Microsystem Technologies

, Volume 24, Issue 5, pp 2199–2213 | Cite as

Sensitivity analysis of an in-plane MEMS vibratory gyroscope

  • P. Krishna Menon
  • Jagannath Nayak
  • Rudra Pratap
Technical Paper


This paper aims to put forward a detailed sensitivity analysis of an in-plane MEMS gyroscope with respect to various performance criteria that are very critical for use of the sensor in different applications ranging from platform stabilization to micro UAVs. Sensitivity analysis involves selecting key design parameters and critical performance criteria and studying the effect of variation of each design parameter on each of the performance criteria. The five key design parameters of the MEMS gyro are the drive stiffness k d , sense stiffness k s , drive mass m d , sense mass m s and the sense damping coefficient C s . The four critical gyro performance criteria selected are scale factor, bandwidth, resolution and dynamic range. The influence of variations in different geometric dimensions of the structure on the design parameters of the gyro is also established. The critical geometric dimensions are identified that are then suitably modified allowing faster convergence of the design to meet the desired performance specifications. This study is relevant on two counts (1) the fine tuning of the design to meet all the desired performance criteria with minimum variation in geometric dimensions and with no change in the footprint of the sensor die and (2) the influence of geometric dimensional variations induced during the fabrication of the MEMS gyro structure.


  1. Acar C, Shkel AM (2005) An approach for increasing drive-mode bandwidth of MEMS vibratory gyroscopes. JMEMS 14(3):520–528Google Scholar
  2. Acar C, Shkel A (2009) MEMS vibratory gyroscopes—structural approaches to improve robustness. Springer, ISBN 978-0-387-09535-6Google Scholar
  3. Adamst S, Grovest J, Shawt K, Davist T, Cardareli D, Carroll R, Walsh J, Fontanella M (1999) A single-crystal silicon gyroscope with decoupled drive and sense. SPIE 3876:74–83Google Scholar
  4. Alper SE, Azgin K, Akin T (2007) A high-performance silicon-on-insulator MEMS gyroscope operating at atmospheric pressure. Sens Actuators A 135:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Apostolyuk V (2006) Theory and design of micromechanical vibratory gyroscopes. MEMS/NEMS handbook—techniques and applications, pp 173–195Google Scholar
  6. Bao M-H (2000) Micromachined transducers – pressure sensors, accelerometers and gyroscopes. Handbook of sensors and actuators, p 8Google Scholar
  7. Bernstein J, Cho S, King AT, Kourepenis A, Maciel P, Weinberg M (1993) A micromachined comb-drive tuning fork rate gyroscope. IEEE, pp 143–148Google Scholar
  8. Blom FR, Bouwstra S, Elwenspoek M, Fluitman JHJ (1992) Dependence of the quality factor of micromachined silicon beam resonators on pressure and geometry. J Vac Sci Technol 10:19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chang H, Zhang Y, Xie J, Zhou Z, Yuan W (2010) Integrated behavior simulation and verification for a MEMS vibratory gyroscope using parametric model order reduction. JMEMS 19(2):282–293Google Scholar
  10. Coventor Inc (2015) Coventorware analyzer version 10 field solver referenceGoogle Scholar
  11. Dong H, Xiong X (2009) Design and analysis of a MEMS comb vibratory gyroscope, UB-NE ASEE 2009 conferenceGoogle Scholar
  12. Ferguson MI, Keymeulen D, Peay C, Yee K (2005) Effect of temperature on MEMS vibratory rate gyroscope. IEEE, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  13. Geiger W, Folkmer B, Merz J, Sandmaier H, Lang W (1999) A new silicon rate gyroscope. Sens Actuators 73:45–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hopcroft MA, Nix WD, Kenny TW (2010) What is the Young’s modulus of silicon? JMEMS 19(2):229–238Google Scholar
  15. Kawai H, Atsuchi K-I, Tamura M, Ohwada K (2001) High-resolution microgyroscope using vibratory motion adjustment technology. Sens Actuators A 90:153–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mochida Y, Tamura M, Ohwada K (2000) A micromachined vibrating rate gyroscope with independent beams for the drive and detection modes. Sens Actuators 80:170–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Park KY, Lee CW, Oh YS, Cho YH (1997) Laterally oscillated and force-balanced micro vibratory rate gyroscope supported by fish hook shape springs. IEEE, pp 494–499Google Scholar
  18. Prikhodko IP, Zotov SA, Trusov AA, Shkel AM (2011) sub-degree-per-hour silicon MEMS rate sensor with 1 million Q-factor. IEEE, pp 2809–2812Google Scholar
  19. Senturia SD (2001) Microsystem design. Kluwer, BostonGoogle Scholar
  20. Sharma A, Zaman MF, Zucher M, Ayazi F (2008) A 0.1°/hr bias drift electronically matched tuning fork microgyroscope. IEEE, pp 6–9Google Scholar
  21. Tanaka K, Mochida Y, Sugimoto M, Moriya K, Hasegawa T, Atsuchi K, Ohwada K (1995) A micromachined vibrating gyroscope. Sens Actuators A 50:111–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tatar E, Alper SE, Akin T (2012) Quadrature-error compensation and corresponding effects on the performance of fully decoupled MEMS gyroscopes. JMEMS 21(3):656–667Google Scholar
  23. Tatar E, Mukherjee T, Fedder GK (2014) Simulation of stress effects on mode-matched MEMS gyroscope bias and scale factor. IEEE, pp 16–20Google Scholar
  24. Trusov AA et al (2010) Micromachined rate gyroscope architecture with ultra-high quality factor and improved mode ordering. Sens Actuators A Phys. Google Scholar
  25. Weber M, Bellrichard M, Kennedy C (2004) High angular rate and high G effects in the MEMS gyro. Coventor website (online) Google Scholar
  26. Yoon S, Park U, Rhim J, Yang SS (2015) Tactical grade MEMS vibrating ring gyroscope with high shock reliability. Microelectron Eng 142:22–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Centre ImaratHyderabadIndia
  2. 2.Centre for Nanoscience and EngineeringIndian Institute of ScienceBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations