Advertisement

Microsystem Technologies

, Volume 24, Issue 5, pp 2265–2276 | Cite as

Digital platform for Sigma-Delta accelerometer assessment and test

  • Vasco Lima
  • Nuno Brito
  • Jorge Cabral
  • João Monteiro
  • João Gaspar
  • Luis Alexandre Rocha
Technical Paper

Abstract

A digital platform for fast assessment and testing of multiple order architectures of electromechanical Sigma-Delta modulators for MEMS capacitive accelerometers is introduced in this paper. It is well known that the introduction of a negative feedback loop on sensors presents significant advantages to improve important characteristics, such as precision, linearity, speed, and dynamic range over open-loop operation (Borovic et al. in J Micromech Microeng 15(10):1917–1924, 2005; Chen et al. in IEEE Sens J 16(17):6476–6495, 2016). In a closed-loop system, the controller is responsible for the aforementioned improvements, enabling the relaxation on the manufactured device specifications. Consequently, it demands better and more complex electronic circuits for the controller. A configurable multi-order (2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th) ΣΔ module was developed in field-programmable gate array, along with the necessary signal acquisition and actuation modules, using a processor-centric approach, ensuring real-time performance, simple reconfiguration, and fast assessment of different orders and gains for the ΣΔ modulator with real MEMS devices. The system is capable of a measuring cycle lower than 100 ms. The platform was used to perform a comparison between two different types of MEMS accelerometers, evaluating the results obtained with second, third, fourth and fifth modulation orders for two bandwidth values—200 and 1000 Hz. The best noise figure achieved was 4.4 µg/√Hz, using a fifth order ΣΔ modulator and the device with the larger seismic mass. A comparison between three similar devices is also performed, as well as a comparison between simulated and experimental results.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The first and second authors are supported by FCT–Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia through the Grants PDE/BDE/114563/2016 and SFRH/BD/91806/2012 respectively.

References

  1. Borovic B, Liu AQ, Popa D, Cai H, Lewis FL (2005) Open-loop versus closed-loop control of MEMS devices: choices and issues. J Micromech Microeng 15(10):1917–1924.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0960-1317/15/10/018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brito N, Ferreira C, Alves F, Cabral J, Gaspar J, Monteiro J, Rocha L (2016) Digital platform for wafer-level MEMS testing and characterization using electrical response. Sensors (Switzerland).  https://doi.org/10.3390/s16091553 Google Scholar
  3. Chen F, Li X, Kraft M (2016) Electromechanical Sigma-Delta modulators (ΣΔM) force feedback interfaces for capacitive MEMS inertial sensors: a review. IEEE Sens J 16(17):6476–6495.  https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2016.2582198 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cifuentes A, Marín E (2015) Implementation of a field programmable gate array-based lock-in amplifier. Measurement (Elsevier Ltd) 69:31–41.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2015.02.037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dong Y, Kraft M, Gollasch C, Redman-White W (2005) A high-performance accelerometer with a fifth-order Sigma-Delta modulator. J Micromech Microeng 15:22–29.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0960-1317/15/7/004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dong Y, Kraft M, Redman-White W (2007) Higher order noise-shaping filters for high-performance micromachined accelerometers. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 56(5):1666–1674.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2007.904477 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dong Y, Zwahlen P, Nguyen AM, Frosio R, Rudolf F (2011) Ultra-high precision MEMS accelerometer. In: 16th international solid-state sensors, actuators and microsystems conference. IEEE, pp 695–698.  https://doi.org/10.1109/transducers.2011.5969218
  8. Henrion W, DiSanza L, Ip M, Terry S, Jerman H (1990) Wide dynamic range direct digital accelerometer. In: IEEE 4th technical digest on solid-state sensor and actuator workshop. IEEE, pp 153–157.  https://doi.org/10.1109/solsen.1990.109842
  9. Hoover G, Brewer F, Sherwood T (2007) Towards understanding architectural tradeoffs in MEMS closed-loop feedback control. In: CASES’07: Proceedings of the 2007 international conference on compilers, architecture, and synthesis for embedded systems, pp 95–102.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1289881.1289901
  10. Inose H, Yasuda Y, Murakami J (1962) A telemetering system by code modulation—Δ–Σ modulation. In: IRE transactions on space electronics and telemetry, SET, vol 8, no 3, pp 204–209.  https://doi.org/10.1109/iret-set.1962.5008839
  11. Lima V, Brito N, Alves FS, Cabral J, Gaspar J, Rocha LA (2016) Performance comparison of Sigma-Delta modulator architectures for MEMS accelerometers using a fully-digital approach. Procedia Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.280 Google Scholar
  12. Peluso V, Marques AM, Steyaert M, Sansen W (1997) Optimal parameters for single loop ΔΣ modulators. IEEE Int Symp Circuits Syst 1:57–60.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCAS.1997.608524 Google Scholar
  13. Petkov VP, Boser BE (2004) A fourth-order ΣΔ interface for micromachined inertial sensors. In: 2004 IEEE international solid-state circuits conference. IEEE, pp 320–321.  https://doi.org/10.1109/isscc.2004.1332723
  14. Wilcock R, Kraft M (2011) Genetic algorithm for the design of electro-mechanical sigma delta modulator MEMS sensors. Sensors 11(12):9217–9232.  https://doi.org/10.3390/s111009217 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CMEMS-UM Universidade do MinhoGuimarãesPortugal
  2. 2.ALGORITMI Center, Universidade do MinhoGuimarãesPortugal
  3. 3.INL, International Iberian Nanotechnology LaboratoryBragaPortugal

Personalised recommendations