Advertisement

Microsystem Technologies

, Volume 18, Issue 6, pp 797–803 | Cite as

Frequency response of in-plane coupled resonators for investigating the acceleration sensitivity of MEMS tuning fork gyroscopes

  • Thakur Praveen Singh
  • Koji Sugano
  • Toshiyuki Tsuchiya
  • Osamu Tabata
Technical Paper

Abstract

The frequency response of in-plane coupled resonators is used for investigating the acceleration sensitivity of a MEMS tuning fork gyroscope (TFG) and a new method of suppressing the acceleration output is presented. The unbalancing of two sense resonators in the TFG caused by fabrication errors converted an external vibration into anti-phase mode excitation. To reduce the acceleration output, decoupling between in- and anti-phase modal frequencies [decoupling ratio (DR)] is crucial, since coupled resonators may cause large anti-phase vibrations from the acceleration. The acceleration output model was verified using two coupled resonators with 1 and 5 % stiffness unbalance. FEM simulation results showed a 25 % reduction in the anti-phase vibration by increasing the decoupling ratio from 0.09 to 0.29, irrespective of the coupled resonators designs. Quantitative analysis of a TFG based on coupled resonators with 1 % stiffness unbalance showed the acceleration output decreased from 5.65 to 1.43 deg/s/g.

Keywords

Output Capacitance Couple Resonator Acceleration Output Fabrication Error Sense Resonator 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Ayazi F (2011) Multi-DOF inertial MEMS: from gaming to dead reckoning. Proceedings Transducers’11, Beijing, China, pp 2805–2808Google Scholar
  2. Bernstein J, Cho S, King AT, Kourepenis A, Maciel P, Weinberg M (1993) A micromachined comb-drive tuning fork rate gyroscope. Proceedings MEMS Conference, Fort Lauderdale, FL, pp 143–148Google Scholar
  3. Cho J, Gregory JA, Najafi K (2011) Single-crystal-silicon vibratory cylindrical rate integrating gyroscope (CING). Proceedings Transducers’11, Beijing, China, pp 2813–2816Google Scholar
  4. Geen JA (2004) Progress in integrated gyroscopes. Proceedings Position, Location, and Navigation Symposium (PLANS), Monterey, CA, USA, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  5. Mochida Y, Kato Y, Konaka Y, Mori A, Kobayashi M, Kobayashi S (2007) Precise MEMS gyroscope with ladder structure. Proceedings Transducers and Eurosensors’07, pp 2529–2532Google Scholar
  6. Neul R, Gomez U, Kehr K, Bauer W, Classen J, Doring C, Esch E, Gotz S, Hauer J, Kuhlmann B, Lang C, Veith M, Willig R (2005) Micromachined gyros for automotive applications. IEEE SENSORS Conference, pp 527–530Google Scholar
  7. Palaniapan M, Howe RT, Yasaitis J (2003) Performance comparison of integrated Z-axis frame gyroscopes. Proc. IEEE MEMS’03, Kyoto, Japan, pp. 482-485Google Scholar
  8. Prikhodko IP, Zotov SA, Trusov AA, Shkel AM (2011) Sub-degree-per-hour silicon MEMS rate sensor with 1 million Q-factor. Proceedings Transducers’11, Beijing, China, pp 2809–2812Google Scholar
  9. Schofield AR, Trusov AA, Shkel AM (2007) Multi degree of freedom tuning fork gyroscope demonstrating shock rejection. IEEE SENSORS conference, pp 120–123Google Scholar
  10. Yoon SW, Lee SW, Perkins NC, Nazafi K (2007) Vibration sensitivity of MEMS tuning fork gyroscopes. IEEE SENSORS conference, pp 115–118Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thakur Praveen Singh
    • 1
  • Koji Sugano
    • 1
  • Toshiyuki Tsuchiya
    • 1
  • Osamu Tabata
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Micro Engineering, Graduate School of EngineeringKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations