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

net/publication/304638069

Novel Deployable Mechanisms With Decoupled Degrees-of-Freedom

Article  in  Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics · April 2016

DOI: 10.1115/1.4031639

CITATIONS READS

15 1,682

5 authors, including:

Shengnan Lyu Dimiter Zlatanov

Beihang University (BUAA) Università degli Studi di Genova
36 PUBLICATIONS   197 CITATIONS    86 PUBLICATIONS   2,055 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Rezia M. Molfino Matteo Zoppi

Università degli Studi di Genova Università degli Studi di Genova
295 PUBLICATIONS   1,571 CITATIONS    193 PUBLICATIONS   1,308 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Automatic handling of palletized freight units by an autonomous vehicle with forks using single plane Lidar and camera data. View project

Variable Stiffness Actuators View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Shengnan Lyu on 15 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Shengnan Lu
Robotics Institute,
Beihang University,
Beijing 100191, China;
PMAR Robotics,
University of Genoa,
Genoa 16145, Italy
Novel Deployable Mechanisms
e-mail: lvshengnan5@gmail.com
With Decoupled Degrees-of-
Dimiter Zlatanov
PMAR Robotics,
University of Genoa,
Freedom
Genoa 16145, Italy
e-mail: zlatanov@dimec.unige.it A novel family of deployable mechanisms (DMs) is presented. Unlike most such devices,
which have one degree-of-freedom (DOF), the proposed DM can be deployed and com-
pacted independently in two or three directions. This widens the range of its potential
Xilun Ding applications, including flexible industrial fixtures and deployable tents. The mechanism’s
Robotics Institute,
basic deployable unit (DU) is assembled by combining a scissor linkage and a Sarrus
Beihang University,
linkage. The kinematic properties of these two components and of the combined unit are
Beijing 100191, China
analyzed. The conditions under which the unit can be maximally compacted and deployed
e-mail: xlding@buaa.edu.cn
are determined through singularity analysis. New 2DOF DMs are obtained by linking the
DUs: each mechanism’s shape can be modified in two directions. The relationship
Rezia Molfino between the degree of overconstraint and the number of DUs is derived. The magnifica-
PMAR Robotics,
tion ratio is calculated as a function of link thickness and the number of DUs. The idea of
University of Genoa,
deployment in independent directions is then extended to three dimensions with a family
Genoa 16145, Italy
of 3DOF mechanisms. Finally, kinematic simulations are performed to validate the
e-mail: molfino@dimec.unige.it
proposed designs and analyses. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4031639]
Matteo Zoppi
PMAR Robotics,
University of Genoa,
Genoa 16145, Italy
e-mail: Zoppi@dimec.unige.it

1 Introduction deployed. Deployable roofs, e.g., covering swimming pools [15]

as well as portable structures for temporary shelters and exhibition
DMs have the ability to alter their shape automatically to meet
displays [16,17], can be erected quickly at a low cost and allow
different practical requirements and are widely used in both aero-
rapid moves from one site to another. A possible novel use is in
space and civil engineering applications [1]. In the design of a
the design of reconfigurable fixtures for large pieces, such as the
DM, usually a planar mechanism, such as the scissor or the paral-
ones used in auto manufacturing [18].
lelogram linkage, is selected as a basic building element, as in the
Most proposed DMs have 1DOF. (A rare exception is Kiper
famous Hoberman polyhedral mechanism [2]. Pellegrino and co-
and S€oylemez [19] presenting a group of foldable regular polygo-
workers improved the design of Hoberman by using differently
nal linkages, of which the cubic linkage has 3DOF.) This is a limi-
shaped links and analyzed the DMs kinematics analytically and
tation on the range of possible applications, as 1DOF may not be
numerically [3,4]. Feray et al. systematically analyzed the behav-
sufficient for the required change in physical shape. For example,
ior of the scissor linkage as a basic unit of DMs with different
during metal sheet manufacturing, high efficiency assembly lines
expansion patterns [5]. Gantes and Konitopoulou proposed a
require reconfigurable fixtures with the ability to handle workpie-
method of building arbitrarily curved deployable arches with scis-
ces with different shapes. A fixture that can vary only in one
sor linkages with different geometric parameters [6]. Zhao et al.
dimension cannot satisfy the design requirements, while a mecha-
constructed foldable stairs with scissor-shape mechanisms [7].
nism that can expand in two directions could be potentially useful
Kiper et al. used planar DUs to form deployable polygons and
for this purpose. In this paper,1 we present a novel DM with
polyhedrons [8].
2DOF. The mechanism consists of both planar and spatial sublin-
Recently, more attention has been paid to spatial linkages as
kages. Importantly, each of the 2DOFs is associated directly with
possible building units for the design of DMs. Chen developed a
the change in physical size in one of two perpendicular directions,
class of DMs using the Bennett, the Myard, and the Bricard link-
allowing very good control of the change of shape of the structure.
ages [9]. Baker presented a class of foldable spatial 6R mecha-
The idea is generalized to three dimensions, allowing to construct
nisms based on the Bricard linkage [10]. Ding et al. proposed a
a 3DOF DM enclosing a volume modifiable in three directions.
novel mast mechanism using spatial polyhedral linkages arranged
The paper is organized as follows: In Sec. 2, the 1DOF mod-
along radial axes [11]. DMs are often intended for aerospace and
ules, i.e., the scissor linkage and the Sarrus linkage, are analyzed
civil engineering applications. For example, a deployable antenna
and a DU consisting of several of these is proposed. In Sec. 3, the
[12,13] or a deployable mast [14] can be compacted into a rela-
conditions for complete folding and expansion are derived and the
tively small package to be sent into orbit, while forming a large
kinematic analysis of the proposed DU is performed. In Sec. 4, we
space structure, e.g., a reflector or a solar-array frame, when

1
Manuscript received February 2, 2015; final manuscript received September 8, Preliminary versions of parts of this work were presented in August 2013 at
2015; published online November 24, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Andrew P. Murray. ASME-IDETC (Paper No. 13187) in Portland, OR, and in Ref. [20].

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics Copyright V

C 2016 by ASME APRIL 2016, Vol. 8 / 021008-1

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/26/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 1 A scissor linkage assembly
show how a large mobile assembly with a bidirectionally expand-
able cross section area can be constructed using multiple DUs.
The degree of overconstraint of this DM is analyzed, and its mag-
nification ratio, depending on the number of units and the geomet-
ric shape of the links, is computed. An analogous 3DOF
mechanism able to deploy in three-independent spacial directions
is described in Sec. 5. Finally, Sec. 6 reports the results of simula-
tions illustrating and validating the proposed novel mechanisms
and the performed analysis.
2 The 2DOF DM Unit
Typically, a DM is made of a (possibly very large) number of
identical (or nearly identical) basic units. The unit mechanism we
proposed consists of two Sarrus linkages. It connects to neighbor-
ing units via scissor elements.
2.1 The Scissor Linkage Element (SLE). As mentioned
above, DMs often use the SLE as a basic unit. The simplest planar
SLE consists of two rigid segments, OT and SQ, of equal length l,
connected by a revolute joint in their midpoints, as in Fig. 1.
Obviously, the variable directed segments OS and QT must
always remain equal, while jOSj2 þ jOQj2 ¼ l2 and point Q
moves away from O when S comes closer. If O is fixed and S
¼ ð0; yS Þ is constrained to stay on Oy, as in Fig. 1, where the scis-
sor bars are part of a slider crank, the coordinates of T are (xQ, yS)
with x2Q þ y2S ¼ l2 .
We can add a second scissor element with segments QT1 and
TQ1 attached to the first with hinges at Q and T, and a third one,
and so on, without increasing the DOF. The motion of points Ti
and Qi, for all i, is completely determined by the motion of O and
S. Thus, if S is moving with xS ¼ 0 and O fixed, the DOF is one
and the points T1 and Q1 perform a motion similar to that of T and
Q but with a twice larger amplitude in the x direction. In general,
for the end-point of the ith SLE, Ti1 ; yi1 ¼ yS and, assuming
0  xQ      xi1 (distal elements
ffi staying to the right of proxi-
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
mal ones), xi1 ¼ ixQ ¼ i l2  y2S .
A series of SLEs can be added along rather than across the
slider direction. In Fig. 2, point Q (rather than S) is fixed to the
Fig. 2 Another scissor linkage assembly
021008-2 / Vol. 8, APRIL 2016
Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/26/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 3 The Sarrus linkage
sliding body and must move along Oy. Now, new points Qi and Ti
are added above Q and T, and again their motion can be driven by
the slider (parameterized by yQ). In this case, we have xi1 ¼ xS
and yi1 ¼ iyQ , assuming distal elements stay above proximal
ones. It should be noted that if any of the points Qi, rather than Q,
is constrained by a slider and a hinge (or by any other means) to
stay on Oy, the motion of all points remains exactly the same.
2.2 The Sarrus Linkage. The Sarrus linkage was the first 3D
overconstrained linkage to appear in a publication [21]. It converts
circular to linear motion using only hinge joints. The model and
parameters of the Sarrus linkage are shown in Fig. 3. It comprises
a single loop and six revolute joints. A unit joint rotation twist and
its axis are denoted by qi and ‘ðqi Þ; i ¼ 1; …; 6. The adjacent
axes of joints 1, 2, and 3 are parallel and so are those of joints 4,
5, and 6. In the base frame Oxyz, the x axis coincides with ‘ðq1 Þ
and Oz is along the common normal of ‘ðq1 Þ and ‘ðq6 Þ. The angle
between the necessarily nonparallel directions of Ox and ‘ðq6 Þ is
denoted by a.
From the geometric constraints of the Sarrus linkage, a purely
translational motion is generated between the base (link 0) and
link 3. (The moving link numbered i contains joints i and i þ 1.)
One can think of link 3 as the platform of a parallel mechanism
with two legs, each constraining it to perform planar motion. The
only motion, whether instantaneous or finite, allowed by both legs
is the pure translation directed as the intersection of the “planes of
the motion” of the legs.
Indeed, the intersection of the twist systems of the legs is one-
dimensional and spanned by the pure translation along k, the unit
vector of the z axis. (All elements of a planar screw system
defined by a direction, u, are the rotations with axes parallel to u
and the translations with directions perpendicular to it, and so it
can be seen by inspection that there are no other screws in the
intersection.)
Similarly, the finite motions of link 3 are given by the intersec-
tion of the motions allowed by the legs. In SE(3), the intersection
Fig. 4 The adopted Sarrus linkage
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 7 A slider–rocker mechanism
Fig. 5 A DU combining scissor and Sarrus linkages

Fig. 6 CAD model of the DU

of two distinct subgroups of type SE(2) is a one-dimensional

translational subgroup.
In the following, we will assume that ‘ðq1 Þ and ‘ðq6 Þ are copla-
nar and so are ‘ðq3 Þ and ‘ðq4 Þ. Additionally, in the Sarrus linkage
in Fig. 4 the planes traced by ‘ðq3 Þ and ‘ðq4 Þ contain ‘ðq1 Þ and
‘ðq6 Þ, respectively. In other words, the translating direction is par-
allel to any common normal of ‘ðq3 Þ and ‘ðq1 Þ, as well as of
‘ðq4 Þ and ‘ðq6 Þ. The reasons for these choices are explained in Fig. 8 Configuration space of the slider–rocker mechanism
Sec. 3. The nonzero common normals between adjacent joint axes
are denoted by l1, l2, l4, and l5. Rigid segments of some length
l0 ¼ l3 are chosen normal to q6 in the base and in link 3, to form
the physical bars composing the Sarrus assembly.
3 Analysis of the DU
Herein, we analyze the configuration space and the motion
2.3 Combining Scissor and Sarrus Linkages. The proposed transmission properties of the Sarrus linkage. This allows the
DU is composed of two Sarrus linkages with a common base (link determination of the suitable Sarrus geometries, as well as the
0) and four SLEs. The only geometric constraint between the two identification and avoidance of singularities and the derivation of
merged Sarrus linkages is that their translation directions must be the precise input–output equations of the DU.
different.
We label the two Sarrus linkages with P and Q, the correspond-
ing joint-twist and link-segment notations being qPi ; lPi1 and 3.1 The Slider–Crank/Rocker and the Sarrus Link-
age. Since the Sarrus “platform,” link 3, translates with 1DOF,
qQ Q
i ; li1 , i ¼ 2; …; 6, the common base is l0, the angle a in Fig. 3 each “leg” motion can be seen as that of a slider–crank (or slider–
is labeled as aP and aQ, respectively. In each Sarrus, joint 2 (and
rocker), such as the one in Fig. 7.
similarly joint 5) together with its adjacent links can be thought of
The configuration space of such a linkage can be described by a
as a scissor element, analogous to the one composed of OT and
system of two quadratic equations in the variables xA, yA, and yQ
SQ in Fig. 2 (the role of the slider being played by the Sarrus link-
age translation). Figure 5 shows the schematic diagram of the (
mechanism, while the computer-aided design (CAD) model of the x2A þ y2A ¼ l21
(1)
combined DU is shown in Fig. 6. ðxA  hÞ2 þ ðyQ  yA Þ2 ¼ l22
During the movement of the deployment unit, the two Sarrus
branches can move independently from one another, realizing an Each equation defines a cylinder with axis through the origin:
arbitrary relative planar translation between the links with the one along the z axis, the other inclined at 45 deg in Oyz. The con-
rigid bars lP3 and lQ 3 . The movement of each Sarrus can be trans- figuration space is the intersection curve of the two cylinders. For
mitted to a neighboring unit via a shared scissor linkage. Thus, the linkage in Fig. 7 with l1 ¼ 80; l2 ¼ 60, and h ¼ 30, the
each branch of the DU can fold and deploy in one direction inde- solution is shown in Fig. 8.
pendently from the other branch, and hence with 2DOF, but syn- To analyze how the linkage transmits motion, we assume that
chronously with other attached DUs, maintaining the same 2DOF the input is the rotation at O and the output is the linear motion of
within the larger assembly. Q. Then, the input and output singularities are the critical points

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics APRIL 2016, Vol. 8 / 021008-3

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/26/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 1 Singularities in three cases

l1  l2 > 0 l1  l2 ¼ 0 l1  l2 < 0

s1 IIM,RI,RO IIM,RI,RO IIM,RI,RO

s2 and s3 RI,IO RI,IO RI,IO
s4 II,RO IIM,RI,RO 
s5 II,RO  

Fig. 10 A collapsible Sarrus with nonzero offsets (a) and top

view (b)

Fig. 9 The three types of c-spaces for a collapsable Sarrus leg

of the projection of the configuration space curve on the circle

x2A þ y2A ¼ l21 in Oxy and on the z axis, respectively. For example,
in Fig. 8, there are four singular configurations. Points s1 and s4
indicate the singular configurations which belong to the class2 (II
and RO), while s2 and s3 represent (RI and IO) singularities [22].
Depending on the relative magnitude of l1, l2, and h, different
c-space curves are obtained, with different singular configura-
tions. The curve can have one or two components and may or may
not be fully wrapped around the vertical cylinder (indicating a
crank or a rocker, e.g., Fig. 8 shows a slider–rocker).
To obtain the c-space of the Sarrus linkage from the curve of
one of its two slider–crank/rocker branches, one needs to (i) possi-
bly truncate the curve by the range in z ¼ yQ allowed by the other
leg and (ii) take every remaining point (except some singularities)
in two copies, because for every generic position of Q the inverse
kinematics gives two solutions for the RRR planar chain. The
result will be homeomorphic to two copies of a slider–crank c-
space curve, merged at some singularities (and possibly with
removed sections corresponding to some ranges of z).
3.2 Fully Folding Geometries. We need not consider all the
many possible Sarrus c-spaces outlined above, because good
design requires that the Sarrus linkages used in the DU are able to
fold completely. Indeed, the magnification ratio is a key index of
a DM, and it is important that, in terms of the slider Q, yQ can
become 0 (theoretically, and in practice as near to 0 as link inter-
ference allows).
Therefore, only a Sarrus linkage which has a configuration with
all joint axes in the same plane is considered acceptable. This
implies that the pairs of lines, ‘ðq1 Þ; ‘ðq6 Þ and ‘ðq3 Þ; ‘ðq4 Þ, are co-
planar in the base and link 3, respectively. Moreover, each leg sli-
der–crank/rocker must satisfy the condition jl1  l2 j ¼ h. (Herein,
Fig. 11 Equal-bar slider–crank mechanism
the input and the output are defined in Sec. 3.2.) Depending on the
sign of l1  l2 , three types of c-spaces are possible, see Fig. 9.
The singularities of each case are shown in Table 1.
The number and type of singularities vary in the three cases.
When l1  l2 > 0, there are five singularities, while in the case
l1  l2 < 0, there are only three. When l1 ¼ l2, besides the four
singularities shown on Fig. 9(b), all the points on the circular
intersection of the two cylinders indicate singular configurations
belonging to the (RI and IO) class. In Fig. 9, point s1 is a self-
intersection at yP ¼ 0; in each case it is a c-space singularity which
belongs to types (IIM, RI, and RO). Configurations s2 and s3 are
always (RI and IO) singularities. Points s4 and s5 are of singular-
ities of class (II and RO) in the case l1  l2 > 0. These two points
merge in s4, a c-space singularity, class (IIM, RI, and RO), for
l1 ¼ l2.
For easier control, it is better to drive the mechanism without
passing through singular configurations. The selected singularity-
free c-space region is the top right segment between s1 and s2 in
Fig. 9. In each case, it is the section between s1 and s2.
A possible collapsable Sarrus linkage, with offsets h1 > 0 and
h2 < 0, is shown in Fig. 10.
Although using any leg with jl1  l2 j ¼ h allows Q to come the
closest to O; when h ¼ 0, yP reaches its maximum for given l1 and
l2. For this reason in the following, we assume all rotating links to
be of the same length.

2
In Ref. [22], six singularity types are defined: redundant input/output (RI/RO),
impossible input/output (II/IO), increased instantaneous mobility (IIM), and 3.3 Input Output Equations of the DU. The reference frame
redundant passive motion (RPM). A singularity class is a combination of types. of the DU has origin at O; Oz is along l0 which is perpendicular to

021008-4 / Vol. 8, APRIL 2016 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/26/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 the translational directions of the two Sarrus linkages. The x axis
is directed as the translation of the first Sarrus linkage, see Fig. 5.
The DU can thus be seen as two Sarrus mechanisms with a
common base, l0. The two output links, lP3 and lQ 3 , can obviously
translate independently, and so the mobility is two. Another way
of looking at the combined unit is as a serial chain of two 1DOF
(Sarrus) couplings.
As the 2DOFs are decoupled, they can be analyzed separately.
Each is realized by a Sarrus linkage equivalent to the planar
slider–crank. Let Fig. 11 represent the slider–crank equivalent to
the Sarrus with joints qQ Q
1 ; …; q6 .
As chosen in Sec. 3.2, l1 ¼ l2, therefore u1 ¼ p  2h1 , where h1
and u1 are the joint angles measured as in Fig. 11. Note that the
crank angle h1 of the planar chain which corresponds to the Sarrus
Q is exactly equal to the joint angle hQ Q
1 about joint q1 of the spa-
tial mechanism, see Fig. 5. Similarly lengths l1 and l2 correspond
to lQ Q
1 and l2 , respectively. (For the other Sarrus linkage, labeled
with P, the corresponding variables are hP2 ; lP1 , and lP2 , refer to Fig.
5.)
The displacement of the end-effector along the x axis is
Fig. 13 Assembly process of the 2DOF DM
xQ ¼ 2lQ
1 sin h1 (2)

Differentiating yields

vQ ¼ 2lQ
1 cos h1 (3)

We thus have expressions for the displacement and velocity of the

Q Sarrus branch in Fig. 5. (The lQ
3 bar translates along the x axis,
so yQ ¼ 0.) The corresponding results in the P Sarrus branch are

xP ¼ 2lP1 sin hP1 sin b (4) Fig. 14 DM with two DUs

yP ¼ 2lP1 sin hP1 cos b (5)

vP ¼ 2lP1 cos hP1
where the direction of the velocity of P is at an b þ p=2 angle to
the x axis.
4 A 2DOF DM
DUs like the ones described in Sec. 3 can be assembled into a
deployable parallelogram. Such a novel mechanism can be folded
(and deployed) independently in two directions. We describe the
assembly process, then analyze the relationship between the num-
ber of DUs and the degree of overconstraint, and derive the mag-
nification ratio as a function of the physical thickness of the link
and the number of DUs.
4.1 Assembling the Deployable Parallelogram. In the DU,
refer to Fig. 12, each Sarrus linkage leg has zero offset and equal
length links. The corner bars labeled P and Q in Fig. 12, which
correspond to links lP3 and lQ3 in Fig. 5, translate with respect to the
(6) bar at O in horizontal directions forming an angle b þ p=2. A top
view of the DU is shown in Fig. 12(b).
Two units can be assembled by merging two pairs of corre-
sponding translating bars. In Fig. 13, O, P, and Q are the corner
bars in the first unit and O0 ; P0 ; and Q0 are the corresponding parts
in the second unit. By merging P ¼ Q0 and Q ¼ P0 , a new mecha-
nism assembled with two DUs is created. The common parts are
named P and Q in the new mechanism, while O0 is called R, see
Fig. 13.
The reference frame of the obtained DM is defined as follows:
the origin is on the O translating bar, the Oxy plane is parallel to
the translating directions, and the x axis indicates the translation
of bar Q, see Fig. 14.
The input variables are hQ P
1 on the OQ branch and h1 on the OP
branch. Since translating bars O, P, and Q are part of one DU,
their positions are determined as in Sec. 3. When viewed from the
top, bars O, P, R, and Q are the vertices of a parallelogram (in the

Fig. 12 CAD model of a DU (a) and top view (b) Fig. 15 A DM with four units (a) and top view (b)

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics APRIL 2016, Vol. 8 / 021008-5

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/26/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Oxy plane). Therefore, the position of the R bar can be calculated
as
xR ¼ xQ þ xP ¼ 2lQ Q P P
1 sin h1  2l1 sin h1 sin b (7)
yR ¼ yP ¼ 2lP1 sin hP1 cos b (8)
To form the two-unit mechanism in Fig. 13, it is enough to
form the new links P and Q, and no additional connection is
needed. However, when combining several such two-unit blocks
in a parallelogram, the SLEs are essential to transmit the motion.
A DM with four units is shown in Fig. 15. The units (POQ,
PRQ, RPP0 ; and RR0 P0 ) have been used to assemble a DM; the
branch PR is common to two DUs, PRQ, and RPP0 . The scissor
elements have been used to connect branches OP with PP0 and
QR with RR0 . Two Sarrus linkages can be connected by linking
one branch of each with a scissor linkage. For achieving a larger
magnification ratio, the branches with joint axes parallel to Oxy
are used.
The four-unit DM has six translating bars connected with Sar-
rus linkages and, in addition, SLEs. More generally in a mecha-
nism assembled in this way from 2qp DUs, there are
ðq þ 1Þðp þ 1Þ translating bars. Thus, inside the parallelogram
outline, the DM consists of a grid of translating bars and connect-
ing chains.
One of the basic units of the mechanism, the Sarrus linkage, is
overconstrained. Moreover, the units themselves form multiple
closed loops. As a result, the proposed mechanism is highly over-
constrained. It turns out that it is possible to remove a single RRR
branch from each of a number of the component Sarrus linkages
without altering either the physical outline or the mobility of the
kinematic chain. This reduces the number of links and joints and
helps to avoid interference among the internal links during com-
pacting. There are two ways to remove RRR chains.
In the first, the internal grid is kept. If q ¼ 1 and p > 1, all the
Sarrus linkages on two adjacent sides of the parallelogram outline
need to be kept, so the minimum number of essential Sarrus link-
ages is p þ 1. When q > 1 and p > 1, besides the linkages on two
peripheral sides, one more Sarrus is needed on the third border;
thus, the total number is q þ p þ 1. Two of the example mecha-
nisms are shown in Fig. 16.
To illustrate that q þ p þ 1 is the minimum, we take the DM
with p ¼ 2 and q ¼ 2 as an example, see Fig. 16(b). If we only
keep the Sarrus linkage on the two peripheries, there are totally
p þ q Sarrus linkages. The constraint system of the central trans-
lating bar comprises moments in three directions. So the recipro-
cal system represents three translations. This means that the
central bar can perform translational motion in all three directions,
which violates the 2DOF condition. Adding an extra Sarrus link-
age on the third border brings an additional force in the constraint
system, reducing the freedoms to two translations.
In the second approach, the internal grid is removed. Along
each peripheral side, at most one Sarrus linkage can be removed
without increasing the 2DOF. Otherwise, a translating bar con-
nected to no Sarrus will be able to rotate around its only hinge.
When q > 1 and p > 1, 2ðq þ p  2Þ Sarrus linkages remain. If
q ¼ 1 and p > 1, the minimum number of Sarrus linkages is 2p,
Fig. 16 Simplified 2DOF DM with internal grid: (a) q 5 1, p 5 2
and (b) q 5 2, p 5 2
021008-6 / Vol. 8, APRIL 2016
Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/26/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 17 Simplified 2DOF DM without internal grid: (a) q 5 1,
p 5 2 and (b) q 5 2, p 5 2
because no links can be removed along the short sides of the
parallelogram. Two of the example mechanisms are shown in
Fig. 17.
A special case is q ¼ p ¼ 1, when 3 Sarrus linkages are
required, see Fig. 18.
By varying b, different parallelograms can be obtained. If
b ¼ 0, the footprint is a rectangle.
4.2 The Overconstraint Analysis of the Assembly. The
deployable parallelogram is highly overconstrained. Here, we cal-
culate the degree of overconstraint, c, by which the actual mobil-
ity, two, differs from the one estimated by the standard
Gr€ubler–Kutzbach formula
X
nJ
M ¼ gðnL  nJ  1Þ þ fi ¼ 6ðnL  1Þ  5nJ (9)
i¼1
Above, g ¼ 6 is the order of the system, nL is the number of links
including the base, nJ is the number of joints, and fi ¼ 1 is the
number of DOF for the ith joint.
The expected mobility, M, depends both on the numbers of unit
pairs in the two directions, q and p, and on the manner in which
the assembled DM is simplified by removing redundant RRR
chains (discussed in Sec. 4.1).
In a DM with internal grid, we obtain

2ðp þ 1Þ þ 4ðp þ 1Þ þ 4p; q ¼ 1
nL ¼ (10)
ðq þ 1Þðp þ 1Þ þ 4ðq þ p þ 1Þ þ 4qp  2; q > 1

6ðp þ 1Þ þ 6p þ 2ðp  1Þ; q ¼ 1
nJ ¼ (11)
6ðq þ p þ 1Þ þ 6qp  3 þ 2qp  2; q>1
The numbers nL and nJ are calculated by counting the links and
joints in the Sarrus and scissor linkages. In the second equation of
Eq. (10), we add ðq þ 1Þðp þ 1Þ translating bars, four extra links
for each of the q þ p þ 1 Sarrus linkages, and two links for each
of the 2qp  1 scissor elements between adjacent translating bars
not connected with a Sarrus. Similarly, in the second line of Eq.
(11), we add six revolute joints for each of the q þ p þ 1 Sarrus
linkage, three revolute joints for each of the 2pq  1 edges, of
which one branch of the Sarrus linkage is removed, and ðp þ
1Þðq  1Þ þ ðp  1Þðq þ 1Þ joints for the connecting SLEs. In the
first equations of both Eqs. (10) and (11), the numbers of links
and joints are counted in a similar way.
Fig. 18 DM with two DUs
Transactions of the ASME
 For the DM without internal grid, the relationship between the where Vcom and Vdep are the volumes of the circumscribed boxes
numbers of units, links, and joints is of the completely deployed and the completely folded configura-
 tions, respectively. The definition of the bounding right parallele-
2ðp þ 1Þ þ 8p þ 4; q ¼ 1 piped, with (variable-length) sides W, L, and height H, is shown in
nL ¼ (12)
2ðq þ pÞ þ 8ðq þ p  2Þ þ 8; q > 1 Fig. 19. Its volume is V ¼ WLH sin c; c ¼ b þ p=2.
We have

2ðp þ 1Þ þ 8p þ 4; q ¼ 1   
nJ ¼ (13) 2lQ sin aQ lP sin aP
2ðq þ pÞ þ 8ðq þ p  2Þ þ 8; q>1 Vcom ¼ þ pt þ t þ qt þ t
sin c sin c
 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
For the case q ¼ p ¼ 1, nL ¼ 18 and nJ ¼ 21.
The degree of overconstraint, c ¼ 2  M, is obtained by substi-  2 l2P  t2 þ h0 sin c (18)
tuting Eqs. (10)–(13) into Eq. (9). With internal grid, we have
 Vdep ¼ ð2qlQ Þð2plP Þh0 sin c (19)
10p  8; q ¼ 1
c¼ (14)
10qp  5; q > 1 where lQ (or lP) is the crank length, and aQ (or aP) is the angle
between the Sarrus linkage planes, along the short (or long) edge
Without of the maximum parallelogram. The height of the translating bars
 is denoted h0.
10p  8; q ¼ 1 For a given link size, the relationship between the magnification
c¼ (15) ratio and the number of DUs is obtained. The simulation parame-
10q þ 10p  24; q > 1
ters are lP ¼ 30, lQ ¼ 20, t ¼ 5, h0 ¼ 20; and c ¼ 90 deg. The anal-
For the special case, q ¼ p ¼ 1, the degree of overconstraint is ysis result is shown in Fig. 20.
5. In other words, five constraints can be removed without chang- In the beginning, the magnification ratio has a rapid growth
ing the DOF of the system. (Possibly, by replacing revolute joints with the increase of the number of DUs. When the numbers
with spherical or cylindrical ones.) become bigger, the rate of increase slows, r2 converges, but never
reaches its upper bound, lQ lP =t.
4.3 Magnification Ratio Analysis. Normally, a DM is com-
pacted while it is transported and deployed in its working state. 5 Expansion in the Third Dimension
Therefore, its magnification ratio is an important index of the per- A natural next step is to generalize the proposed DUs ability to
formance of a DM. In this section, the relationship between the expand in two decoupled directions in a new unit linkage that can
magnification ratio and the number of DUs is discussed. In prac- provide three-independent translations and thus give rise to a DM
tice, the physical links of the mechanism need to have some geo- able to deploy independently in all three dimensions.
metric shapes, which affect the magnification ratio and should be This can be achieved by adding another Sarrus linkage in a
taken into consideration during the design. third-independent direction. Two 2DOF DMs are connected by
The relevant definition of the magnification ratio varies with the Sarrus linkage in the third direction. In order to avoid the colli-
the application. First, we consider only the relative increase of the sion among links, the third Sarrus branch is designed to be nonco-
area of the parallelogram footprint planar. A DU with 3DOF is obtained, see Fig. 21. It can be seen
as a fixed bar with three branches, each able to perform a pure
r1 ¼ rP rQ (16) translation along a constant direction.
As in the assembly of deployable planar shapes, the scissor
where linkage plays a role in combining multiple 3DOF units into a large
DM (Fig. 22). Using the same assembling method, two 3DOF
B C DMs are obtained, the one on the left includes two DUs, the other
rP ¼ and rQ ¼
ð p þ 1Þt ðq þ 1Þt has eight.
It can be seen clearly that the so-constructed mechanism has a
are the magnification ratios in the two directions. Above, B and C great number of links which would interfere with the possible use
are, respectively, the length and width of the parallelogram in the of the interior of the deployable parallelepiped. Therefore, a
completely deployed configuration, while t is the thickness of the 3DOF DM of this type with more than two layers may be difficult
translating bar. In this definition, it is assumed that there is no link to build in practice; interferences among the links are likely to
collision in the compact form. affect the movement of the mechanism. However, adding more
According to a second definition, all the space occupied by the units in each of the two layers causes no such problems.
mechanism is considered, and then the magnification ratio is
defined as a ratio of volumes

Vdep
r2 ¼ (17)
Vcom

Fig. 20 The magnification ratio r2 as a function of the number

Fig. 19 The circumscribed box of the DM of units q and p

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics APRIL 2016, Vol. 8 / 021008-7

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/26/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 21 CAD model of the 3DOF DU
Fig. 22 Assembly of 3DOF DM
Fig. 23 Mechanism assembly with eight DUs
Fig. 24 Mechanism assembly with 18 DUs
6 Simulation
Two 2DOF DMs, one with 8 DUs and the footprint forms a par-
allelogram, the other one has 18 DUs with a rectangle footprint,
were designed and simulated.
The two DMs have different numbers of units resulting in dif-
ferent magnification ratios and degrees of overconstraint. From
Eqs. (16) and (17), the values for r1 of the two DMs are 170.67
and 216, while the r2 indices are 1.87 and 3.62. The degrees of
overconstraint in the two DMs are 35 and 85, respectively. The
mechanism with more units has a large magnification ratio, but
also a higher degree of overconstraint (Figs. 23 and 24).
The kinematic simulation results are illustrated in Figs. 23 and
24. Figures 23(a) and 24(a) show the deployed configuration, and
the compacted configuration is in Figs. 23(c) and 24(c). The simu-
lation confirms that the mobility of this assembled DM is indeed
021008-8 / Vol. 8, APRIL 2016
Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/26/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 25 A 3DOF DM contains eight 3D units
two and the two movements of the mechanism are decoupled.
This design can be potentially used as a deployable roof of a trans-
portable canopy.
A 3DOF DM which has eight DUs has also been modeled and
simulated. Figure 25(a) shows it fully compacted, and the
deployed configuration is in Fig. 25(d). Figures 25(b) and 25(c)
show the DM expanding in different directions.
7 Conclusion
This paper presents a novel family of 2DOF DMs that can be
deployed and compacted in two directions independently. The DU
of the DM uses the scissor and Sarrus linkages as its elements.
Singularity analysis determines conditions for the link lengths
ensuring that the DM can be fully compacted and deployed. The
kinematics of the DU are derived from the analysis of the compos-
ing element linkages.
By connecting DUs through revolute joints, the DOF of the
mechanism does not increase, which guarantees the mechanism
can be assembled with indefinitely many unit mechanisms, retain-
ing the same mobility. Two ways of removing the inner nonessen-
tial links are proposed. The degree of overconstraint of the
mechanisms rises with the number of units. The influence of the
number of deployable modules and the thickness of the links on
the magnification ratio is calculated.
The DU can be modified to allow a third-independent transla-
tion by adding another Sarrus linkage. Based on that, DMs with
3DOF are also acquired. Kinematic simulations of several of the
new DMs verify the results of the analysis and validate the pro-
posed design.
Acknowledgment
This research has been supported by the AUTORECON project
funded under the Seventh Framework Program of the European
Commission (Collaborative Project No. NMP-FOF-2011-
285189), National Natural Science Funds (of China) for Distin-
guished Young Scholar under Grant No. 51125020, and the
National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No.
51275015. The authors gratefully acknowledge the supporting
agencies.
References
[1] Pellegrino, S., and Guest, S. D., eds., 2000, IUTAM-IASS Symposium on
Deployable Structures: Theory and Applications, Cambridge, UK, Sept. 6–9,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Transactions of the ASME
 [2] Hoberman, C., 1991, “Radial Expansion/Retraction Truss Structures,” U.S.
Patent No. 5,024,031.
[3] Gan, W. W., and Pellegrino, S., 2006, “Numerical Approach to the Kinematic
Analysis of Deployable Structures Forming a Closed Loop,” Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng., Part C, 220(7), pp. 1045–1056.
[4] You, Z., and Pellegrino, S., 1997, “Foldable Bar Structures,” Int. J. Solids
Struct., 34(15), pp. 1825–1847.
[5] Feray, M., Koray, K., and Yenal, A., 2011, “A Review of Planar Scissor Struc-
tural Mechanisms: Geometric Principles and Design Methods,” Archit. Sci.
Rev., 54(3), pp. 246–257.
[6] Gantes, C. J., and Konitopoulou, E., 2004, “Geometric Design of Arbitrarily
Curved Bi-Stable Deployable Arches With Discrete Joint Size,” Int. J. Solids
Struct., 41(20), pp. 5517–5540.
[7] Zhao, J. S., Chu, F. L., and Feng, Z. J., 2009, “The Mechanism Theory and
Application of Deployable Structures Based on SLE,” Mech. Mach. Theory,
44(2), pp. 324–335.
€ 2008, “A Family of Deployable
[8] Kiper, G., S€oylemez, E., and Kişisel, A. U. O.,
Polygons and Polyhedra,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 43(5), pp. 627–640.
[9] Chen, Y., 2003, “Design of Structural Mechanisms,” Ph.D. thesis, University of
Oxford, Oxford, UK.
[10] Baker, J. E., 2006, “On Generating a Class of Foldable Six-Bar Spatial Link-
ages,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 128(2), pp. 374–383.
[11] Ding, X. L., Yang, Y., and Dai, J. S., 2011, “Topology and Kinematic Analysis
of Color-Changing Ball,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 46(1), pp. 67–81.
[12] Chu, Z. R., Deng, Z. Q., Qi, X. Z., and Li, B., 2014, “Modeling and Analysis of
a Large Deployable Antenna Structure,” Acta Astronaut., 95, pp. 51–60.
Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics
DownloadedViewFrom:
publicationhttp://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/
stats on 05/26/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
[13] Kwan, A. S. K., 1995, “Parabolic Pantographic Deployable Antenna (PDA),”
Int. J. Space Struct., 10(4), pp. 195–203.
[14] Brown, M. A., 2011, “A Deployable Mast for Solar Sails in the Range of
100–1000 m,” Adv. Space Res., 48(11), pp. 1747–1753.
[15] Escrig, F., Valcarcel, J. P., and Sanchez, J., 1996, “Deployable Cover on a
Swimming Pool in Seville,” J. Int. Assoc. Shell Spatial Struct., 37(1), pp.
39–70.
[16] Hoberman, C., and Davis, M., 2010, “Synchronized Four-Bar Linkages,” U.S.
Patent No. 7,644,721.
[17] Hoberman, C., 2006, “Transformation in Architecture and Design,” Transport-
able Environments, Vol. 3, Taylor & Francis, Oxon, UK.
[18] Ahmad, Z., Lu, S. N., Zoppi, M., and Molfino, R., 2013, “Conceptual Design of
Flexible and Reconfigurable Gripper for Automotive Subassemblies,” Proc.
World Acad. Sci. Eng. Tech., 80, pp. 211–216.
[19] Kiper, G., and S€ oylemez, E., 2009, “Regular Polygonal and Regular Spherical
Polyhedral Linkages Comprising Bennett Loops,” Computational Kinematics,
Springer, Berlin, pp. 249–256.
[20] Lu, S. N., Zlatanov, D., Ding, X. L., Molifino, R., and Zoppi, M., 2013, “A
Novel Deployable Mechanism With Two Decoupled Degrees of Freedom,”
ASME Paper No. DETC2013-13187.
[21] Sarrus, P. T., 1853, “Note sur la Transformation des Mouvements Rectilignes
Alternatifs, en Mouvements Circulaires; et Reciproquement,” Acad. Sci., 36,
pp. 1036–1038.
[22] Zlatanov, D., Fenton, R., and Benhabib, B., 1995, “A Unifying Framework for
Classification and Interpretation of Mechanism Singularities,” ASME J. Mech.
Des., 117(4), pp. 566–572.
APRIL 2016, Vol. 8 / 021008-9