4.7 Article

A low noise capacitive MEMS accelerometer with anti-spring structure

Journal

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS A-PHYSICAL
Volume 296, Issue -, Pages 79-86

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.sna.2019.06.051

Keywords

Anti-spring design; Allan deviation; Capacitive accelerometer; Frequency drift; Low noise; Seismic application; Thermal effect

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFB2002303]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51575439, 91748207]
  3. Key research and development program of Shaanxi Province [2018ZDCXL-GY-02-03]
  4. 111 project [B12016]
  5. International Joint Laboratory for Micro/Nano Manufacturing and Measurement Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This work reports a capacitive MEMS accelerometer designed for seismic applications. The asymmetrical anti-spring structure is used and the device is microfabricated using SOI technology. Two capacitive readout methods, namely, capacitance-to-voltage-converter (CVC) and a commercial sigma-delta modulator, are introduced for comparison in the device characterization. For both methods, the accelerometer has a frequency dynamic range of 0-158 Hz. The sensitivity and non-linearity of the sensor is 53 fF/g (21.3 mV/g), 0.03% by the sigma-delta modulator, while the CVC method is 3.78 mV/g with the non-linearity 0.04%. As for the resolution, both methods have detected the lab's background noise of 11.5 mu g/root Hz at 0.03 Hz and have exhibited the resolution of the sensor is better than 10 mu g/root Hz. Regardless of the difference in parameter selection for the circuits, the CVC method has a much lower noise floor (51.8 ng/root Hz at 1 Hz) than sigma-delta readout configuration (10 mu g/root Hz at 1 Hz). The proposed MEMS accelerometer based on anti-spring structures shows its high sensitivity and low noise performance, demonstrating its potential in seismic applications. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available