Tapered Micromachined Strut for MEMS Mirror Flatness

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

MEMS mirror arrays face challenges in achieving high optical quality due to stress-induced deformations, which are exacerbated by traditional reinforcing struts that increase the moment of inertia and limit the range of motion.

Innovation Solution

A tapered strut with a polyhedral shape, featuring slanted facets oriented at angles different from 90 degrees, is used to reinforce the mirror, reducing the moment of inertia and allowing for a wider range of motion without sacrificing optical quality.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If a uniform rectangular reinforcing strut is used, then the mirror flatness is improved, but the moment of inertia increases and response time worsens

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemirror flatnessVSAvoidresponse time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The strut cross-sectional dimensions are varied along its length, with the width and thickness being smaller at the center and larger at the ends. This non-uniform geometry provides localized reinforcement where needed (at the ends near the mirror edges) while minimizing mass at the center, thereby reducing the moment of inertia and improving response time without sacrificing mirror flatness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The geometric parameters of the strut (width, thickness) are changed along its longitudinal axis to create a tapered profile. This parameter variation optimizes the distribution of material, providing sufficient reinforcement for mirror flatness while minimizing the moment of inertia for faster response time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Manufacturing precision

If a uniform rectangular reinforcing strut is used, then the mirror flatness is improved, but the range of motion is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemirror flatnessVSAvoidrange of motion
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLength of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The tapered strut geometry concentrates material at the ends where reinforcement is needed for mirror flatness, while the reduced central section allows greater angular deflection. This local variation in cross-sectional dimensions enables the mirror to achieve a wider range of motion without compromising flatness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The strut features rounded corners and edges instead of sharp rectangular profiles. This curved geometry reduces stress concentration and allows the strut to flex more easily during mirror deflection, thereby increasing the achievable range of motion while maintaining structural integrity for flatness control.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #14Spheroidality (Curvature)

3Strength

If the strut thickness is increased, then the reinforcing effect is improved, but the moment of inertia increases and response time worsens

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereinforcing effectVSAvoidresponse time
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The strut thickness is increased only at the end regions where reinforcement is most needed to maintain mirror flatness, while the central portion maintains a smaller thickness. This localized thickening provides the necessary reinforcing effect without significantly increasing the overall moment of inertia, thus preserving fast response time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The thickness parameter of the strut is varied along its length, creating a non-uniform profile that is thicker at the ends and thinner in the center. This parameter change optimizes the balance between reinforcing effect (strength) and moment of inertia (response time).

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS7916373B2Tapered reinforcing struts for micromachined structures
Publication Date: 2011.03.29 NOKIA OF AMERICA CORP
  • US7916373B2 patent drawing
  • US7916373B2 patent drawing
  • US7916373B2 patent drawing

AI summary

According to one embodiment, a reinforcing strut of the invention is a polyhedron attached to a plate and having at least two slanted facets, with each of the slanted facets oriented with respect to the plane of the plate at an angle different from about 90 degrees. Two slanted facets intersect to form an edge that causes the strut to have a tapered profile along the longitudinal axis of the strut.