4.7 Article

A multiple-beam tuning-fork gyroscope with high quality factors

期刊

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS A-PHYSICAL
卷 166, 期 1, 页码 22-33

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.sna.2010.12.024

关键词

Tuning-fork gyroscopes; Vibrations; Quality factor; Rate sensitivity; Rate resolution; Bias instability

资金

  1. NSF CMMI [0826420]
  2. NNIN
  3. National Science Foundation [ECS-0335765]
  4. Directorate For Engineering
  5. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn [0826420] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents the design, theoretical analysis, fabrication, and experimental results of a multiple-beam tuning-fork gyroscope (MB-TFG). Based on a numerical model of thermoelastic damping, a multiple-beam tuning-fork structure is designed with high quality factors (Q(s)) in its two operation modes. A comprehensive theoretical analysis of the MB-TFG design is conducted to relate the design parameters to its operation parameters and further performance parameters. In conjunction with a mask that defines the device through trenches to alleviate previously identified severe fabrication effect on anchor loss, a simple one-mask fabrication process is employed to implement this MB-TFG design on silicon-on-insulator wafers. Experimental results of the fabricated MB-TFGs are thoroughly compared with the theoretical analysis for accurate interpretation. The highest measured Q(s) of the fabricated MB-TFGs in vacuum are 255,000 in the drive-mode and 103,000 in the sense-mode, at a frequency of 15.7 kHz. Under a frequency difference of 4 Hz between the two modes (operation frequency is 16.8 kHz) and a drive-mode vibration amplitude of 3.0 mu m, the measured rate sensitivity is 80 mu V-PP/degrees/s with an equivalent impedance of 2.5 M Omega. The calculated overall rate resolution of this device is 0.37 degrees/h/root Hz, while the measured angle random walk (ARW) and bias instability are 6.67 degrees/root h and 95 degrees/h, respectively. Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据