Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
7 years ago
Nov 6, 2017, 9:22 p.m. EST
- A strain of 0.01 would be a very large strain and would require unphysically large applied voltage.
- You haven't precisely explained your configuration. However the particular geometry you describe can be solved directly using the piezoelectric equations. You do not need a simulation.
- There are two types of 2D simulation which represent different limits of a 3D problem. A plane strain simulation (the default in Comsol) is the limit appropriate for a specimen very thick in one dimension. The plane stress approximation is appropriate for a very thin specimen. In between a 3D simulation will be required.
D.W. Greve
DWGreve Consulting
1. A strain of 0.01 would be a very large strain and would require unphysically large applied voltage.
2. You haven't precisely explained your configuration. However the particular geometry you describe can be solved directly using the piezoelectric equations. You do not need a simulation.
3. There are two types of 2D simulation which represent different limits of a 3D problem. A plane strain simulation (the default in Comsol) is the limit appropriate for a specimen very thick in one dimension. The plane stress approximation is appropriate for a very thin specimen. In between a 3D simulation will be required.
D.W. Greve
DWGreve Consulting
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
7 years ago
Nov 7, 2017, 5:19 a.m. EST
Thanks for your response.
We are checking the deflection of piezoelectric bimorph layer with substrate material of ABS and PZT-5A as piezolectric. We are taking reference of a thesis by Marek Hudec which I have attached here and also the shared link. According to him the canteliver deflection is inversely proportional to its width but the same modelling in comsol is not giving the required deflection relation.
I have attached the image in which he have used Y1(youngs modulus of MFC at constant electric field) instead of using the Youngs modulus of MFC.
Can you please tell me which Youngs modulus should be taken in calculations and what is the relation of the deflection with width of the canteliver. Kindly have a close look at the moment integral due to piezoelectric properties mentioned in the thesis.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1M_wXDpNHcrQQWK1irsyENCAkvwbjI2pZ
Thanks for your response.
We are checking the deflection of piezoelectric bimorph layer with substrate material of ABS and PZT-5A as piezolectric. We are taking reference of a thesis by Marek Hudec which I have attached here and also the shared link. According to him the canteliver deflection is inversely proportional to its width but the same modelling in comsol is not giving the required deflection relation.
I have attached the image in which he have used Y1(youngs modulus of MFC at constant electric field) instead of using the Youngs modulus of MFC.
Can you please tell me which Youngs modulus should be taken in calculations and what is the relation of the deflection with width of the canteliver. Kindly have a close look at the moment integral due to piezoelectric properties mentioned in the thesis.
[https://drive.google.com/open?id=1M_wXDpNHcrQQWK1irsyENCAkvwbjI2pZ](http://)
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
7 years ago
Nov 8, 2017, 11:13 a.m. EST
This is a vastly different and more complex question than the one you originally posed.
Perhaps this will be read by someone who is familiar with that specific document and who can help you out.
D.W. Greve
DWGreve Consulting
This is a vastly different and more complex question than the one you originally posed.
Perhaps this will be read by someone who is familiar with that specific document and who can help you out.
D.W. Greve
DWGreve Consulting