diff --git a/nass-fem.org b/nass-fem.org
index 591c4b4..1264d0a 100644
--- a/nass-fem.org
+++ b/nass-fem.org
@@ -362,10 +362,10 @@ Yet, based on the available properties of the stacks in the data-sheet (summariz
 | Length         | $mm$      |         20 |
 | Stack Area     | $mm^2$    |      10x10 |
 
-The properties of this "THP5H" material used to compute $g_a$ and $g_s$ are listed in Table ref:tab:test_apa_piezo_properties.
+The properties of this "THP5H" material used to compute $g_a$ and $g_s$ are listed in Table ref:tab:detail_fem_piezo_properties.
 From these parameters, $g_s = 5.1\,V/\mu m$ and $g_a = 26\,N/V$ were obtained.
 
-#+name: tab:test_apa_piezo_properties
+#+name: tab:detail_fem_piezo_properties
 #+caption: Piezoelectric properties used for the estimation of the sensor and actuators sensitivities
 #+attr_latex: :environment tabularx :width 1\linewidth :align ccX
 #+attr_latex: :center t :booktabs t
diff --git a/nass-fem.pdf b/nass-fem.pdf
index f788b42..8332e8c 100644
Binary files a/nass-fem.pdf and b/nass-fem.pdf differ
diff --git a/nass-fem.tex b/nass-fem.tex
index 70f359d..74eb306 100644
--- a/nass-fem.tex
+++ b/nass-fem.tex
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-% Created 2025-04-03 Thu 21:39
+% Created 2025-04-03 Thu 22:01
 % Intended LaTeX compiler: pdflatex
 \documentclass[a4paper, 10pt, DIV=12, parskip=full, bibliography=totoc]{scrreprt}
 
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ The theoretical foundations and implementation are presented in Section \ref{sec
 The framework was then applied to optimize two critical nano-hexapod elements: the actuators (Section \ref{sec:detail_fem_actuator}) and the flexible joints (Section \ref{sec:detail_fem_joint}).
 Through this approach, system-level dynamic behavior under closed-loop control conditions could be successfully predicted while detailed component-level optimization was facilitated.
 \chapter{Reduced order flexible bodies}
-\label{sec:orgcd4de1a}
+\label{sec:org9c118d2}
 \label{sec:detail_fem_super_element}
 Components exhibiting complex dynamical behavior are frequently found to be unsuitable for direct implementation within multi-body models.
 These components are traditionally analyzed using Finite Element Analysis (FEA) software.
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ First, the fundamental principles and methodological approaches of this modeling
 It is then illustrated through its practical application to the modelling of an Amplified Piezoelectric Actuator (APA) (Section \ref{ssec:detail_fem_super_element_example}).
 Finally, the validity of this modeling approach is demonstrated through experimental validation, wherein the obtained dynamics from the hybrid modelling approach is compared with measurements (Section \ref{ssec:detail_fem_super_element_validation}).
 \section{Procedure}
-\label{sec:org89e4f49}
+\label{sec:orgd6255e7}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_super_element_theory}
 
 In this modeling approach, some components within the multi-body framework are represented as \emph{reduced-order flexible bodies}, wherein their modal behavior is characterized through reduced mass and stiffness matrices derived from finite element analysis (FEA) models.
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ The outcome of this procedure is an \(m \times m\) set of reduced mass and stiff
 m = 6 \times n + p
 \end{equation}
 \section{Example with an Amplified Piezoelectric Actuator}
-\label{sec:org9338c69}
+\label{sec:org99a5f8a}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_super_element_example}
 The presented modeling framework was first applied to an Amplified Piezoelectric Actuator (APA) for several reasons.
 Primarily, this actuator represents an excellent candidate for implementation within the nano-hexapod, as will be elaborated in Section \ref{sec:detail_fem_actuator}.
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ Stiffness & \(21\,N/\mu m\)\\
 \end{tabularx}
 \captionof{table}{\label{tab:detail_fem_apa95ml_specs}APA95ML specifications}
 \end{minipage}
-\paragraph{Finite Element Model}
-\label{sec:org1bd5502}
+\subsubsection{Finite Element Model}
+\label{sec:org9ffb40b}
 
 The development of the finite element model for the APA95ML required the knowledge of the material properties, as summarized in Table \ref{tab:detail_fem_material_properties}.
 The finite element mesh, shown in Figure \ref{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_mesh}, was then generated.
@@ -128,8 +128,8 @@ The modal reduction procedure was then executed, yielding the reduced mass and s
 \end{subfigure}
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_model}Obtained mesh and defined interface frames (or ``remote points'') in the finite element model of the APA95ML (\subref{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_mesh}). Interface with the multi-body model is shown in (\subref{fig:detail_fem_apa_model_schematic}).}
 \end{figure}
-\paragraph{Super Element in the Multi-Body Model}
-\label{sec:org5b98193}
+\subsubsection{Super Element in the Multi-Body Model}
+\label{sec:orgf1583cd}
 
 Previously computed reduced order mass and stiffness matrices were imported in a multi-body model block called ``Reduced Order Flexible Solid''.
 This block has several interface frames corresponding to the ones defined in the FEA software.
@@ -139,8 +139,8 @@ Therefore, a force source \(F_a\) operating between frames \(\{3\}\) and \(\{2\}
 This is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:detail_fem_apa_model_schematic}.
 
 However, to have access to the physical voltage input of the actuators stacks \(V_a\) and to the generated voltage by the force sensor \(V_s\), conversion between the electrical and mechanical domains need to be determined.
-\paragraph{Sensor and Actuator ``constants''}
-\label{sec:org8148055}
+\subsubsection{Sensor and Actuator ``constants''}
+\label{sec:orga72c195}
 
 To link the electrical domain to the mechanical domain, an ``actuator constant'' \(g_a\) and a ``sensor constant'' \(g_s\) were introduced as shown in Figure \ref{fig:detail_fem_apa_model_schematic}.
 
@@ -177,11 +177,11 @@ Stack Area & \(mm^2\) & 10x10\\
 \end{tabularx}
 \end{table}
 
-The properties of this ``THP5H'' material used to compute \(g_a\) and \(g_s\) are listed in Table \ref{tab:test_apa_piezo_properties}.
+The properties of this ``THP5H'' material used to compute \(g_a\) and \(g_s\) are listed in Table \ref{tab:detail_fem_piezo_properties}.
 From these parameters, \(g_s = 5.1\,V/\mu m\) and \(g_a = 26\,N/V\) were obtained.
 
 \begin{table}[htbp]
-\caption{\label{tab:test_apa_piezo_properties}Piezoelectric properties used for the estimation of the sensor and actuators sensitivities}
+\caption{\label{tab:detail_fem_piezo_properties}Piezoelectric properties used for the estimation of the sensor and actuators sensitivities}
 \centering
 \begin{tabularx}{1\linewidth}{ccX}
 \toprule
@@ -197,8 +197,8 @@ From these parameters, \(g_s = 5.1\,V/\mu m\) and \(g_a = 26\,N/V\) were obtaine
 \bottomrule
 \end{tabularx}
 \end{table}
-\paragraph{Identification of the APA Characteristics}
-\label{sec:orgcc15bce}
+\subsubsection{Identification of the APA Characteristics}
+\label{sec:org30104dc}
 
 Initial validation of the finite element model and its integration as a reduced-order flexible model within the multi-body model was accomplished through comparative analysis of key actuator characteristics against manufacturer specifications.
 
@@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ Through the established amplification factor of 1.5, this translates to a predic
 
 The high degree of concordance observed across multiple performance metrics provides a first validation of the ability to include FEM into multi-body model.
 \section{Experimental Validation}
-\label{sec:org3f582e5}
+\label{sec:orga0c1c4b}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_super_element_validation}
 Further validation of the reduced-order flexible body methodology was undertaken through experimental investigation.
 The goal was to measure the dynamics of the APA95ML and to compare it with predictions derived from the multi-body model incorporating the actuator as a flexible element.
@@ -238,8 +238,8 @@ Measurement of the sensor stack voltage \(V_s\) was performed using an analog-to
 \includegraphics[scale=1,width=\linewidth]{figs/detail_fem_apa95ml_bench_schematic.png}
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_bench_schematic}Test bench used to validate ``reduced order solid bodies'' using an APA95ML.}
 \end{figure}
-\paragraph{Comparison of the dynamics}
-\label{sec:org11ed21e}
+\subsubsection{Comparison of the dynamics}
+\label{sec:orgd50cd8c}
 
 Frequency domain system identification techniques were used to characterize the dynamic behavior of the APA95ML.
 The identification procedure required careful choice of the excitation signal \cite[, chap. 5]{pintelon12_system_ident}.
@@ -271,8 +271,8 @@ Regarding the amplitude characteristics, the constants \(g_a\) and \(g_s\) could
 \end{subfigure}
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_comp_plant}Comparison of the measured frequency response functions and the finite element model of the APA95ML. Both for the dynamics from \(V_a\) to \(y\) (\subref{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_comp_plant_actuator}) and from \(V_a\) to \(V_s\) (\subref{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_comp_plant_sensor})}
 \end{figure}
-\paragraph{Integral Force Feedback with APA}
-\label{sec:org0d2d636}
+\subsubsection{Integral Force Feedback with APA}
+\label{sec:org3d5f71f}
 
 To further validate this modeling methodology, its ability to predict closed-loop behavior was verified experimentally.
 Integral Force Feedback (IFF) was implemented using the force sensor stack, and the measured dynamics of the damped system were compared with model predictions across multiple feedback gains.
@@ -305,16 +305,16 @@ The close agreement between experimental measurements and theoretical prediction
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_iff_results}Results using Integral Force Feedback with the APA95ML. Closed-loop poles as a function of the controller gain \(g\) are predicted by root Locus plot (\subref{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_iff_root_locus}). Circles are predictions from the model while crosses are poles estimated from the experimental data. Damped plants estimated from the model (dashed curves) and measured ones (solid curves) are compared in (\subref{fig:detail_fem_apa95ml_damped_plants}) for all tested controller gains.}
 \end{figure}
 \section*{Conclusion}
-\label{sec:org8e4cad3}
+\label{sec:orgc9b9f6b}
 The experimental validation with an Amplified Piezoelectric Actuator confirms that this methodology accurately predicts both open-loop and closed-loop dynamic behaviors.
 This verification establishes its effectiveness for component design and system analysis applications.
 
 The approach will be especially beneficial for optimizing actuators (Section \ref{sec:detail_fem_actuator}) and flexible joints (Section \ref{sec:detail_fem_joint}) for the nano-hexapod.
 \chapter{Actuator Selection}
-\label{sec:orgaed2754}
+\label{sec:orgdbca6b6}
 \label{sec:detail_fem_actuator}
 \section{Choice of the Actuator based on Specifications}
-\label{sec:org55fd74f}
+\label{sec:orgc816a2f}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_actuator_specifications}
 
 The actuator selection process was driven by several critical requirements derived from previous dynamic analyses.
@@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ Height  \(< 50\, [mm]\) & 22 & 30 & 24 & 27 & 16\\
 \end{tabularx}
 \end{table}
 \section{APA300ML - Reduced Order Flexible Body}
-\label{sec:org596b422}
+\label{sec:org3980880}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_actuator_apa300ml}
 
 The validation of the APA300ML started by incorporating a ``reduced order flexible body'' into the multi-body model as explained in Section \ref{sec:detail_fem_super_element}.
@@ -416,7 +416,7 @@ While this high order provides excellent accuracy for validation purposes, it pr
 
 The sensor and actuator ``constants'' (\(g_s\) and \(g_a\)) derived in Section \ref{ssec:detail_fem_super_element_example} for the APA95ML were used for the APA300ML model, as both actuators employ identical piezoelectric stacks.
 \section{Simpler 2DoF Model of the APA300ML}
-\label{sec:org8d0582b}
+\label{sec:org8816367}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_actuator_apa300ml_2dof}
 
 To facilitate efficient time-domain simulations while maintaining essential dynamic characteristics, a simplified two-degree-of-freedom model, adapted from \cite{souleille18_concep_activ_mount_space_applic}, was developed.
@@ -488,7 +488,7 @@ While higher-order modes and non-axial flexibility are not captured, the model a
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_apa300ml_comp_fem_2dof_fem_2dof}Comparison of the transfer functions extracted from the finite element model of the APA300ML and of the 2DoF model. Both for the dynamics from \(V_a\) to \(d_i\) (\subref{fig:detail_fem_apa300ml_comp_fem_2dof_actuator}) and from \(V_a\) to \(V_s\) (\subref{fig:detail_fem_apa300ml_comp_fem_2dof_force_sensor})}
 \end{figure}
 \section{Electrical characteristics of the APA}
-\label{sec:org68b0967}
+\label{sec:org6794c26}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_actuator_apa300ml_electrical}
 
 The behavior of piezoelectric actuators is characterized by coupled constitutive equations that establish relationships between electrical properties (charges, voltages) and mechanical properties (stress, strain) \cite[, chapter 5.5]{schmidt20_desig_high_perfor_mechat_third_revis_edition}.
@@ -508,7 +508,7 @@ However, the electrical characteristics of the APA remain crucial for instrument
 Proper consideration must be given to voltage amplifier specifications and force sensor signal conditioning requirements.
 These aspects will be addressed in the instrumentation chapter.
 \section{Validation with the Nano-Hexapod}
-\label{sec:org0bde7c1}
+\label{sec:org0a27bad}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_actuator_apa300ml_validation}
 
 The integration of the APA300ML model within the nano-hexapod simulation framework served two validation objectives: to validate the APA300ML choice through analysis of system dynamics with APA modelled as flexible bodies, and to validate the simplified 2DoF model through comparative analysis with the full FEM implementation.
@@ -540,7 +540,7 @@ These results validate both the selection of the APA300ML and the effectiveness
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_actuator_fem_vs_perfect_plants}Comparison of the dynamics obtained between a nano-hexpod having the actuators modeled with FEM and a nano-hexapod having actuators modelled a 2DoF system. Both from actuator force \(\bm{f}\) to strut motion measured by external metrology \(\bm{\epsilon}_{\mathcal{L}}\) (\subref{fig:detail_fem_actuator_fem_vs_perfect_iff_plant}) and to the force sensors \(\bm{f}_m\) (\subref{fig:detail_fem_actuator_fem_vs_perfect_hac_plant}).}
 \end{figure}
 \chapter{Flexible Joint Design}
-\label{sec:orgf6572af}
+\label{sec:orgee992e3}
 \label{sec:detail_fem_joint}
 High-precision position control at the nanometer scale requires systems to be free from friction and backlash, as these nonlinear phenomena severely limit achievable positioning accuracy.
 This fundamental requirement prevents the use of conventional joints, necessitating instead the implementation of flexible joints that achieve motion through elastic deformation.
@@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ The analysis of bending and axial stiffness effects enables the establishment of
 These specifications guide the development and optimization of a flexible joint design through finite element analysis (Section \ref{ssec:detail_fem_joint_specs}).
 The validation process, detailed in Section \ref{ssec:detail_fem_joint_validation}, begins with the integration of the joints as ``reduced order flexible bodies'' in the nano-hexapod model, followed by the development of computationally efficient lower-order models that preserve the essential dynamic characteristics of the flexible joints.
 \section{Bending and Torsional Stiffness}
-\label{sec:orgbb0d797}
+\label{sec:org76084a2}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_joint_bending}
 
 The presence of bending stiffness in flexible joints causes the forces applied by the struts to deviate from the strut direction \cite{mcinroy02_model_desig_flexur_joint_stewar} and can affect system dynamics.
@@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ A parallel analysis of torsional stiffness revealed similar effects, though thes
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_joints_bending_stiffness_iff_locus}Effect of bending stiffness of the flexible joints on the attainable damping with decentralized IFF. When having an actuator modelled as 1DoF without parallel stiffness to the force sensor (\subref{fig:detail_fem_joints_bending_stiffness_iff_locus_1dof}), and with the 2DoF model of the APA300ML (\subref{fig:detail_fem_joints_bending_stiffness_iff_locus_apa300ml})}
 \end{figure}
 \section{Axial Stiffness}
-\label{sec:orge681787}
+\label{sec:org4f7778b}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_joint_axial}
 
 The limited axial stiffness (\(k_a\)) of flexible joints introduces an additional compliance between the actuation point and the measurement point.
@@ -686,7 +686,7 @@ Based on this analysis, an axial stiffness specification of \(100\,N/\mu m\) was
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_joints_axial_stiffness_iff_results}Effect of axial stiffness of the flexible joints on the attainable damping with decentralized IFF (\subref{fig:detail_fem_joints_axial_stiffness_iff_locus}). Estimation of the coupling of the damped plants using the RGA-number (\subref{fig:detail_fem_joints_axial_stiffness_rga_hac_plant})}
 \end{figure}
 \section{Specifications and Design flexible joints}
-\label{sec:org1248d7e}
+\label{sec:org1531b2d}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_joint_specs}
 
 The design of flexible joints for precision applications requires careful consideration of multiple mechanical characteristics.
@@ -734,7 +734,7 @@ The final design, featuring a neck dimension of 0.25mm, achieves mechanical prop
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_joints_design}Designed flexible joints.}
 \end{figure}
 \section{Validation with the Nano-Hexapod}
-\label{sec:org8e5fa20}
+\label{sec:orgdb5365d}
 \label{ssec:detail_fem_joint_validation}
 
 The designed flexible joint was first validated through integration into the nano-hexapod model using reduced-order flexible bodies derived from finite element analysis.
@@ -771,7 +771,7 @@ While additional degrees of freedom could potentially capture more dynamic featu
 \caption{\label{fig:detail_fem_joints_fem_vs_perfect_plants}Comparison of the dynamics obtained between a nano-hexpod including joints modelled with FEM and a nano-hexapod having bottom joint modelled by bending stiffness \(k_f\) and axial stiffness \(k_a\) and top joints modelled by bending stiffness \(k_f\), torsion stiffness \(k_t\) and axial stiffness \(k_a\). Both from actuator force \(\bm{f}\) to strut motion measured by external metrology \(\bm{\epsilon}_{\mathcal{L}}\) (\subref{fig:detail_fem_joints_fem_vs_perfect_iff_plant}) and to the force sensors \(\bm{f}_m\) (\subref{fig:detail_fem_joints_fem_vs_perfect_hac_plant}).}
 \end{figure}
 \chapter*{Conclusion}
-\label{sec:org3cd82fd}
+\label{sec:orgbb92db4}
 \label{sec:detail_fem_conclusion}
 
 In this chapter, the methodology of combining finite element analysis with multi-body modeling has been demonstrated and validated, proving particularly valuable for the detailed design of nano-hexapod components.