Romansy 16 pp 23-30 | Cite as

L-legs for the Design of Mini and Micro Parallel Compliant Mechanisms

  • Matteo Zoppi
  • Rezia Molfino
Part of the CISM Courses and Lectures book series (CISM, volume 487)


The paper presents a delocalized-compliance mechanism architecture, named L-gimbal, with 3 elastic equivalent degree of freedom and discusses three example applications of it characterized by the same degree of freedom requirements. The L-gimbal is a parallel mechanism realized using modular compliant leg elements named L-legs. It originates from a mechanism in IIM (Increased Instantaneous Mobility) singular configuration, showing that singularities can be exploited in synthesis of compliant mechanisms. The simple geometry of the L-gimbal makes it fit for fabrication with MEMS techniques. Three example applications of this compliant architecture are presented: an elastic joint for the steering-trust module of a worm robot with peristaltic locomotion, a micro wrist for minimally invasive robotic surgery, and an active MEMS mirror support.


Shape Memory Alloy Compliant Mechanism Surgical Robot Flexure Hinge Rotational Freedom 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    S. Smith. Flexures, Elements of Elastic Mechanisms. Taylor & Francis, London, England, 2000.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    J.M. Paros and L. Weisbord. How to design flexure hinges. Int. J. Machine Design, 37(27):151–156, 1965.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    N. Labontiu. Compliant Mechanisms: Design of Flexure Hinges. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2002.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    B. Trease, Y. Moon, and S. Kota. Design of large-displacement compliant joints. ASME Int. J. of Mechanical Design, 127(4):788–798, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    W. Weinstein. How to design flexure hinges. Int. J. Machine Design, 37(13-D):150–157, 1965.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    L.L. Howell. Compliant Mechanisms. Wiley, New York, 2001.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    G.K. Lau, H. Du, and M.K. Lim. Use of functional specifications as objective functions in topological optimization of compliant mechanism. Int. J. Comp. Methods in Applied Mech. and Eng., 190(34):4421–4433, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    M. Zoppi and R. Molfino. Micro L-gimbal parallel mechanism for the active support of a micro mirror. In 36th Int. Symposium on Robotics ISR05, Keidanren Kaikan, Tokyo, Japan, November 29–December 1 2005.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    D. Zlatanov, R.G. Fenton, and B. Benhabib. A unifying framework for classification and interpretation of mechanism singularities. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 117:566–572, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    D. Zlatanov, I. Bonev, and C. Gosselin. Constraint singularities of parallel mechanisms. In 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA 2002, pages 496–502, Washington, DC, USA, May 11–15 2002.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    M. Zoppi, D. Zlatanov, and CM. Gosselin. Analytical kinematics models and special geometries of a class of 4-dof parallel mechanisms. IEEE Trans. on Robotics, 21(6):1046–1055, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CISM, Udine 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matteo Zoppi
    • 1
  • Rezia Molfino
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Genova, PMARlabGenovaItaly

Personalised recommendations