Dynamic modelling is essential for accurate analysis of the actuator behaviour. It allows parameters such as spring rate, diameter and length to be chosen so the response can be optimised for a given task. It also allows the effect of the material properties on the response to be analysed which can improve the design of the actuator.
2.1. Equations of State for DEAs
To model the DEA, a 1D planar model is constructed and then used to predict the in-plane expansion and the curvature of the spring roll. The membrane has original dimensions
,
and
. The membrane is subject to forces from the electric field generated by the voltage across the electrodes,
and mechanical forces
,
and
, acting on the membrane, such as a pre-stretch, and cause original dimensions of the membrane to become
,
and
, as shown in
Figure 4. Each element of the actuated membrane is modelled as shown in
Figure 4b. The accumulated charge on each opposing electrode is represented by
and the resulting stretch of the membrane can be represented by the principal stretches,
=
,
=
,
=
. Deformation of the membrane is shown by the curvature of the actuator and is assumed entropic [
20].
The resulting work done on the membrane (mechanical and charge from the applied voltage) can be represented using the Helmholtz free energy,
taken to be a function of four independent variables,
. Equation (1) is the free energy of the thermodynamic system,
using the potential energy from the forces, compressed massless spring,
[
5] and the applied voltage [
11].
This is a measure of the useful work of a closed system and states that energy is conserved, therefore
represents the maximum amount of work the system can perform. Assuming the forces and voltage are fixed, the free energy of the system,
can be defined as a function of four independent variables. Minimising this function represents an equilibrium state, i.e., the free energy has been minimised with respect to the variables. It can be assumed the membrane undergoes homogeneous deformation therefore the nominal density of the Helmholtz free energy,
=
can now be defined using: the stresses,
=
,
=
,
=
, the electric field,
=
and the electric displacement,
=
. The volume of an elastomer undergoing a large deformation can be assumed to be constant, as the change in shape of an elastomer is typically much more significant. Equation (2) represents the constant volume, and one of the equations of state of the membrane [
20]:
Prior to the incompressibility assumption, each stretch was independent, however only two are required now to fully represent the deformation, along with the electrical displacement,
. Setting
=
[
8] and assuming
is a function of the three independent variables:
The free energy of the system can be represented using equations (1) and (3) [
20]:
Fixing the forces and voltage, an equilibrium state is achieved when equation (4) is true. Setting the partial derivative of
with respect to each independent variable = 0, i.e.,
= 0 gives the other three equations of state:
The forces and voltage can now be determined given a suitable energy function,
for the incompressible DE [
8]. Setting
=
, where
is the relative permittivity of the membrane, and integrating equation (7) with respect to
gives:
This integration leaves two independent terms, the constant of integration,
which represents the Helmholtz free energy from the deformation of the elastomer and the
term representing the Helmholtz free energy associated with the membrane polarisation. Note that
represents the free energy due to elastic stretching [
20] or the strain energy density function used to model the deformation of the membrane. The electromechanical coupling is therefore a geometric effect given the expression,
=
. Equation (8) is known as the model of ideal dielectric elastomers [
20] and can now be combined with the free energy of the system (equation (4)):
Note that the free energy of the system,
, is now a function of only two planar stretches as the voltage is fixed. Again, a state of equilibrium is reached at the minimum value of
i.e., = 0. Equivalents to equations (5) & (6) can now be written as [
8]:
Where
represents the Maxwell stress [
21]. Acrylic membranes, especially the VHB series, suffer from viscoelastic effects. This results in long-term relaxations (hundreds of seconds [
10]) and slower response times which makes precisely modelling and controlling the actuator difficult. Additionally, any forces acting on the membrane, represented by
,
and
in equation (9) will change the characteristics of the actuator and thus the response. Pre-stretching the film reduces the creep strain behaviour due to viscoelasticity and, therefore may be an effective method to combat the difficulties with modelling and controlling the viscoelastic effects. The effect of the degree of pre-stretching on the performance of the actuator can be investigated [
10].
The viscoelasticity was modelled using the nonlinear viscoelastic DE model developed by Yang et al [
22] as it was developed using the same DE membrane. The model combines two parallel springs (one elastic and one inelastic with a viscous dashpot).
Figure 5 shows the viscoelastic model composed of two parallel units. The upper unit consists of a spring,
with shear modulus,
and the lower unit consists of a spring,
with shear modulus,
and a dashpot, with viscosity,
. The spring
and dashpot represent the nonlinear time-dependent deviation from the equilibrium state, described by equation (17). The deformations in the spring
, spring
and dashpot are characterised by
&
,
&
, and
&
respectively. The stretch of the parallel units is equal therefore,
=
&
=
. Limiting stretch parameters
and
are used to represent the finite contour length of the membrane.
As the dashpot relaxes with time, the stored energy is dissipated, reducing the deformation capacity [
10]. The strain energy density function,
can now be written as the sum of the contributions from the two units,
&
:
The axial pre-stress of the film,
due to the compression of the spring may be represented by:
The pre-stretch,
is a result of the spring’s extension,
is assumed = 1 as the spring restricts any lateral expansion of the membrane. A lower value for
increases the bending angle, and therefore as
is low, the pre-stress from the spring can be assumed = 0 [
5]. Maintaining the incompressibility assumption sets
=
. The nonlinearities in the deformation of the film are now represented and the deformation may be predicted and compared with experimental results. Therefore, setting
=
= 0 [
23] and
= 1 gives:
Written in full using the Gent energy function:
Where
and
are material constant and represent the limiting stretches of spring,
and spring,
respectively. Only the membrane regions with electrode will be subjected to the Maxwell stress. The viscoelastic relaxation time,
is set =
= 50 s [
10]. Equation (15) can be solved for
as a function of time,
allowing the dynamic behavior of the actuator to be assessed. Model specific material parameters are seen in
Table 1.
The bending angle of the 2-DOF roll,
is assumed to have constant curvature and estimated using [
17]:
Where
is the stroke of the actuator and
is the radius of the spring. The viscoelastic relaxation of the membrane can be represented by the deformation rate,
and viscosity,
of the dashpot, shown using the Gent model [
24]:
2.2. Charge-control & leakage current
The membrane cannot be assumed to be a perfect insulator, and therefore part of the charge which accumulates on the electrodes,
leaks through,
as shown in
Figure 6. This leakage current consists of electronic and ionic conduction, where charged particles within the material complete the circuit due to the applied field [
7,
24].
The process of charging and discharging the capacitor is not instant and can be represented by:
Where
is the charge moving in the wire. Dividing equation (18) by
gives the change in current with time:
Where
=
represents the current in the wire,
represents the rate of change of the charge on the electrodes and
=
represents the leakage current through the membrane [
25]. The capacitor and resistor circuit transfer function is then generated and used to create the first-order lag response of the capacitor charging with leakage current. Equation (20) shows the resulting transfer function:
Where
is the voltage across the capacitor,
is the resistance used to limit the current from the power supply,
is the leakage current equivalent resistance,
is the capacitance of the DEA and
is the complex parameter from the Laplace transform. The charge on the capacitor was then converted to an equivalent field, where the leakage current is modelled using a resistor,
[
24,
25]:
Where
is the breakdown voltage of the membrane, and the membrane conductivity,
= 2.159
10
-14 [
24]. The discharging process is equivalent and inverse.