A thermodynamic field formulation for anodic bonding of microelectromechanical systems (MEMS).

A thermodynamic field formulation for anodic bonding of microelectromechanical systems (MEMS)

Development of Wearable Micro-actuator Array for 3-D Virtual Tactile Displays

International audienc

Application of Sensory Body Schemas to Path Planning for Micro Air Vehicles (MAVs)

International audienc

Image Schema Based Landing and Navigation for Rotorcraft MAV-s

International audienceTo date, most autonomous micro air vehicles (MAV-s) operate in a controlled environment, where the location of and attitude of the aircraft are measured with an infrared (IR) tracking systems. If MAV-s are to ever exit the lab, their flight control needs to become autonomous and based on on-board image and attitude sensors. To address this need, several groups are developing monocular and binocular image based navigation systems. One of the challenges of these systems is the need for exact calibration in order to determine the vehicle's position and attitude through the solution of an inverse problem. Body schemas are a biologically-inspired approach, emulating the plasticity of the animal brain, which allows it to learn non-linear mappings between the body configurations, i.e. its generalized coordinates and the resulting sensory outputs. The advantages of body schemas has long been recognized in the cognitive robotic literature and resulting studies on human-robot interactions based on artificial neural networks, however little effort has been made so far to develop avian-inspired flight control strategies utilizing body and image schemas. This paper presents a numerical experiment of controlling the trajectory of a miniature rotorcraft during landing maneuvers suing the notion of body and image schemas. More specifically, we demonstrate how trajectory planning can be executed in the image space using gradient-based maximum seeking algorithm of a pseudo-potential. It is demonstrated that a neural-gas type artificial neural network (ANN), trained through Hebbian-type learning algorithm, can be effective in learning a mapping between the rotorcraft's position/attitude and the output of its vision sensors. Numerical simulation of the landing performance, including resulting landing errors are presented using an experimentally validated rotorcraft model. Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Transparent Electrostatic Clamp For Visual Assembly and Packaging

This paper describes the development of a miniature assembly cell for micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS). Potential applications of the developed assembly cell are assembly of miniature optical systems, integration of optoelectronics, such as laser diodes with CMOS, and epitaxial lift-off (ELO) of thin films used in optoelectronic devices. The cell utilizes a transparent electrostatic gripper and uses several disparate sensing modalities for position control: computer vision for part alignment with respect to the gripper, a fiber-coupled laser, and a position sensitive detector (PSD) for part to assembly alignment. Assembly experiments indicate that the gripping force and stage positioning accuracy are sufficient for insertion of 500µm wide parts in 550 µm wide slots etched in silicon wafers. Details on the cell operation, the control algorithm used and their limitations are also provided

Photostress Testing Device for Diagnosing Retinal Disease

Retinal diseases such as Age-Related Macular Degeneration (ARMD) affect nearly one in three elderly patients. ARMD damages the central vision photoreceptors in the fovea. The Photostress Test is a simple technique for testing for the early effects of ARMD. Here, the illumination sources in a novel self-administered Photostress Testing device were modeled for safety and distribution in illumination software. After satisfying the design constraints in the model, a prototype of the illumination system was fabricated and tested to confirm the modeling results. The resultant prototype can be used to aid in the diagnosis of retinal disease and is well within retinal safety levels

Goldmann tonometry tear film error and partial correction with a shaped applanation surface

Purpose: The aim of the study was to quantify the isolated tear film adhesion error in a Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) prism and in a correcting applanation tonometry surface (CATS) prism. Methods: The separation force of a tonometer prism adhered by a tear film to a simulated cornea was measured to quantify an isolated tear film adhesion force. Acrylic hemispheres (7.8 mm radius) used as corneas were lathed over the apical 3.06 mm diameter to simulate full applanation contact with the prism surface for both GAT and CATS prisms. Tear film separation measurements were completed with both an artificial tear and fluorescein solutions as a fluid bridge. The applanation mire thicknesses were measured and correlated with the tear film separation measurements. Human cadaver eyes were used to validate simulated cornea tear film separation measurement differences between the GAT and CATS prisms. Results: The CATS prism tear film adhesion error (2.74 +/- 0.21 mmHg) was significantly less than the GAT prism (4.57 +/- 0.18 mmHg, p<0.001). Tear film adhesion error was independent of applanation mire thickness (R-2=0.09, p=0.04). Fluorescein produces more tear film error than artificial tears (+0.51 +/- 0.04 mmHg; p<0.001). Cadaver eye validation indicated the CATS prism's tear film adhesion error (1.40 +/- 0.51 mmHg) was significantly less than that of the GAT prism (3.30 +/- 0.38 mmHg; p=0.002). Conclusion: Measured GAT tear film adhesion error is more than previously predicted. A CATS prism significantly reduced tear film adhesion error by similar to 41%. Fluorescein solution increases the tear film adhesion compared to artificial tears, while mire thickness has a negligible effect.NIH SBIR [R43 EY026821-01]; Arizona Eye Consultants, Tucson, AZThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]

Goldmann applanation tonometry error relative to true intracameral intraocular pressure in vitro and in vivo

Background: Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) error relative to intracameral intraocular pressure (IOP) has not been examined comparatively in both human cadaver eyes and in live human eyes. Futhermore, correlations to biomechanical corneal properties and positional changes have not been examined directly to intracameral IOP and GAT IOP. Methods: Intracameral IOP was measured via pressure transducer on fifty-eight (58) eyes undergoing cataract surgery and the IOP was modulated manometrically on each patient alternately to 10, 20, and 40 mmHg. IOP was measured using a Perkins tonometer in the supine position on 58 eyes and upright on a subset of 8 eyes. Twenty one (21) fresh human cadaver globes were Intracamerally IOP adjusted and measured via pressure transducer. Intracameral IOP ranged between 5 and 60 mmHg. IOP was measured in the upright position with a Goldmann Applanation Tonometer (GAT) and supine position with a Perkins tonometer. Central corneal thickness (CCT) was also measured. Results: The Goldmann-type tonometer error measured on live human eyes was 5.2 +/- 1.6 mmHg lower than intracameral IOP in the upright position and 7.9 +/- 2.3 mmHg lower in the supine position (p <.05). CCT also indicated a sloped correlation to error (correlation coeff. = 0.18). Cadaver eye IOP measurements were 3.1+/-2. 5 mmHg lower than intracameral IOP in the upright position and 5.4+/- 3.1 mmHg in the supine position (p <.05). Conclusion: Goldmann IOP measures significantly lower than true intracameral IOP by approximately 3 mmHg in vitro and 5 mmHg in vivo. The Goldmann IOP error is increased an additional 2.8 mmHg lower in the supine position. CCT appears to significantly affect the error by up to 4 mmHg over the sample size.NIH SBIR Grant [R43 EY026821-01]; Arizona Eye Consultants, Tucson, AZ; Abbott Medical Optics investigational grantThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]

Goldmann and error correcting tonometry prisms compared to intracameral pressure

Background: Compare Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) prism and correcting applanation tonometry surface (CATS) prism to intracameral intraocular pressure (IOP), in vivo and in vitro. Methods: Pressure transducer intracameral IOP was measured on fifty-eight (58) eyes undergoing cataract surgery and the IOP was modulated manometrically to 10, 20, and 40 mmHg. Simultaneously, IOP was measured using a Perkins tonometer with a standard GAT prism and a CATS prism at each of the intracameral pressures. Statistical comparison was made between true intracameral pressures and the two prism measurements. Differences between the two prism measurements were correlated to central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal resistance factor (CRF). Human cadaver eyes were used to assess measurement repeatability. Results: The CATS tonometer prism measured closer to true intracameral IOP than the GAT prism by 1.7+/-2.7 mmHg across all pressures and corneal properties. The difference in CATS and GAT measurements was greater in thin CCT corneas (2.7+/-1.9 mmHg) and low resistance (CRF) corneas (2.8+/-2.1 mmHg). The difference in prisms was negligible at high CCT and CRF values. No difference was seen in measurement repeatability between the two prisms. Conclusion: A CATS prism in Goldmann tonometer armatures significantly improve the accuracy of IOP measurement compared to true intracameral pressure across a physiologic range of IOP values. The CATS prism is significantly more accurate compared to the GAT prism in thin and less rigid corneas. The in vivo intracameral study validates mathematical models and clinical findings in IOP measurement between the GAT and CATS prisms.NIH SBIR Grant [R43 EY026821-01]; Arizona Eye Consultants, Tucson, AZ; Abbott Medical OpticsThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]