Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanism and Machine Theory

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mechmt

Research paper

Design of a compliant adjustable constant-force gripper based on

circular beams
Jinqiang Gan a , Hao Xu b , Xianmin Zhang b , Huafeng Ding a ,∗
a School of Mechanical Engineering and Electronic Information, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China
b School of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Compliant grippers have been widely used in engineering systems to achieve precision opera-
Constant-force mechanism tions. In this paper, a compliant adjustable constant-force gripper based on circular beams is
Compliant gripper developed for realizing the compatible and stable constant-force operation. In the developed
Pseudo-rigid-body model
gripper, a stiffness-combination constant-force mechanism (SCCFM) is applied as its basis. A
Circular beam
pseudo-rigid-body PPRR model and particle swarm optimization algorithm are utilized for
circular-beam modeling and identification of the SCCFM, respectively. A devised preload
mechanism realizes the adjustment of the initial preloading state of the SCCFM. A series of
experiments are conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of the developed SCCFM and the
gripper.

1. Introduction

Over the past two decades, micro-operating systems have been developed widely in robotic processing [1], nanomanipulation [2],
biomedicine [3], precision optics [4], aerospace [5], and other engineering fields. Since micro-scale objects are usually small
and easily damaged, the micro-grippers, as the critical components of micro-operating systems, must have good environmental
compatibility and rapid perception with contact force control [6]. Compared with rigid mechanisms, compliant mechanisms are more
sensitive to changes in contact force. In addition, compliant mechanisms also have such advantages as frictionless, lubrication-free,
high motion accuracy, effortless control, and easy miniaturization [7,8]. Hence, the micro-gripper constructed by the compliant
mechanisms, the compliant grippers, have been widely used in micromanipulations [9–14].
In recent years, a constant-force operation has become a hard demand in engineering. For example, in precision engineering,
the operation processing requires maintaining the contact force’s change between the manipulator and the object within the range
of millinewtons [15,16]. For compliant gripping systems, the traditional constant-force operations are usually realized by using
closed-loop control systems composed of sensors and control algorithms [17,18]. Although it is effective, such techniques are likely
to cause complex structure and bulky problems for the entire system, which inhibits the corresponding applications to certain
extents [19]. Another way to conducting constant-force operation is to use effective constant-force mechanisms (CFMs). The CFMs
do not completely follow Hook’s law. They mainly use the buckling coupling effect when the mechanisms are largely deflected
to form the zero stiffness of the mechanism. The CFMs replace the complex control system with their mechanical characteristics,
which significantly reduces the workload of the program design and costs without affecting the accuracy. Therefore, the compliant
constant-force grippers have border applications and preferable prospects in micro-operation technology.
In general, the existing compliant constant-force grippers can be divided into curved-beam constant-force grippers and stiffness-
combination constant-force grippers. The working principle of the former is to generate constant-force output by designing a curved

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: ganjq@cug.edu.cn (J. Gan), 20141001994@cug.edu.cn (H. Xu), zhangxm@scut.edu.cn (X. Zhang), dhf@ysu.edu.cn (H. Ding).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2022.104843
Received 8 June 2021; Received in revised form 15 March 2022; Accepted 15 March 2022
Available online 1 April 2022
0094-114X/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Fig. 1. The diagram of the stiffness-combination constant-force mechanism and its different preload states: (a) Initial state; (b) positive preloading state; and (c)
negative preloading state.

beam with a rigidity close to zero. The specific way is usually to use the distributed shape optimization method in which the target
equations are firstly established, and then the shape of the curved beams is gradually determined. For example, Lan et al. [20] used
this method to design a compliant CFM that can be applied in robot end effectors. Using a similar method, Miao and Zheng [21]
optimized a compliant CFM for apple picking based on the curved beams with continuous curvature. Wang [22] achieved the
constant-force output of their proposed gripper by optimizing the geometric structure of the three connected straight beams.
Compared with curved-beam types, stiffness-combination constant-force grippers are more straightforward in structure and
design process. They acquire constant-force output by adopting a zero stiffness mechanism formed by a positive stiffness mechanism
and a negative stiffness mechanism [23]. A positive stiffness mechanism means that its reaction force is proportional to its
deformation, while a negative stiffness mechanism is the opposite. In the literature, Liu and Xu [24] designed a constant-force
gripper based on stiffness-combination constant-force mechanism (SCCFM). Considering the degree of freedom of manipulation,
Zhang and Xu [25] proposed a two-dimension compliant gripper with a constant driving force along with X and Y axes. Since a
single SCCFM has a limited constant-force range and cannot fit different sizes of grip objects, Ye et al. [26] synthesized the method
of stiffness combination and developed a two-stage constant-force gripper. Another series of compliant constant-force operating
platforms are also developed with SCCFM in Refs. [27–29].
Compliant constant-force mechanisms have made significant progress in micro-operation overload protection. Since a given CFM
has a certain output force and fixed constant-force interval, the performance of a gripper that can be improved only by the CFM is
relatively limited. A more effective way to achieve overload protection and enhance the compatibility of a gripper is by adopting
adjustable CFM. For example, Chen and Lan [30] firstly improved the output performance of the CFM by using a combination of
multiple-beam types, then used a stepper motor to achieve the preload of the CFM, and finally achieved the adjustable constant-force
output of a single CFM. Lan and Wang [31] established a curved-beam constant torque mechanism for surgical clamps using a linear
motor. This mechanism did not change its initial state but adjusted the output force by changing the length of the output lever using
the motor. Given that the complex structure and unidirectional adjustment characteristics of the platform depend on a motor, Hao et
al. [32] used the differential head to realize the manual preload adjustment of the SCCFM and then designed a two-way adjustable
compliant constant-force gripper. Anyway, the schemes proposed in these papers have the defect of large structures and are also
challenging to adapt to the micro-gripping platform.
In conclusion, a compliant gripper based on curved-beam CFM can provide a large constant-force stroke than those based on
SCCFMs. The design of SCCFM can greatly simplify the design processing. And an adjustable CFM has the advantage of significantly
improving the compatibility of the mechanism compared with the traditional compliant CFMs. However, there is still a lack of
research that effectively combines these features in one gripper system. In addition, circular beams, as a unique form of curved
beams, can be applied more conveniently in mechanisms due to their straightforward structures compared with the amorphous
curved beams. Motivated by the mentioned issues, this paper aimed to design a compliant adjustable constant-force gripper based
on circular beams. The content of this paper is organized as follows: The analysis and modeling of the SCCFM are presented in
Section 2. The gripper structure and the preloading mechanism are introduced in Section 3. The performance of the gripper is
verified through experimental study together with finite element analysis (FEA) in Section 4. In the end, Section 5 concludes this
paper.

2. Design of the stiffness-combination constant-force mechanism based on circular beams

In this section, the working principle of the constant-force gripper is firstly demonstrated. A simple comparative experiment is
carried out to illustrate the advantages of circular beams intuitively. A pseudo-rigid-body (PRB) PPRR model and elliptic integral
method are adopted for modeling the positive stiffness beams and the negative stiffness beams in the proposed SCCFM, respectively.
The parameters of the SCCFM structure are obtained by particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm. The diagram of the proposed
SCCFM and its preload principle is shown in Fig. 1. The mathematical modeling and optimization solution process are as follows.

2
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

2.1. Stiffness model of the gripper system and the SCCFM

A constant-force operating system can be divided into actuation module and constant-force module, and connected in series,
generally [24–28,30]. In such a system, the total stiffness can be written as:
𝐾actuator 𝐾SCCFM
𝐾system = (1)
𝐾actuator + 𝐾SCCFM
Eq. (1) shows that the whole system can exhibit zero stiffness when 𝐾SCCFM approaches zero, regardless of the value of 𝐾actuator .
And for 𝐾SCCFM , it consists of two parts in parallel, one has:

𝐾SCCFM = 𝐾𝑛 + 𝐾𝑝 (2)

where 𝐾𝑛 and 𝐾𝑝 denote the stiffness of the negative stiffness mechanism and the positive stiffness mechanism. From Eq. (2)
knows that 𝐾SCCFM will be zero when 𝐾𝑛 and 𝐾𝑝 are the same value but opposite to each other. Hence the mathematical models
corresponding to these two components need to be established first to solve the required 𝐾SCCFM .

2.2. Deflection model of the negative stiffness mechanism

As a typical type of negative stiffness mechanism, the inclined beam has been extensively studied for its simple structure and
superior performance. E.g., Zhao et al. [33] established a general numerical integral equation that can be used to solve the buckling
process of beams based on geometric nonlinearity theory. Holst et al. [34] introduced the beam deflection model, and used the
elliptic integral to discuss in detail the bending behavior and the axial deflection of the fixed-guided beam. And besides, the chained
beam-constraint model proposed by Chen et al. [35] provides a strategy for the solution of inclined fixed-guided beams.
Suppose a straight beam of an equal cross-section with a length of 𝐿, the elastic modulus of the material is 𝐸, and the cross-
sectional moment of inertia is 𝐼. One end of the beam is fixed, and the other free end is subjected to external loads 𝐹 and 𝑀. The
simple model describing the buckling issue of the inclined straight beam is shown in Fig. 2. For convenience, the coordinate system
is established along with the initial beam shape instead of the deformed direction. Then the moment of a point 𝑃 along the beam
can be written as Eq. (3) based on the Bernoulli–Euler equation:
𝑑𝜃
𝑀𝑃 = 𝐸𝐼 = 𝐹 sin 𝜙(𝑎 − 𝑥) − 𝐹 cos 𝜙(𝑏 − 𝑦) + 𝑀 (3)
𝑑𝑠
where 𝑑𝑠 is the differential of the length. Take the derivative of Eq. (3) with respect to 𝑠, then integrate with respect to 𝜃, and take
into account of 𝑑𝑥∕𝑑𝑠 = cos 𝜃, 𝑑𝑦∕𝑑𝑠 = sin 𝜃, and the boundary condition of 𝜅 = 𝑀∕𝐸𝐼 when 𝜃 = 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 , yield
( )2
𝑑𝜃 2𝐹
= 𝜅2 = − (cos 𝜙 sin 𝜃 − sin 𝜙 cos 𝜃)𝑑𝜃
𝑑𝑠 ∫ 𝐸𝐼
2𝐹
=−
(cos 𝜙 cos 𝜃 − sin 𝜙 sin 𝜃) + 𝐶
𝐸𝐼
2𝐹 [ ] 𝑀
= cos(𝜙 − 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 ) − cos(𝜙 − 𝜃) + (4)
𝐸𝐼 𝐸𝐼
In which 𝐶 is the integral constant. The physical meanings of 𝜅 and 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 are the curvature of 𝑃 and the slope angle of the beam
tip, respectively. Solving for 𝑑𝑠 can get
𝐿 𝐿 𝐿
𝐿= 𝑑𝑠, 𝑎 = cos 𝜃𝑑𝑠, 𝑏 = sin 𝜃𝑑𝑠 (5)
∫0 ∫0 ∫0
which gives the integrals for the displacements by knowing 𝑑𝑠 = 𝑑𝜃∕𝜅
𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝
1
𝐿= √ [ ] 𝑑𝜃 (6)
∫𝜃𝑂
2𝐹 cos(𝜙 − 𝜃) − cos(𝜙 − 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 ) ∕𝐸𝐼 + 𝑀∕𝐸𝐼
𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝
cos 𝜃
𝑎= √ [ ] 𝑑𝜃 (7)
∫𝜃𝑂
2𝐹 cos(𝜙 − 𝜃) − cos(𝜙 − 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 ) ∕𝐸𝐼 + 𝑀∕𝐸𝐼
𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝
sin 𝜃
𝑏= √ [ ] 𝑑𝜃 (8)
∫𝜃𝑂
2𝐹 cos(𝜙 − 𝜃) − cos(𝜙 − 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 ) ∕𝐸𝐼 + 𝑀∕𝐸𝐼

The parameter 𝜃 in Eqs. (6)–(8) continuously changes from 𝜃𝑂 at the fixed end to 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 at the beam tip along the beam. Since
1
the inclined beam is straight, one has 𝜃𝑂 = 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 = 0. When the beam is buckling in the first mode, 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 appears at the midpoint of
the beam due to symmetry. When into the second mode, 𝜃 gradually increases from 𝜃𝑂 to 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 2 , then decreases to 𝜃 2 , and finally
𝑚𝑖𝑛
increases to 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 . The maximum and minimum values of 𝜃 need to be solved first to get the correct solution of the above integrals,
which can be a burden. The common way to solve these problems is to transform them into the form of elliptic integrals. Refer to
Ref. [7,34], the dimensionless equations of displacements can be obtained as:
√ ( ) ( )
𝛼 = 𝐹 𝑘, 𝜙2 − 𝐹 𝑘, 𝜙1 (9)

3
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Fig. 2. Large deflection elastic beam bending under combined loads.

𝑏1 1 { ( ) [ ( )
= − √ 2𝑘 cos 𝜙 cos 𝜙1 − cos 𝜙2 + sin 𝜙 2𝐸 𝑘, 𝜙2
𝐿 𝛼
( ) ( ) ( )]}
− 2𝐸 𝑘, 𝜙1 − 𝐹 𝑘, 𝜙2 + 𝐹 𝑘, 𝜙1 (10)
𝑎1 1 { ( ) [ ( )
= − √ 2𝑘 sin 𝜙 cos 𝜙2 − cos 𝜙1 + cos 𝜙 2𝐸 𝑘, 𝜙2
𝐿 𝛼
( ) ( ) ( )]}
− 2𝐸 𝑘, 𝜙1 − 𝐹 𝑘, 𝜙2 + 𝐹 𝑘, 𝜙1 (11)
/ ( ) ( )
where 𝛼 is the dimensionless force, expressed as 𝛼 = 𝐹 𝐿2 𝐸𝐼. Functions 𝐹 𝑘, 𝜙𝑖 and 𝐸 𝑘, 𝜙𝑖 are elliptic integrals of the first and
second kind, respectively. Defined as
( ) 𝜙𝑖
𝑑𝛿
𝐹 𝑘, 𝜙𝑖 = √ (𝑖 = 1, 2) (12)
∫0
1 − 𝑘2 sin2 𝛿
( ) 𝜙𝑖 √
𝐸 𝑘, 𝜙𝑖 = 1 − 𝑘2 sin2 𝛿𝑑𝛿 (𝑖 = 1, 2) (13)
∫0
the parameter 𝑘 is the modulus of the elliptic integral function, varying between 0 to 1. And 𝜙𝑖 is the amplitude of the function,
which continuously changes from 𝜙1 to 𝜙2 . 𝜙1 and 𝜙2 are associated with the inclination angle 𝜃𝑂 and 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 at both ends of the beam,
respectively. For the beam, there is the following equation
𝜙−𝜃
𝑘 sin 𝜙𝑖 = cos (𝑖 = 1, 2) (14)
2
However, due to 𝜃𝑂 = 𝜃𝑡𝑖𝑝 = 0, using Eq. (14) to solve 𝜙1 and 𝜙2 can only get

sin 𝜙1 = sin 𝜙2 (15)

which has an infinite set of solutions. Therefore, the variable 𝜙1 is required to be the principal solution of Eq. (15), while 𝜙2 is
the higher-order solution. The order of 𝜙2 corresponds to the number of inflection points on the beam. The third order and above
solutions exist theoretically, but considering the asymmetry of the actual system, only the first two orders need to be considered.
The solution of the first mode is

𝜙2 = 𝜋 − 𝜙1 (16)

and the second mode is

𝜙2 = 2𝜋 + 𝜙1 (17)

Each mode represents a different area of the beam deflection space. Only one of the two situations can be used for the solution
process of a given beam.
In addition to the bending process, the axial deflection of the beam will produce certain horizontal displacements 𝑎2 and vertical
displacements 𝑏2 . The displacements can be obtained based on Hooke’s Law. For a beam with a cross-sectional area of 𝐴, its total
axial strain can be written as
𝐿 𝐿
𝐹 cos(𝜙 − 𝜃)
𝐿= 𝜀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑠 = 𝑑𝑠 (18)
∫0 ∫0 𝐸𝐴

4
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Fig. 3. (a) The shapes of the deflected inclined beam; and (b) the displacement–reaction force curve and the displacement–stiffness curve of the inclined beam.

so the corresponding dimensionless horizontal and vertical strain can be presented as

1 𝜀 1
𝑎2 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 cos 𝜃 𝐹 cos (𝜙 − 𝜃) cos 𝜃
= 𝑑𝑠 = 𝑑𝑠 (19)
𝐿 ∫0 𝐿 ∫0 𝐸𝐴𝐿
1 𝜀 1
𝑏2 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 sin 𝜃 𝐹 cos (𝜙 − 𝜃) sin 𝜃
= 𝑑𝑠 = 𝑑𝑠 (20)
𝐿 ∫0 𝐿 ∫0 𝐸𝐴𝐿
Hence, the dimensionless coordinates of the beam end can be computed as

𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑝 ∕𝐿 = 𝑎1 ∕𝐿 + 𝑎2 ∕𝐿 (21)
𝑏𝑡𝑖𝑝 ∕𝐿 = 𝑏1 ∕𝐿 + 𝑏2 ∕𝐿 (22)

For the solution of a fixed-guided beam as shown in Fig. 2, the deflection of the beam is generally known, so it needs to solve
the above equations in reverse.
Bistable beams have some unique mechanical properties when loaded. For example, a inclined beam with a length of 20 mm, the
in-plane thickness is 0.2 mm, the out-of-plane thickness is 4 mm, the inclination of the displacement line is 𝛾 = 2◦ , and the Young’s
modulus is 𝐸 = 7.2 × 1010 Pa. The shapes of the deflected beam are shown in Fig. 3(a). The reaction force and the stiffness of the
beam during the deflection process are shown in Fig. 3(b). It is worth noting that the second mode interval, that is, the negative
stiffness interval, whose length can theoretically be widened without limitation by changing its geometric parameters. These features
are very effective when using inclined beams to construct high-performance negative stiffness mechanisms for SCCFMs. But such a
characteristic requires the positive stiffness mechanism to provide a stable positive value in the same interval to fully realize the
superposition of zero total stiffness.

2.3. Design of the positive stiffness mechanism based on circular beam

In SCCFMs, straight beams are normally used as a positive stiffness mechanism to balance the negative stiffness of the inclined
beams [23–27,29,32]. However, the stiffness value of the straight beam can only be considered stable under the premise of small
deflection. For a instance, a pair of uniformly fixed-guided straight beams with length of 25 mm, in-plane thickness of 0.1 mm, and
out-of-plane thickness of 4 mm. A displacement of 2 mm is applied to the guide end. The characteristics of the selected material
are same as above. The results of FEA are organized as shown in Fig. 4(𝑎). Under such test conditions, the reaction force of the
/
straight beam-based system reaches 13.533 N, and the instantaneous stiffness of the structure increases from 0 to 19.7 N mm with
the increase of the input displacement.
Meanwhile, the circular beams can provide better performances when used as positive stiffness mechanisms. A simulation
experiment was carried out for a pair of semicircular beams with the same cross-section, constraints, and parameter settings a
radius of 10 mm. According to the results shown in Fig. 4(𝑏), when a 5 mm maximum driving displacement is applied at the guide
end, the maximum reaction force of this pair of semicircular beams is only 0.63 N, and the instantaneous stiffness of the structure
/
is basically stable between 0.1 and 0.2 N mm. This means the circular beams can provide smaller and more stable stiffness than
straight beams. Corresponding to the conclusion drawn at the end of Section 2.2, using circular beams to construct high-performance
positive stiffness mechanisms for SCCFMs has more advantages than using straight beams.
The mathematical modeling of the fixed-guided circular beam is complicated. Therefore, a simple pseudo-rigid-body (PRB) PPRR
model [36] is employed to establish the deflection model of the circular beam in this subsection. The PRB model method is a
recognized simple and effective method for compliant mechanisms. The adopted PRB PPRR model has been proved to be well

5
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Fig. 4. (a) The reaction force and the instantaneous stiffness of the fixed-guided straight beam; and (b) the reaction force and the instantaneous stiffness of the
fixed-guided circular beam.

applied for modeling compliant circular beams. When the PRB PPRR model is subjected to certain loads, the general equations of
the model’s end pose are
/
𝑎 𝐿 = 𝛥𝛾𝑥 + 𝛾0 + 𝛾1 cos 𝛩1 + 𝛾2 cos 𝛩 (23)
/
𝑏 𝐿 = 𝛥𝛾𝑦 + 𝛾1 sin 𝛩1 + 𝛾2 sin 𝛩 (24)
𝛩 = 𝛩1 + 𝛩2 (25)

and
( )/ ( )
⎡𝐸𝐼𝐾1 𝛩1 − 𝛩10 𝐿⎤ ⎡𝛾1 sin 𝜙 − 𝛩1 + 𝛾2 sin (𝜙 − 𝛩) 1 0 0⎤ ⎡ 𝐹 𝐿 ⎤
⎢ ( )/ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥
⎢𝐸𝐼𝐾2 𝛩2 − 𝛩20 𝐿⎥ = ⎢ 𝛾2 sin (𝜙 − 𝛩) 1 0 0⎥ ⎢ 𝑀 ⎥
(26)
⎢ 𝐸𝐼𝐾𝑥 𝛥𝛾𝑥 𝐿2 ⎥ ⎢ 0 0 1 0⎥ ⎢𝐹 cos 𝜙⎥
⎢ 𝐸𝐼𝐾𝑦 𝛥𝛾𝑦 𝐿2 ⎥ ⎢ 0 0 0 1⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ 𝐹 sin 𝜙 ⎥⎦
⎣ ⎦ ⎣
where 𝛾𝑖 𝐿 (𝑖 = 0, 1, 2) represents the length of each rigid rod, satisfying 𝛾0 + 𝛾1 + 𝛾2 = 1. 𝐾1 , 𝐾2 define the stiffness coefficient of the
two torsion springs while 𝐾𝑥 , 𝐾𝑦 correspond to the two linear springs, respectively. The incline angle and initial angle of each rod
relative to the previous one are 𝛩1,2 and 𝛩10,20 , and the angle of the model is recorded as 𝛩.
After evaluating the influence of the beam’s arc on both structure and performance, a semi-circular beam is adopted to construct
the positive stiffness mechanism. Through the detailed process described in Ref. [36], the characteristic parameters of the PRB PPRR
model for the circular beams are obtained as shown in Eq. (27). The load parameters (𝐹 , 𝑀, 𝜙) can be inversely resolved through
Eqs. (23)–(26) with these known PRB parameters.

𝛾0 = 0.0651, 𝛾1 = 0.6679, 𝛾2 = 0.2670

𝐾1 = 4.6849, 𝐾2 = 12.2019 (27)
𝐾𝑥 = 1.4390, 𝐾𝑦 = 145.1075

2.4. Parameters identification and test of the SCCFM

The diagram of the designed constant-force mechanism based on the principle of stiffness combination is shown in Fig. 1(a).
The upper block connecting the circular beams and the inclined beams is the input of the SCCFM, and the outer edge block is the
output. Between the lower block connecting the circular beams and the outer edge block lies the preload module, which refers to
a series of structures used to generate quantitative preload displacement 𝐷𝑝 .
The SCCFM has six basic structural parameters: inclined beam length 𝐿, inclined angle 𝛷, in-plane thickness of the inclined beam
𝑡1 , radius of the circular beam 𝑅, in-plane thickness of the circular beam 𝑡2 and out-of-plane thickness 𝑏. Under normal circumstances,
both the variable 𝑏 and the constant-force output 𝐹𝑡 have relatively definite requirements. So that the parameter identification
problem of the SCCFM can be sorted into a five-dimensional single-objective optimization problem. The actual objective equation
is

1 ∑ |( 𝑝
𝑁
𝑝) |
minimize ∶ 𝑒 = | 2𝐹𝑐 + 2𝐹𝑖 − 𝐹𝑡 | (28)
𝑁 𝑝=1 | |

where 𝐹𝑐𝑝 and 𝐹𝑖𝑝 are the force of the circular beam and the inclined beam along the input direction, respectively. And 𝑁 = 15
( )
sampling points are evenly distributed within the maximum displacement loading range 𝐷𝑖𝑛 of the SCCFM. Then Eq. (28) can

6
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Table 1
Geometric parameters of the SCCFM (units: mm, degree).
Material 𝑏 𝑡1 𝐿 Φ 𝑡2 𝑅
Al-6061 4 0.15 20.8844 4.0406 0.15 9.1245

Fig. 5. (a) Displacement–reaction force curves of the two pairs of beams; and (b) displacement–reaction force curves of their sum.

be understood as the length of the stroke where the output force is equal to 𝐹𝑡 in the maximum working stroke of 𝐷𝑖𝑛 . For micro-
manipulation, the sizes of the manipulated objects are typically less than 1 mm, and the gripping force also needs to be small [17].
Consequently, the parameter 𝐹𝑡 is set to 1 N and 𝐷𝑖𝑛 is set to 1 mm as a demonstration. Given the difficulty of processing, the
thickness of the beams needs to be specified first. Finally, the value range of the corresponding structural parameters can be limited
to

𝑡1 = 0.15 mm, 𝐿 ∈ [10, 30] (mm), 𝛷 ∈ [0.1, 15] (degree)

𝑡2 = 0.15 mm, 𝑅 ∈ [5, 15] (mm)

Combining Eqs. (9)–(22) and (23)–(26), a set of data obtained with the material of Al-6061 and thickness of 4 mm will be
employed for further test and design. The parameters of the SCCFM identified by the particle swarm optimization algorithm are
listed in Table 1.
Based on the established parameters, theoretical, FEA, and experimental tests are carried out on independent inclined beam pair
and circular beam pair, respectively. The test results obtained are arranged in the following Fig. 5. Profit from the structural design,
the constant-force output by the SCCFM has good stability, and only a short displacement is required to enter the constant-force
interval. The CFM, especially the inclined beam, is very sensitive to the change of the structure size, and the test scale is small,
so there is a certain difference between the experimental results and the ideal ones. For the constant-force value, the error of the
experimental result relative to the mathematical and FEA ones are 10.06% and 8.63%, respectively.
Moreover, the preload adjustment performance of the SCCFM module was tested. Two sets of preload displacement with
𝐷𝑝 = +0.8 mm and 𝐷𝑝 = −0.8 mm were preliminarily selected. In the test, the imaginary 𝐷𝑝 is applied to the SCCFM before adding
the input displacement. The reaction force of the CFM when the input end is loaded is observed. The related results are organized
in Fig. 6. It can be seen from the figure that the proposed SCCFM can still maintain a stable constant-force output in each preload
state, and the constant force interval is beyond the test range. Regarding the characteristics of the proposed SCCFM, this mechanism
can be extended to a high-performance compliant adjustable constant-force gripper design.

3. Design of the gripper and the preloading mechanism

Piezoceramic actuator is adopted as the displacement input device in this paper because of its virtue of nearly infinite resolution,
high rigidity, fast response speed, and 𝑒𝑡𝑐. Since the active constant-force mechanisms can only maintain constant-force operation
on objects of certain sizes, while the passive constant-force mechanism can ensure that the force perceived by the manipulated items
is controllable, the design of the passive constant-force mechanism is adopted in this paper. Considering the relationship between
the input and output of the proposed constant-force mechanism and the size of the selected actuator, the final designed compliant
gripper is shown in Fig. 7.
As mentioned in Section 2.1, the output of the actuator and the input of the SCCFM are connected in series. Due to the limited
amount of input provided by the actuator, a two-stage lever mechanism is utilized to enlarge the input displacement. In addition, two
dual parallel guide mechanisms are installed to restrict the direction of the movements. The moving jaw of the gripper is integrated
with the output part of the SCCFM (marked as 𝑇 block in Fig. 7(a)), and the fixed jaw is an expansion of the outer frame.

7
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Fig. 6. Displacement–reaction force curve of the SCCFM with different preload displacement 𝐷𝑝 .

Fig. 7. (a) Schematic diagram of the gripper and partial dimensioning. (b) A prototype of the proposed compliant adjustable constant-force gripper.

The preload module connects and fixes the block connecting the two circular beams (marked as 𝑀 block in Fig. 7(a)) and the 𝑇
block. Given this module should meet the requirements of two-way adjustment, large range, no additional torque, and small size,
a plan composed of a preload block, a preload bolt, a limiter, and a small guide rail is raised in this paper. The preload block first
realizes the fixed connection with the gripper through the preload bolt and the rail and then realizes the fixed connection with the
𝑀 block through the screws. The bolt can only rotate around its central axis relative to the 𝑇 block on account of the restriction of
the limiter. And due to the existence of the rail, the preload block can only move along the 𝑌 -axis. Therefore, when the preload bolt
is screwed, only the preload block will form a linear movement, and the 𝑀 block will move together, and finally, the adjustment
of the preload displacement is realized. When the gripper is working, the distance between the 𝑇 block and the 𝑀 block will not
change unless the preload bolt is further adjusted.
The capability of the proposed SCCFM was tested in Section 2.4. However, the results of Fig. 6 are based on ideal constraints
and loading conditions, which are difficult to implement in practice. To enhance the structural rigidity and reduce the mass and
volume of the CFM as much as possible, a scheme that mainly manifested as adding a pair of bosses (𝑡1 ) and three pairs of filleted
corners (𝑅1,2,3 ) is applied.
The compliance matrix method is combined with the PRB PPRR model to describe the compliance of the two-stage lever
mechanism and the guide mechanism. Since the hinges are all straight and mainly compressed, the solution of the characteristic
parameters of the PPRR model is firstly needed. By repeating the process described at the end of Section 2.3, the parameters that meet
the current requirements are obtained as: 𝛾0 = 0.0011, 𝛾1 = 0.8340, 𝛾2 = 0.1649, 𝐾1 = 4.2367, 𝐾2 = 1.3090, 𝐾𝑥 = 15.2801, 𝐾𝑦 = 27.5258.

8
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Fig. 8. The coordinate system of each hinges and the input point.

Table 2
Main geometric parameters of the gripper mechanism (units: mm).
Parameter 𝑑1 𝑑2 𝑑3 𝑑4 𝑡1 𝑡2 𝑡3 𝑡4 𝑅1 , 𝑅2 𝑅3 𝐵1 𝐵2 𝐵3 𝐵4
Value 3 22 5.5 40 4 8 11 4 10 3 5,0.5 3,0.5 27,0.15 –,0.15

Due to the designed gripper being a planer mechanism, and the PRB model is mainly suitable for describing the in-plane motion,
only the in-plane compliances of the hinges are considered in this paper. Then the foundational flexibility matrix of the leaf beams
can be expressed as
⎡ 𝐶𝑥𝐹 𝐶𝑥𝐹𝑦 𝐶𝑥𝑀 ⎤
⎢ 𝑥
⎥
𝐶𝑂𝑖 = ⎢ 𝐶𝑦𝐹𝑥 𝐶𝑦𝐹𝑦 𝐶𝑦𝑀 ⎥ (29)
⎢𝐶 𝐶𝜃𝑧 𝐹𝑦 𝐶𝜃𝑧 𝑀 ⎥⎦
⎣ 𝜃𝑧 𝐹𝑥
Each element of 𝐶𝑂𝑖 represent flexibility of the load (𝐹𝑥 , 𝐹𝑦 , 𝑀) to form a movement along the direction (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝜃𝑧 ) in its local
coordinate system. Based on Eqs. (23)–(26) the expression of each element refers to the PRB model parameters can be obtained.
The coordinate system of each hinge and their numbers are shown in Fig. 8. By concerting the matrix of Eq. (29), the compliance
of each hinge transferred to the input point can be calculated by

𝐶𝑖𝑖𝑛 = 𝐴𝑑 𝐶𝑂𝑖 𝐴𝑇𝑑 (30)

where 𝐴𝑑 donates the adjoint matrix for coordinate transformation. According to the relationship of series and parallel, the global
input compliance can be written as
( )−1
𝐶𝑂𝑖𝑛 = 𝐶𝑎 −1 + 𝐶𝑏 −1 (31)
( )−1
−1 −1 −1 −1
𝐶𝑎 = 𝐶1𝑖𝑛 + 𝐶2𝑖𝑛 + 𝐶3𝑖𝑛 + 𝐶4𝑖𝑛 (32)
{[ ] }−1
( ) −1
−1 −1 −1
𝐶𝑏 = 𝐶𝑐 −1 + 𝐶9𝑖𝑛 + 𝐶8𝑖𝑛 + 𝐶7𝑖𝑛 + 𝐶6𝑖𝑛 + 𝐶5𝑖𝑛 (33)
( )−1
𝑖𝑛 −1 𝑖𝑛 −1 𝑖𝑛 −1 𝑖𝑛 −1 𝑖𝑛
𝐶𝑐 = 𝐶11 + 𝐶12 + 𝐶13 + 𝐶14 + 𝐶10 (34)

The output compliance can be obtained by establishing the corresponding coordinate systems and the adjoint matrixes according
to the same method. However, the specific process will not be repeated here.
For a lever mechanism with a high magnification ratio, its hinges will be largely deformed, which will significantly impact the
actual output. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the drift of the lever rotation center when modeling for the magnification ratio.
Refers to Ref. [37], the drift of the rotation center is mainly related to the axial flexibility 𝐶𝑥 and the rotation flexibility 𝐶𝜃 , which
leads to the parameter describing the stability of the rotation center, expressed as

𝜆 = 𝐶𝑥 ∕𝐶𝜃𝑧 (35)

Then the amplification ratio of the two-stage lever mechanism after considering the drift of rotation center of each hinge is
obtained as
𝜆2 + 𝜆(𝑑1 𝑑2 + 2𝑑1 𝑑3 + 𝑑2 𝑑3 − 𝑑32 + 3𝑑1 𝑑4 + 𝑑2 𝑑4 − 𝑑3 𝑑4 ) + (𝑑1 𝑑2 𝑑32 + 𝑑1 𝑑2 𝑑3 𝑑4 )
𝑘𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = (36)
5𝜆2 + 𝜆(3𝑑12 + 2𝑑1 𝑑2 + 2𝑑22 − 𝑑1 𝑑3 − 2𝑑2 𝑑3 + 2𝑑32 ) + 𝑑12 𝑑32

Based on the mentioned constructions, as well as the size of the selected SCCFM and the actuator, the main geometric parameters
of the modified gripper are listed in Table 2.

9
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Fig. 9. Experiment system of the adjustable constant force gripper.

4. Experimental study of the gripper

4.1. Prototype fabrication

The prototype adjustable constant force gripper is fabricated, as exhibited in Fig. 7. To reduce the difficulty of integrated
processing caused by multiple long leaf beams, a means of sub-fabricating and assembling is accepted to complete the gripper.
The wire electrical discharge machining process is used to manufacture the rigid part and the lever mechanism. The leaf beams are
shaped by laser cutting a 0.15 mm thick aluminum plate, and the circular beams are additionally cold stamped. Other structural
parts are formed by 3D printing. The gripper exhibits a dimension of 136 × 130 × 4 mm3 . The test system is illustrated in Fig. 9. The
selected model of the PZT actuator is COREMORROW PSt150/7/60 VS12, which can provide a maximum output of 57 μ m/1200
N. The actuator is driven through a commercial amplifier and a dSPACE-MicroLabBox system. A force sensor(model: SBT970 and
SBT674) and two laser displacement sensors (model: KEYENCE LK-G5001V and LK-H050) are used to collect the load data of the
gripping jaw and the displacement data of the PSA input point and the B block, respectively.

4.2. Experimental analysis

Experimental study together with finite element analysis (FEA) is performed to validate the analytical model of the proposed
gripper. Static structural analysis is first carried out to evaluate the adjustable constant-force output property. Then the stress analysis
is also conducted to verify the mechanism can work normally. Furthermore, modal analysis is operated to assess the dynamic
characteristics of the gripper. The ‘large deflection’ setting is turned on in all finite element analyses. And to ensure the accuracy of
the FEA process, the model needs to be finely meshed, and the load substep needs to be controlled to a sufficient amount. Besides,
a pair of small offset loads are added to the inclined beam to predict the mode shape [34].
Since the proposed gripper is essentially a passive constant-force mechanism, it has two working modes. In the first mode, the
actuator is continuously inputting, but the moving jaw does not touch the object, the input block of the SCCFM (marked as 𝐵 block
in Fig. 7(a)) along with all subsequent structures are moving together. Analysis of magnification ratio and stress are performed
in this working state. Under this mode, The maximum input of the driver is 49 μm due to the influence of the input stiffness of
the mechanism. The displacement of the moving jaw in the gripping direction reaches 977.06 μm, while the FEA gave the value of
997.15 μm. The amplifying ratio is approximate 19.94 and 20.35 respectively, and compared with the theoretical magnification ratio
of 21.02, the error is 5.14% and 3.19% respectively. The design of a large magnification ratio ensures that the SCCFM can be driven
to the constant-force interval regardless of the size of the object being operated. Under this condition, the maximum input force
required for the actuator is 321.42 N. This means the input stiffness is about 6560 N∕mm, and the error of relative to the analysis
result 7279 N∕mm is 9.88%. The maximum value of equivalent stress is 396.05 MPa, which locate at the center of the shaft of the
first-level lever mechanism.
In another mode that the moving jaw has touched the object, the 𝑇 and 𝑀 block is regarded as fixed, while the 𝐵 block can
maintain its movement on account of the low stiffness of the SCCFM. As mentioned in the previous section, the 𝑇 and the 𝑀 block
is fixed connected by the preload mechanism. Thus the resultant force of the reaction force generated by the two blocks during the
operational process is the output force of the gripper. When the gripper outputs a maximum displacement as well, the results of the
gripper’s output force in the initial preload state are arranged in Fig. 10(a). It can be seen from the figure that the constant-force
output of the gripper in the initial state is 0.8118 N. The displacement of 𝐵 block reaches 852 μm at the initial preload state. Partial
sets of output force under different 𝐷𝑝 states relative to the displacement of B block 𝐷𝐵 are arranged in Fig. 10(b). Loss of the
output displacement at a higher preload state and reduced constant force value at the initial state are caused by the relatively small
output stiffness of the mechanism and the reduction of the stiffness of the beams in SCCFM due to assembly and machining errors.

10
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Fig. 10. The reaction force of the gripper: (a) at initial preload state and relative to the PSA input displacement, (b) compared with FEA ones, and (c) at
different preload state (𝐷𝑝 ) and relative to the displacement of 𝐵 block (𝐷𝐵 ).

Fig. 11. Curves of variables related to 𝐷𝑝 : (a) constant-force value, (b) standard deviation of force data in constant force interval, and (c) displacement of the
jaw and loading displacement required to enter the constant force interval.

However, due to the advantages of the designed preload mechanism, the prototype can achieve the predetermined adjustment
performance even if more preload displacement is required. Moreover, the gripper can reflect a certain constant force output in each
preload state, and this phenomenon is more evident in the lower preload state, which provides a stable safety guarantee from the
mechanism for the operation of precision objects. More results obtained are sorted out as shown in Fig. 11. All the constant forces
have good stability and have a linear relationship with preload displacements as shown in Fig. 11(a). The following two sub-figures
(b) and (c) reflect the standard deviation of the selected constant force data and its proportion in the gripping stroke. For ease of
use, the constant force data 𝐹𝑐 are fitted using a first-order polynomial with respect to preload displacement 𝐷𝑝 , expressed as

𝐹𝑐 = 0.356 × 𝐷𝑝 + 0.8108, 𝐷𝑝 ∈ [−2, 3] (37)

Note that the upper limit of the constant-force interval is greater than the displacement that the 𝐵 block can achieve in each
preload state, and the reaction force keeps good stability in the entire constant-force interval. Such output behaviors make it
possible to realize efficient constant-force manipulation without controller design. Thus, the gripper in all the gripping tests shown
in Fig. 12 are all driven by a maximum output of the PSA, different items have corresponding constant force adjustment certainly.
A performance comparison between the proposed gripper and the approximate constant-force grippers and adjustable CFMs are
tabulated in Table 3. Which can get to know that the proposed one has given more balanced superiority in terms of adjustability,
constant-force output, and force miniaturization.

4.3. Modal analysis

Lastly, the dynamic performance of the proposed gripper is verified through modal analysis. In particular, the frequency response
test of point B block with initial output and preload state is carried on. The PSA is driven by a swept-sin wave with an 8 V amplitude
and frequency ranging from 0.01 to 100 Hz. The specific frequency response is achieved by evaluating the displacement data of the
B block, which gave the final natural resonant frequency of 3.2 Hz.

11
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

Fig. 12. The gripping test of (a) fully open, (b) fully close, and gripping (c) a fine copper wire, (d) a steel ball, and (e) a micro part.

Table 3
A performance comparison with other constant force grippers and mechanisms.
Type Actuator Adjustability Constant force (N) Interval length (mm) Loading interval (mm)
Proposed PSA, screw Two-way 0.110 ∼ 1.735 0.516 ∼ 0.146 0.596 ∼ 0.346
Liu [24] PSA – 0.530 0.220 a 0.400

Zhang [25] XYZ positioning stage – 4.4(4.3) 1.4 1.7

Chen [30] –, stepper motor One-way 10.6 ∼ 21.2 4 2
Hao [32] –, Micrometer Two-way 1.31 ∼ 7.11 3 2.3
a a
Pluimers [38] Linear motor ON, OFF 0.4, 4.4 16 1
a
Conjecture.

5. Conclusion

A compliant adjustable constant-force gripper based on circular beams is proposed in this paper. Firstly, the analysis and modeling
of the circular and inclined beams in the gripper are presented. Secondly, the structural parameters of the SCCFM are identified
by the particle swarm optimization algorithm by means of the elliptic integral method and the pseudo-rigid body model method.
Thirdly, a passive constant-force gripper based on the proposed SCCFM is put forward. Finally, a series of static structural analyses
and modal analyses are conducted to demonstrate the performance of the presented gripper. The results indicate the designed gripper
has good capabilities of constant-force output and adjustment. The main contributions of this work can be concluded as follows:
(1) A compliant adjustable constant-force gripper is designed.
(2) A stiffness-combination constant-force mechanism based on circular beams is developed and can generate a stable constant
force and long constant-force interval.
(3) A compact-structured preload mechanism is designed for achieving the adjustable output of the gripper, which can make the
continuous and changing operating tasks be conducted by using a single proposed gripper.
In a word, the compliant adjustable constant-force gripper makes the operating force for micro-objects no longer severely limited
by the manipulator, and it could enable easy and safe operation without complex controller design. In future work, the optimization
of the dynamic performances will be conducted to improve the efficiencies of micro-manipulations, and automatic constant force
adjustment will also be on the schedule.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 52175035 and 51805494),
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant Nos. CUGL180819). This support is greatly acknowledged.

12
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

References

[1] C.-H. Liu, G.-F. Huang, C.-H. Chiu, T.-Y. Pai, Topology synthesis and optimal design of an adaptive compliant gripper to maximize output displacement,
J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 90 (3) (2018) 287–304, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10846-017-0671-x.
[2] A.M. Hoover, R.S. Fearing, Rapidly prototyped orthotweezers for automated microassembly, in: Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics
and Automation, IEEE, 2007, pp. 812–819, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2007.363086.
[3] M. Zareinejad, S. Rezaei, A. Abdullah, S. Shiry Ghidary, Development of a piezo-actuated micro-teleoperation system for cell manipulation, Int. J. Med.
Robot. Comput. Assist. Surg. 5 (1) (2009) 66–76, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rcs.236.
[4] A. Henke, M. Kümmel, J. Wallaschek, A piezoelectrically driven wire feeding system for high performance wedge-wedge-bonding machines, Mechatronics
9 (7) (1999) 757–767, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0957-4158(99)00025-2.
[5] M. Guelman, A. Kogan, A. Kazarian, A. Livne, M. Orenstein, H. Michalik, Acquisition and pointing control for inter-satellite laser communications, IEEE
Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst. 40 (4) (2004) 1239–1248, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TAES.2004.1386877.
[6] M. Boudaoud, S. Regnier, An overview on gripping force measurement at the micro and nano-scales using two-fingered microrobotic systems, Int. J. Adv.
Robot. Syst. 11 (3) (2014) 45, http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/57571.
[7] L.L. Howell, S.P. Magleby, B.M. Olsen, J. Wiley, Handbook of Compliant Mechanisms, Wiley Online Library, 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
9781118516485.
[8] B. Zhu, X. Zhang, H. Zhang, J. Liang, H. Zang, H. Li, R. Wang, Design of compliant mechanisms using continuum topology optimization: a review, Mech.
Mach. Theory 143 (2020) 103622, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2019.103622.
[9] M. Doria, L. Birglen, Design of an underactuated compliant gripper for surgery using nitinol, J. Med. Dev. 3 (1) (2009) http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.
3089249.
[10] M.N.M. Zubir, B. Shirinzadeh, Development of a high precision flexure-based microgripper, Precis. Eng. 33 (4) (2009) 362–370, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.precisioneng.2008.10.003.
[11] D. Petković, N.D. Pavlović, S. Shamshirband, N.B. Anuar, Development of a new type of passively adaptive compliant gripper, Ind. Robot Int. J. (2013)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IR-12-2012-452.
[12] G. Hao, R.B. Hand, Design and static testing of a compact distributed-compliance gripper based on flexure motion, Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 16 (2016)
708–716, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2016.04.011.
[13] R.S. Joshi, A.C. Mitra, S.R. Kandharkar, Design and analysis of compliant micro-gripper using pseudo rigid body model (PRBM), Mater. Today Proc. 4 (2)
(2017) 1701–1707, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.02.010.
[14] Q. Xu, Design, fabrication, and testing of an MEMS microgripper with dual-axis force sensor, IEEE Sens. J. 15 (10) (2015) 6017–6026, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1109/JSEN.2015.2453013.
[15] D. Wang, Q. Yang, H. Dong, A monolithic compliant piezoelectric-driven microgripper: Design, modeling, and testing, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mech. 18 (1)
(2011) 138–147, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2011.2163200.
[16] Q. Xu, Micromachines for Biological Micromanipulation, Springer, 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74621-0.
[17] X. Sun, W. Chen, Y. Tian, S. Fatikow, R. Zhou, J. Zhang, M. Mikczinski, A novel flexure-based microgripper with double amplification mechanisms for
micro/nano manipulation, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 84 (8) (2013) 085002, http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4817695.
[18] Q. Xu, A new compliant microgripper with integrated position and force sensing, in: 2013 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent
Mechatronics, IEEE, 2013, pp. 591–596, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/AIM.2013.6584156.
[19] P. Wang, Q. Xu, Design and modeling of constant-force mechanisms: A survey, Mech. Mach. Theory 119 (2018) 1–21, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
mechmachtheory.2017.08.017.
[20] C.-C. Lan, J.-H. Wang, Y.-H. Chen, A compliant constant-force mechanism for adaptive robot end-effector operations, in: 2010 IEEE International Conference
on Robotics and Automation, IEEE, 2010, pp. 2131–2136, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2010.5509928.
[21] Y. Miao, J. Zheng, Optimization design of compliant constant-force mechanism for apple picking actuator, Comput. Electron. Agric. 170 (2020) 105232,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105232.
[22] J.-Y. Wang, C.-C. Lan, A constant-force compliant gripper for handling objects of various sizes, J. Mech. Des. 136 (7) (2014) http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/
1.4027285.
[23] P. Wang, Q. Xu, Design of a compact compliant constant-force XY precision positioning stage, in: 2016 12th IEEE/ASME International Conference on
Mechatronic and Embedded Systems and Applications (MESA), IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–6, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MESA.2016.7587107.
[24] Y. Liu, Y. Zhang, Q. Xu, Design and control of a novel compliant constant-force gripper based on buckled fixed-guided beams, IEEE/ASME Trans.
Mechatronics 22 (1) (2016) 476–486, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2016.2614966.
[25] X. Zhang, Q. Xu, Design and analysis of a 2-DOF compliant gripper with constant-force flexure mechanism, J. Micro-Bio Robot. 15 (1) (2019) 31–42,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12213-019-00112-4.
[26] T. Ye, J. Ling, X. Kang, Z. Feng, X. Xiao, A novel two-stage constant force compliant microgripper, J. Mech. Des. 143 (5) (2021) http://dx.doi.org/10.
1115/1.4048217.
[27] Y. Liu, Q. Xu, Design of a compliant constant force gripper mechanism based on buckled fixed-guided beam, in: 2016 International Conference on
Manipulation, Automation and Robotics At Small Scales (MARSS), IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–6, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MARSS.2016.7561731.
[28] P. Wang, Q. Xu, Design of a flexure-based constant-force XY precision positioning stage, Mech. Mach. Theory 108 (2017) 1–13, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.mechmachtheory.2016.10.007.
[29] X. Zhang, Q. Xu, Design and testing of a novel 2-DOF compound constant-force parallel gripper, Precis. Eng. 56 (2019) 53–61, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.precisioneng.2018.09.004.
[30] Y.-H. Chen, C.-C. Lan, An adjustable constant-force mechanism for adaptive end-effector operations, J. Mech. Des. 134 (3) (2012) http://dx.doi.org/10.
1115/1.4005865.
[31] C.-C. Lan, J.-Y. Wang, Design of adjustable constant-force forceps for robot-assisted surgical manipulation, in: 2011 IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation, IEEE, 2011, pp. 386–391, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2011.5979556.
[32] G. Hao, J. Mullins, K. Cronin, Simplified modelling and development of a bi-directionally adjustable constant-force compliant gripper, Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng. C 231 (11) (2017) 2110–2123, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0954406216628557.
[33] J. Zhao, J. Jia, X. He, H. Wang, Post-buckling and snap-through behavior of inclined slender beams, J. Appl. Mech. 75 (4) (2008) http://dx.doi.org/10.
1115/1.2870953.
[34] G.L. Holst, G.H. Teichert, B.D. Jensen, Modeling and experiments of buckling modes and deflection of fixed-guided beams in compliant mechanisms, J.
Mech. Des. 133 (5) (2011) http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4003922.
[35] G. Chen, F. Ma, G. Hao, W. Zhu, Modeling large deflections of initially curved beams in compliant mechanisms using chained beam constraint model, J.
Mech. Robot. 11 (1) (2019) 011002, http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4041585.
[36] H. Xu, J. Gan, X. Zhang, A generalized pseudo-rigid-body PPRR model for both straight and circular beams in compliant mechanisms, Mech. Mach. Theory
154 (2020) 104054, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2020.104054.

13
J. Gan et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 173 (2022) 104843

[37] X. Shen, L. Zhang, D. Qiu, A lever-bridge combined compliant mechanism for translation amplification, Precis. Eng. 67 (2021) 383–392, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.precisioneng.2020.10.010.
[38] P.J. Pluimers, N. Tolou, B.D. Jensen, L.L. Howell, J.L. Herder, A compliant on/off connection mechanism for preloading statically balanced compliant
mechanisms, in: International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Vol. 45035, American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2012, pp. 373–377, http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/DETC2012-71509.

14