Design of a Multifunctional Compliant previous work, we introduced the concept of multifunctional sur-
gical instruments for laparoscopy 关3兴. The focus of the current
Instrument for Minimally
Invasive Surgery
Mary I. Frecker1
Ph.D.
Associate Professor
e-mail: mxf36@psu.edu
Katherine M. Powell
Graduate Student Research Assistant
Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA 16802
Randy Haluck
M.D.
Associate Professor of Surgery
Department of Surgery, The Pennsylvania State
University, Hershey, PA 17033
A new multifunctional compliant instrument has been designed for
use in minimally invasive surgery. The instrument combines scis-
sors and forceps into a single multifunctional device. The main
advantage of using multifunctional instruments for minimally in-
vasive surgery is that instrument exchanges can be reduced, thus
reducing procedure time and risk of inadvertent tissue injury dur-
ing instrument exchanges. In this paper, the length, width, and
thickness of the multifunctional compliant mechanism tool tip is
optimized to maximize the jaw opening and the grasping force.
The optimized design is then modeled to simulate the stresses
encountered in the scissors mode. A 5.0 mm diameter stainless
steel prototype is fabricated using electro-discharge machining
and is shown to grasp and cut successfully.
关DOI: 10.1115/1.2056560兴
Keywords: Minimally Invasive Surgery, Multifunctional
Instrument, Compliant Mechanism
Introduction and Background
During many types of operations involving minimally invasive
techniques, which can range from laparoscopy in the abdomen to
retinal surgery such as vitrectomy, surgeons use tiny instruments
such as scissors and forceps. These instruments are continually
exchanged throughout the surgical procedure. By using multifunc-
tional instruments, i.e., those that can perform multiple surgical
tasks, the number of instrument exchanges, and thus the overall
procedure time, are reduced. A reduction in instrument exchanges
also reduces the risk of inadvertent tissue trauma during ex-
changes. This minimization of instrument exchanges is especially
important in ophthalmic surgery where there is a risk of retinal
tears at the entry sites 关1兴. Using multifunctional instruments will
help minimize the corrective healing that the eye must undergo
and minimize complications resulting from the surgery 关2兴. In our
1
Corresponding author: 326 Leonhard Bldg., University Park, PA 16802. Phone:
814-865-1617. Fax: 814-865-9693.
Contributed by the Bioengineering Division for publication in the JOURNAL OF
BIOMECHANICAL ENGINEERING. Manuscript received by the Bioengineering Division
April 8, 2005; revision received July 8, 2005. Review conducted by: Tianhong Cui.
990 / Vol. 127, NOVEMBER 2005 Copyright © 2005 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://biomechanical.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
paper is on a new multifunctional scissors-forceps design. Based
on instrument utilization studies for laparoscopy 关4兴 and oph-
thalmic surgery 关5兴, the combination scissors-forceps is expected
to be useful in procedures such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy
or ophthalmic vitrectomy.
The multifunctional instrument proposed in the current paper
consists of a compliant mechanism end-effector. A compliant
mechanism can be thought of as a monolithic mechanism without
hinge joints that uses large elastic deformation to achieve motion
and displacement. Compliant mechanisms are well-suited for
small-scale applications because they can be manufactured mono-
lithically, avoiding difficult assembly of tiny parts. A monolithic
compliant mechanism would be easier to sterilize for reuse than a
device with many parts, or the compliant instrument might be so
cost-effective that it could be made available as a single-use dis-
posable instrument. A 5.0 mm multifunctional compliant mecha-
nism has previously been designed for use in laparoscopic surgery
关6兴.
Modeling
The scissors-forceps end-effector design is illustrated in Fig. 1.
The conceptual design was developed by Culkar 关7兴. The neutral
position of the device is in the forceps-open position. As the small
outer tube is moved toward the distal end of the forceps, it closes
the tips to create the forceps grasping motion. Then, a twisting
moment is applied to the outer tube which creates a shearing
motion at the tips for cutting.
First, the forceps or grasping part of the problem is considered.
One-half of the symmetric device is modeled as a cantilever
beam, as shown in Fig. 2. The long portion of the arm 共A-B兲 is
treated as a flexible cantilever beam, and the shorter portions 共B-C
and C-D兲 at the distal ends are assumed to be rigid. The deflection
of point B 共⌬B兲 is calculated based on large deflection beam
theory, and the resulting movement of the tip of the forceps jaw at
point D 共⌬D兲 is calculated based on the relative rigid body motion
of sections B-C and C-D. Since the displacement of the tips of the
forceps is very large compared to the size of the device, nonlinear
beam analysis is required. The pseudo-rigid body model of a
fixed-free compliant segment 关8兴 is used for the large deflection
analysis. The pseudo-rigid body model approximates the nonlin-
ear bending performance by modeling the compliant segment as a
pseudo-rigid-body link with a torsional spring, as shown in Fig. 3.
It was assumed that the jaws close due to an external force F
applied one-half of the way along segment A-B and that there is
no resistance at the tips of the jaws. This condition is called the
free deflection and represents the maximum possible deflection at
the tips of the forceps jaws. When the tips of the jaws touch, the
forceps is assumed to be closed, therefore the total jaw opening is
twice the free deflection. In practice, the surgeon usually applies
additional force beyond when the tips touch in order to increase
the clamping force at the jaws, but this situation is not considered
here.
The grasping force that the forceps can apply at the tips is
modeled by assuming that the jaws of the device are closed on a
rigid object. This condition is called the blocked force and repre-
sents the maximum possible force at the forceps jaws. The
blocked force 共Fb兲 is calculated by applying an external force at
the tip of the flexible beam 共point B兲 and iteratively determining
the magnitude of that force required to produce zero deflection at
tip. The blocked force at the jaw tip 共point D兲 is then calculated
based on statics.
Optimization Problem
The compliant mechanism is assumed to be of uniform rectan-
gular cross-section 共Fig. 4兲. The thickness 共h兲 and width 共w兲 of the
cross section and the length of the compliant arm 共L兲 are the
Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 1 Compliant scissors-forceps design
design variables in the optimization problem. The angle of the
compliant arm 共␪兲 is prespecified by the designer.
Optimization is used to find a suitable tradeoff between maxi-
mizing the free deflection and maximizing the blocked force.
These are contradictory objectives because the design with maxi-
mum free deflection is extremely flexible 共i.e., long and thin兲,
whereas the design with the maximum blocked force is extremely
stiff 共i.e., short and thick兲. To resolve this tradeoff, the optimiza-
tion problem is posed as maximization of blocked force for a
range of free deflection values 关Eq. 共1兲兴:
max共Fb兲
s.t.
⌬ Dl 艋 ⌬ D 艋 ⌬ Du
Ll 艋 L 艋 Lu
共1兲
hl 艋 h 艋 hu
wl 艋 w 艋 wu
␴ − n␴ y 艋 0
3
2
冑 ␭
w
2
−h艋0
Lower and upper limits are imposed on the design variables, de-
noted by the subscripts l and u, respectively. Another important
consideration is the maximum bending stress, which is handled
using a stress limit based on the yield stress 共␴y兲 multiplied by a
scaling factor n共⬍1兲. The final inequality constraint serves to
limit solutions to those that are manufacturable by UV LIGA.
Using photolithography imposes limitations upon the dimensions
because the resolution, or width of the design, is dependent upon
Fig. 2 Compliant mechanism model. A-B is treated as a flex-
ible beam; sections B-C and C-D are assumed to be rigid
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
Downloaded From: http://biomechanical.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 3 Pseudo-rigid body model
the wavelength of the exposing radiation and the depth of the
photoresist. The minimum feature size 共height of the compliant
arms as a function of the width兲, which can be defined in photo-
resist due to light diffraction at a wavelength of ␭ = 435 nm 关9兴, is
defined as shown in the last constraint of Eq. 共1兲.
Since there are only a few design variables and the analysis is
straightforward, the optimization problem may be solved graphi-
cally. A program was written in Matlab 关10兴 to enumerate all
possible designs by varying w, h, and L between their limits. The
blocked force, free deflection, and maximum bending stress of
each design are then calculated. The free deflection, stress, and
microfabrication constraints are evaluated, and all feasible designs
共i.e., those that satisfy all the constraints兲 are displayed graphi-
cally. Using this method it is easy for the designer to visualize the
performance space and to select a suitable design.
Optimization Results
Two examples are presented, one for an ophthalmic surgery
application 共0.5 mm diameter兲 and one for a laparoscopic surgery
application 共5.0 mm diameter兲. The parameters used in each prob-
lem are given in Table 1. The choice of materials is important for
both design and biomedical considerations. Nickel with 8% phos-
phorous was selected for the 0.5 mm example, as it has been
shown to be suitable for UV LIGA 关11兴. 共The nickel device would
have to be coated with a biocompatible material for use in sur-
gery.兲 Stainless steel 共17-4 PH condition H900兲 was selected for
the 5.0 mm example due to its high-strength and suitability for
fabrication by wire EDM.
Upper and lower limits on the dimensions of the compliant
mechanism were determined based on surgical and manufacturing
requirements. For the laparoscopic instrument the upper limits of
2.0 mm on width and thickness are well within the 5.0 mm can-
nula diameter. The limits on the thickness of the ophthalmic in-
strument are based on a general limitation for nickel electroplat-
ing, where the minimum possible thickness is about 20 ␮m and
the maximum is about 200 ␮m.
Results are shown in Fig. 5 for the 0.5 mm example. Each point
on the graph represents a feasible design. Notice that no points
exist in the upper right-hand corner where free deflection and
blocked force are simultaneously maximized. The best design for
a given free deflection is the one with maximum blocked force.
Fig. 4 Compliant mechanism variables
NOVEMBER 2005, Vol. 127 / 991
 Table 1 Optimization parameters

Ophthalmic Laparoscopic
共0.5 mm diameter兲 共5.0 mm diameter兲

⌬Dl 共mm兲 1.0 10.0

⌬Du 共mm兲 3.0 30.0
Ll 共mm兲 6.0 60.0
Lu 共mm兲 15.0 150.0
hl 共mm兲 0.05 0.5
hu 共mm兲 0.2 2.0
wl 共mm兲 0.02 0.1
wu 共mm兲 0.2 2.0 Fig. 7 Finite element model of scissors-forceps
n 0.75 0.75
␴y 共MPa兲 900 999.7
Material Nickel with 8% Stainless steel 共17-4 PH
phosphorus condition H900兲 scissors motion is too complex for a simple analytical model, so
Young’s modulus 共GPa兲 100.0 203.4 ANSYS 关12兴 finite element analysis software is used. A nonlinear
⌰ 共deg兲 167.0 167.0 static analysis was performed using ten-node solid tetrahedral el-
ements.
Multiple load cases must be considered to account for the fact
that the forceps must first close, then the jaws move in a perpen-
For example, for a jaw opening of 3.8 mm, the best design is the dicular plane to scissor. The multiple load cases were modeled
highest point with free deflection of 3.8/ 2 = 1.9 mm, which has using two different time steps: 共1兲 a force is applied half way
blocked force of 4.0 mN. This point represents a design with L along the on the compliant arm until the tips of the forceps close
= 15.0 mm, w = 0.1 mm, and h = 0.05 mm. 共F1 in Fig. 7兲, and 共2兲 and the perpendicular loads are added 共F2 in
Results for the 5.0 mm example are pictured in Fig. 6. Again, it Fig. 7兲 to cause the blades to shear. This model can be thought of
can be seen that no points exist in the upper right-hand corner. A as the free deflection condition for the scissors.
suitable design is one with a jaw opening of 26.0 mm or free The FEA was conducted for the optimal 5.0 mm compliant
deflection of 13.0 mm; the best design has blocked force of 0.4 N. mechanism design. The material properties were assumed to be
This point represents a design with L = 80.0 mm, w = 2.0 mm, and linear, elastic, and isotropic, with a modulus of elasticity of
h = 0.6 mm. 203.4 GPa and a Poisson’s ratio of 0.33. The resulting Von Mises
stress distribution after both loading steps is shown in a half-
symmetry model in Fig. 8. The predicted maximum Von Mises
Detailed FEA stresses during the forceps and scissors loading cases are 762 and
After the optimization procedure resolves the tradeoff between 917 MPa, respectively. The Matlab simulation predicted a stress
force and deflection for the forceps, the scissors motion is consid- of 749 MPa during the forceps loading case, indicating good
ered. Modeling the loading conditions and large deflections for the agreement with the FEA.

Prototype Evaluation
A prototype of the 5.0 mm diameter compliant mechanism was
fabricated from stainless steel 共17-4 PH condition H900兲 using
wire electro discharge machining. An important consideration in
the design of a scissors-forceps instrument is the surface of the
working jaws. The surface should be rough to provide friction
while grasping, but also smooth to allow the scissor jaws to shear.
These conflicting requirements were handled by making the inter-
mediate portion of the jaw surface smooth, and the remaining
potions textured 共Fig. 9兲. Several 0.3 mm diameter teeth were
machined into the surface of the jaws. The teeth were designed to
mesh to allow the jaws to slide relative to one another during

Fig. 5 Results for 0.5 mm compliant mechanism

Fig. 8 Von Mises stress distribution „MPa… for scissors-

Fig. 6 Results for 5.0 mm compliant mechanism forceps „half-symmetry model…

992 / Vol. 127, NOVEMBER 2005 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://biomechanical.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 9 Prototype compliant multifunctional scissors-forceps
cutting. The shape of the jaw tips was designed to resemble scis-
sors blades. Bevels at an angle of 20° were incorporated on op-
posite sides of the jaws to give a sharp edge. Figure 10 shows the
prototype grasping an egg membrane. Notice the cut in the egg
membrane that was made by the prototype in the scissors mode.
The ability to cut the egg membrane was assessed as a qualitative
measure of cutting performance, as is done by manufacturers of
ophthalmic surgical instruments.
The methods for evaluating multifunctional prototypes de-
scribed in 关3兴 for laparoscopic instruments were employed here.
The pull-off force, a measure of grasping ability used by industry,
1
was measured by gripping a 4 in. diameter piece of red rubber
surgical tubing in the instrument jaws and measuring the force
required to pull the tube from the jaws using a digital force meter
共Fig. 11兲. The average pull-off force of prototype was 1.80 N. The
grasping and cutting forces were measured by closing the jaws
against a digital force meter 共Fig. 12兲. It should be noted that the
measured cutting force is not equivalent to the shear force be-
tween the scissors blades; instead it is the closing force of the
scissors jaw. The measured grasping force was 0.30 N and the
measured cutting force was 0.20 N. A previously designed com-
pliant scissors-forceps prototype was reported to have pull-off,
grasping, and cutting forces of 1.51, 1.78, and 0.36 N, respec-
tively 关3兴. The measured grasping force of the current prototype is
considerably less, indicating that the compliant mechanism is
more flexible. However, the pull-off force is slightly greater, indi-
cating that even though the mechanism is more flexible, accept-
Fig. 10 Prototype grasping an egg membrane. Note cut made
by scissors.
Fig. 11 Pull-off force test setup
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
Downloaded From: http://biomechanical.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 12 Grasping force test setup
able pull-off force can be achieved with proper design of the jaw
texture. The cutting forces of the two prototypes are comparable.
The predicted blocked force and measured grasping force are 0.40
and 0.30 N, respectively. Since the blocked force is the maximum
possible grasping force, it is expected that the measured grasping
force is somewhat lower.
Conclusions
A design for a multifunctional scissor-forceps instrument is pro-
posed. The compliant mechanism end-effector is analyzed and it
is found that there are many feasible designs and that the best
design is the one with the maximum blocked force for a given free
deflection. The optimization is applied to two examples, a 0.5 mm
problem for ophthalmic application and a 5.0 mm problem for
laparoscopic application. The optimal 5.0 mm design is evaluated
using a detailed FEA that models the multifunctional loading con-
ditions. A prototype instrument is fabricated and evaluated in
bench-top experiments. The results achieved during instrument
testing were promising for a first generation prototype; the mea-
sured pull-off and cutting forces are comparable to those of a
previously designed compliant prototype for use in laparoscopic
surgery. Ongoing work includes integrating the compliant end-
effector with a working handle and evaluating its dexterity and
performance in a surgical simulator. In the future, it is expected
that the multifunctional instrument could also benefit other areas
of surgery such as endoscopic and catheter-based procedures.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Life Sci-
ences Greenhouse of Central Pennsylvania.
References
关1兴 Saperstein, D. A., and Capone, A., 1999, “Pars Plana Vitrectomy,” in Diseases
of the Retina and Vitreous, R. F. Spaide, ed., pp. 333–350.
关2兴 Sharma, T., and Gopal, L., 2000, “Recent Developments in Viteroretinal Sur-
gery,” J. Indian Med. Assoc., 98共12兲, pp. 754–762.
关3兴 Frecker, M., Schadler, J., Haluck, R., Culkar, K., and Dziedzic, R., 2004,
“Multifunctional Instruments for Laparoscopic Surgery: Design and Testing of
Initial Prototypes,” J. Soc. Laparoendosc Surg., 9共1兲, pp. 105–112.
关4兴 Mehta, N., Haluck, R., Frecker, M., and Snyder, A., 2003, “Sequence and Task
Analysis of Instrument Use in Common Laparoscopic Procedures,” Surg. En-
dosc, 16, pp. 280–285.
关5兴 Cazzini, K., and Booth, D., 2004, “Utilization Study of Ophthalmic Instru-
ments,” Alcon Manufacturing, Ltd., internal report.
关6兴 Frecker, M., Dziedzic, R., and Haluck, R., 2002, “Design of Multifunctional
Compliant Mechanisms for Minimally Invasive Surgery,” Min. Invasive
Therapy Allied Technol., 11共5/6兲, pp. 311–319.
关7兴 Culkar, K., 2004, “Design and Optimization of Minimally Invasive Multifunc-
tional Surgical Instruments,” in Mechanical Engineering, Penn State Univer-
sity.
关8兴 Howell, L., 2001, Compliant Mechanisms, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
关9兴 Madou, M., 2001, Fundamentals of Microfabrication, The Science of Minia-
turization, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
关10兴 Matlab, 2005, The Mathworks, Inc., Natick, MA.
关11兴 Yang, M., Culkar, K., Powell, K., Frecker, M., and Zahn, J., 2004, “Design and
Fabrication of a UV-LIGA Compliant Micrograsper for Ophthalmic Surgery,”
in ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress, Anaheim, CA.
关12兴 Ansys, 2005, Ansys, Inc., Canonsburg, PA.
NOVEMBER 2005, Vol. 127 / 993