 1,
subject to viscous damping with a coefficient ĉ per
unit length and actuated by an electric load VDC +
VAC cos( ˆ tˆ), where VDC is the DC polarization volt-
age, and VAC and  ˆ are the amplitude and frequency of
the AC voltage. The equation of motion that governs
the transverse deflection ŵ(x̂, tˆ) is written as [4, 5]
∂ 4 ŵ ∂ 2 ŵ ∂ ŵ
EI + ρ A + ĉ
∂ x̂ 4 ∂ tˆ2 ∂ tˆ
   2 
EA ∂ ŵ ∂ 2 ŵ
= d x̂ + N̂
2 0 ∂ x̂ ∂ x̂ 2
b[VDC + VAC cos (ˆ tˆ)]2
+ (1)
2 (d − ŵ) 2
where x̂ is the position along the microbeam, A and
I are the area and moment of inertia of the cross-
section, E is Young’s modulus, N̂ the applied tensile
axial force, tˆ is time, ρ is the material density, h the
microbeam thickness, d the capacitor gap width, and
 the dielectric constant of the gap medium. The last
term in Equation (1) represents an approximation of the
Fig. 1 A schematic of an electrically actuated microbeam
Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163 155

parallel-plate electric force assuming complete overlap deflection as

of the area of the microbeam and the stationary elec-
trode. The boundary conditions are
M
w(x, t) = u i (t)φi (x) (8)
i=1
∂ ŵ(0, tˆ) ∂ ŵ(, tˆ)
ŵ(0, tˆ) = ŵ(, tˆ) = 0, = = 0 (2)
∂ x̂ ∂ x̂
where u i (t) is the ith generalized coordinate and φi (x)
For convenience, we introduce the nondimensional is the ith linear undamped mode
shape of the straight
1
variables microbeam, normalized such that 0 φi φ j d x = δi j and
governed by

ŵ x̂ EI
w= , x= , t = tˆ , φiiv = N φi + ωi2 φi (9)
d  ρbh4
 φi = 0 and φi =0 at x =0 and x =1
ˆ ρbh
4
= (3) (10)
EI

Substituting Equation (3) into Equations (1) and (2), Here, ωi is the ith natural frequency of the microbeam.
we obtain We multiply Equation (4) by φn (x)(1 − w)2 , substitute
Equation (8) into the resulting equation, use Equation
∂ 4w ∂ 2w ∂w ∂ 2w (9) to eliminate φiiv , integrate the outcome from x = 0
+ + c = [α 1 (w, w) + N ]
∂x4 ∂t 2 ∂t ∂x2 to 1, and obtain
[VDC + VAC cos (t)]2
+ α2 
(1 − w)2
M 1
ü n − 2 ü i u j φi φ j φn d x
(4) i, j=1 0

w(0, t) = w(1, t) = 0,
M  1

∂w ∂w + ü i u j u k φi φ j φk φn d x + cu̇ n + ωn2 u n
(0, t) = (1, t) = 0 (5) i, j,k=1 0
∂x ∂x
 1

where the functional  is given by = α2 [VDC + VAC cos(t)] 2

φn d x
0


 M 1
1
∂ f1 ∂ f2 +2 ωi2 u i u j φi φ j φn d x
 ( f 1 (x, t), f 2 (x, t)) = dx (6)
0 ∂x ∂x i, j=1 0

M  1
The parameters appearing in Equation (4) are − ωi2 u i u j u k φi φ j φk φn d x
i, j,k,=1 0
 2 
ĉ4 d
M 1
c= , α1 = 6 , +2 u̇ i u j cφi φ j φn d x
EIT h 0
i, j=1
N̂ 2 64 
N = , α2 = (7)
M 1
EI Eh 3 d 3 − u̇ i u j u k cφi φ j φk φn d x
i, j,k=1 0
Next, we generate a reduced-order model [16, 17] by

M  1
discretizing Equations (4) and (5) into a finite-degree- + α1 u i u j u k (φi , φ j ) φn φk d x
of-freedom system consisting of ordinary-differential i, j,k=1 0
equations in time. We use the undamped linear mode

M  1
shapes of the straight microbeam as basis functions in − 2α1 u i u j u k u l (φi , φ j ) φk φl φn d x
the Galerkin procedure. To this end, we express the i, j,k,l=1 0

Springer
156 Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163

M
+ α1 u i u j u k u l u m (φi , φ j )
i, j,k,l,m=1
 1
× φk φl φm φn d x for n = 1, 2, . . . , M (11)
0

Equation (11) represents a discretized system of M cou-

pled nonlinear ordinary-differential equations describ-
ing the dynamic behavior of an electrically actuated
microbeam. A single-mode approximation yields the
following equation:

  
  1 1
u¨1 + cu˙1 + ω12 u 1 1 − 2u 1
0 0
 1
= α2 [VDC + VAC cos(t)]2
+ α1 u 31 (φ1 , φ1 )
 
1 1
× φ1 φ1 d x − 2u 1
0 0
 
1
+ u 21 φ13 φ1 d x
0
Using three or more modes in Equation (11) was shown
[16, 17] to guarantee convergence for the stable equi-
libria. In the following analysis, we use three or more
modes to generate the results.
Equation (11) constitute a non-explicit system
of second-order nonlinear ordinary-differential equa-
tions. To calculate solutions of these equations, one can
use an implicit scheme, such as a predictor–corrector
scheme, or transform them into an explicit system in
ü n by multiplying Equation (11) with the inverse of the
mass matrix. In the present calculations, we used the
latter approach.
3 Results
We utilize three, four, and five modes in the reduced-
order model, Equation (11), to calculate the equi-
libria of a microbeam under DC loading when  =
510 μm, h = 1.5 μm, b = 100 μm, d = 1.18 μm, and
the nondimensional axial load N = 8.7. Details of the
calculations are presented in [16, 17]. Figure 2 shows
variation of the microbeam mid-point deflection wMax
Springer
φ13 d x + u 21 φ14 d x
φ1 d x
0
Fig. 2 Equilibria of an electrostatically actuated resonator cal-
culated using three (blue), four (green), and five (red) modes;
solid lines: stable, dashed lines: unstable
φ12 φ1 d x
with the DC voltage. While all three models converge
(12) to the lower branch of solutions, they diverge as the
voltage approaches zero on the upper branch. The sta-
ble (lower) branch and the unstable (upper) branch of
equilibrium points collide in a saddle-node bifurcation
at the static pull-in instability VDC ≈ 4.8 V, resulting
in the destruction of both branches. This static analysis
suggests that MEMS resonators should be designed to
operate below 4.8 V to ensure stability, while MEMS
switches should be actuated by a DC voltage larger than
4.8 V to trigger pull-in.
For the dynamic analysis, we use two DC voltages:
3.5 and 2 V. It follows from Fig. 2 that four modes are
sufficient to produce both of the stable and unstable
equilibria and hence four modes are adequate to repre-
sent the global dynamics at these DC voltages.
Next, we study the dynamic behavior of the mi-
crobeam under VDC = 2 V and an AC harmonic excita-
tion near its fundamental natural frequency ω1 = 23.9.
We assume a quality factor Q = 1000, which is related
to the damping coefficient by c = ω1 /Q. We use a com-
bination of a two-point boundary-value problem and a
shooting method [10] to calculate periodic solutions of
Equation (11) and study their stability using Floquet
theory [10]. In Fig. 3, we show variation of wMax the
maximum displacement of the microbeam mid-point
with the frequency of excitation when VAC = 0.01 V.
Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163
Fig. 3 Frequency–response curve below the dynamic pull-in
instability: VDC = 2 V and VAC = 0.01 V
Fig. 4 Variation of the normalized nonlinear resonance fre-
quency with the amplitude of AC loading; solid curve: perturba-
tion approach, stars: global approach
The solid lines denote stable branches and the dashed
line denotes an unstable branch. The nonlinear res-
onance frequency in Fig. 3 is approximately 24.337,
where one of the Floquet multipliers approaches unity.
There is no indication of pull-in in the figure.
To validate the reduced-order model, we compare
in Fig. 4 the nonlinear resonance frequency obtained
using the model (stars) to that obtained using an ap-
proximate analytical solution [7] (the solid line) found
by directly attacking the distributed-parameter system,
Equations (4) and (5). The figure shows the variation
of the nonlinear resonance frequency normalized with
respect to the natural frequency ω1 = 26.9523 of a mi-
crobeam of  = 310 μm and VDC = 2 V with the ex-
citation amplitude VAC . The quality factor is Q = 151
157
Fig. 5 Frequency–response curve showing the onset of dynamic
pull-in: VDC = 2 V and VAC = 0.1 V
Fig. 6 Long-time integration results for a set of initial conditions
close to the orbit of bifurcation point B of Fig. 5
and the rest of the specifications are the same as those
used in Fig. 2. Figure 4 shows that the model is in
good agreement with the analytical solution within the
approximation limits (small but finite motions) of the
analytical solution.
Figure 5 shows variation of wMax with  for the
resonator of Fig. 3 when the AC voltage is increased
to VAC = 0.1 V. In this case, the frequency–response
curve does not close within the figure. The dotted-
dashed line represents a branch of saddles (unstable
equilibria corresponding to the upper branch in Fig. 2).
There are three cyclic-fold bifurcations within the fre-
quency range 23–25 Hz where a stable branch collides
Springer
158 Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163

Fig. 7 Long-time integration results for two sets of initial conditions close to the orbit of bifurcation point A of Fig. 5

with an unstable branch of solutions. Each bifurcation

point is characterized by the slope of the curve ap-
proaching infinity and a Floquet multiplier approaching
unity. One bifurcation point B is on the left side at
 = 24.47 and two points A and C are on the right
side at  = 24.31 and  = 24.80. Sweeping the exci-
tation frequency beyond any of these points will result
in the following qualitative changes in the response:
r A down-sweep past point A will result in a jump up
(to the left stable branch or the upper stable branch)
or in pull-in.
r An up-sweep past point B will result in a jump up (to
the upper stable branch) or down (to the lower right
stable branch) or in pull-in.
r An up-sweep past point C will result in a jump down
(to the lower right stable branch) or in pull-in.
Any of these abrupt changes in the response are un- Fig. 8 Frequency–response curves for VDC = 2 V and VAC =
desirable in devices like resonant microsensors. The 0.1 V (red), 0.2 V (green), and 0.5 V (blue)
present global analysis can predict the location of the
regions where jumps and hysteresis exist.
As an example of these qualitative changes, we show ity of the disturbance, the number of stable attractors
in Fig. 6 the results of long-time integration of Equation available at the operating point, and the size of the basin
(11) for a set of initial conditions near the bifurcation of attraction of each of the attractors. Once the system
point B and a forcing frequency  = 24.49 that slightly is disturbed away from its operating point, it might
exceeds the bifurcation threshold. The time is nondi- settle back to the same point, settle down to another
mensionalized with respect to T = 7.1195 × 10−5 s. stable attractor, or go to pull-in, depending on interac-
The system response stays for a while around the pre- tions among these factors. To illustrate this point, we
vious stable solution (its “ghost” [10]) and then leaves show in Fig. 7a and b time-history evolutions gener-
to the pull-in instability. In interpreting the results in ated from long-time integration of Equation (11) for
Fig. 6, note that w = 1 corresponds to collapse of the two sets of initial conditions close to the orbit of bifur-
microbeam into the fixed electrode. cation point A of Fig. 5. The forcing frequency is set to
The response of the system to external disturbances  ≈ 24.29, u̇ 1 = 0.2 in Fig. 7a, u̇ 1 = 0.23 in Fig. 7b,
depends on the system transient dynamics, the sever- and the rest of the initial conditions are identical. We

Springer
Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163
Fig. 9 Force–response curve showing the onset of dynamic pull-
in when Q = 1000
note from Fig. 7a that the system settles back to a
point on the lower right stable branch. On the other
hand, Fig. 7b shows that the system jumps to pull-in.
As mentioned previously, two more possibilities ex-
ist in which the system settles down on either the sta-
ble branch of the left side or the upper stable branch.
However, in the present case, the domains of attraction
of these stable branches are small (because the orbits
they represent are quite large and approach the saddle),
hence it is hard for the system to jump to these states
physically.
Increasing the amplitude of the AC voltage VAC
from 0.1 to 0.5 V, as shown in Fig. 8, moves the left
and right parts of the frequency–response curve further
away from each other and the location of the bifurca-
Fig. 10 Long-time integration results for points near the two lower cyclic-fold bifurcations of Fig. 9
159
tion points to higher values of wMax . At higher values of
VAC , an interval opens up around ω1 where the only pos-
sible solution is the upper stable branch. The basin of
attraction of this branch is small and resonators excited
in this frequency range can go to pull-in due to small
external disturbances.
Figure 9 shows variation of wMax with VAC when
VDC = 2 V,  = 24.16, and Q = 1000. The upper
branch has been truncated at wMax = 0.8 because the
continuation of the unstable branch beyond this point
is of little interest and the accuracy of the predic-
tions beyond wMax = 0.9 is dubious, as indicated in
Fig. 2. Three cyclic-fold bifurcations appear in the
figure where the slope of the curve approaches infinity
and a Floquet multiplier approaches unity. Unlike the
frequency-sweep case in Fig. 5, the highest bifurcation
point at VAC ≈ 0.282 V will always lead to pull-in. It
is a sufficient condition for dynamic pull-in. The other
two bifurcation points at VAC = 0.0498 and 0.00738 V
can lead to phenomena similar to those discussed in
Fig. 5. We illustrate two of these possibilities, namely a
jump up to a larger orbit and a jump down to a smaller
orbit in Fig. 10a and b, respectively. The initial con-
ditions for the time integration are taken from orbits
corresponding to the two bifurcation points, while the
excitation amplitudes are VAC = 0.05 and 0.00732 V,
respectively, slightly beyond the bifurcation thresholds.
The ensuing motion experiences a transient behavior,
after which the system settles onto a totally different
orbit from that before the jump. A force-sweep over
an interval including these two bifurcation points will
lead to hysteresis.
Springer
160
Fig. 11 Force–response curve for the parameters of Fig. 8 and
Q = 100
Figures 5 and 9 show that the dynamic pull-in in-
stability occurs at a voltage much lower than the static
pull-in voltage 4.8 V. The root mean squares of the volt-
age loads leading to dynamic pull-in are 2.07 and 2.2 V,
respectively. These results illustrate the importance of
taking into account dynamic pull-in when designing
MEMS resonators to avoid device failure under dy-
namic loads. They also suggest a novel dynamic actu-
ation method for MEMS switches, in which the pull-in
voltage is much less than the static pull-in voltage. This
actuation method is a promising approach to reduce the
actuation voltage of RF MEMS switches.
Fig. 12 Long-time integration results for VAC = 0.09 V and u 1 (0) = −0.265
Springer
Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163
Figure 11 shows variation of wMax with VAC for the
same parameters of Fig. 8 but with Q = 100. The upper
branch has been truncated at wMax = 0.8 because the
continuation of the unstable branch beyond this point
is of little interest and the accuracy of the predictions
beyond wMax = 0.9 is dubious, as indicated in Fig. 2.
Figure 11 shows that decreasing the quality factor by an
order of magnitude eliminates the unstable branch and
the two lower bifurcation points. On the other hand,
the highest bifurcation point undergoes a small shift
to VAC = 0.299. So, while the increase in Q elimi-
nates the undesirable nonlinear phenomena of jumps
and hysteresis, it has a minimal effect on the use of
dynamic pull-in for switching applications. In fact, the
switch packaging requirements can be relaxed signifi-
cantly, thus the quality factor, at the expense of a slight
increase in the actuation voltage used to trigger pull-in.
We have observed fractal behavior in the system re-
sponse. Figure 12a and b show a time-history evolution
and a phase portrait of the system response at a point
on the stable branch in Fig. 9 when VAC = 0.09 V. As
indicated in Fig. 9, the motion is stable and periodic. In
Fig. 13a and b, we show a time-history evolution and a
phase portrait of the system response when a single ini-
tial condition has been changed from u 1 (0) = −0.265
to −0.264. There is a qualitative difference in the sys-
tem response to these two closely-spaced sets of initial
conditions. While one of them (in Fig. 12) produces
a stable periodic motion, the other (Fig. 13) triggers
a transient response that collides with the stable man-
ifold of the saddle located at WMax ≈ 0.91 (compare
Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163 161

Fig. 13 Long-time integration results for VAC = 0.09 V and u 1 (0) = −0.264

the location of the saddle in Fig. 2 with that in Fig. 13)

and goes to pull-in. Dynamic pull-in occurs here away
from any bifurcation point, demonstrating yet another
pull-in scenario. These results show response sensitiv-
ity to initial conditions, an indication of fractal behavior
[10].
The ‘effective’ nonlinearity of the resonator changes
its sign from positive, corresponding to a hardening
behavior, to negative, corresponding to a softening be-
havior near VDC = 3.25 V. This is a result of the fact
that the device is locally (in-well) hardening due to
the effect of the mechanical field and globally soften-
ing due to the effect of the electric field, see [7] for a
detailed analysis of this phenomenon. The frequency–
response curves in the softening domain are not merely
bent to the left rather than to the right, they also have
a different structure from those found in the hardening
domain. Figure 14 shows a frequency–response curve Fig. 14 A frequency–response curve in the softening domain:
for a resonator exhibiting a softening-type nonlinearity VDC = 3.5 V and VAC = 0.1 V
where VDC = 3.5 V and VAC = 0.1 V. The left part of
the curve is composed of a stable and an unstable branch
of solutions. The right part starts with a stable branch of Likewise, force–response curves in the softening do-
solutions that goes through a period-doubling bifurca- main have a different structure from those in the hard-
tion at PD to develop a branch of stable period-two pe- ening domain. Figure 15 shows a force–response curve
riodic solutions, which in turn loses stability through a of a resonator exhibiting a softening-type effective non-
symmetry-breaking bifurcation at SB. As the frequency linearity where VDC = 4 V and σ = −0.5. As in Fig. 9,
is decreased towards PD, we find that a Floquet multi- two stable branches of period-one periodic solutions
plier exited the unit circle along the real axis through meet an unstable branch at two cyclic-fold bifurca-
−1, indicating a period-doubling bifurcation. As the tions. On the other and, the upper cyclic-fold bifur-
frequency is decreased further towards SB, a Floquet cation of Fig. 9 does not exist here, rather the branch
multiplier exited the unit circle through +1, indicat- goes through a period-doubling bifurcation PD to gen-
ing a symmetry-breaking bifurcation. Similar behav- erate a stable period-two periodic solution followed by
iors were reported in the problem of capsizing of ships a symmetry-breaking bifurcation SB where the solu-
[10, 18]. tion loses stability.

Springer
162
Fig. 15 A force–response curve in the softening domain: VDC =
4 V and σ = −0.5
4 Discussion and conclusions
We analyzed the dynamics of MEMS resonators, iden-
tified a new instability, dynamic pull-in, in capacitively-
actuated MEMS, and showed the need to take into ac-
count the static and dynamic instabilities in the design
of MEMS. The dynamic pull-in phenomenon can be
used to advantage to solve a challenging dilemma in
the design of RF MEMS switches, namely the high
driving voltage requirement. We proposed a novel ap-
proach to the design of low-voltage MEMS switches.
Experimental work is planned to investigate the feasi-
bility of the new switch design.
We found three distinct mechanisms leading to the
dynamic pull-in instability. The first mechanism is a
bifurcation (a cyclic-fold in the hardening-domain or a
symmetry-breaking in the softening-domain) that leads
directly to pull-in. It is not sensitive to initial conditions
or transient dynamics, as a result the stability limits it
predicts represent an upper bound to stable motions.
In the other two mechanisms, the transient dynamics
of the system determines whether it settles down, fol-
lowing a disturbance, to a stable orbit or pulls-in. In
one of these mechanisms, the change in the amplitude
or frequency of the AC signal drives the device be-
yond a lower cyclic-fold bifurcation, leading to a jump
up from a lower stable branch (Fig. 7b). This pull-in
mechanism is not always present. It exists only when
Springer
Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163
the quality factor and forcing level are high enough to
produce multi-stable responses (two or more coexist-
ing stable branches of solutions). When the response is
single-valued it fails to exist.
To explain the third mechanism, we summarize first
our conclusions on the dynamics of capacitively driven
microbeams. The application of a DC voltage VDC to
a microbeam creates the stable fixed point (center)
and the unstable fixed point (saddle) shown in Fig. 2.
In the phase plane representing the mid-point of the
beam and for the case of free vibration of the mi-
crobeam (no forcing or damping), a homoclinic or-
bit [10] starts and ends at the saddle and encircles
the center. This orbit is composed of a stable mani-
fold and an unstable manifold that intersect nontrans-
versely away from the saddle. Any initial conditions
(disturbances) inside the closed orbit result in a sta-
ble oscillatory motion around the center and any initial
conditions outside it result in an unstable motion. In
the presence of damping, the center becomes a stable
focus, the saddle remains a saddle, and the homoclinic
orbit is destroyed. Here, the stable and unstable man-
ifolds do not intersect. Exciting this system with a
small AC force leads to a stable periodic motion in
the stable regime near the focus. As the AC forcing
and thus the amplitude of the motion increases, the sta-
ble manifold approaches the unstable manifold. Even-
tually, both manifolds intersect transversally infinitely
many times, resulting in a complex dynamic behav-
ior called homoclinic tangle [10]. One implication of
this complex behavior is the sensitivity to initial con-
ditions or the unpredictability of motion. Increasing
the amplitude of excitation further results in an ero-
sion of the basin of attraction of bounded motions;
and the possibility of finding a set of initial conditions
that leads to a stable motion decreases. So, while a
stable periodic orbit exist, small transient deviations
around it can lead to pull-in, as seen in Figs. 12 and
13.
A minimum of three modes were employed in the
reduced-order model used to predict the transient and
steady-state responses reported here. This corresponds
to a six-dimensional phase space. As a result, generat-
ing the device stability maps is a nontrivial task. Fur-
ther study of the dynamic pull-in phenomenon as well
as generation of the stability maps under various op-
erating conditions is the subject of forthcoming work.
Meanwhile, we would like to point out that the dy-
namic pull-in instability is quite similar to the problem
Nonlinear Dyn (2007) 48:153–163
of capsizing of biased ships [18, 19] and the motion
of the probe of an atomic force microscope within a
van der Waals potential field [20, 21]. All of these phe-
nomena are manifestation of a characteristic of biased
dynamical systems, namely escape from an asymmet-
ric potential well. This process is discussed in further
details in [10].
References
1. Elwespoek, M., Wiegerink, R.: Mechanical Microsensors.
Springer, Berlin (2001)
2. Clark, J.R., Bannon, F.D. III, Ark-Chew, W., Nguyen, C.T.-
C.: Parallel-resonator HF micromechanical bandpass filters.
In: Proceedings of the Conference on Solid State Sensors
and Actuators: TRANSDUCERS ’97, Chicago, IL, Vol. 2,
pp. 1161–1164 (1997)
3. Varadan, V.M., Vinoy, K.J., Jose, K.A.: RF MEMS and Their
Applications. Wiley, New York (2003)
4. Younis, M.I., Abdel-Rahman, E.M., Nayfeh, A.H.: Static
and dynamic behavior of an electrically excited resonant
microbeam. In: Proceedings of the 43rd AIAA Structures,
Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Denver,
CO, AIAA Paper, 2002–1305 (2002)
5. Abdel-Rahman, E.M., Younis, M.I., Nayfeh, A.H.: Charac-
terization of the mechanical behavior of an electrically ac-
tuated microbeam. J. Micromech. Microeng. 12, 795–766
(2002)
6. Tilmans, H.A., Legtenberg, R.: Electrostatically driven
vacuum-encapsulated polysilicon resonators. Part II. Theory
and performance. Sensors Actuators A 45, 67–84 (1994)
7. Younis, M.I., Nayfeh, A.H.: A study of the nonlinear re-
sponse of a resonant microbeam to an electric actuation.
Nonlinear Dyn. 31, 91–117 (2003)
8. Abdel-Rahman, E.M., Nayfeh, A.H., Younis, M.I.: Dynam-
ics of an electrically actuated resonant microsensor. In: Pro-
ceedings of the International Conference of MEMS, NANO
and Smart Systems, Banff, Canada, pp. 188–196, (2003)
9. Gui, C., Legrenberg, R., Tilmans, H.A., Fluitman, J.H.J.,
Elwenspoek, M.: Nonlinearity and hysteresis of resonant
strain gauges. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 7, 122–127 (1998)
View publication stats
163
10. Nayfeh, A.H., Balachandran, B.: Applied Nonlinear Dynam-
ics. Wiley, New York (1995)
11. Ananthasuresh, G.K., Gupta, R.K., Senturia, S.D.: An ap-
proach to macromodeling of MEMS for nonlinear dynamic
simulation. In: Proceedings of the ASME International Con-
ference of Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition
(MEMS). Atlanta, GA, pp. 401–407 (1996)
12. Krylov, S., Maimon, R.: Pull-in dynamics of an elastic beam
actuated by distributed electrostatic force. In: Proceedings
of the 19th Biennial Conference in Mechanical Vibration
and Noise (VIB), Chicago, IL, Paper DETC2003/VIB-48518
(2003)
13. Seeger, J.I., Boser, B.E.: Parallel-plate driven oscillations
and resonant pull-in. In: Proceedings of the Solid-State Sen-
sor, Actuator and Microsystems Workshop. Hilton Head Is-
land, SC pp. 313–316 (2002)
14. Tilmans, H.A., Raedt, W.D., Beyne, E.: MEMS for wire-
less communications: From RF-MEMS components to RF-
MEMS-Sip. J. Micromech. Microeng. 13, 139–163 (2003)
15. Nayfeh, A.H.: Introduction to Perturbation Techniques.
Wiley, New York (1981)
16. Younis, M.I., Abdel-Rahman, E.M., Nayfeh, A.H.: A
reduced-order model for electrically actuated microbeam-
based MEMS. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 12, 672–680
(2003)
17. Abdel-Rahman, E.M., Younis, M.I., Nayfeh, A.H.: A non-
linear reduced-order model for electrostatic MEMS. In:
Proceedings of the 19th Biennial Conference in Me-
chanical Vibration and Noise (VIB), Chicago, IL, Paper
DETC2003/VIB-48517 (2003)
18. Nayfeh, A.H., Sanchez, N.E.: Chaos and dynamic instabil-
ity in the rolling motion of ships. In: Proceedings of the
17th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics. Hague, The
Netherlands pp. 617–631 (1988)
19. Soliman, M.S.: An analysis of ship stability based on tran-
sient motions. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Con-
ference on the Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Naples,
Italy (1990)
20. Ashhab, M., Salapaka, M.V., Dahleh, M., Mezić, I.: Dynam-
ical analysis and control of microcantilevers. Automatica 35,
1663–1670 (1999)
21. Ashhab, M., Salapaka, M.V., Dahleh, M., Mezić, I.:
Melnikov-based dynamical analysis of microcantilevers in
scanning probe microscopy. Nonlinear Dyn. 20, 197–220
(1999)
Springer