Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
2
, where
is the displacement of the slider crank end. The free, no load,
displacement of the actuator tip is modeled as
= g(E, actGeom) (1)
where E is the electric eld in the PZT layer and actGeom is
the geometry of the actuator.
B. Transmission
Afour-bar-type transmission is employed to amplify the small
tip displacements of the piezoelectric actuator. Due to actuator
Fig. 2. Displacement (left axis) and torque transmission curves (right axis)
for 75-Hz resonance single-apping-wing system.
out
is the torque output of
the four-bar. The lengths of these four-bars links are {L0, L1, L2, L3} = {13.5,
12.1, 10, 5} mm.
bending, a slider crank mechanism is implemented to transfer
the actuator output forces into the transmission. The four-bar
joints are modeled as ideal pin joints, with the exception of the
joint at the output link of the four-bar, designated by in Fig. 1,
which has a stiffness value assigned to it, as it undergoes the
largest range of motion and hence can signicantly affect system
dynamics. Based on the four-bar transmission kinematics mod-
eled in [23], the output angle and torque transmission function
of the four-bar is
= h(links
i
, config, ) (2)
M
drive
= f(links
i
, config,
F
in
) (3)
where
M
drive
is the moment that is applied to the wing about
its apping axis (E
3
axis from Fig. 3), links
i
are the lengths
of the 4 four-bar links, config is the conguration of the four-
bar, i.e., its position through the stroke, and
F
in
is the force
input from the actuator, as portrayed in Fig. 1. These general
equations are sufcient to describe any transmission system
transforming linear input displacement into angular output mo-
tion. In the case of a piezoelectric actuator, F
in
= k
act
( )
and represents how the actuator stiffness enters into the theo-
retical model. Numerical optimization is employed to achieve a
particular transmission ratio and symmetry over the actuator dc-
bias voltage, yielding transmission curves portrayed in Fig. 2.
Generally, higher torque transmission ratios imply a higher res-
onance frequency if everything else is kept constant. Intuitively,
this arises from the fact that higher transmission ratios impart
smaller wing inertial forces on the actuator and hence the latter
senses a smaller effective wing inertia.
C. Wing Aerodynamics
Passive rotation of the wing is achieved by attaching the wing
to a driver spar with an elastic joint, thus, allowing the elas-
tic/damping properties of the exure material to inuence wing
motion. In fact, the interaction of these elastic and damping
torques with the wings inertia and aerodynamic forces is essen-
tial to the generation of proper apping wing trajectory. Fig. 3
portrays the geometric setup of the simulation model and the
sets of Euler angles for coordinate transformations.
Throughout its motion, the wing is affected by aerodynamic
forces stemming from various small Reynolds number effects.
ARABAGI et al.: SIMULATION AND DESIGN TOOL FOR A PASSIVE ROTATION FLAPPING WING MECHANISM 789
Fig. 3. Schematics of the passive apping wing setup. Coordinate sets repre-
sent transformations established by (apping angle) and (rotation angle).
The coordinate systems are shifted for clarity, while in simulation they are all
centered at the point labeled coordinate sets origin. The
E
coordinate system
is attached to the wing.
Fig. 4. (a) Wing SolidWorks model and (b) wing prole illustration of aero-
dynamic force due to rotation. The wing center of mass and rotation axis are
illustrated.
Overall, the total force on the wing is
F
tot
= F
t
+ F
rot
+ F
air
+ F
wc
(4)
where F
t
is the translational force, F
rot
is the force due to wing
rotation, F
air
is the force due to added air mass, and F
wc
is the
force created by wake capture. Translational force estimates are
quasi-steady approximations adapted from thin airfoil theory.
F
rot
is the force generated by air resistance to wing rotation as
portrayed in Fig. 4(b). The added air mass forces are imparted
on the wing by the surrounding air and are generated due to
unsteady wing motion [24]. This is also the only force that aids
the rotation of the wing during stroke reversal, since the inertia
of the air trapped in the vicinity of the wing tends to continue
its linear motion, thereby imparting a torsional moment on the
wing [25]. The wake capture effect is a nonsteady phenomenon
occurring when the wing traverses vortices and air circulation
generated by its motion prior to the direction change. Since a
closed form expression for this force cannot be determined, it is
not included in the dynamical model. Thus, the expressions for
aerodynamic forces acting on chordwise wing strips, dr, take
the form
dF
t
=
1
2
U
2
c(r)[C
2
l
() + C
2
d
()]
1/2
dr (5)
dF
rot
=
1
2
C
rot
| |
c(r)
z
|z
|dz
dr (6)
dF
air
=
4
(
cos
sin)rc(r)
2
dr
z
RA
c(r)
2
c(r)
2
dr (7)
where is the air density, r is the radial position of a wing strip
from the wings apping axis, c(r) is the chord length of the
particular strip, and are the apping and rotation angles,
respectively (portrayed in Fig. 3), is the angle of attack of
the wing, or (/2 ), and z
RA
is the location of the rotation
axis measured from the wings leading edge. The translational
force component is obtained by vector addition of mutually
orthogonal lift and drag forces. U is taken to be the velocity in
the
E
2
direction of each wing strips midchord point
U(r) = v
mc
E
2
= r
+
c(r)
2
cos (8)
where v
mc
is the midchord velocity of each wing division. The
use of midchord velocity in the translational lift force expres-
sion is justied by the fact that the incoming air stream velocity
is linearly distributed along each chord of the wing; hence, the
best approximation to a constant velocity eld, which was used
to obtain the translational lift coefcients in [8], is the mean ve-
locity along each wing chord, observed at the midchord point.
C
l
, C
d
, and C
rot
are the translational lift, drag, and rotational
force coefcients, respectively, where the translational coef-
cient expressions were tabulated experimentally by Sane and
Dickinson for a Reynolds number (Re) of 136 [25]
C
l
() = 0.225 + 1.58 sin(2.13 7.2) (9)
C
d
() = 1.92 1.55 cos(2.04 9.82) (10)
where is in degrees. The position of the rotation axis has been
set at 1/4 chord length from the leading edge of the wing, at
its aerodynamic center (according to thin-plate airfoil theory).
The Reynolds number for our system is Re = 2800, calculated
by averaging the Re numbers obtained for each wing strip, is
similar, in aerodynamic sense, to RoboFlys one, Re = 136,
justifying the use of Sane and Dickinsons ndings as means of
approximating the aerodynamic forces on the wing. The value
for the rotational drag coefcient C
rot
was taken to be 2, as
this is the theoretical result of rotational drag on a at plate
subjected to normal ow [26], [27]. To account for the radial
variability of wing velocity, the aforementioned equations need
to be integrated numerically to obtain the aerodynamic forces
on the entire wing.
D. Equations of Motion of the Passive Rotation Wing System
The wing has a carbon ber leading edge spar with an ex-
truding vein for chordwise stiffness and a Kapton membrane
as the main airfoil (see Fig. 4). The inertial properties of the
wing required for the dynamic equations are obtained directly
from the SolidWorks model. In addition, the three carbon ber
links of the four-bar and the slider crank mechanism were mod-
eled as inertial elements. The dynamic equations are formulated
in Lagrangian form, with generalized coordinates of and
being the apping and rotation angles, respectively. Thus, we
790 IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 2, APRIL 2013
formulate the Lagrangian as follows:
L = T V =
1
2
mv v +
1
2
J
+
1
2
m
Li
v
Li
v
Li
+
1
2
J
Li
Li
Li
+
1
2
m
e
1
2
k
rot
2
(11)
where m is the wing mass augmented with the added air mass
[as described in (19)], v is the velocity at the wings center
of gravity (CG), J is the wings inertia matrix taken about the
wings center of mass, k
rot
is the torsional spring stiffness at the
rotation axis, m
Li
, J
Li
, v
Li
, and
Li
are the masses, rotational
inertias, linear and angular velocities of the four-bar links 13,
respectively, m
e
is the effective mass of the actuator,
is the
horizontal velocity of the tip of the actuator (scalar), and is
the angular velocity of the wing dened as
=
3
+
1
=
1
+
sin()
2
+
cos()
3
(12)
expressed in terms of basis vectors of the coordinate frame at-
tached to the wing. Furthermore, the expressions for angular
and linear velocity of the four-bar links are complex in closed
form and, hence, have been substituted by numerically com-
puted trajectories parametrized by the output apping angle
(i.e., v
2
(t) = f((t)) and hence
dv
2
(t)
dt
=
(t)
f
(t)
). Den-
ing the conventions f
f
(t)
and
f
df
dt
, and substituting
all knowns into the Lagrangian L, we obtain the following
equation:
L = 1/2(k
rot
2
+ sin()
2
J
yy
2
+ (cos()J
xz
+J
xx
)+cos()
(cos()J
zz
+ J
xz
)
+ 1/2m((2R
2
CG
+
2
cos(2))
2
+ 4R
CG
cos()
+ 2
2
2
) +
3
i=1
m
Li
2
x
Li
2
+
2
i=1
J
Li
2
Li
+ J
L3
2
+ m
e
2
) (13)
where R
CG
and
CG
are the radial and vertical positions, re-
spectively, of the center of mass fromthe origin of the coordinate
systems, as portrayed in Fig. 4, J
ii
are the components of the
wings inertia matrix, x
Li
is the CG position of link i of the
four-bar, and
Li
is the orientation of the links (note that the
four-bar motion is planar and equations are simplied to reect
2-D motion). Note that for a thin wing, the inertial components
J
yz
and J
xy
are extremely small and have been omitted from
the equations. Thus, the Lagrange equations describing the wing
apping and rotation dynamics are as follows:
d
dt
=
M
aero
E
1
d (14)
d
dt
= (
M
drive
+
M
aero
)
E
3
D
(15)
where d is the rotational damping coefcient, D is the ap-
ping damping coefcient arising from the transmission exure
damping,
M
drive
is the driving apping torque, and
M
aero
is the
moment due to the aerodynamic forces, explicitly dened as
M
aero
=
F
i
i
() (16)
where
F
i
s are the translational and rotational aerodynamic
forces and
i
s are the respective positions of their centers of
pressure from the wing rotation axis, explicitly dened as
|
t
()| =
0.82
|| + 0.05
c(r) (17)
|
rot
| =
span
z
dF
rot
span
dF
rot
(18)
where
t
denes the position of the translational lift center of
pressure as a function of angle of attack for each wing chord
strip c(r) and is obtained from experimental results of Dickson
et al. [28].
rot
is the effective moment arm of the rotational
force distribution of Fig. 4(b).
Given that there is no analytical solution for the added air
mass force on a wing planform moving in 3-D fashion, dF
air
of (7) does not accurately describe the moments exerted by
the added air mass on the apping and rotation angles. As an
approximation, the effect of added air mass forces was imple-
mented in the form of virtual mass that augmented the physical
mass of the wing, similar to the inertial implementation in [26]
and [29]. Stemming from the concept that the added mass effect
can be estimated as dm =
4
c(r)
2
dr [30], the expression for
m emerges as follows:
m = m
w
+
span
4
c(r)
2
dr (19)
where m
w
is the physical mass of the wing. This approximation
allows a simplied treatment of the added air mass effects that
is sufcient for the development of a simulation tool able to
predict general dynamics and lift force trends. Although this
mass augmentation approach is used in the differential equations
dening the systemdynamics, the expression for added air mass
force of (7) is used to estimate the aerodynamic lift generated
by this effect in all lift plots presented in this paper.
The previously presented Lagrange equations (14) and (15)
are fully general, governing the dynamics of a passive rotation
apping wing driven by a torque
M
drive
around the apping
axis. In our case of the driving mechanismconsisting of a piezo-
electric actuator coupled to a four-bar transmission,
M
drive
is
given by (3). Thus, substituting all the known quantities into (14)
and (15) and simplifying, we obtain the nonlinear differential
equations governing the apping and rotation angles that can be
found in the Appendix, due to their length and complexity.
III. MANUFACTURING AND EXPERIMENTAL
PARAMETER DETERMINATION
In order to best quantify the theoretical simulations perfor-
mance, two experimental systems consisting of an actuator, a
four-bar and wing were manufactured, having different reso-
nant frequencies of 30 and 75 Hz. Both systems feature the
ARABAGI et al.: SIMULATION AND DESIGN TOOL FOR A PASSIVE ROTATION FLAPPING WING MECHANISM 791
Fig. 5. Overall dimensions of the manufactured wing and actuator for the
(a) 30-Hz resonant system and (b) 75-Hz system. The actuator mount is 3-D
printed from VisiJet HR 200 material, and assembled with Cyanoacrylate glue.
same construction components, differing only in their dimen-
sions and lengths.
A. Component Manufacturing
All the parts comprising the apping wing system were man-
ufactured using the Smart Composite Microstructures (SCM)
methodology and manually assembled afterward [9]. This last
manual step generally introduces some misalignment and uncer-
tainty in the nal assembly, which tends to adversely affect the
dynamics of the system, generally in the formof unwanted com-
pliance. The transmission members are formed of two preim-
pregnated, unidirectional M60J ultrahigh modulus carbon ber
layers of 60-m thickness (Toray) sandwiching a 12.7-m layer
of Kapton (DuPont Kapton 50HN) and cured together. The wing,
whose Kapton layer serves as a membrane, is manufactured from
thinner Kapton of merely 6.3 m (DuPont Kapton 25HN), as
the minimization of the wing weight is of major importance.
The actuators active layer consists of two layers of carbon
ber bonded to a 125-m-thick layer of PZT-5H (Piezo Sys-
tems), while the passive extension has an additional layer of
s-glass, increasing stiffness. Some dimensions of the actuator
and the wing used in the experimental apping wing systems
are portrayed in Fig. 5.
B. Actuator Experimental Characterization
Since the piezoelectric actuator is of key importance in den-
ing systemdynamics, experiments were performed to obtain the
actual actuator blocking force, tip stiffness, and material prop-
erties. Using laminar plate theory, the actuator bending stiffness
with a force applied at its tip, labeled k
act
in Fig. 1, replicating
the operational scenario, was calculated at 160 N/m. Through
indentation experiments, the actual actuator stiffness was found
to be 169 N/m, measured by the ratio of force over given tip
displacements.
C. Wing Rotational Flexure Characterization
The dynamic parameters of the rotational exure were exper-
imentally measured after manufacturing, to account for any im-
perfections. The stiffness and damping properties of each exure
were determined by applying an impulse impact to it, after an
additional known mass was added. The resulting displacements
were recorded with a laser scan micrometer (Keyence LS-3100,
Woodcliff Lake, NJ), and, being second-order responses, al-
lowed the determination of stiffness and damping parameters
fromthe dominating frequency and envelope of the signal. These
test were performed under vacuum such as to eliminate aerody-
namic damping, which would constitute the main component of
damping otherwise.
D. Transmission Compliance Characterization
Given that the slider crank and four-bar exures are sources
of unwanted compliance, the stiffness and damping properties
of the transmission are measured experimentally. Compliance
of the slider crank is measured via an indentation test at the tip
of the rst transmission link, with the actuator rigidly xed. The
recorded tip stiffness is transformed via the transmission ratio
to stiffness of the slider crank and modeled in simulation in
series with the actuator tip stiffness k
act
. Throughout our exper-
iments, slider crank stiffness ranges as low as k
sc
= 300 N/m
and as high as k
sc
= 1650 N/m. The large span of stiffness val-
ues is attributed to the easy misalignment of the slider crank
links, resulting in exure buckling. For all simulations in this
paper, the 30-Hz resonance apping system was simulated with
a nominal slider crank stiffness of k
sc
= 1400 N/m, while the
75-Hz system had a value of k
sc
= 300 N/m, per experimental
measurements.
The damping coefcient of the four-bar was measured by im-
parting an impulse on wing-driving mechanism, with the wing
rotated 90
, i.e., = 0
in
experiment, suggesting that only the experimental system has
begun the transition to out-of-phase rotation, thus, reducing the
produced lift.
The full simulation of the 75-Hz resonance system, portrayed
in Fig. 11, overall portrays much worse agreement of simula-
tion to experiment. The twofold discrepancy in total lift force
produced is attributed primarily to the greatly underpredicted
apping amplitude in simulation, 20
(m
w
R
CG
CG
cos() + J
xz
cos())
2
cos()sin()(m
2
CG
+ J
yy
J
zz
)
+ (m
2
CG
+ J
xx
) + k
rot
=
M
aero
E
1
d
1
(20)
where all the constant denitions are presented in the main body
of this paper.
The equation governing the motion of is more complex as it
involves numerous inertial terms and parameterizations in terms
of . We need to remind ourselves that according to the notation
discussed in the text, we have the following:
f
f
(t)
, f
2
f
(t)
2
,
f
df
dt
,
f
d
2
f
dt
2
. (21)
Then, the equation of motion for becomes
sin
2
()J
yy
+ cos
2
()J
zz
+
R
2
CG
+
2
CG
2
1
2
2
cos(2)m +
3
i=1
m
Li
(x
2
Li
+ y
2
Li
) + m
e
2
+
2
i=1
J
Li
2
Li
+ J
L3
+ cos()(mR
CG
CG
+ J
xz
)
2
sin()(mR
CG
CG
+ J
xz
) +
sin(2)(m
2
CG
+ J
yy
J
zz
) +
3
i=1
m
Li
2
(x
Li
x
Li
+ y
Li
y
Li
)
+
2
i=1
J
Li
Li
Li
2
+ m
e
2
= (
M
drive
+
M
aero
)
E
3
D . (22)
The coupled equations for (t) and (t) are solved numeri-
cally with MATLABs ode15s solver. The obtained results are
presented in the main body of the paper.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank R. Smith for his work on the
mean lift measuring setup, as well as prototype manufacturing
and testing.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Bergou, S. Xu, and Z. Wang, Passive wing pitch reversal in insect
ight, J. Fluid Mech., vol. 591, pp. 321337, 2007.
[2] R. B. Srygley, A. L. R. Thomas, Unconventional lift-generating mecha-
nism in free-ying butteries, Nature, vol. 420, pp. 660664, 2002.
[3] T. L. Hedrick and T. L. Daniel, Flight control in the hawkmoth manduca
sexta: The inverse problemof hovering, J. Exp. Biol., vol. 209, pp. 3114
3130, 2006.
[4] F. T. Muijres, L. C. Johansson, R. Bareld, M. Wolf, G. R. Spedding, and
A. Hedenstrom, Leading-edge vortex improves lift in slow-ying bats,
Science, vol. 319, pp. 12501253, 2008.
[5] S. Fry, R. Sayaman, and M. H. Dickinson, The aerodynamics of hovering
ight in drosophila, J. Exp. Biol., vol. 208, pp. 23032318, 2005.
798 IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 2, APRIL 2013
[6] J. Birch and M. H. Dickinson, The inuence of wing-wake interactions
on the production of aerodynamic forces in apping ight, J. Exp. Biol.,
vol. 206, pp. 22672272, 2003.
[7] M. Hamamoto, Y. Ohta, K. Hara, and T. Hisada, A fundamental study of
wing actuation for a 6-in-wingspan apping microaerial vehicle, IEEE
Trans. Robot., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 244255, Apr. 2010.
[8] S. P. Sane and M. H. Dickinson, The aerodynamic effects of wing rotation
and a revised quasi-steady model of apping ight, J. Exp. Biol., vol. 205,
pp. 10871096, 2002.
[9] R. J. Wood, S. Avadhanula, M. Menon, and R. S. Fearing, Microrobotics
using composite materials: The micromechanical ying insect thorax, in
Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom., 2003, pp. 18421849.
[10] S. Avadhanula and R. S. Fearing, Flexure design rules for carbon ber
microrobotic mechanisms, in Proc. Int. Conf. Robot. Autom., 2005,
pp. 15791584.
[11] B. Cheng and X. Deng, Translational and rotational damping of apping
ight and its dynamics and stability at hovering, IEEE Trans. Robot.,
vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 116, Oct. 2011.
[12] T. L. Hedrick, B. Cheng, and X. Deng, Wingbeat time and the scaling of
passive rotational damping in apping ight, Science, vol. 324, pp. 252
255, 2009.
[13] F. V. Breugel, W. Regan, and H. Lipson, From insects to machines:
Demonstration of a passively stable, untethered apping-hovering micro-
air vehicle, IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 6874, Dec.
2008.
[14] R. J. Wood, The rst takeoff of a biologically inspired at-scale robotic
insect, IEEE Trans. Robot., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 341347, Apr. 2008.
[15] E. Steltz and R. Fearing, Dynamometer power output measurements
of miniature piezoelectric actuators, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics,
vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 110, Feb. 2009.
[16] S. N. Mahmoodi, N. Jalili, and M. Daqaq, Modeling, nonlinear dynamics,
and identication of a piezoelectrically actuated microcantilever sensor,
IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 5865, Feb. 2008.
[17] R. J. Wood, E. Steltz, and R. S. Fearing, Optimal energy density piezo-
electric bending actuators, Sens. Actuators A, vol. 119, pp. 476488,
2005.
[18] M. Sitti, D. Campolo, J. Yan, R. S. Fearing, T. Su, D. Taylor, and T. Sands,
Development of PZT/PZN-PT unimorph actuators for micromechani-
cal apping mechanisms, in Proc. IEEE Robot. Autom. Conf., 2001,
pp. 38393846.
[19] M. Sitti, Piezoelectrically actuated four-bar mechanism with two exi-
ble links for micromechanical ying insect thorax, IEEE/ASME Trans.
Mechatronics, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 2636, Mar. 2003.
[20] R. J. Wood, Liftoff of a 60mg apping-wing mav, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ
Int. Conf. Intell. Robots Syst., 2007, pp. 18891894.
[21] M. Karpelson, G. Wei, and R. J. Wood, Milligram-scale high-voltage
power electronics for piezoelectric microrobots, in Proc. Int. Conf. Robot.
Autom., 2009, pp. 22172224.
[22] R. J. Wood, E. Steltz, and R. Fearing, Nonlinear performance limits for
high energy density piezoelectric bending actuators, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ
Int. Conf. Intell. Robots Syst., 2005, pp. 36333640.
[23] S. Avadhanula, The design and fabrication of the MFI thorax based on op-
timal dynamics, Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Mech. Eng., Univ. California,
Berkeley, CA, 2005.
[24] L. I. Sedov, Two-Dimensional Problems in Hydrodynamics and Aerody-
namics. New York: Interscience, 1965.
[25] M. H. Dickinson, F. Lehman, and S. P. Sane, Wing rotation and the aero-
dynamic basis of insect ight, Science, vol. 284, pp. 19541600, 1999.
[26] A. Andersen, U. Pesavento, and Z. J. Wang, Unsteady aerodynamic of
uttering and tumbling plates, J. Fluid Mech., vol. 541, pp. 6590, 2005.
[27] J. P. Whitney and R. J. Wood, Aeromechanics of passive rotation in
apping ight, J. Fluid Mech., vol. 660, pp. 197220, 2010.
[28] W. B. Dickson, A. D. Straw, C. Poelma, and M. H. Dickinson, An
integrative model of insect ight control, in Proc. AIAA Aerosp. Sci.
Meet. Exhib., 2006, pp. 119.
[29] R. J. Wood, Design, fabrication, and analysis of a 3 DOF, 3 cm apping-
wing mav, in Proc. 2007 IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intell. Robots Syst.,
pp. 15761581.
[30] R. Dudley, The Biomechanics of Insect Flight: Form, Function and Evo-
lution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 1999.
[31] S. Montambault and C. M. Gosselin, Analysis of underactuated mechan-
ical grippers, J. Mech. Design, vol. 123, pp. 367375, 2001.
[32] R. Olfati-Saber, Nonlinear control of underactuated mechanical systems
with application to robotics and aerospace vehicles, Ph.D. dissertation,
Dept. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci., Massachussets Inst. Technol., Cambridge,
MA, 2000.
[33] N. Perez-Arancibia, J. Whitney, and R. Wood, Lift force control of
apping-wing microrobots using adaptive feedforward cancelation sche-
mes, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, [Online]. Available:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org, DOI: 10.1109/TMECH.2011.2163317.
[34] X. Deng, L. Schenato, and S. Sastry, Flapping ight for biomimetic
robotic insects: Part II: Flight control design, IEEETrans. Robot., vol. 22,
no. 4, pp. 789803, Aug. 2006.
[35] P. Lotz, M. Matysek, and H. Schlaak, Fabrication and application of
miniaturized dielectric elastomer stack actuators, IEEE/ASME Trans.
Mechatronics, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 5866, Feb. 2011.
[36] C. Zheng and T. Xiaobo, Acontrol-oriented and physics-based model for
ionic polymermetal composite actuators, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mecha-
tronics, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 519529, Oct. 2008.
Veaceslav Arabagi received the B.Sc. degree from
the University of California, Berkeley, in 2006,
and the M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from Carnegie
Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, in 2008 and 2011,
respectively.
He is currently a Research Fellow at Childrens
Hospital Boston, Boston, MA, where he is involved
in the eld of surgical robotics. His research interests
include apping wing ight, small-scale design and
manufacturing techniques, and bioinspired robotics.
Dr. Arabagi placed rst in the 2011 ASME Grad-
uate Robot Design Competition for his work on the design of a apping wing
aerial robot.
Lindsey Hines received the B.Sc. degree in mechan-
ical engineering and the B.A. degree in mathematics
fromthe University of St. Thomas, Saint Paul, MN, in
2008, and the M.Sc in robotics fromCarnegie Mellon
University, Pittsburgh, PA, in 2011, where she is cur-
rently working toward the Ph.D. degree in robotics.
Her interests include apping ight and robust
control.
Ms. Hines has been awarded both the National Sci-
ence Foundation and National Defense Science and
Engineering Graduate Fellowship, and placed rst in
the 2011 Graduate Robot Design Competition.
Metin Sitti (S94A99M99SM08) received the
B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in electrical and electron-
ics engineering from Bogazici University, Istanbul,
Turkey, in 1992 and 1994, respectively, and the Ph.D.
degree in electrical engineering from The University
of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, in 1999.
He was a Research Scientist at the University of
California, Berkeley, from 1999 to 2002. He is cur-
rently a Professor in the Department of Mechanical
Engineering and Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon
University, Pittsburgh, PA, where he is also the Di-
rector of the NanoRobotics Laboratory and the Center for Bio-Robotics. He
was the Adamson Career Faculty Fellow during 20072010. His research in-
terests include micro/nanorobotics, bioinspired miniature mobile robots, and
micro/nanomanipulation.
Dr. Sitti received the Society of Optics and Photonics Nanoengineering Pi-
oneer Award in 2011. He received a National Science Foundation CAREER
Award in 2005. From 2008 to 2010, he was the Vice President of Technical Ac-
tivities of the IEEE Nanotechnology Council. He was elected as a Distinguished
Lecturer of the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society from 2006 to 2008. He
also received the Best Paper Award at the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on
Intelligent Robots and Systems in 2009 and 1998, the Best Biomimetics Paper
Award at the IEEE Robotics and Biomimetics Conference in 2004, and the Best
Video Award at the IEEE Robotics and Automation Conference in 2002. He is
Co-Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Micro/Nano-Mechatronics.