Difference between revisions of "Connection method"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | In the context of APM '''locking mechanisms''' are the simplest most compact physical structures that one can built that hold things together. | + | In the context of APM '''locking mechanisms''' are the simplest most compact physical structures that one can built that hold things together. <br> |
| − | They | + | They can be split into three classes: |
| − | * energy | + | * energy barrier locks |
| − | * hirachical | + | * hirachical locks |
| − | * friction | + | * friction locks |
[Todo: Improve this article] | [Todo: Improve this article] | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
= Hirachical locking = | = Hirachical locking = | ||
| + | Something is hirachical locked when one has to remove a part such that a locking part can be removed. | ||
Macroscale combined first level hirachical is common ... | Macroscale combined first level hirachical is common ... | ||
| + | Tree shaped | ||
= Friction = | = Friction = | ||
| Line 28: | Line 30: | ||
One can design surfaces such that thay perfectly intermesh but this would effectively create a series of energy barriers (energy barrier locking) | One can design surfaces such that thay perfectly intermesh but this would effectively create a series of energy barriers (energy barrier locking) | ||
in which the barrier adter the first one won't have much use (linear instead of exponential decrease of accidental disassambly probability). | in which the barrier adter the first one won't have much use (linear instead of exponential decrease of accidental disassambly probability). | ||
| − | Furthermore the energy might | + | Furthermore the energy might be not well recoverable (honstiff hydrogen bonds dissipate power) leading to unnecessary waste heat. |
| − | Thus the classical nail and screw design probably makes no sense at the nanocosm ('''To investigate:''' inhowfar is this statement true?) | + | Thus '''the classical nail and screw design probably makes no sense at the nanocosm''' ('''To investigate:''' inhowfar is this statement true?) |
| + | |||
| + | = Examples = | ||
| + | |||
| + | * snap ring: hirachical locking of at least one but most of the time two layer | ||
| + | * door handle mechanism: hirachical locking of one layer (with retention of the locking part) | ||
Revision as of 14:28, 7 December 2013
In the context of APM locking mechanisms are the simplest most compact physical structures that one can built that hold things together.
They can be split into three classes:
- energy barrier locks
- hirachical locks
- friction locks
[Todo: Improve this article]
Energy barrier locking
In the mancroscale springs, magnets, gravitation, and almost unused electrostatic attraction belong to this class.
In the nanoscale springs, VdW-force (Van der Walls attraction), chemical bonds and in some cases electrostatic attraction are well usable.
There thermal movement can knock a lock open by probabilistic chance which must be taken under consideration in system design. Energy barriers high enough to effectively prevent opening by chance can be easily reached. [Todo add VdW math example; add more details]
All other locking methods do too display energy barriers but have other more predominant traits.
Hirachical locking
Something is hirachical locked when one has to remove a part such that a locking part can be removed. Macroscale combined first level hirachical is common ... Tree shaped
Friction
Nails and screws base their locking ability on friction but in AP products one usually finds superlubrication between suraces.
One can design surfaces such that thay perfectly intermesh but this would effectively create a series of energy barriers (energy barrier locking) in which the barrier adter the first one won't have much use (linear instead of exponential decrease of accidental disassambly probability). Furthermore the energy might be not well recoverable (honstiff hydrogen bonds dissipate power) leading to unnecessary waste heat. Thus the classical nail and screw design probably makes no sense at the nanocosm (To investigate: inhowfar is this statement true?)
Examples
- snap ring: hirachical locking of at least one but most of the time two layer
- door handle mechanism: hirachical locking of one layer (with retention of the locking part)
